Delphi Murders Update January 20, 2021

Rambo: By the way, have you heard anything else about Delphi? That’s when everybody was here. It’s been what, 4 years?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I have some excellently sourced new information, probably straight from law enforcement, that is better than anything that anyone else is putting out. I keep thinking I’m going to put it up, but then I think about how those monsters treated me, reporting me to the police, 40 times for murdering those girls and 30 times for being a pedophile or child molester (!!!). They’re my worst nightmare.

I probably ought to just bite the bullet and do it though. The stuff I have kicks the ass of anything that anyone else has put out. It’s blockbuster.

I also worry that I will jeopardize the investigation, but this thing is practically cold case by now. If you look up cold cases, you can see that in every case, quite a bit of information of the type these cops are hiding from us has been released due to the passage of time. They can’t keep all these secrets forever.

I have:

The motive for the crime. It’s not one anyone thinks!

What exactly was done to each of the girls in terms of wounds and other bodily intrusions if you catch my drift.

Excellent evidence of a sex crime.

Brand new biological evidence which, from the sound of it, seems downright excellent.

Bizarre things that were done to the girls’ bodies that made people think it was a Satanic ritual killing. This information is straight from a law enforcement source*! I do not think it was a Satanic ritual murder, but I can see people might think that because this has got to one of the most out and out weird and bizarre homicide crime scenes I’ve ever heard of.

Staging of the girls’ bodies and the killer’s signature in his style of murder.

New information on two possible locales where the girls might have been killed.

New information on whether the dump site was searched the night before and whether the bodies were moved to the dump site.

Information on the crime scene down to the exact geographical location where it started and the name of the landowner who owned that land and the terrain over which it continued. The crime scene for some odd reason stretches for nearly a quarter of a mile.

Attempt to chemically destroy biological evidence at the scene.

The biological state of one of the victims in terms of her body when she was murdered. Straight from another law enforcement source*!

Blockbuster information on the relations of a victim and the murderer on social media prior to the crime.

More blockbuster information about the use of crime scene photographs by the killer and the sending of these photos to another cell phone.

Information on a possible suspect in terms of a general group of people with a relationship to the girls who police seem to be looking at.

Final proof of a controversial theory about the state of one of the victim’s bodies at her funeral.

Some problems with the case that have made it difficult to file against any possible murderer. Problems with the evidence in other words that would make a DA not want to file. Keep in mind that DA’s only file murder charges unless they are pretty damn sure that not only do they have their guy but that they have enough evidence to convict in court.

*Message to my endless legions of enemies among the noobs, normies, kooks, clowns, cranks, and (mostly) psychos who make up most of this “crime aficionados” invested in trying to solve the mystery of these profoundly tragic crimes.

I’m not hear to brag about any special sources or any of that. We’ve never had any. We just got our information from the usual townspeople chatter with a very rare bit from law enforcement and a tiny bit from the families. We don’t have any special secret sources! I really wish these moronic psychos would quit talking about that.

Also there was a lot of talk about the use of anonymous sources. This drove the equally deranged and dangerous psychos in the Bigfooter audience into a similar conniption fit. Bigfooters and True Crime fans have to be two of the biggest groups of psychos and kooks in this entire Clown Psycho Kookosphere Planet. Furthermore, both groups of people are actually dangerous, as in menacing, vicious and dedicated to destroying innocent humans.

You guys just don’t get it. I guess you’re slow or something or you failed 8th grade. Anyway, I’ll write this real slow so you can maybe understand it in your tiny little pea brains.

I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism. I’ve actually worked in the field. I was an editor for a significant sized magazine you could see for sale on shelves in shops. I also worked as a proofreader. I worked as a freelance writer. And now I am an actual published author, having written a chapter for an academic book out of a university press. Some of my fiction (believe it or not) was actually published in a small literary magazine. It was praised by none other than Gary Snyder. In other words, I’m an actual professional writer.

Ok, look. One thing you learn in journalism school is about how to use sources. I always ask my sources if they want to go on record or if they wish to be anonymous. Given the sensitive nature of this gruesome subject, most opt for anonymity. So I list them, naturally, as anonymous sources. Anonymous sources are very commonly used in journalism, always identified as such. We have a duty to protect our sources and not only not to print their names but to tell others who they are. We take great pride in how well we protect our sources. We are supposed to go to jail before we reveal them.

