Repost: Alt Left: What Percentage of Homosexual People Is Acceptable To You in a Given Population?

Answered on Queera.

Believe it or not, all of the answers said that if a country’s population was 100% gay, that would be absolutely wonderful! I’m sure having all the population of your country gay would be the greatest thing since sliced bread! What the Hell’s the matter with people? It would be catastrophic for any country to be 100% gay, though we’re probably headed that way in the US at the rate we’re going here.

How could having 100% of the population of your country gay possibly be a good thing!? Color me mystified.

A given population as in for a country? 3%. That’s the percentage in the US, and it’s just fine by me. Understand that homosexuality is bad for society in the sense that it causes a lot of costly problems for society. Furthermore, taxes paid by gays do not make up for the costs that society incurs from homosexuals.

  • Homosexuals live 20 years less than heterosexuals. It is horribly sad for gay people that they miss out on so many years of wonderful life, but it seems to me that reduced lifespan is costly to society.
  • Gays have higher rates of mood and anxiety disorders. While this causes a lot of suffering to gay people, and this is sad, at the same time, mental illness is costly to society.
  • Gays have much higher rates of drinking, smoking, and drug abuse than straights. The gay male party and play scene revolving heavily around methamphetamine and club drugs is particularly alarming. Lesbians in particular smoke a lot. The costs of drinking, smoking, and drug abuse to gays themselves are no doubt significant in terms of disease, mortality, and the suffering that can come from excessive substance abuse; nevertheless, this incurs a lot of costs to society.
  • Gay men obviously have a very high STD rate. At 20% infection rate, the HIV rate is especially alarming. Most of these diseases remain confined to the gay community and have not broken out significantly to the straight community, with the exception of the Black community with all the down low men. But the great heterosexual HIV epidemic spreading from gays to straights never occurred mostly because HIV goes from men to women and then it stops, as spokesmen from the New York Department of Public Health said as early as the 1980’s. That’s not completely true, but it is very hard to get HIV from a woman. Hepatitis A, B, and C are or were   fairly to very common to in the gay community, vastly more common than among heterosexuals, most of whom only acquire B and C from IV drug use. Parasitical diseases such as shigella, ameobiasis, and giardiasis are also extremely common among gay men; whereas they are quite rare among straights. In recent syphilis epidemics, up to 85% of cases are among gay men. Syphilis is quite uncommon among straights. Gay men have elevated rates of anal cancer, and the rate is rising. The rate is vastly higher than the rate among straights. I would like to point out that it is gay men themselves who suffer most from these diseases, and this suffering, although self-imposed, is often tragic, horrifying, and heartbreaking in particularly in the heart-wrenching case of HIV. Lesbians have very low rates of STD’s but higher rates of breast cancer. I doubt if lesbians impose a disease burden on society. The very high gay male STD rate, in particular the HIV rate, obviously imposes considerable costs to society.
  • Tragically, gay men have a suicide rate 3X higher than straight men, even in San Francisco, the most gay-friendly place in the US. The attempted suicide rate is also very high. Gay male teenagers have a tragically very high attempted suicide rate at 8X the normal rate. Suicidal behavior causes unfathomable and heartbreaking suffering on gay men. However, attempted and completed suicides impose considerable cost on society.
  • Domestic violence rates are very high in gay and lesbian couples, especially the latter. A gay man is much more likely to beat his partner than a straight man is. A woman is much less likely to be beaten by a male partner than by a female partner. This causes immense suffering to the partners of gay and lesbian batterers. In addition, domestic violence is costly to society.
  • In gay areas, gay men typically take over all of the public restrooms and turn them into miniature sex clubs. This renders most public restrooms unusable by the rest of us. Most gay men typically vociferously support the use of public restrooms as sex dens for gays. I don’t have much sympathy here. Gay men are simply being very irresponsible with this depraved mindset. Further, this is a cost to society.

It is first of all most important to point out that gay men themselves suffer worst from most from these largely self-imposed conditions, a suffering so profound that it almost moves you to tears. Compassion is essential. Nevertheless, there is a cost to society. Some of these issues may be caused by discrimination (see the high teenage gay male attempted suicide rate), but there is a cost to society no matter what causes it. Some of these problems would lessen with increased acceptance of gays, but others would linger or possibly even worsen.

The question comes up whether gays pay for the costs they bring to society. Many gays seem to have above average intelligence for some reason, especially gay men. Gays seem more artistically talented than straights. More gays than straights seem to get college degrees, in particular gay men.
Gay men seem to earn higher than average wages and are disproportionately employed in high paying and prestigious professions.

I am always hearing about a homosexual, often a gay man, who is contributing something noteworthy and exemplary to our society such that it mentions a media notice. Obviously, gay men contribute more to the tax base per capita than straights. So gays, especially gay men, offer considerable benefits to society, not flowing from their homosexuality but from other aspects of their lives.

I have not discussed lesbians here because I know little about them, but I doubt that they impose serious costs on society other than reduced lifespan.

However the question rises whether gays pay for themselves. Despite their excellent contributions to society and their higher than normal tax contributions, I still do not think that homosexuals pay for themselves.

The question then arises about whether the rest of us should be willing to carry a small burden for our gay brothers.

Personally I feel that at 3%, I am willing to shoulder the costs of homosexuals to society, as the numbers are so small that it is something we can cope with. I would be willing to tolerate up to 6% gay men in society. I think we could deal at that rate. However, if the rate of male homosexuality went higher than that, all of these problems above would increase in scope with attendant costs.

Honestly, even when you get to 10% gay men in any country, your problems are going to go up a lot. The % of gay men in New York and San Francisco is quite high, and they definitely impose considerable costs on these cities. Once you start heading up to 15–20% of any country’s population being gay, I think it would be unsustainable for many reasons (see above).

Homosexuality in society seems to be one of those things, like many things in life, that is best in small doses.

Alt Left: Do Not Eat Processed Meats with Nitrates or Nitrates

I am just learning this right now. The nitrates are added to processed meats such as luncheon meats, bacon, ham, sausages, pepperoni, etc. to help preserve them and to give them the pink color. Most meat that has that pink color is probably bad for you.

The nitrates and nitrites themselves are not harmful. Many vegetables have them. However, when added to meats, especially red meats, the nitrates interact with chemicals in the meat to produce nitrosamines, which are not only bad for your heart but are also a strong carcinogen.

We’ve known this for a long time now. There was a big warning leveled against these meats in the mid-1970’s.

Back then the FDA was pro-consumer, unlike now when it is viciously anti-consumer, pro-business, and anti-public health. The FDA gave the meat industry three months to prove that nitrates in meat were harmless. They couldn’t do it. Instead they made up a lie that nitrates were required to keep botulism out of food.

But meats cured without nitrates have been used for decades and there hasn’t been one case of botulism. Most botulism comes from canned foods, often canned vegetables. The can is often very old and many times the botulism causes a bulge in the can. Never eat out of any can that has developed an odd bulge in it.

In 1980, Republicans came in and a consumer and public health-hostile and pro-business FDA came in and the nitrate controversy went away. It awakened again a few years ago when British papers published studies showing that processed meats with nitrates caused thousands of cases of cancer per year in the UK. This was called the bacon scare.

The industry has been lying shamelessly about these carcinogens in our foods for almost fifty years now. Their line came right out of the tobacco industry’s playbook.

There are many websites on the Net with articles about the fake nitrate scare and even how nitrates are good for you. I just realized that I bought a package of turkey hot dogs and one of ground turkey meat that both had sodium nitrite in it.

There’s really no safe amount of this stuff you can eat. Even eating one nitrate hot dog a day significantly increases your risk of dying of cancer, typically colon cancer. If you know what’s good for you, you will quit eating this junk right now.

There are not a lot of nitrate-free processed meats out there, but there are some. There are completely safe traditional ways to cure meats that work just as well as nitrates. But the curing process can take up to 18 months. Meat companies want their meats to cure rapidly. Waiting around for them to cure cuts into profits.

So we see once again how the maximize profits directive of capitalism once again puts money and profits over human lives. Capitalism literally murders or kills humans just so other humans can make a buck. I hope you fanboys are proud of that fancy free market of yours.

All the Ways That IQ Is Relevant to Society

Intelligent Mouse: By “relevant for society” i meant relevant for economics. IQ can matter for many reasons, like for example just being interested in any form of scientific rigor in understand behavior could make it relevant to an individual as the person would seek for all (or at least most) alternatives in models.
But lets investigate some of the potencial usage of intelligence meassurments and see how IQ tests meassure up.
Measuring potential school performance:
Some small amount of years in school will already give the teachers or parents ample information about their prospects, but also traits that make IQ more productive in synthesis:
https://books.google.se/books?id=SCyEAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=Layzer+(1973:+238)&source=bl&ots=9Rf9sy0Jd6&sig=WjWMXZsLTGLGy7SS7JSZQ9RLmNE&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjl0q7t78fdAhUQpIsKHXb7AFsQ6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=Layzer%20(1973%3A%20238)&f=false
Job performance:
Well, IQ correlates around 0.3 with job performance, but the measurement is subjective so it might capture some things that correlate with social-class and therefore IQ.
Eugenics:
Pleitropy and polygenic structures makes eugenics by swapping SNPs impractical. Breeding programs can only do so much without further molecular biology knowledge. Twin studies seem kinda ridiculous:
Twin Studies, Adoption Studies, and Fallacious Reasoning
And i also agree with:
Behavior Genetics and the Fallacy of Nature vs Nurture
and (which is what GWAS interested behavioral geneticists like Steven Hsu agree on):
Height and IQ Genes
making eugenics very hard. If we already knew the mechanisms behind
Testing mental health:
This is actually the best use of IQ, as decreasing IQ is indicative of loss in brain stuff.
Criterion validity and correlation:
I also think that IQ´s criterion validity lies on shaky grounds when its founded on correlations that are only tested in narrow environments, essentially just creating the same correlation again and again without testing the methodological validity by testing the correlation appropriately. to test correlation appropriately would find anomalies in the pure environmentalist approach (or any level of conviction to environmental explanations) or finding causal IQ relationships (which Environmentalists have done).
I’m not really an IQ denier though, i think there probably is an range of IQ that any given person can inhabit, but the fact of individuals sticking around the mean makes it hard to know who could be where, especially in such large and genetically similar groups like economic classes and races. Some people are obviously extreme, but as previously stated, we don’t need IQ tests to know that.
And whats to say that smart people have high IQ? IQ is contingent on G, but all of my criticisms on IQ are pretty much equally (for better or worse) valid against G.
I see no use in IQ if not for future developments. Its an unfinished project at best.

 
I do not think that people realize what they are criticizing when they attack IQ. For IQ is simply the best measure we have for measuring intelligence in human beings. No better test has ever been devised. So when you criticize IQ as a concept, you are actually criticizing human intelligence itself. Do you IQ critics who say IQ is not that important really want to say that human intelligence is not important for human beings? Because that is exactly what you are saying.
You realize IQ correlates very well with all sorts of things, right?
Percentage of country that are college grads. % of college grads rises with rising IQ.
Grades in college, SAT. Good correlation between college grades, SAT scores and IQ.
Wealth of society. As IQ rises, societies tend to become more wealthy. As IQ falls to a low level, you can end up with extreme poverty, a lot of crime and chaos, rampant disease, and sometimes even a failed state.
State of the infrastructure of society. Infrastructure of society improves as IQ rises. People and society are more likely to maintain things. When IQ falls to a low level, people often do not know how to fix broken infrastructure and there is a tendency to jerry rig or do temporary quick and dirty fixes to problems that last for a bit but then fail again.
Civilizational level of society. As IQ rises, societies appear more civilized. As it drops to a low level, countries can appear downright barbarous.
Crime rate of society: As IQ rises, the nation’s crime rate falls.
Whether or not you will go to jail or prison and how long: As IQ falls,  you are more likely to be imprisoned and for longer.
Whether you will go on welfare programs. As IQ falls, welfare use increases.
Whether you will get an advanced degree. As IQ rises, advanced degrees become more common.
Income (up to a certain level). Income rises in tandem with IQ up to 125-130, after which it falls
Accident rate. As IQ falls, people get into many more accidents, some fatal. Includes car crashes, recreational accidents, accidents at home, etc.
Hospitalization rates. As IQ rises, people are hospitalized less often.
Rates of alcoholism and serious drug abuse. As IQ rises, rates of drug and alcohol abuse fall.
The environment you create for your children. As IQ rises, parents create better environments for their children.
Stability for chaotic nature of your surroundings. Even if you look at it on a neighborhood level, as IQ rises, the neighborhood becomes calmer, sometimes nearly to the point of being boring. Yet only three miles away, a large group of apartment complexes housing many low wage workers has a lot of noise, a general chaotic atmosphere, frequent police calls, a lot of yelling and screaming coming from homes, more frequent and more chaotic parties, more violence, more residential crime, and more drug and alcohol abuse.
Domestic violence rates. Domestic violence falls precipitously as IQ rises. Men at the highest IQ levels seldom beat their wives. As IQ falls down to a low level, domestic violence becomes commonplace to the point where most men are beating their wives.

Alt Left: "Sleazy Gay Men Who Just Want Boys"

Great article from a gay man who has now gone religious and is opposed to homosexuality. The problem with these guys is that they say homosexuality is a sin against God according to Christians. Regardless of whether that is true or not, it’s not a scientific argument and most us, even Christians like me, are most interested in the science than the doctrine when it comes to that. Anyway, I don’t think homosexual behavior is sinful.
There are other problems with these guys.
They all adopt an anti-essentialist point of view on homosexuality. Of course, we on the Alt Left are essentialists or we are nothing. The best available evidence that is the homosexuals somehow get wired up that way by the time they hit puberty. The best theory is that homosexuality is a developmental disorder akin to left-handedness. These people seem to argue that gays choose to be that way, when that does not seem to be the truth.
They all argue that homosexuals can be cured, while there is no evidence that they can be.
They are also against gay marriage of course, which I support.
Other than that, a lot of these men offer an immaculate critique of modern gay culture that cannot be found anywhere else because PC/SJW Culture means that gay men are a protected class above all critique. Apparently it’s illegal to even look at them wrong. It’s long been known that homosexuals have high levels of mental pathology along with a long list of medical problems. The way homosexuals live shaves a full 20 years off their lifespans. A lot of gay men are are flaky and sleazy. Crime is high in the gay community as is a general debasement of morality and culture itself as everything of value is subsumed to the supreme value of sex above all else.
That gay male culture has very high rates of pederasty and that pederasty has been elevated as the ultimate gay male relationship above all others has been true since Antiquity. Older gay men have very high rates of sex with young teenage boys than older straight men do with young teenage girls. Yet no one says a word about this because gay male culture is silent on the older gay man – teenage boy question.
These relationships, many of them illegal, are ubiquitous across the gay community. They are regarded with an accepting or amnesic shrug, and these older men are almost never turned in. Gay organizations deal with these relationships constantly and they never turn the man in even one time. Yet we hear no end of screeching from the Puritan/feminists about how all of us straight men are pedophiles for turning our heads when a hot 17 year old girl walks by.

This article contains graphic true language of the sinfulness of homosexual sin.
I have to thank Michelangelo Signorile and other gay writers who have come forward in the Huffington Post and elsewhere in response to the discussion of Dustin Lance Black’s relationship with a nineteen-year-old boy. After decades of false pretenses, they have at last come clean with the American public and admitted that the gay movement cannot succeed unless taboos against man-boy sex are at last knocked down.
I had tiptoed around the issue until this week. I had been attacked as “anti-equality” and “anti-gay” for over a year, even without bringing up what I knew about the rampant pederasty (sex between men and teenagers, as opposed to pedophilia, which is sex between men and children.) Even as my defense of children’s rights made me vulnerable to charges of conspiring with evil homophobic rubes, I was holding back an even more difficult dimension of my opposition to same-sex parenting.
I had known that beneath the appeals to gay “normalcy,” there was an underbelly in the gay male world of men sleeping with boys.
I avoided mentioning this when I testified in St. Paul, Paris, and Brussels. Nonetheless I had engaged in the debate about same-sex parenting with the unspoken suspicion that many gay male couples, if given the chance to be foster parents or adoptive fathers, would end up having sex with boys in their care or exposing their charges (both boys and girls) to a gay male culture that trampled on the generally understood prohibition against old people sleeping with vulnerable young people.
The result, I feared, would mirror many of the negative impacts on gay boys that have occurred as a result of “It Gets Better,” the Gay-Straight Alliances in high schools, sexualized curriculum, online gay sites like Chatroulette and TrevorSpace (not to mention the creeps on Craigslist), and gay mentorship programs. These public policy projects have blossomed over the last twenty-five years in the United States with the best of intentions — to keep gay boys from killing themselves out of despair.
As it turns out, gay boys don’t usually kill themselves simply because people reject them for being gay. The vast majority of people really don’t care what anybody does in their private sex life, which is why Dayna Morales, the tragic lesbian waitress in New Jersey, had to fabricate the tale of homophobic patrons stiffing her on a tip.
Homophobia is far less powerful than the reigning callousness and indifference of society to what’s going on with other people, really. So gay boys are far more likely to kill themselves not because people care about their gayness and hate them for it, but rather because most people don’t care about their gayness at all other than horny gay men who are much older than they and fuck them up the ass when they aren’t ready to deal with the emotional minefield of homosexuality.
All these naive programs placed boys in contact with adult gay men based on the assumption that the gay adults wouldn’t end up using such arrangements to corner boys and sodomize them. That assumption was criminally negligent.
I speak crudely because, as the statistics from the Department of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control reveal, the end result of many such gay mentor programs has been many adults inserting their penises into boys’ anuses. Hence there has been a spike in the HIV infection rate of boys aged 13-19, of which 95% result from unprotected anal sex.
Studies into HIV infection rates among black gay men reveal that blacks are infected with HIV at an exorbitant rate because they of all the races are most likely to be engaged in relationships with males much older or much younger than they are. Black gays do not engage in higher rates of unprotected sex, nor do they have unusually high or risky numbers of sex partners. Rather, their Achilles’ heel is their greater penchant for what Mr. Signorile lovingly calls “intergenerational” sex.
One of the top indicators of HIV infection risk is a tendency to date much older or much younger than oneself, and this makes sense for a basic reason: the kind of men who disregard the taboo against men fucking boys will usually also disregard other ethical limitations to their gratification, seeing limits as unfair or prejudiced. Condoms disappear somewhere in the confusion — and no, making people feel less guilty about doing something doesn’t make what they do safer, as the recent statistics shockingly tell us.
Let’s forget HIV for an instant however and the overall issues of sexually transmitted diseases. What if there were no STD’s at all to be spread from older men to boys through anal and oral sex?
There is still tremendous emotional vulnerability in a boy who is considering gay sex which isn’t there with girls or boys who are 100% straight.
A boy who starts getting fucked by men finds his whole future rewritten — it is not only an event dealing with one particular partner, but rather a foundational shift in his imagined future.
He will be in the gay community, living by its rules. Once an old man’s penis finds its way into the boy’s anus, the boy has to redefine his life goals, envision a future without women, without children, without access to the cultural mainstays enjoyed by the 99% of the world that isn’t gay and male. He must picture spending his time in the constricted, tiny circle of gay bars, gay associations, and gay cliques, looking for love in a tiny, somewhat incestuous pool of familiar local characters; gay men who will flit in and out of his life, vanishing without a morning call-back after a year and then popping up two years later on the arm of his best friend.
There is also the sheer physical change that happens when you are a boy and you first start letting men fuck you. It’s painful. You are being taught how to mix pain and pleasure, which increases the likelihood that you’re going to develop masochistic behaviors. You feel like a different person. As someone who got fucked by a lot of men in their forties and fifties when I was a teenage boy, I speak from real, extensive experience.
So when you as a grown man fuck a boy, you are inflicting a host of potential anxieties on him. You are throwing his masculinity and sexual identity in doubt. You are forcing him to picture himself growing old and dying without having a wife and children, without giving his parents a daughter-in-law and grandchildren — being stuck in a claustrophobic world full of flaky and sleazy men.
The recent statistics from many sources all seem to confirm that man-boy sex is a rampant problem in the gay community, and it’s destroying people’s lives.
The Department of Justice found that gay teens are much more likely to be in physically abusive relationships not to mention emotionally abusive relationships, with one of the key factors the fact that they are involved so often in unstable sexual liaisons with men much older than they are. While the report included a statement about the lack of “role models” for gay teens, we must extrapolate a deeper problem that straight researchers might not be able to piece together. Gay teens have role models, but the role models are fucking them. That messes up their heads.
Many of the recent cases involving gay foster dads or gay mentors who sexually abused boys do not reflect a sinister, evil psychology in the adult gay male, but rather a frighteningly innocent belief on the part of the adult that the youth wanted to get fucked and somehow fucking him was part of helping him.
Walter L. Williams, the founder of USC’s Gay and Lesbian Archives, got caught in sex traffic with underage boys in the Philippines and elsewhere, after decades of writing in favor of more open attitudes toward sexuality. He most likely thought that he was doing something benevolent by fucking boys. He had been after all a veritable father figure to gay college students for years.
Mark Newton, who manufactured a baby with an illegal Russian surrogate and then used the child he bought as an international sex slave, said it was an “honor” to have been a gay father as he was sentenced and sent off to prison. He was profiled by Australia’s ABC in 2010 as the idyllic example of same-sex parenting, beneath a headline, Two Dads Are Better than One. He and his husband, Peter Truong, probably felt that the toddler was experiencing pleasure with penises in his mouth, since the experience was pleasant for the adult getting a blow job.
There is a failure of ego differentiation in many of these cases (of which these are only a sliver.) The gay male adult, fed a steady diet of LGBT narratives about people being born gay and deserving sexual gratification as a civil right, cannot comprehend that what they believe and feel isn’t exactly the same as what the child is believing and feeling.
Since so much argumentation about gay parenting has hinged on the notion of “gay couples providing a loving home,” many gay adults charged with youths get lost in the nebulous meaning of “loving.” They have been prompted to believe that if what they do to young people comes from affectionate motives, it’s good. Which is a very convenient way to talk oneself into fucking a boy, unfortunately.
I am sure that Dan Savage felt that he was helping young boys with “It Gets Better,” though it seems that the tens of thousands of testimonials from adult gays merely encouraged boys to go out and get fucked up the ass by older men, with the result that now a lot of them are going to die from AIDS.
And then think of Caleb Laieski, the teen activist honored by President Obama, who helped a fortysomething gay policeman score with a fourteen-year-old boy who was questioning his sexuality. As Caleb and his adult conspirator prepare to go off to prison as well, I cannot say that they were ill intended. He and the gay policemen were leaders in the gay community and thought they were helping the fourteen-year-old by breaking him in. Unfortunately for them, the boy got suicidal and exposed the entire activist game as a terrible exploitative ruse.
While neither Michael Jackson nor Jerry Sandusky identified as gay, it is worth noting that they both also viewed their suspicious congress with boys as part of nurturing and affection.
These abhorrent data result from the gay movement’s uncritical celebration of the penis and its supposed liberating power. Your penis is not an instrument of charity, gentlemen. Your penis is a loaded weapon. You must understand that.
Mr. Signorile speaks of intergenerational sex as “nurturing” and educational. His views on this reveal that the modern gay male has little to no concept of nurturing and educational relationships except when such connections involve inserting their penises into people and ejaculating into them.
It’s bad enough that relationships between gay male adults have to be hypersexualized. When your beginning mindset is, “I can help and coddle this young boy, and fuck him too,” and you see nothing wrong with this, in fact believing that any resistance to it is based on homophobia (as Mr. Signorile has written in stark terms), you may be qualified to lead the gay community in developing its imagination, its fantasies, and its sense of self-actualization.
But you should not have custody of children, teenagers, or young adults. You should not be asking the American people to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and then place millions of future 18-year-olds in basic combat training under gay NCO’s who think this way. You should not be asking the American people to allow gay leaders in the Boy Scouts. You definitely should not be listed as a potential foster care home, let alone candidates for adoption.
The response from Mr. Signorile that the 19-year-old in the Dustin Lance Black case was a “consenting adult” makes it all the more urgent that the American people reject the ligbitist push to change laws about adoption, employment non-discrimination, and the like. Mr. Signorile, like most in the movement, believes that anything legal is okay. It shouldn’t be surprising that they are therefore so interested in changing laws to make more of the sleazy things they do legal.
I didn’t arrive at these harsh declarations because I hated gay people or because I am part of the gay community and have a deep abiding love for my gay brothers; I got here because I love young people and understand that it’s better that gay men don’t try to fuck them, which they will, if given the chance. That scares me.
As a professor, I live and operate with the understanding that people in a seasoned, mature, mentor-like role must express love toward those who are in the learning, young, and undeveloped role, without unzipping our pants and getting our penises involved.
As a father, I live and operate with the understanding that my daughter should go forth in the world and be mentored by adults who can differentiate between teaching her about professional life, etc., and involving her in the fraught act of sexual intercourse.
As a veteran of the US Army Reserves (as undistinguished as my service admittedly was), I live and operate with the understanding that training and discipline do not mix well with orgasms and erections and ejaculation.
These are all understandings — norms, if you will — that an adult entrusted with children has to walk around with. It has to be second nature. It must be something beyond question, beyond editorial review, beyond negotiation. While women face this issue, it is even more acutely an issue for men, who have a long history and perhaps biological predisposition, to inject their penis into situations and confuse their own quest for pleasure with their obligation to teach, mentor, and guide young people.
Heterosexual men who defy these rules with girls are subject to swift recrimination, even if they get away with it because it’s supposedly “legal.”
Colleagues of mine who have violated the sacred sexual barrier between teacher and student and made love to their pupils have lost tremendous respect from me and especially from females in the profession.
Non-commissioned officers or officers who sleep with female subordinates are subject to severe penalties in the military.
Think of what happened to Bill Clinton and David Petraeus as a result of their inability to manage their penises properly in the presence of younger forbidden fruit.
Dustin Lance Black is thirty-nine years old and almost the same age as his boyfriend’s father when the latter passed away recently. Judging from what the boy said in the video and what others have reported as information gleaned from people close to him, he looked up to Dustin Lance Black and wanted to learn from him, be mentored, be held and fathered by him.
It’s entirely possible that the boy broached the topic of sex and wanted the older man to teach him about homosexual intercourse–as a professor, trust me, I am familiar with how 19-year-olds can be sexually aggressive, even demanding that a relationship that should be based on mentorship turn into sex.
When I say that our penises are loaded weapons, I do not mean to say that the “victims” of gay penises aren’t sometimes eager to have access to them. But the adult in the room has to be able to say “no,” tell the college freshman to calm down, and keep his zipper up and his penis under lock and key. That’s part of being a grown-up. If you can’t say “no” to a young person who wants to take a look at your penis, you have no business trying to pass the Every Child Deserves a Family Act.
Related articles
Why I Cannot Blame Russia and India for Taking on the Gays (americanthinker.com)
Michelangelo Signorile: Tom Daley Is 20 Years Younger than Dustin Lance Black… So What? (huffingtonpost.com)
Michelangelo Signorile: No, Pope Francis Is Not the LGBT Person of the Year (huffingtonpost.com)
Poor Black and Hispanic Men Are the Face of H.I.V. (thelib2013.wordpress.com)
Man-Boy Sex and Its Long Tradition among Gay Men (robertlindsay.wordpress.com)
Michelangelo Signorile at Odds With HRC over Positive ‘Duck Dynasty’ Message (towleroad.com)
Gay Teens Are At Higher Risk for HPV, Study Shows (thegayclassifieds.wordpress.com)
Study Finds HPV Common in Young Sexually Active Gay Men (counselheal.com)

Alt Left: The Real Reasons for Many Murders of Transwomen and Gay Bashings of Gay Men

Much has been written about how many transwomen are murdered. Many transwomen are indeed murdered. Whether these are the true transsexuals (homosexuals) or the transtrenders (transvestites, crossdressers, and autogynephiles) is not known. Many transwomen (men who think they are women) work as prostitutes. Many are not able to work in ordinary jobs, they often have very poor mental health that prevents them from working at regular jobs.
Transwomen have the highest rates of mental disorder of any group seen clinically. 90% of transwomen are significantly mentally ill, and they have everything under the book, from mood disorders such as depression and bipolar disorder to anxiety disorders of different kinds to personality disorders. They also have very high rates of paraphilias and sexual disorders and have rates of being convicted for sex crimes (these are the transtrenders). The transwomen working on the street are often homeless and many have drug and alcohol problems. Very high HIV rates have been found for transwomen prostitutes – up to 42%.
Although the murders of transwomen are tragic, it is helpful to note the circumstances under which these are occurring.
A lot of these murders occur when they are prostituting themselves, and their label doesn’t always say what’s in the bottle. In other words, they are out on the streets advertising themselves as female prostitutes. They get picked up by male clients thinking they are picking up a woman.
At some point, they are shocked to find that it is actually a man as many transwomen are pre-ops, that is, they take the hormones but they have not taken the surgery, so they look like women, have women’s breasts, and yet they still have penises. When the client finds out that this is a “woman with a penis” sometimes they fly into a rage and kill the transwoman in a blind rage murder of the type that men are susceptible.
A friend of mine picked up a “woman” in a cab and went home with “her” only find out halfway through the blowjob that it wasn’t a woman at all. He didn’t get violent but he was pretty freaked out and upset.
It’s pretty abusive for TIM’s to tell us other men that they are women, and we men get into dating/sexual stuff with them and suddenly find out they’re a guy. They’re men pretending to be women and worse they are not even telling everyone!
No one wants to hear this, but a lot of gay bashing is actually done to gay men who are openly propositioning straight men (like, say, grabbing their cocks?). I am not supporting bashing of course, and I have been gay-bashed three times myself, once with a baseball bat! So I’m not wild about gay men, but homophobes are 100X worse. Also, how come no one talks about straight men getting gay-bashed? It’s epidemic.
But it is actually true. Many gay bashings occur not just when gay men hit on straight men, which they do constantly, but when they won’t take no for an answer, which is all the time. You women think straight men are bad about not taking no for answer, well, gay men are 50X worse.
And no one talks about this either, but gay men are far worse than straight men as sexual harassers, in fact they wrote the book on sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is the unspoken norm in gay male society.
I do dislike gay men but I support them politically and even work on their campaigns. I dislike them because they have been hitting on me for decades, and they won’t take no for an answer. My reaction is similar to that of women mad at men over sexual harassment.
Yes, gay men sexually harass straight men. You cannot talk about this either because it is “homophobic.” When I lived in LA, I lived in a gay community for a while. Supposedly I was good-looking back and then had some male modeling offers. I had a couple of friends who were straight models who started out pro-gay but became almost violently homophobic over time due to constant harassment by gay men. Male models are not all gay. Actually 2/3 are straight.
Anyway, the place was swarming with gay men, and I would walk down the street, and all of them would be rubbernecking me in their cars driving by. I had one who waited outside my workplace every night right before work. I would go to the window and look out, and there he would be, staring right up at my window. I almost had a panic attack every time. And he would watch me like a hawk as I walked to my car.
When I would go to parties, etc. they would creepily stare at me for long periods of time.
I related this on my site and got called homophobe of course, but some of my female readers commented and said, “Ok, now you know what it feels like to be a woman!” And she was right. I didn’t like those gay men treating me like a piece of meat. Now if women want to, ok, maybe.
The generally feeling would best be described as unnerving, which may be how women feel with constant male sexual attention?
I also disagree that sexual harassment is driven by misogyny. As you can see, men harass other gay men worse than they harass women and gay men harass straight men like crazy.
Men sexually harass women because they are men, and that is what men, do – they sexually harass other humans?
It’s a more science-based theory.

Alt Left: Female to Male HIV Transmission: How Does It Work?

Shakey: It’s 2018, do you still think it’s impossible for female to transmit HIV to male (negative) during vaginal intercourse?

I never said that. I would not say that because there have been a number of documented cases of female-male transmission.

  • If a male has an open sore like syphilis, herpes or chancroid, you can get HIV from a female.
  • And if she has any sort of vaginal bleeding or if the male has any sort of penile bleeding, all bets are off. Almost all cases of female-male cases nowadays involve the presence of genital bleeding, most often vaginal bleeding.
  • Odds of catching HIV from a woman are 1/10,000 per sex act, but this is from a study of long-term discordant couples. The couples in which the woman infected the man all had significant episodes of penile and vaginal bleeding (Nancy Padian 1989). This the famous Padian study that causes so much ridiculous and unnecessary uproar among Gay Politics types, who simply objected to the negative findings of the study. At the time, Gay Politics was actively promoting a falsehood that all heterosexuals were at risk of HIV.  This was done because they felt that if Americans thought only gays were getting HIV, they would not care to spend much money as gays were a despised minority. In order to get the funding that the gays thought they needed to study and treat the illness, the gays thought they had to convince heterosexual Americans that they were all at risk too. However, this was a lie concocted for political reasons. Padian was ferociously attacked by gays for her largely negative reports on female to male HIV transmission, as her findings blew up the gays’ lie that all straight were at risk too. Padian was forced to do a humiliating apology to gay SJW types for no reason at all. The whole matter was disgusting.
  • In the subtypes of HIV present in the US, the titers of HIV in vaginal fluid seems quite low to my eye anyway. I am looking at those titers, and they are so low, I am wondering how they are even going to transmit. It’s not enough to simply be exposed to HIV. You can be exposed to HIV many times and never get infected. The exposure that infects you has to carry a high enough viral load to cause infection, otherwise your body will just fight it off and you will not be infected. There is little to no evidence so far of female to male transmission of HIV via vaginal fluids from female to male.
  • Keep in mind that HIV is a blood borne illness. It tends to be transmitted via blood and that blood needs to come in contact with the blood of the other person for an infection to occur. Semen is full of blood, so semen can cause HIV infection. But it has to come in contact with the bloodstream of the other person for this to occur. In homosexual anal sex, the semen from one man comes into contact with the anus of the other man. Anal sex causes small microtears in the lining of the anus. Furthermore, the lining of the anus is very thin. The anus seems to be a mucous membrane that simply soaks up whatever is in it. Hence it is relatively easy for blood-infused semen to enter the bloodstream of the receptive partner of gay anal sex. In vaginal sex, the risks are much lower because the vagina has very thick walls in order to pass a huge baby, for one thing. It was also designed for regular hard PIV sex, which it handles quite easily. However, if a man ejaculates inside a woman’s vagina, it can somehow come in contact with the woman’s bloodstream. I am not sure exactly how this happens. If you have read this far, you can see that HIV carried by something either blood or blood-infused, is needed to transmit HIV. There is nothing in a woman’s body that is blood-infused enough to give HIV to a man, and it has to somehow get into his bloodstream anyway. Hence the only reliable method of female to male transmissions seem to be occurring when there is vaginal bleeding. If the man comes into contact with this blood that has a lot of HIV in it, apparently this blood can get into his bloodstream somehow and infect him.
  • The question of a man getting HIV from a woman via insertive anal sex is not known. A man could theoretically be exposed to blood from the woman while he is having sex with her. However, it would still need to get into his bloodstream somehow, and it’s not known how HIV can infect someone via a man’s penis.
  • The question now turns to whether a man performing oral sex on a woman can HIV that way. Not only will you almost surely not get HIV this way, but you stand a very low chance of getting any STD through oral sex on a woman. It is one of the safest sex acts out there. The question of vaginal fluid being so low in titers that I doubt if it transmits is still somewhat up in the air. There has been one documented case of transmission of HIV female to male via a man performing oral sex on a woman. A 60 year old man who was impotent nevertheless still liked sex and had some money. He paid a  prostitute every day to perform oral sex on her. These sessions could go on for an hour or two. The prostitute was HIV positive this whole time. This sex went on for an hour or two a day for six months, after which the woman infected the man with HIV. The vaginal fluid with HIV entered the man’s bloodstream somehow via his mouth, possibly via bleeding in his mouth. Another thing to consider is multiple exposures. So vaginal titers may be able to transmit under extreme circumstances. It is useful to note that lesbians often perform oral sex on each other in the same way that men to do women. I am not aware of a single transmission of HIV from woman to woman via oral sex.
  • The role of a reduced immune system. In the above case of the man getting HIV via oral sex with a woman, the researchers still thought the transmission was odd. They searched for other factors that could explain his infection. This older man had diabetes, which can significantly lower your immune system. The authors of the report felt that the man’s reduced immune system plaid a role in his infection. Someone with a good immune system would not have gotten infected.
  • The role of multiple microinfections with vaginal fluid. Vaginal titers are very low, but that mostly means that they will not transmit in one sex act. However, if you repeatedly get exposure to low titer vaginal fluid many times, you can build up enough microinfections that you build up a high enough HIV level in your system via many repeated infections.
  • Bottom line is it is very hard for a woman to transmit HIV to a man. Since I wrote articles on this, commenters with experience with long term sex with an HIV positive woman and an HIV-negative man. One couple had been married for 23 years and had been having regular sex the whole time. They often used condoms, but for the first three years of their marriage, they did not. Even after 23 years of regular sex, the woman had not yet given HIV to the man. I had a Black woman who was HIV positive comment. She said she was HIV-positive, but had been having regular sex with her HIV-negative husband for 10-15 years. She had not yet transmitted HIV to him. I asked her about it and she simply said, “It doesn’t go from woman to man, so we don’t worry about and have sex any way we please.
  • It is probable that there has not been a single female to male HIV infection in the porn industry over many years. Some of the men who claimed they got it from a woman were later revealed to have been having sex with men on the side, often working as male prostitutes. They practiced receptive anal sex when they did this.
  • The female to male infection rate figures are artificially inflated because many men who claim they got HIV from a woman are simply lying. This has been known for some time. In the late 1980’s, the New York state Health Department reported that they had had a number of reports of female to male transmission since the early 80’s. However they said that via very careful extended interviewing, in every single case it was found that the man claiming he got it from a woman had  actually gotten it either from IV drug use or from homosexual sex. The Department felt that female to male transmission was rare. The head of the department said, “HIV goes from men to women, and then it stops.” In other words, women are the last stop for HIV infection and the line of infection typically stops with women as they do not usually give to someone else. Recently an Infectious Disease specialist physician in the US reported that he had received a number of patients who were men who said that they got HIV from a woman. In every case but one, he was able to either find evidence of IV drug use via needle marks on the skin or via examination of the men’s anuses, he found evidence of receptive anal sex in them. I don’t know what that evidence constitutes. In the one case where he found neither method of transmission, the man had active Herpes lesions. The doctor felt that the man had gotten HIV from a woman via the woman infecting him through his Herpes lesions. These are after all open sores that provide direct access to the bloodstream.

Please help support this site. If you enjoy the hard work that goes into this website, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. Donations are the only thing that keep the site operating.

Alt Left: How the Cultural Left Privileges Gay Male Sex Over Straight Male Sex

Most gay men are sexually degenerate, and they probably always have been. There are reports from large European cities like Paris and Florence of men prowling the city parks at night for surreptitious homosexual sex. These reports date from the 1500’s and 1600’s. Yep, gay cruising was a thing way back in the Middle Ages.
I think the wild promiscuity and sexual degeneracy of gay men is part of what I call the Gay Male Syndrome. Male homosexuality is not a mental illness, but it is a psychological syndrome in that certain mindsets and behaviors almost ubiquitous among gay men across time and space. These common behaviors probably have to do with deep truths about male homosexuality that are part of the package it is delivered in. In other words, as with so many things, they have to do with Natural Law. Mother Nature getting her two cents in.
You don’t have to like gay male degeneracy to support gay rights. I figure this is just the way they are, and there’s nothing we can do about it.
Prominent gays have been screaming about gay promiscuity for decades now since the Gay Plague hit. Promiscuity did drop a lot, but it went down from stratospheric to the cloud layer. Gay men still have very high rates of HIV – in the US, 20% of gay men are HIV positive. Gay society and public health folks wage endless propaganda campaigns to try to stop gay men from turning themselves into Typhoid Mary’s, but they continue to acquire dangerous and deadly diseases at a high rate.
At some point you wonder if gay sex itself is a death wish – Eros and Thanatos, supposedly opposing forces, instead perversely wrapped in a deadly embrace, tumbling to the gallows. And I wouldn’t be the first person to suggest that. Many gay writers have hinted at something similar going on.
In other words, gay men still screw anything that moves and probably a lot of things that don’t. A lot will even screw a woman not because they like to but because gay guys fuck anything. Quite a few will screw an animal, gerbils for one. Even if you don’t like gay decadence, you probably ought to shrug your shoulders and leave them alone to sleep in the dirty bed they made. Their stupid lifestyle cuts a full 20 years off their lifespan. It’s death by a hundred self-inflicted cuts. They won’t stop, there’s no way to stop them, and they’re mostly hurting themselves. Leave them alone to the consequences of their misbehavior.
Anyway, here we get to the SJW Left. Of course the SJW Left loves everything gay men do, presumably even eating each other’s shit (practiced by 6% of gay men). There’s no such thing as gay sex that is too sick or fucked up gay sex for the Cultural Left.
Instead the Cultural Left mostly rages at straight men for looking at women or asking them for their phone number. I call that trying to get laid, but the Cultural Left calls it sexual harassment and says it is a form of violence and rapey behavior somewhere on the rape spectrum. Yep, you can rape women with your eyeballs now, but only if you’re a straight man. You can rape women with your mouth if you ask them for a date, as long as you are a heterosexual man. Of course dykes get to to whatever they want to women because they are a privileged victim class on the Cultural Left, and their victim status vastly proceeds that of straight men who are on the bottom of the heap.
So gay men can take 100 bareback Black cocks up the ass a year and acquire three different subtypes of HIV, and that’s all fine and dandy. But we straight men apparently don’t even have a right to get laid because that’s called rape, and we don’t even have a right to try to get laid because that’s harassment, which is a mild form of rape! SJW’s are like this because modern feminism is an essential pillar of the SJW outhouse, and modern feminism hates men, especially straight men, and hates us mostly because we dare to have sex with women, which feminists see as a form of violence and oppression against these precious and frail damsels.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Alt Left: What Percentage of Homosexual People Is Acceptable To You in a Given Population?

Answered on Queera.

Believe it or not, all of the answers said that if a country’s population was 100% gay, that would be absolutely wonderful! I’m sure having all the population of your country gay would be the greatest thing since sliced bread! What the Hell’s the matter with people? It would be catastrophic for any country to be 100% gay, though we’re probably headed that way in the US at the rate we’re going here.

How could having 100% of the population of your country gay possibly be a good thing!? Color me mystified.

A given population as in for a country? 3%. That’s the percentage in the US, and it’s just fine by me. Understand that homosexuality is bad for society in the sense that it causes a lot of costly problems for society. Furthermore, taxes paid by gays do not make up for the costs that society incurs from homosexuals.

  • Homosexuals live 20 years less than heterosexuals. It is horribly sad for gay people that they miss out on so many years of wonderful life, but it seems to me that reduced lifespan is costly to society.
  • Gays have higher rates of mood and anxiety disorders. While this causes a lot of suffering to gay people, and this is sad, at the same time, mental illness is costly to society.
  • Gays have much higher rates of drinking, smoking, and drug abuse than straights. The gay male party and play scene revolving heavily around methamphetamine and club drugs is particularly alarming. Lesbians in particular smoke a lot. The costs of drinking, smoking, and drug abuse to gays themselves are no doubt significant in terms of disease, mortality, and the suffering that can come from excessive substance abuse; nevertheless, this incurs a lot of costs to society.
  • Gay men obviously have a very high STD rate. At 20% infection rate, the HIV rate is especially alarming. Most of these diseases remain confined to the gay community and have not broken out significantly to the straight community, with the exception of the Black community with all the down low men. But the great heterosexual HIV epidemic spreading from gays to straights never occurred mostly because HIV goes from men to women and then it stops, as spokesmen from the New York Department of Public Health said as early as the 1980’s. That’s not completely true, but it is very hard to get HIV from a woman. Hepatitis A, B, and C are or were   fairly to very common to in the gay community, vastly more common than among heterosexuals, most of whom only acquire B and C from IV drug use. Parasitical diseases such as shigella, ameobiasis, and giardiasis are also extremely common among gay men; whereas they are quite rare among straights. In recent syphilis epidemics, up to 85% of cases are among gay men. Syphilis is quite uncommon among straights. Gay men have elevated rates of anal cancer, and the rate is rising. The rate is vastly higher than the rate among straights. I would like to point out that it is gay men themselves who suffer most from these diseases, and this suffering, although self-imposed, is often tragic, horrifying, and heartbreaking in particularly in the heart-wrenching case of HIV. Lesbians have very low rates of STD’s but higher rates of breast cancer. I doubt if lesbians impose a disease burden on society. The very high gay male STD rate, in particular the HIV rate, obviously imposes considerable costs to society.
  • Tragically, gay men have a suicide rate 3X higher than straight men, even in San Francisco, the most gay-friendly place in the US. The attempted suicide rate is also very high. Gay male teenagers have a tragically very high attempted suicide rate at 8X the normal rate. Suicidal behavior causes unfathomable and heartbreaking suffering on gay men. However, attempted and completed suicides impose considerable cost on society.
  • Domestic violence rates are very high in gay and lesbian couples, especially the latter. A gay man is much more likely to beat his partner than a straight man is. A woman is much less likely to be beaten by a male partner than by a female partner. This causes immense suffering to the partners of gay and lesbian batterers. In addition, domestic violence is costly to society.
  • In gay areas, gay men typically take over all of the public restrooms and turn them into miniature sex clubs. This renders most public restrooms unusable by the rest of us. Most gay men typically vociferously support the use of public restrooms as sex dens for gays. I don’t have much sympathy here. Gay men are simply being very irresponsible with this depraved mindset. Further, this is a cost to society.

It is first of all most important to point out that gay men themselves suffer worst from most from these largely self-imposed conditions, a suffering so profound that it almost moves you to tears. Compassion is essential. Nevertheless, there is a cost to society. Some of these issues may be caused by discrimination (see the high teenage gay male attempted suicide rate), but there is a cost to society no matter what causes it. Some of these problems would lessen with increased acceptance of gays, but others would linger or possibly even worsen.

The question comes up whether gays pay for the costs they bring to society. Many gays seem to have above average intelligence for some reason, especially gay men. Gays seem more artistically talented than straights. More gays than straights seem to get college degrees, in particular gay men.
Gay men seem to earn higher than average wages and are disproportionately employed in high paying and prestigious professions.

I am always hearing about a homosexual, often a gay man, who is contributing something noteworthy and exemplary to our society such that it mentions a media notice. Obviously, gay men contribute more to the tax base per capita than straights. So gays, especially gay men, offer considerable benefits to society, not flowing from their homosexuality but from other aspects of their lives.

I have not discussed lesbians here because I know little about them, but I doubt that they impose serious costs on society other than reduced lifespan.

However the question rises whether gays pay for themselves. Despite their excellent contributions to society and their higher than normal tax contributions, I still do not think that homosexuals pay for themselves.

The question then arises about whether the rest of us should be willing to carry a small burden for our gay brothers.

Personally I feel that at 3%, I am willing to shoulder the costs of homosexuals to society, as the numbers are so small that it is something we can cope with. I would be willing to tolerate up to 6% gay men in society. I think we could deal at that rate. However, if the rate of male homosexuality went higher than that, all of these problems above would increase in scope with attendant costs.

Honestly, even when you get to 10% gay men in any country, your problems are going to go up a lot. The % of gay men in New York and San Francisco is quite high, and they definitely impose considerable costs on these cities. Once you start heading up to 15–20% of any country’s population being gay, I think it would be unsustainable for many reasons (see above).

Homosexuality in society seems to be one of those things, like many things in life, that is best in small doses.

Can Your IQ Increase During Adolescence?

Answered on Quora.
Yes, oddly enough, IQ does move around somewhat, including gains or losses of up to 10–15 points, during adolescence. It is not quite known why IQ can move around a bit in adolescence, but in that stage of life, you can move around in a lot of ways. Your personality is not fully formed yet, so we cannot diagnose personality disorders in adolescence.
In addition, you can intervene with some dangerous adolescents, and if you work hard enough, you can make some good progress with them. I recall a young man who seemed to be headed for a career as a rapist, but they grabbed him as a teenager and threw him into intensive therapy. He’s now 40–50, and he hasn’t raped anyone yet. Some adolescents may be on track to seriously assault, attempt to kill or kill other people. I believe that if grab them early enough as teenagers and work hard on them, we can at least get to where they don’t kill anyone during their lifetimes. I have had some good success with people like this myself.
In adulthood, your IQ gets a lot more stuck and it’s hard to raise it. Long ago when I was in high school, a friend told me that a psychologist told him that you could raise your IQ ~15 points even in adulthood if you really put a Herculean effort into it, but it’s so hard to do, that most don’t do it.
He also said that you hit a ceiling at 15 IQ points gain, and you can’t gain any more than that. I think you might be able to lose ~15 IQ points if you sit on your butt, never think or open a book, or stay stoned or drunk a lot. But you will probably hit a floor where you can’t drop it anymore no matter how much of a slacker you are.
Large IQ declines are sometimes seen in illnesses, particularly illnesses of the brain. There is a woman on Quora who documented I believe a 57 point drop in IQ due to her Multiple Sclerosis. She was at Genius IQ before and she fell down to Low Normal. Other MS sufferers also complain of IQ drops. MS is a disease of the brain, so it makes sense.

Why Is the Average IQ in Africa So Low Compared to Other Continents?

Answered on Quora.
I hate to say it, but I think they have genetically low IQ. This is very sad because it smashes a lot of our hopes for Africa and makes its problems even less salvageable.
Nevertheless, due to something called the Flynn Effect, IQ’s in at least some African countries have risen a lot in only a few decades. I believe Kenya saw a rise of ~30 IQ points. But everyone else’s went up too due to the same effect, so at some point, it’s an arms race. An example would be the question of how fast do I have to be to outrun a tiger? I don’t have to be faster than a tiger to outrun a tiger, I just have to be faster than you!
Nevertheless, assuming that Flynn rises are actual increases in intelligence (I think they are), then Africans are definitely getting smarter. That the rest of the world is too doesn’t matter so much. If Africans get more intelligent, they will be so much better at solving their problems.
There are a lot of tropical diseases, parasites, and malnutrition in Africa which undoubtedly lower scores. Nevertheless, I still feel that there is a genetic lower intelligence that is a huge problem. Personally I think many of the problems of Africa are down to low intelligence.
What I am interested in is the notion of raising IQ. IQ can absolutely be raised in many ways, mostly nutritional. The Flynn rise is partly due to nutrition but also due to better education and also a more complex modern society. The ~30 point rise in Kenya was heavily on vocabulary, mathematics, and general knowledge, and it was thought to be down to better schooling.
Let’s get serious about IQ and do everything we can to raise the IQ’s of Africans in whatever way we can. If we can’t raise it enough by environment, maybe in the future we could monkey with human genes. I am serious. That’s how serious of a problem low IQ is in large populations.
You don’t make a problem go away by saying it doesn’t exist. It just festers, prolongs, and maybe gets worse.

Male Homosexuality and Lesbianism as "Syndromes"

 Jynxi: I’m glad you cleared that up because that was exactly my conclusion. That being said, how would you go about classifying homosexuality? Would it not be a type of BDD light?

Homosexuality is not a sin and it’s not chosen anyway. I am not much of a Christian, but it seems hard to figure out if it is a sin considering that God obviously made these people gay.
Homosexuality itself is not a mental disorder. Just because a man is turned on by men and not women or a woman is turned on by women and not men doesn’t mean that that man or woman is crazy. It’s not nuts or crazy to have a sexual preference for your own sex and not the opposite sex.
And it makes no sense to call the whole homosexual syndrome a mental illness because many gay men and possibly lesbians are extremely healthy psychologically. You can’t have mental disorders where the sufferers are very well-adjusted and mentally healthy. That goes against the definition of a disorder.
Nevertheless, both male homosexuality and lesbianism, while not being mental illnesses, still resemble them. In other words, homosexuality is not a mental illness, but it looks like one! This is because there is so much pathology that seems to go along inevitably with these orientations when you look at them as groups.
The PC claim is that all homosexual pathologies are due to discrimination. However, recent surveys have found high levels of all sorts of pathologies in both gays and lesbians even in places like Sweden and most recently in the Netherlands. Gays are more accepted there than anywhere on Earth, so the gays can’t use the discrimination excuse which they always use to handwave away all gay and lesbian pathology.
Male homosexuality and lesbianism on average cut a full 20 years off your lifespan. The most recent studies showing a 20 year lifespan reduction have come out of Sweden, Denmark and Canada. Gays also say that the 20 year reduced lifespan is due to discrimination, but this is hard to reckon with in places like Sweden and Denmark where there is little discrimination against gays. Gay men who die of non-HIV causes only live a few years longer than those who die of HIV, and lesbians who are not affected by HIV don’t live any longer than gay men.
The implication is that all of the pathologies and the reduced lifespan are simply inherent aspects of this homosexual syndrome when look at the groups as a whole. There is something inherent in homosexuality in many cases that causes you to be unhappy, have all sorts of problems and die young.
However, if you believe in Natural Law, homosexuality seems to be violation of Natural Law. Obviously nature wants men and women to pair off and make babies. When that gets messed up as in women raising children alone or homosexual couples raising children, all sorts of problems seem to develop. The children have quite a few more problems than those raised by a father and mother.
A household with a father and a mother continues to be the best for children. This doesn’t really make sense unless you think that possibly Nature wants it this way, or perhaps we have evolved to raise children this way. If the latter, we might not be adapted to raising children in other ways very well.
Homosexual relationships both gay and lesbian seem to run into all sorts of problems. First of all, they usually end up caricaturing heterosexual relationships with one playing the dominant and masculine man and another the submissive and feminine woman in both gay male and lesbian relationships. That even gays end up caricaturing the basic heterosexual pattern implies once again that this is either Natural Law or we have evolved that way (possibly “Natural Law” might mean nothing other than the way we have evolved).
Gay relationships seem almost inherently pathological. They do not seem to last long. 91% of even lesbians never have a relationship that lasts more than five years, and gay men are even worse. Hell, even I did better than that. Gay male couples are 4-5 X more likely to suffer from domestic violence than straight couples are. Lesbians beat each other up so often and so badly that their rates are off charts, worse than even gay men’s rates.
Lesbians often fall into what is called Lesbian Bed Death where they have sex once a month if that often. No one knows why this happens, but perhaps lesbian relationships lack the male “charge” that may be necessary to fire up female sexuality. Lesbians try to imitate the charge by having one woman play the male role, but maybe it doesn’t work.
Gay men typically have notoriously unstable relationships which are much more temporary even than those of lesbians. Gay male life often revolves around a never-ending swirl of temporary and often one-time or even anonymous relationships. A survey out of Australia in 2000 showed that many gay men were continuing to have sex with more than 100 men per year. And this is long after the wild promiscuity of the 1970’s that preceded the HIV epidemic calmed down to much lower levels in  the 1980’s. Even at this late date, gay men are very promiscuous.
All of this wild sex for some reason does not seem to make them happy and in fact it may make them unhappy. Many gay men seem to be caught in this never ending drug and promiscuous sex cycle in which they seem to be chasing an elusive happiness and fulfillment that they never seem to find.
Many gay men seem to be looking for a father figure. Gay men’s relationships with their fathers and male peers were typically quite poor, and it has been suggested that gay men are forever trying to fill the “father hole” that never got filled in them or are forever trying to find the male acceptance and brotherly love that they never got from their peers while growing up. Gay male culture revolves heavily around the notion of the “Daddy,” and many gay male relationships incorporate the “Daddy” archetype. A number of gay men have stated that a theme of their adult lives, particularly sexually, was a search, often wandering, painful, and yearning but ultimately fruitless, for the father relationship that they never had.
Neither gays nor lesbians seem very happy. Gay men have a 3X elevated rate of suicide even in the Netherlands, which is as gay-friendly as you can get. There seems to be something inherent in male homosexuality that causes this suicidality.
One can picture heterosexual relationships in the yin and yang figure. Take them apart and they float alone, missing their other half. Men and women only become completely whole in a heterosexual relationship where the male donates his masculine element to the woman which she incorporates into herself and the woman donates her female element into the male which he incorporates into himself. They are both now whole, locked together in that perfect fitting embrace, the key in the lock of the yin/yang emblem.
Look, I do not think that male homosexuality or lesbianism are lifestyles that gay men and lesbians choose to lead in most cases, although there are some women who seem to choose to be lesbians, and there are a few basically straight men who choose to live a gay lifestyle, but the numbers of the latter are very small.
By age 15, gay men cannot be changed to straight, and they cannot even be made somewhat more heterosexual or somewhat less homosexual. Male homosexuality is incurable, unfixable, or permanent, however you want to look at it.
In early onset cases, lesbianism appears to be quite permanent and incurable too. So almost all gay men and many lesbians are pretty much stuck being gay. 
Still the lifestyles that especially so many gay men in big cities seem to live seem to be very unhealthy both physically and psychologically. In many cases the way they live is simply not a good way to live your life.
I don’t hate gays and lesbians. You can’t hate people for what they can’t help. I wish for all of them the very same happiness and health that I want for myself in life, not 1% less.
Nevertheless, I worry that all of this pathology may simply be somehow inherent in the “syndromes” of male homosexuality and  lesbianism, possibly due to their violations of Natural Law or our evolution, and that these problems may never be fixed much.
And that is quite a sad thing to believe. 

Is It True That the Number of LGBT People Is Growing More and More by the Year?

Answered on Quora.
Indeed in the most recent poll in the UK, the rate of homosexuality and bisexuality has increased dramatically among the youngest generation (18–30).
Now whether the rate is really going up or not will be the subject of an endless circular argument because no matter how high the rate goes, the PC people will always insist that these are just more and more people who would have been counted gay in prior years except they were closeted.
All increases will be hand-waved away as “people coming out of the closet.” Because of this tautological argument the PC types always trot out of all increases being explained by people leaving the closet, we may never be able to determine if the rate of this sort of thing is increasing or not.
I have had also had PC people explain increases in the rate of homosexuality as “those people were already gay anyway.” Once again we see an argument circling around itself. In fact, an argument like this fails falsifiability and hence it is not only inherently false, but it’s not even wrong!
The rate of bisexuality among young women in the West is skyrocketing in recent years, from 1.5% to 12%. Obviously this is a real increase, and many of these women are simply choosing this orientation. There’s no way that all of those women were “born that way.”
It is absolutely certain that the rate of transgenderism is skyrocketing in recent decades. In the 1960’s-1980’s, the rate was 1/90,000. It was quite rare all through the 1970’s. In recent years the rate has exploded to the point where in Generation Z, an incredible 2% of the population claims to be transsexual.
Therefore the rate of transgenderism has gone up 1,800 times (!) in recent years. It’s pretty obvious that there that that 180,000% (!) increase cannot possibly be explained away on an organic basis. Clearly many people are simply choosing to be transsexuals for whatever reason. Either that or it is a mental disorder, which is my position. In that case, the rate of this mental illness is going through the roof.
If it is a choice, it doesn’t seem like a good one to me, as the rates of psychiatric morbidity and mortality among trans people are extremely high. Transsexuals commit suicide at fully 18–57 times the rate of the rest of the population. Their overall death rate is 2.5 X higher than the rest of the population. Rates of heart disease and cancer are double to triple that of the rest of us. 41% of transsexuals attempt suicide. Their life expectancy is cut short, possibly by decades.
The usual PC argument here once again is that no matter what the transgender rate is, the rate was the same in prior years, except these transsexuals were all closeted. I am sorry, but I find it very hard to believe that 2% of the people in my or my parents’ generations were transsexual. Doesn’t pass the smell test. Furthermore, the argument is tautological and hence not only is it not correct, but it’s not even wrong!

Is It True That the Number of LGBT People Is Growing More and More by the Year?

Answered on Quora.
Studies in the US show that 3-5% of the population is gay or bisexual. The rate has been flat for several years.
However in the most recent poll in the UK, the rate of homosexuality and bisexuality has increased dramatically among the youngest generation (18–30). In all other age cohorts, the rate was flat or near-flat.
Now whether the rate is really going up or not will be the subject of an endless circular argument because no matter how high the rate goes, the PC people will always insist that these are just more and more people who would have been counted gay in prior years except they were closeted.
All increases will be hand-waved away as “people coming out of the closet.” Because of this tautological argument the PC types always trot out of all increases being explained by people leaving the closet, we may never be able to determine if the rate of this sort of thing is increasing or not.
I have had also had PC people explain increases in the rate of homosexuality as “those people were already gay anyway.” Hence the rate never goes up or down. Once again we see an argument circling around itself. In fact, an argument like this fails falsifiability and hence it is not only inherently false, but it’s not even wrong! In parts of Ancient Greece, 95% of the male population were bisexual. That rate is the highest recorded rate on Earth. Instead of saying that homosexual behavior showed an explosive increase in Ancient Greece, the argument is “those men were already gay anyway?” What?!
The rate of bisexuality among young women in the West is skyrocketing in recent years, from 1.5% to 12%. Obviously this is a real increase, and many of these women are simply choosing this orientation. There’s no way that all of those women were “born that way.”
It is absolutely certain that the rate of transgenderism is skyrocketing in recent decades. In the 1960’s-1980’s, the rate was 1/90,000. It was quite rare all through the 1970’s. In recent years the rate has exploded to the point where in Generation Z, an incredible 2% of the population claims to be transsexual.
Therefore the rate of transgenderism has gone up 1,800 times (!) in recent years. It’s pretty obvious that there that that 180,000% (!) increase cannot possibly be explained away on an organic basis. Clearly many people are simply choosing to be transsexuals for whatever reason. Either that or it is a mental disorder, which is my position. In that case, the rate of this mental illness is going through the roof.
If it is a choice, it doesn’t seem like a good one to me, as the rates of psychiatric morbidity and mortality among trans people are extremely high. Transsexuals commit suicide at fully 18–57 times the rate of the rest of the population. Their overall death rate is 2.5 X higher than the rest of the population. Rates of heart disease and cancer are double to triple that of the rest of us. 41% of transsexuals attempt suicide. Their life expectancy is cut short, possibly by decades.
The usual PC argument here once again is that no matter what the transgender rate is, the rate was the same in prior years, except these transsexuals were all closeted. I am sorry, but I find it very hard to believe that 2% of the people in my or my parents’ generations were transsexual. Doesn’t pass the smell test. Furthermore, the argument is tautological and hence not only is it not correct, but it’s not even wrong!

Repost: Are Oriental Massage Girls Safe?

This post ran a long time ago too, but I sold some ads on this one too, so I thought I would rerun it. Great post for any male commenters who like to purchase their sex.
BX Monger writes:

You missed out and should have boned her good. Most of these MP babes are cleaner than the avg chick you may meet in a bar and bang. Some of the older MP babes that only do handjobs will put out on occasion, and it’s the tightest p*ssy on earth. 40 yo single Korean babe with no kids and rare romp occasionally likes being ravaged!

I don’t discuss my own experiences on there, but from talking to my friends, those Asian massage parlor chicks in the US ain’t got a damned thing. I have friends who used to go to those places all the time. They told me they never caught a damned thing.
Talking to numerous men over a period of years:
No cases of:
Gonorrhea
Chlamydia
Genital warts
Herpes 2
Syphilis
HIV
Trichomomas
Not one single case.

Confused Old Man Named POTUS Wanders away from His Limousine

Secret Service had to show him the way back to his car. Too bad they didn’t direct Lord Marmalade straight to the nearest busy highway.
He did the same thing at a recent European conference. He got confused and someone had to show him where the exit to the stage is.
The car was right in his ugly orange face and he walked right by it. As if there might be some other limo parked right outside Airforce One. “I’m sorry, Mr. Trump, this limo is for Elon Musk. Yours is over there.”
Jesus Christ! Grandpa has dementia! Man, that’s really scary thinking this sundowning old man has the nuclear codes! Gramps is getting to the point where he needs a full-time caregiver. He never was very smart to start with, but now he has the attention span of a goldfish and the IQ of a french fry.
That’s crazy. People around the Net are saying that that was the first symptom that their grandmother or grandfather showed of dementia – wandering off exactly like this.
Is there some way we could help this guy wander right off the face of the Earth? Too bad the Earth isn’t flat like most of his supporters believe, huh?
Trump for Prison 2017!
 

Possible Origin of the Black Plague

Here.
The standard view is that twelve ships from Florence docked at Messina in 1347, bringing the Plague to Europe. It would later kill 1/3 of all Europeans and an incredible 20% of all humans. It would be as if 1.6 billion people died in only seven years or as if 66 million Americans died over a seven year period. Can you imagine? In my city alone, 12,000 people would be dead. Of every five people you knew at the start of the period, one would be dead after seven years. Can you imagine? That would not have left one person unscathed.
A new view though is that the Plague, which had already been active in Asia for a while, came to Europe via a biological warfare attack by Genghis Khan’s raiders on the city of Caffa in the Crimea. The Caffans were probably Turkic speakers at this time, but it is hard to say what Turkic lect they may have spoken. Perhaps a dead language called Cuman.
Khan’s raiders besieged the city and a number of people died of the Black Plague in the conflict. Khan’s men suspected a thing or two about biological warfare, so they loaded up the bodies that had died of the plague and catapulted them over the walls of the city into the population. Can you  imagine the horror of looking out your window and see a dead, bubonic plague ridden corpse fly by in the air at rapid speed to splatter nearby. Good Lord. In due time, this biological warfare killed a lot of the people in  the city.
Khan knew nothing of the  germ theory of disease, but experience with the plague showed that those who came in contact with victims tended to sicken and die. No one knew what was causing it. One European physician posited that plague victims radiated some sort of death vapors or essence out of their very eyes. Without medical science, people had to fall back on spiritual theories.
But people caught on quickly that being around plague victims could quickly make you a victim yourself. Physicians refused to treat plague patients and patients were often abandoned wherever they sickened. Family members even fled from their own sickened members, leaving them to die in the home while countless people fled to the countryside. But even there they were not safe. Even farm animals, cows, pigs, goats and sheep, caught the plague. So many sheep died that there was an acute wool shortage all over Europe for years afterwards. There was no solace or respite anywhere. The epidemic ended almost as fast as it began in 1354, but Europe was ruined. Entire cities had been abandoned as thousands of residents fled to the false safety of the countryside.
Many people escaped from Khan”s raid on Caffa, and survivors fled all over the Mediterranean. This people soon sickened and died. It was possibly from some of this group, fled to Florence, that the ill-fated death ships docked in Messina on that warm October night. The disease was in Southern France the next year and Germany soon after that. Not long afterwards, it hit Paris. And despite the primitive conditions of the day, it was not long in  Paris before London was also hit. People did have ships in those days you know.
Despite the enticing new theory, the medical journal concludes that the entrance of the Plague to Europe was multifactorial and the infection of the Caffa population did not play an important role in the European pandemic.

Trumpcare Is Going to Kill a Lot of People

A lot of people are going to die.
In the US, 250,000 people already die every year from lack of health insurance. Trumpcare will get rid of healthcare for 23 million people while jacking up rates wildly and reducing coverage for everyone else. It’s hard to understand why anyone other than an insurance executive would support this BS. It’s not good for anyone. Even if you keep your insurance,  Trumpcare is going to jack your rates up to the ceiling while dramatically reducing your coverage.
What’s in it for you, conservatards? Are you all masochists? Is that it?
“Yes, please, throw me off my healthcare so I die! Yes, please, Mr. Trump, jack up my health insurance rates through the roof and reduce my coverage so I am broke with crap medical insurance!”
The more I study conservatives, the more I think they are flat out masochists. They claim they are out to benefit themselves, but whenever the rich or the corporations want to rip off the people or ream them so hard it hurts, conservatives drop their pants, bend over and say, “Batter up!”
I don’t get it. You idiots like to suffer? You like to get ripped off by corporations. What’s your argument?
“Yes I love capitalism! Yes, this corporation and these rich people are running me through the meat grinder to line their greedy pig pockets, but that’s ok! I love to suffer and lose money and stuff so rich people can have more cash! I love to be impoverished so corporations can make more profits! That’s capitalism, and I’m a capitalist!”
Conservatives are dumbasses!
You scumbags are going to kill and hurt lots of Americans so you can give rich people are big fat tax cut. That’s pure political sociopathy. How do conservatives sleep at night?
PS. Republican Wealthcare is not even very popular with conservatives. Only 19% of  Americans support it. It’s so toxic and unpopular that Republicans are holding hearings on it in secret because if anyone finds out what’s really in it, there will be a huge uproar. Trump is phony as usual. He complained that the House version was “mean,” but the  Senate bill is almost worse. The House bill throws 24 million people off their healthcare and the Senate bill throws 23 million people off. Hey, that’s progress! But the Senate bill is actually much worse in terms of Medicaid.
Let’s kill hundreds of thousands of people so billionaires can get a huge tax cut! That’s the logic of capitalism right there, folks.
You guys wonder why we are socialists. You wonder why we hate capitalism so much. Read that paragraph above and see why. We socialists are on firm moral ground, I assure you. We sleep very well at night.

About My Employment Status

I am sort of getting tired of answering questions about my employment that I get from haters every day. Here is a statement on the matter from another site a while back.

I live off a trust fund, and I also work as a therapist. I make some money writing and I do a few other things like brokering deals between consultants and clients, things like that. The reason I do not work is due to health. I am not in good enough health to work. Otherwise I have been working or in school my whole life. My last job title was Linguist/Cultural Anthropologist.

I do not use any government programs, so I am mystified at people always saying I am on welfare or collect a government check. I have no idea where they came up with that idea.
Here are my income sources in the last year or so:

Income Sources

Trust fund. Had $700,000 at the start, but now it is a lot less. It is a spendthrift trust, so I am locked out of it. They have always given me right around a poverty level wage only because my grandfather wanted me to survive but he also wanted to force me to work, so he made it small enough so I could survive but would not live comfortably. The idea was to force me to work because he did not want me kicking back my whole life as a trust fund kid. It was made spendthrift because he figured that if I had control over it, I would blow through the thing in a few years as I was a bit of a spendthrift, party boy and playboy as a young man.
Counseling. Peer counselor. I focus mostly on one condition, a DSM anxiety disorder, which, frankly, I am an expert on. I work with clients all over the world, mostly in the US but also in Chile, El Salvador, Canada, Australia, the UK, Ireland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland. I also work with problems in living, deep stuff (exploring your deep self or childhood issues) and growth stuff (learning how to grow to become a better and more functional human being).
People often break down in tears and start crying right in the middle of sessions. Happens all the time. I deal with suicidal people all the time. In fact, I lost one client to suicide already. I have had clients who were attempting suicide while I was working with them. It can be hard to deal with. I have no degrees, credentials or licenses in this field, but in California, you do not need one. Just hang out your shingle and call yourself “Counselor” and say come talk  to me about your problems. I do not get a lot of business, but I do get some. Considering that I lack all of the things you usually need to do this work, I am amazed that I get any work at all.
I read a lot of books on this subject and I have been studying psychology for 40 years. I had decades of therapy. I read up on counseling psychology and mental illness all the time so I am pretty much self-taught. You would be amazed how many jobs you can do simply by teaching yourself how to do them. It’s a myth that you need degrees, credentials,. etc. to do this or that job. Just teach yourself.
The longer I do this, the better I get at it. It is a stressful job though. I do one 1 hour session and I feel like I just ran a mile. I sometimes have to go lie down. The clients are in so much psychic pain that it seems to leak out of them and into my body. If you are empathetic at all this is going to happen.
Brokering deals between graphic artists and clients. I put the clients and artists together, negotiate prices, etc. and then take a cut for myself.
Conflict resolution/arbitration. In cases of graphic artists and clients where they have come to a standstill and nothing is getting done. An example: client has spent $~1,000 and is not satisfied with the product. Artist has stopped speaking to the client or returning his phone calls or emails. Client sent work back for endless revisions, and eventually the artist just had it. I wade in there, talk to both sides, figure out the nature of the dispute and try to settle the matter so that everyone is happy. I am actually quite good at this.
Webpage design/graphics. Mostly graphics. Working with graphics for people who need websites done. Work with graphic artists.
Graphics editor for books. I was recently a graphics editor for a book. I was in charge of maps. I worked with a graphic artist and told him what to label the areas and where to  shade in the areas we needed to shade in. We used a lot of sources, all of which were wrong. It was a great big mess,  but it was fun to put together the jigsaw puzzle.
Webpage design consulting. Consult with webpage designers who are having problems with their pages to fix their issues.
Selling information. As crazy as it sounds, I have actually made money doing that. I have some pretty much secret information about a few things that a lot of people want but few people have access to. An example would be a geographical location of an  unusual place that a lot of people want to get to, but the location is a closely guarded secret. So I ell directions to this location and then work with them afterwards to help them reach the site, etc. Yes, you can actually sell information! Isn’t that crazy?
Medical counseling. Work with heterosexual men who are worried that they have contracted HIV from sexual contact with women. I am an expert on this type of transmission and have been studying it for over 30 years now. I know more about it than most physicians.
They tell me the situation, and I lay out the odds that they may have contracted the disease based on their situation. I also tell them how HIV is acquired from women and tell them about the various surveys that have been done. I also have a lot of percentages, facts and figures about this type of transmission, like say 1% chance after 40 encounters. I tell them about all the different types of testing, the accuracy, etc. Then I follow them through any tests that they need to take in the next few months. And if they have anxiety or obsessive issues about possibly contracting this illness, I work with them on that, as I am very good at calming down or talking down people who are in the midst of anxiety episodes. I do it all the time.
Author. Just published my first book, or chapter in a book I should say. It is an 80 page chapter. I am supposed to be paid for this at some point. Book was published in Turkey in a university press. Took me 500 hours or three months work at part time. I worked with professors from all over the world on this project. I also had to go through two rather brutal peer reviews. I also came up with the name for this book series, but I was not paid for that.
Sell advertisements. I have made a bit of money selling ads on this site, but honestly it has been very little.
That’s it. I am always looking for new ways to get money though. I wake up every morning and think, “How am I going to get some money today?”
I became ill 21 years ago and have not worked at a regular job since. If I did not have the trust, I would try for Disability. Before I got ill, I was always either working or in college or both. There was never a time when I was doing neither.
If you enjoy the hard work that goes into this website, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. Donations are the only thing that keep the site operating.

Repost: The Smallpox-infected Blankets

Repost from the old site. This is actually one of the most popular posts on this site and it has been linked to from all over, including Takimag. This is one of the best pieces on the Smallpox Blankets story that you will find on the Net. As an aside, there is a lot about an utterly brutal war called The Pontiac War that most have never even heard of. Bottom line is that the Smallpox Blankets story is pretty much bullshit, but it’s bullshit that gets repeated endlessly mostly because it shows how evil we Whites are and hence fits the current anti-White narrative very well.

Oh, how the American Indians love this story! I’ve heard it endlessly.
Did you know that the US gave these evil blankets to Indians all over the country, even here in California? Or Hudson Bay traders gave them to Indians in Canada? That those blankets wiped out “generations” of Indians? That the US gave them out to reservation Indians in the 1800’s? That Puritans gave out the blankets to Massachusetts Indians?
Neither did I.
Ward Churchill said the US Army gave Indians them diseased blankets. He lied, and he should have known better.
It’s always nice to track down a myth, or is it really a myth?
So let’s track it down.
Turns out, Americans never gave smallpox blankets to any Indians anywhere at anytime. Not the government, not the Army, not anyone. So we are absolved on that one. The incident in question occurred in 1763, before there even was a USA, before there even were Americans. And American colonists (pre-Americans) didn’t do it either. It was the British that done the deed, and the one man who is always accused of doing it never even did it.
Further, it was in the midst of a horrible and genocidal war (on both sides) called Pontiac’s Rebellion, which occurred around the Great Lakes area during this time.
This was really a followup to the French and Indian War, with which the rebellion is often incorrectly associated. In the aftermath of that war, the area which had been ruled by the French was now ruled by the British. And the Indians, far from reflexively hating every White man around, had previously adjusted well to French rule and were angry about now being ruled by the British.
The Indians hated the deal they were getting from the British, who were treating the Indians very poorly. There were only a few colonial settlers around at this time.
The Indian goal in the war was to get the French back so they could live under French rule rather than British rule. Towards the end of the war, they may have even wanted freedom.
But freedom for Indians was never going to work out, at least in the short term, because they were stupid. Stupid? Yes, which is why in the mid-1700’s, when the civilized world was starting to get themselves a country or something like a country (monarchical empires), no way could the American Indians have made one.
Why? Because they were so stupid that they had endless deadly blood feuds with most of the surrounding tribes such that they spent way more time fighting and killing each other than they did the White man. Any country they would have gotten would have fallen immediately into mad civil war, with no adults around to sort it out and send one to one room and another to the other.
If you ever find any of those old adolescent novels about the settling of the pre-US Upper Midwest and Appalachia (forget the name), they are a great read. I spent my early adolescence at the library reading those books.
It’s interesting that in the mid-1700’s, these Indians were well-supplied with firearms. They didn’t invent any firearms, but they were smart enough to figure out their great value as weapons quickly, and they even got to the point where they were expert gunsmiths – experts at stocks, barrels and even gunpowder and pellets.
The Whites were selling and giving the Indians good quantities of muskets, pellets and gunpowder in this part of the colonial US at this time, but the stupid Indians were mostly using the firearms to kill their Indian enemies rather than to fight the Whites. This situation went on for decades in the US and seriously hampered the Indians’ anti-colonial wars of national liberation against the White invaders.
In Pontiac’s War, they added firearms to knives, hatchets (not a bad weapon), bow and arrow, flaming bow and arrow and even rocks and clubs. They ingeniously sawed off their muskets into sawed-off shotgun-type muskets so they could hide them under their blankets.
The Indians were horrible and vicious in the course of this war, and the British were too. But it was the British who were really getting pounded. Whole forts were being overwhelmed by 300-strong Indian armies, and after the storming, the Indians would kill everyone in the place, soldiers, women, kids, anyone.
The Indians were raiding towns, settlements and schools and killing every White they could find. These were some of the most hard-ass Indians in the history of the Indian Wars. Further, the Indians actually made an alliance of many tribes living in the area during this war, which is incredible, since the Indians usually hated their neighbors so much they would not even ally with them to fight the Whites.
In the course of the Pontiac Rebellion, a famous British general named Lord Jeffrey Amherst wrote a letter to his subordinate among the besieged British troops in one of the forts suggesting that they give the Indians smallpox-infected blankets. Turns out that this had already been done by that very subordinate. Simeon Ecuyer, the Swiss-born British officer in command of Fort Pitt, was the man who did it.
Although we do not know how the plan worked out, modern medicine suggests that it could not possibly have succeeded. Smallpox dies in several minutes outside of the human body. So obviously if those blankets had smallpox germs in them, they were dead smallpox germs. Dead smallpox germs don’t transmit smallpox.
In addition to the apparent scientific impossibility of disease transmission, there is no evidence that any Indians got sick from the blankets, not that they could have anyway. The two Delaware chiefs who personally received the blankets were in good health later. The smallpox epidemic that was sweeping the attacking Indians during this war started before the incident. The Indians themselves said that they were getting smallpox by attacking settler villages infected with smallpox and then bringing it back to their villages.
So, it’s certain that one British commander (British – not even an American, mind you), and not even the one usually accused, did give Indians what he mistakenly thought were smallpox-infected blankets in the course of a war that was genocidal on both sides.
Keep in mind that the men who did this were in their forts, cut off from all supplies and reinforcements, facing an army of genocidal Indians who were more numerous and better armed than they were, Indians who were given to killing all defenders whether they surrendered or not.
If a fort was overwhelmed, all Whites would be immediately killed, except for a few who were taken prisoner by the Indians so they could take them back to the Indian villages to have some fun with them. The fun consisted of slowly torturing the men to death over a 1-2 day period while the women and children watched, laughed and mocked the helpless captives. So, these guys were facing, if not certain death, something pretty close to that.
And no one knows if any Indians at all died from the smallpox blankets (and modern science apparently says no one could have died anyway). I say the plan probably didn’t even work and almost certainly didn’t kill any of the targeted Indians, much less 50% of them. Yes, the myth says that Amherst’s germ warfare blankets killed 50% of the attacking Indians!
Another example of a big fat myth/legend/historical incident, that, once you cut it open – well, there’s nothing much there.
The tactics in this war were downright terrifying. At one point the city of Detroit itself was surrounded and besieged for weeks on end.
Pontiac was a master tactician, and the history of the war is full of all sorts of evil acts of deception. Fake peace treaties and fake peace delegations. Devious Indian women working as undercover spies for both sides. Indian mistresses tipping off their White lovers to Indian attacks. And the converse, Indian undercover female agents, disguised as workers in the forts, secretly letting the Indians in to massacre the Whites, and Indian mistresses deviously leading their White officer-lovers and the soldiers under them to their deaths.
It took forever for the British to resupply the forts, and many reinforcement missions were ambushed and annihilated by Pontiac’s men. It was not a good time to be White in the Great Lakes region, no sir.
At the end of the day, no one won the war, neither the Indians nor the British.
The Indians had foolishly allowed themselves to become dependent on the fickle Whites for gunpowder and pellets, which the Indians quickly ran out of when the Whites wisely quit supplying them during the hostilities.
Lesson: don’t buy your war supplies from the enemy. When war breaks out, he’ll cut you off.
A little-known aspect of US colonial history.
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

Sexually Transmitted Parasitical Infections

Concerned Assman writes:

Robert,
You mentioned in an earlier post on this general subject that something like 60% of Gay man have nasty parasites in their gut. Where does this come from? From stuff like licking asses and drinking evacuated enema water? I love licking my girlfriend’s ass, but she has impeccable hygiene — however, I do not want to get any nasty parasites in my gut that don’t belong there. Not worth it.

The figure is incorrect. It is not 60% of gay men that have parasites, it is more like ~100% of them do, or at least that was what one study found. I said that they have on average 60 different species of parasites in these gay men. I think most of them are harmless, but still.
Gay men get that from licking asses, which is something they really love to do. They really go to town when they do it too. I have seen a few videos and photos. They go for it like a man who hasn’t eaten in 30 days. It is quite a sight to behold.
I do not think that gay men commonly drink evacuated enema water. Or I certainly hope they don’t. There are probably a few that may do such a thing. I have never in my life heard of gay men engaging in this activity. Neither have I heard of any straight people doing this either, thank God.
The thing is that the gay male population is totally saturated with these parasites, so you are dealing with a disease base or reservoir that is unbelievably infected with these critters.
However, your average straight man has zero parasites in his gut. The same study found both zero parasites in straight men and 60 different species in gay men. It was a health clinic, not sure what kind.
There are only a few of these that are going to get you sick: Giradiasis or Giardia, Ameobiasis or Amoebic dysyntery, and shigella or shigellosis.
There is also Hepatitis A. Gay men at least in the past experienced frequent big outbreaks of Hepatitis A in some of our big cities.
Almost no straight men get Hepatitis A heterosexually. I have never heard of Hepatitis A being transmitted heterosexually, but anything is possible. The problem once again is that the gay male pool is or was heavily infected with Hepatitis A. Further, many to most people who contract it never get it and just become carriers who can infect others. Straight people do not get Hepatitis A heterosexually probably just because the reservoir  is so clean. Few heterosexual people have Hepatitis A, so the reservoir is clean enough that your risk of getting it heterosexually is very low.
There are a few other diseases that can be transmitted this way like typhoid fever. Yes, there have been a few cases of Typhoid fever among gay men, but maybe only ~5 cases in the whole literature.
Most of the other things that can be transmitted this way are more or less harmless and are only a problem for the very young, the very old and the immunosuppressed such as people with HIV.
I did a huge lit search on parasites being transmitted sexually and only came up with 5-10 cases. However, those did occur in recent years. I think it was giardiasis. I still have the notes on that and I can turn it into a good post if I want to but I was afraid to do the post because I was afraid people would attack me for writing about this subject.
If you were going to get something this way from your girlfriend, you would have already gotten it by now due to all the exposure you already had to her. And it’s doubtful that she is a carrier of giardiasis, shigellosis or amoebiasis. After six months of living together, peoples gut bacteria tend to harmonize. What is really happening here is that after six months of living closely together, everyone has eaten enough of each other’s shit (in tiny miniscule amounts) so they all now have the same gut bacteria.
Really you are eating shit all the time, and not just figuratively like with me in my life. I mean literally. Even if you live alone, you are eating your own shit. Surely you are consuming tiny bits of your own shit on a regular basis.
It is sort of like life. The thing that your own shit is not a problem. It’s other people’s shit that is a problem. In other words, the problem is not you, it’s other people, which is my favorite saying.
As in life, so in the human gut.
You can probably even eat your own shit, though I would not recommend it. You might vomit, but you cannot catch a disease. The reason is simple and that is that you cannot catch a disease that you already have. I will leave you to think about that brainteaser a bit.
People like to go on and on about the horrible toxic deadly E. Coli that is found in our guts and our shit. The thing is that this E. Coli strain is pretty much harmless. Just keep it our of your vagina, your urinary tract and especially your blood. As I said, you can even eat shit that has E. Coli in it and nothing will happen except you might puke because it is so disgusting.
The problem here is confusion about strains. The E. Coli strain that causes this nasty outbreaks in humans, sickening and even killing some very young and very old, comes from cows. That’s the nasty strain. You get it from a cow. On farms, cows shit all over the place, so cow shit can get in irrigation water and then on crops, so this is how you might get it from food. Some of these outbreaks are coming from Mexico where farms are not so hygienic.
On the other hand though you can certainly catch a disease from eating other people’s shit but in most cases you probably will not, although I do not recommend going around eating other folks’ shit. It is not such a great idea.
Besides it’s gross. I mean really people, come on now.
I suppose if the commenter is going to lick his girlfriend’s ass, I would have her wash that area with soap and hot water well beforehand.

Why Mass Sexual License and Depravity Should Not Be Promoted to the Masses

Ryan England: I think that the pertinent question in matters of sexual politics is: to what extent does “promoting” such-and-such a sexual behavior actually result in increased participation in said behavior on a societal level? The way I see it, if people have it in them to do gang-bangs, threesomes, sex with two hundred women or the like, they will.

Oh, I know that the promotion of this stuff leads to more of it. I have dated many women. I also have female friends who have many young woman friends. A female friend told me that all her young woman friends are under pressure from their lovers to engage in anal sex and to have threeways with another woman. So all these young women are taking it up the ass and eating pussy due to cultural pressure, whereas they probably would not be ordinarily doing so. My friend told me that all of this is happening because of porn. I would agree with that.
I have dated a lot of women, and I also have noted that the sex has gotten a lot more pornified in recent years, even among older women. I mean 50 years old. I mean in recent years I could not believe the crazy sex I was having. It was like I was living in a porno movie.
I go on dating sites, and the women say pretty quickly, “Ok here is what I do.”
And then they proceed to list all their kinks, and by age 50, they’ve accumulated a few. They are actually trying to outwhore each other! I’m serious.
I am on a dating site, and I meet a woman and pretty soon it’s, “Ok, well do deep throat, I take it up the ass but only sometimes, you can tie me up, blindfold me and handcuff me, and I like it sort of rough.”
It’s like they are having a contest to see who can be the most kinky and whorish so they can get the hot guy, and the sluttiest woman gets the sexy guy. This is a recent thing. Women were not like this 30 years ago. Not that I object. But it’s obviously all coming from porn or faddism or peer pressure.
People are immensely susceptible to fads and peer pressure when it comes to sexuality. You think all those Romans having wild orgies all the time “had it in them already?” Hell no, but they were born into a society where this was the cool thing to do, so they did it. Same thing with fucking guys. In Rome and Greece, fucking other men and boys was the groovy thing to do, and in some cases up to 95% of the men were fucking other men (Sparta). I don’t see how people can say that sexual activity is not culturally driven. That’s just nuts, sorry.
I am absolutely certain that articles on Slate or Alternet lead to more and more people doing this stuff. Plus it’s disgusting that they are promoting degeneracy to the masses in the first place.
Recent articles include a man who likes to get pegged (his girlfriend straps on a dildo and fucks him in the ass). I guess all us guys need to go out there and get women to strap on dildos and fuck us in the ass! Nothing gay about that! Men: How To Get in Touch with Your Bisexual Side. Ok all us men need to get out there and suck a cock! I want to see all my male commenters going to a gay bar and ordering a Penis Colada before the month is over. That’s an order!
Other articles promote on having 3-ways, cuckolding (a big favorite), where idiot men enjoy seeing their wives fuck other men while they watch and get humiliated, and a similar major movement of White men who love being “cucks” to Black men called “Bulls” who they bring in to fuck their White wives. The White guys like to be humiliated and often enjoy having their wives or her Black lover degrade them by comparing them unfavorably to the Black man. The White wives even lock up the White men’s genitals in little cages at night before bed. Then they deny the White men sex for weeks to months. These articles were actually promoting this activity to White men as the latest groovy trend.
And by the way, gay male culture is an excellent example of a culture that promotes mass sexual license and depravity. Look at the result:

  • A horrific HIV epidemic that’s killed hundreds of thousands of gay men. 20% of gay men are infected to this day. Gay men are 1.5% of the population and over 50% of new HIV infections.
  • Regular outbreaks of Hepatitis A and B and parasites. Most gay men have 60 different types of parasites in their gut, whereas the average straight man has zero.
  • Regular outbreaks of syphilis and gonorrhea. Gay men are 1.5% of the population and 70% of the syphilis cases.

37% of gay men practice S/M. The result is that many serial killers (40%) are homosexuals, because serial killing and sexual sadism are linked and once you make sexual sadism the latest hip trend, you are going to create some dangerous men. Gay men are 1.5% of all the men and 40% of the serial killers.
16% of gay men drink piss. 8% of gay men like to get shit on or eat shit. Gay men are 1.5% of the population and 50% of the consumers of scat porn.
By age 30, almost all gay men have had group sex, and many to most of them have been to orgies with 8 or more men at once.
The result of all of this unbridled sexual license is a seriously messed up culture psychologically and medically with regular disease outbreaks and a drastically shortened lifespan by ~20 years. Yes, being gay knocks 29 years off a man’s life expectancy.

Night of the Living Anthrax Zombies

Here.
After a 75 year hiatus, anthrax zombies rise from their permafrost graves to kill again! They have killed a boy and a grandma so far and hospitalized 72 other humans. In the meantime as far as non-humans go, they have killed over 2,300 reindeer. This variety doesn’t like to eat brains*, but they can kill you dead just the same.
Whew! It’s a good thing there’s no such thing as global warming! They really had me worried there for a second!
*One of my favorite movie lines of all time comes from that great movie. It’s near the end when the huge police forces have been killed out to kill the zombies, who can only be killed with a bullet to the head. A nervous civilian asks a ranking cop if the zombies can move fast on the ground.
“Are they fast?” he asks anxiously.
The captain looks disgusted and turns away like he wants to spit on the ground. “Nah,” he says. They’re slow. They’re dead. They’re all fucked up.
God smiles down on you, George Romero.

Lee Stranahan on Beyond Highbrow

Here. Moral Inversion and Cultural Liberalism and Me.
This is one of the best posts ever written about me and this site, and it’s written by a hard rightwinger who writes for Breitbart!
But it’s a very nice column and sums up in a few paragraphs a lot of the weirdness involved in this site such that probably 90% of the people who are talking about it are getting it completely wrong somehow. But maybe that was the idea in the first place. Sort of a poststructural experiment to make nine out of ten people think the site is something that it’s not.
The site used to have the motto, “If I’m not making you mad, I’m not doing my job.” I like that, and it also sums up what is going on here. I’m a provocateur. The site’s all about me being a provocateur along with a lot of shitposting and sensible senselessness.
He quotes from an old post of mine:

Since when is chastity a sin or a sign of failure as a human being anyway? Sluts and players perch on the top of the moral pyramid while the chaste and true wallow in Hellish boiling mud below. Talk about inversions. We have truly turned morality upside down and made morals of sins and sinners of the good.
And it’s true that the way I lived my life, while I am proud of it, isn’t exactly optimal for society. In fact, a lot of society’s problems are due to too many people living like I did and not enough people showing some degree of moral probity.

This is exactly what we liberals on the Cultural Left have done. Chastity is now a sin! Can you believe it? I know a young woman. I met her when she was a 19 year old college girl and we are still very good friends. At the time, she was down about a lot of things, but one thing she was really down about was that she was still a virgin. She felt that she was a loser and a complete failure for still being a female virgin at age 19! So what! So you’re a 19 year old virgin? What’s wrong with that?
Do you see what the Hell we on the Left have done? We have actually flipped morality upside down just like Sade does in his wicked books. No good deed shall go unpunished, like in Justine! We have told this poor 19 year old college girl that she’s evil, a scum, a worthless person, a loser, an idiot, an idiot and most especially that she’s a bad person. Get that? She’s a bad person because she dared to retain her virginity until the late age of 19! Crazy.
Meanwhile some gay teenage boy who at age 19 has already racked up 100 cocks up the ass and a multiple-strain case of virulent HIV is the greatest guy on Earth. All hail King Bungholio! He’s practically Mother Theresa. Why? Because he is fighting against the evil of prudery, chastity, probity, decency, monogamy, cautiousness, guilt, neurosis and honor. Honor bad! Suicidal libertinism good!
Sade must be smiling in his grave.
I started realizing this back in the 1970’s when people used to write in to sex magazines saying that they had sexual hangups or that they were still a virgin or whatever. Xaviera Hollander (Jew) and other moral paragons would lambast these poor conflicted souls. Sexual hangups were evil! Prudery was evil! Virgins were evil scum! Get out there and fuck 100 new people right now! Just to prove how pure and right you are.
The Cultural Left does this all the time.
Here we are at the Folsom Street Parade in San Francisco.
There is a homosexual man over there getting pissed on by several leather clad gay men forming a circle around him. The urine covers his face, his hair, his body. He opens his mouth to wallow further, relishing the tart piss in his mouth as he swallows again and again. See Robert Lindsay over there, cringing as this homosexual gets a five man golden shower in public at a public parade where single Moms bring their little children? He’s a bad person! Lindsay is evil! Because being morally offended at this site is evil. And cheering it on as an act of charity and benevolence is good.
See that homosexual walking down the parade with pink panties? He has a dildo strapped on to his crotch. He periodically jerks it up and down to the cheers of the crowd. The men cheer. The single women cheer. The little kids cheer. In doing this act, this man is showing us mercy and grace. See Jose over there from Argentina? He’s grotesquely offended, turning his head, nauseous. Jose is evil. He’s a bad person. He’s like a criminal, a scumbag, for being repulsed by Father Theresa with the holy dildo.
See that open window? See that naked homosexual sticking his ass out the window? See the dildo in his hand? Ok, you know what comes next. The crowd of good Samaritans oohs and ahhs in anticipation. The dildo swings around, enters the man’s ass, and begins pumping hard up and down in the guy’s ass. The crowd goes wild! Such an act of grace, of selflessness, of duty unto God! See Tulio over there yelling? “It’s a public parade man! That’s gross! You queers are sick!” Tulio is bad. He’s no good. He’s a a lowlife, on the level of pond scum. Why? Because he was revolted at this grown up altar boy’s good acts. Acts above faith you know.
We have actually turned everything upside down. Good is bad! Bad is good! Sin is purity! Morals are transgressions!
I would also argue that although I have had fun in my life, part of the problem with society is too damn many people lived their lives carelessly and frivolously like I lived mine, filling it up with promiscuous sex, booze, endless parties, every drug known to man, avoidance of marriage and children, and general debauchery, degeneracy and even depravity.
Sure it was fun, but look at the results. The middle class adopted the counterculture and moved to Marin in middle age to practice yoga and save the whales. The underclass adopted the counterculture and created Detroit and Baltimore.
We were wrong. We blew it. We screwed up. Turn on, tune in and drop out was a lie. Feed your head was stupid. Look at the results. All around you, the walking detritus. We on the Left need to take some responsibility for some of the serious downside to the moral collapse we advocated.
Stranahan then quotes Breitbart. Now I hated Breitbart, but this line of his is pure gold, singing off the page:

Breitbart said he liked the Left for parties and music. He just didn’t want them running things.

Exactly.
And this is why the Left won the Culture War. The Right adopted the Cultural Left as lifestyles and values while retaining conservatism in government, business, politics and a few other things.
Ok, the Left won the Culture War. But what did we win?
Detroit? Baltimore? Juggalos? The Folsom Street Parade? Kaitlyn Jenner? Kim Kardashian? The Oxycontin epidemic? Gardisil injections for 12 year old girls? Heather Has Two Mommies? Microaggressions? Noel Ignatiev? Sanctuary cities? Omar Mateen in Orlando? Vietnam 1968 in Chicago every weekend? A mass shooting a day? Genderqueer? Pansexuality? Amanda Marcotte? Press one for English? Anchor babies? Birth tourism? Pegging? Grindr? White privelege?
What’s that, the booby prize?
We thought we were creating a Cultural Utopia, but sometimes I think we accidentally created a Cultural AIDS epidemic instead, just as the homosexuals made the AIDS epidemic with their heedless debauchery 30-40 years ago.
Maybe grandma was right and the wages of sin are decline and eventual collapse. It’s the wisdom of ancients, so maybe there is something to it?
Anyway, some ideological transgressions here for you to ponder…

For Men: How to Catch HIV from a Woman

John writes:

Oh, yes. Hello. Just as I thought. When stories come out in the press about heterosexuals contracting HIV from sexual intercourse, it’s always women. I know two women infected, have heard of others, but never a straight man. I know a bunch of guys who don’t always use condoms and not one of them has HIV. HPV or other less serious stuff, sure; but never HIV. If you ask any person on the street if they know or have heard of a case involving a heterosexual male who never went bi or who isn’t a junkie having HIV, I guess the vast majority will say they haven’t.

This is how you get it if you are a man:
Plan 1: Get yourself an HIV-positive wife or girlfriend. Be monogamous with her.
Have sex with her ~700 times over a five year period. That means you are having sex with her maybe 140X/yr or 10X/month. Never use a condom. Make sure to have some incidents of vaginal and/or penile bleeding during the sex (very important).
Ok, now after you had sex with her 700 times over that five year period, you now have a 20% chance that you got HIV from her. But you have an 80% chance that you didn’t get it! Bummer! This a very poor and lengthy way to get HIV from a woman, and you probably won’t even get it, so it’s hardly worth it to try it, but you can try it as a last resort if nothing else works. Plan 2 is a much better and more efficient way to get HIV.
So you see, you can get it from a woman, but it is not that easy.
Here is an easier way:
Plan 2: Go to Thailand as a Western sex tourist. Have sex with some prostitutes. It would be best if you ask around to find out which prostitutes are HIV-positive. This is an easier way to get it because the HIV strain in Thailand transmits easier female-male than the one in the West. Only have sex with the HIV-positive ones. Refuse to use a condom no matter what she says.
Make sure you fuck her dry, that is, when she is not aroused. This generally will cause some vaginal bleeding (very important). Keep doing for a while, and you will probably get HIV.
This is the best way I can think of to get HIV from a woman. So if you are a man looking to get HIV from a woman during sex, I would recommend this route. Plan 1 is much riskier because it takes years, and even after quite a few years, you still might not get it. Plan 2 would be much better for men looking for a more surefire and rapid transmission.

How Can You Tell If a Woman Has HIV?

Chris writes:

Very interesting articles Robert…I have got a lot of questions that I am interested to know. How would you tell if a woman have HIV?
Can I smell them if they smells something bad like fishy? My ex bro-in-law have told me that I would only get tell when I smells her virgin that smells like fishy or very cheesy, then I would know she is infected??
He said that if I look at her eyes to see if she is on drugs or something that looks suspect spots on her body, then I would know she might have HIV?
And he said that most black male are HIV-positive. Should I always ask my partner if she have shag a black male or with someone who are on the drugs?
If my partner say she have shag a black male or with someone that are on drugs, then I would know she might have HIV?
If my partner say she is sick or she is on the pills, then I would know she might have HIV?

Let’s go through these one by one here:

Very interesting articles Robert…I have a lot of questions that I am interested to know. How would you tell if a woman have HIV?

You can’t.

Can I smell them if they smell something bad like fishy? My ex-bro-in-law have told me that I would only tell when I smell her vagina that smells fishy or very cheesy, then I would know she is infected??

A fishy or cheesy smell indicates some sort of a vaginal infection, especially a yeast infection. A fishy or cheesy smelling vagina does not indicate HIV infection at all.

He said that if I look at her eyes to see if she is on drugs or something that looks suspect spots on her body, then I would know she might have HIV?

You generally cannot look in someone’s eyes and tell if they are on drugs or not. You can’t look for suspected spots on their body either. One thing you can do is look for track marks or needle marks, usually on their arms, but they can also be in other places.

And he said that most Black male are HIV-positive. Should I always ask my partner if she have shag a Black male or with someone who are on drugs?

Absolutely not true. It is not true at all that most Black men are HIV-positive. In fact, I doubt if 2% of Black men in the US are HIV-positive, but I could be wrong. It would be nice to know how many Black men are HIV positive.

If my partner says she has shagged a Black male or with someone that is on drugs, then I would know she might have HIV?

Absolutely not. The vast majority of women who have had sex with Black men are not HIV positive at all. In fact, the percentage of women who have had sex with Black men where the women are now HIV-positive themselves is no doubt quite small. Ditto if she had sex with a drug user. However, if she had sex with male IV drug users, now that is another matter.

If my partner says she is sick or she is on pills, then I would know she might have HIV?

Not at all. People get sick all the time and they also take pills all the time. I take up to 10-11 different pills every day right at this moment, but it is usually more like eight or nine pills. However, if she looks quite sickly, especially if she is pale and emaciated, then you might want to see if she is HIV-positive. However, many other diseases can also make you look like that. But if someone looks like that, one thing you know for sure is that they are quite ill.

Football Is Inherently Dangerous

There’s apparently no way whatsoever to make the game safer. They have tried everything at this point, and nothing works. The only way to make the game safer is to not play it in the first place. They are talking mostly about head injuries. No matter how they make the helmets, football players still get head injuries. And those who play it for a long time apparently end up brain damaged, just like boxing. There’s new data on this just starting to come out now.

Prevalence of Sex Acts Among Gay Men

These figures are extremely controversial, and in fact, the man who accumulated them is one of the most vilified men in the West. However, all of his conclusions are from legitimate peer reviewed medical journals and books. The people who jump up and down and yell so much about these findings are encouraged to go out and come up with some figures of their own.

These figures appear to be good at least for this particular time period. One argument might be that gay men’s sex practices have changed over the past 30 years, and therefore, these figures are no longer viable. That is an interesting hypothesis, but it remains to be seen if it is true or not. Those who claim that these studies are outdated are encouraged to go out and find some more updated studies so we can compare them to these older results. My gut feeling is that gay men’s behavior has not changed very much.

I am not sure why I am putting this stuff out there, but it’s nice to know such things. It’s also a good counterpoint to the “Gays are just like straights except for the PIV (penis in vagina ) sex.” Obviously that is not true at all.

You can do whatever you want to with this figures – I have no particular agenda here except to disagree with the SJW’s who insist that homosexual sex is the greatest thing since sliced bread. This is clearly not the case.

                Ever  Last yr. Last mo. Last 6 mos.

Sex acts

Oral-penile      99.5  92      67
Anal-penile      93    94      97
Oral-anal        87    63      79       60
Public/orgy sex  82 
Fisting/toys     39
S/M B/D          37
Urine sex        26
Minor sex        23.5
Enemas           11
Shit eating       6   

Based on six different surveys conducted from 1977 to 1991 in the US, Denmark, London, Sydney. The surveys were done a while back – the median year for the surveys was 1984.

It is true that these figures come from the reviled Paul Cameron. Cameron is very much a homophobe all right. The PC crowd and the SJW’s have trashed his figures to Kingdom Come. However, all of Cameron’s figures come from peer reviewed studied studies in medical journals and books (see below). The SPLC in particular has trashed all of his findings, and the American Psychological Association has disassociated itself from Cameron and thrown him out of the organization. All of this apparently because he is coming up with the wrong conclusions.

As usual with these types, it is put up or shut up. While they have completely trashed Cameron’s findings, they have never shown how or why they are wrong, and worse, they have never shown any newer findings that indicates how Cameron is wrong.

Until further studies indicate that Cameron is wrong, his figures must stand.

References

Beral, V. et al. 1992. Risk of Kaposi’s Sarcoma and Sexual Practices Associated with Fecal Contact in Homosexual or Bisexual Men with AIDS. Lancet.

Biggar, R. J. 1984. Low T-lymphocyte Ratios in Homosexual Men. Journal of the American Medical Association. 7/18/91. Wall Street Journal, p. B1.

Elford, J. et al. 1992. Kaposi’s Sarcoma and Insertive Rimming. Lancet.

Jaffee, H. et al. 1983. National Case-control Study of Kaposi’s Sarcoma. Annals Of Internal Medicine.

Jay, K. & Young, A. 1979. The Gay Report. NY: Summit.

Quinn, T. C. et al. 1983. The Polymicrobial Origin of Intestinal Infection in Homosexual Men. New England Journal of Medicine.

Republican Propaganda Analyzed: “After 1995, Welfare Rolls Crashed, and Disability Payments Soared”

From here.

Figures. Whenever you hear these horrific stories from conservatives that make you want to abandon liberalism altogether, it’s almost always some sort of a lie. That’s why I banned a lot of rightwing commenters on here. For one thing, conservatives are bizarre. I can’t imagine a liberal going to a conservative forum just to fight the wingnuts. Most of think think that would be like taking a swim in a sewer, and that’s pretty much what it would in fact be.

However, conservatives are just weird. They love to fight, and they love to fight their liberal enemies. Now why this is I am not sure, but I can guess. I get why they like to fight. Authoritarian types love conflict and hate peace. But why do they fight us? Well, they think they are Good and we are Evil. They actually believe that liberalism is pure 100% Evil. So when they fight us, they are just fighting Evil.

Conservatives also love to proselytize, while most liberals don’t bother as we consider most conservatives too hopeless to convert, and we don’t like fighting anyway. I get the impression that conservatives simply cannot fathom how any sane human being could ever believe in liberalism. Many conservatives have told me that conservatism is rational, logical, and reasonable: it’s just common sense. Many others say that conservative positions are actually empirically proven to be correct.

Never mind that hardly any politics can ever be empirically proven to be correct – how will you do it? Test it out in a lab under controlled double blind conditions and then run multivariate analysis on it?

Anyway, they think conservatism is commonsensical scientifically provable fact, like saying the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. To conservatives, liberals are like folks who are argue that black is white and 2+2 = 5. They simply cannot fathom how any sane person, given the proper facts, would not be a conservative. In other words, we baffle them.

Really there is no such thing as empirical politics.

Rightwinger: After the 1995 changes to welfare (and many of those changes were good, though not all), the number of people on welfare dropped–and the number of people receiving disability payments went up, up, up.

Leftwinger: Welfare rolls plunged, and poverty soared. They plunged because welfare was no longer an entitlement. Since it was no longer an entitlement, one might or might not be able to get any help, regardless of how great that person’s need, and counties put limits on caseloads. If, say, the their caseload limit was 100, and you were the 101th person to apply, you could not get aid. Strict time limits were imposed, regardless of circumstances. Desperately poor people are, indeed, simply dumped off on the streets. Caseloads fell because cases were closed and new cases were denied.

Poverty grew. What we always called welfare is gone. There is no general assistance or AFDC. TANF is a marginally subsidized, time limited work program (only for those with minor children).

Now, on disability: This is fairly complex (much info and links at ssa.gov). When one applies for disability, it takes a minimum of a year, as long as 3 years, between the day you submit your application and the day your case is decided. Before you can even submit your application, you must obtain your medical records dating back many years, and official medical documentation confirming not simply that you have a disability (having a disability in itself does not make you eligible for disability aid), but that the disability is so severe that gainful employment impossible.

Only a doctor (not the SSA) can make that decision. All of this said: Many on welfare were the seriously ill and disabled who were not able to manage the (extremely complex, difficult) disability application process. They survived on GA welfare. (The bottom line was that it was simply cheaper to keep them on GA.) When welfare was ended, county agencies had to scramble to find a way to keep the truly disabled/seriously ill from being dumped out on the streets.

This resulted in a temporary surge of of cases being transferred from welfare offices to the SSA. (Nope. No fraud was involved — just saving lives.) One must have a medical (psychiatric) diagnosis of suffering from legitimate mental illness that is so severe as to make it impossible to maintain gainful employment.

Was Chavez Poisoned by the US?

Here.

Bernie Sanders revealed his phony populism by shamelessly bashing the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez – murdered by Obama, either poisoned or infected with incurable cancer causing substances.

Four surgeries in 18 months couldn’t save him. At the time, then acting (now current) President Nicholas Maduro said he “was poisoned by dark forces in order to hit at the Venezuelan people and Latin America.”

Bottom line is they never proved it. It’s just an unproven theory. It is rather interesting that several of the New Left Latin American leaders all came down with cancer around the same time, but that in and of itself doesn’t prove anything. Plus there’s no good, hard evidence that you can give someone cancer via poisoning or infection. Perhaps you can, but it’s not proven yet.

Women Having Sex with Gay Men is a Very Bad Idea

Juno writes:

So Robert, according to you, girls have to be out of their mind when they have sex with a gay guy. To some extent I agree with you. And that goes for the gay guys in fact too, in my opinion. But the reason you give, namely that it’s a health hazard for those girls because of the ‘infection rates’ among gays, is quite outrageous. You obviously have no idea how homophobic that remark is.

Why do so many gay men have sex with women? Why in God’s name would they even want to? They’re gay, for Chrissake! And if you ask one of these guys, he will say, “Oh no, I am not bisexual! I am 100% gay! But I want to have sex with that woman.” What the heck? How many straight men run around having sex with guys all the time? Not that many. A very common complaint among fag hags is that completely gay men are often trying to have sex with them. I don’t understand gay men. You’re gay, right? So go have sex with men, ok? Knock yourselves out. But leave women alone – it’s ridiculous.

Women having sex with gay men has to be up there on the list of high risk behaviors for women.

HIV+ rates for gay and bisexual men in the US:

Gay and bisexual men in the US: 20%.

Gay and bisexual men in Baltimore: 38%!

Gay and bisexual men in New York: 29%!

Gay and bisexual Black men: 28%.

Gay and bisexual men in their 40’s: 28%.

Gay and bisexual men in the 5 largest metropolitan gay areas in the US: 27%.

Gay and bisexual men in Dallas: 26%.

Gay and bisexual men in Houston: 26%.

Gay and bisexual men in Miami: 25%.

Gay and bisexual men aged 30+: 25%.

Gay and bisexual men in San Fransisco: 23%.

Gay and bisexual men in New Orleans: 21%.

Many of the women getting infected with HIV nowadays are getting it from bisexual men, especially Black men on the downlow. Straight men have a very low HIV rate. Gay and bisexual men have an HIV+ rate 44 times higher than straight men. A woman who has sex with a gay or bisexual man has a fully 44 times greater risk of getting HIV than she does from a straight man. It’s almost Russian roulette.

At least in the past, gay men had very high rates of Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis A epidemics periodically flared through various gay communities. Hepatitis B is not common among straight men, and Hepatitis A is almost unheard of.

Gay men also have very high rates of syphilis. In fact, 2/3 of syphilis cases are among gay men. Syphilis has very low rates among straight men. Most who have it are illegal aliens screwing illegal alien whores from Mexico who go to a house of 20 illegals and do them all.

Gay men also have much more gonorrhea than straight men. Outside of the group sex and porn scenes and picking up skanky, often Black, street hos, it is quite hard for a straight man to get gonorrhea.

Ameabiasis, giardiasis, shigellosis and salmonellosis are parasites, and straight men have very low rates of infections with these parasites. Gay men have sky high rates of infection of all four of these parasites.

Any woman who has sex with a gay man is insane.