Sadly, many sleazeball journalists nowadays do not honor subjects they interview’s requests for anonymity. I was interviewed once by a slimeball journalist who as usual, acted very friendly towards me though I guess he didn’t like me. Sleazy journalists do this a lot. He got me quoted saying something that made me look very bad and after he got the quote, I asked to be anonymous. He denied my request and said I had to ask to be anonymous before the interview starts, otherwise he’s running my name. So he ran my name in his sleazeball ambush interview with me in the story I wrote.

As with most everything in this Clown Nation, ethics have been going to Hell in Journalism for a long time now, probably at least 35 years.

Protecting sources and people’s wish for anonymity is only one in the list of ethics we journalists are supposed to subscribe to. It is very important to me that I have good, strong journalistic ethics when I write because that enables me to feel good morally about my writing.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

A New US False Flag against Russia: The “Novichok” Attack on Alexei Navalny

Perhaps you have read about the latest attempted poisoning of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny with “Novichok,” the same poison that was supposedly used against the Skirpals earlier, although that whole mess was an MI6 false flag to frame Russia. No one, much less the Skirpals, got dosed with “Novichok.”

The Skirpals probably got dosed with BZ. After all, BZ was found in one the samples they accidentally sent to the “outside lab” in Switzerland. The poisoning symptoms resembled BZ, not Novichok. Remember how the story kept changing and the Skirpals kept getting dosed with Novichok in place after place. The story changed because after one fake story fell apart, they had to invent another one.

Main reason no one was dosed with Novichok in the Skirpal incident? If a weaponized dose of Novichok was put on their doorknob (the fake story they finally settled on), they’d both be dead. Novichok is fatal. Within 10 minutes. No exceptions. Further, the poisoning symptoms observed in the Skirpals looked nothing like Novichok symptoms.

That Swiss lab wrecked everything. They also found an extremely pure trace of Novichok in the Skirpals’ blood. Problem? That was three weeks after the attack. The Novichok found had only been there a day or two. The stuff degrades, fast. If they had been dosed with Novichok three weeks before, that Novichok would have been significantly degraded.

Further, Novichok comes in weaponized doses. A weaponized chemical weapon has various other components in it to enhance delivery, etc. It’s a weapon. None of the standard additives that are found in weaponized chemical weapons were found in that sample. Instead, it was pure, straight out of the lab. Well, no one uses something like that in a chemical weapons attack. They use the weaponized version.

Here’s obviously what happened. Remember the Skirpals got dosed a mere five miles away from the diabolical Porton Down, the UK chemical and biological weapons lab where a variety of very nasty and completely illegal substances continue to be created and stockpiled against every treaty about such things the UK ever signed. The UK is as bad as the US, I’m telling you. Pure evil.

Porton Down was in on the whole scam. They supplied the BZ and  somehow dosed the Skirpals with it. As with so many of these other anti-Russia false flags, the hand of the Russian oligarch opposition was present. A helicopter came to fly people to safety as soon as the false flag unfolded. It came from the compound of a Russian billionaire oligarch  who absolutely hates Putin. So he was in on this false flag too.

After the Skirpals are hospitalized and the story gets revised every day or so, everything is confused. Now Porton Down makes up some lab-fresh Novichok. It’s well known that Porton Down had made and worked with this substance before. They put it in the Skirpals blood vials. Hence the purity and the non-weaponized nature of the Novichok. The BZ was already there since Porton Down were the people who dosed the Skirpals.

The Skirpals were forbidden to talk to just about anyone while wild contradictory tales floated about around their condition. At some point, they vanished off the face of the Earth.

The British are responsible for whatever happened to them. Skirpal himself is a Russian double agent, but he already did his time in Russia and no one in Russia cared about him anymore. He and his daughter (also dosed) are either dead, killed by MI6, or they are being imprisoned somewhere by the MI6. There are also stories that the Skirpals are in New Zealand. Wherever they are, I wouldn’t want to be either of them right now. Intelligence agencies kill people. And they never get caught.

In this latest Novichok reversion, Russian dissident got poisoned with “Novichok” by Putin because he is a dissident.

Problem? First, Navalny is CIA, but everyone knows that. So what?

Second, Navalny, the darling of the West, the “voiced of the Russian opposition” runs in Presidential elections all the time. He gets a whopping 1-2% every time. He has no support in Russia. All of his support is with Russia regime change agents in the West. Putin and many others in the government laugh about Navalny and say he’s a nobody. He’s nothing. He has no support. There’s nothing to worry about. Why kill him? What’s the point of killing an irrelevant, harmless man with no power and no support?

Navalny got very sick on his plane trip. This much of it is true. He went to the bathroom and came back very ill. The pilot quickly rerouted the plane to an airport where he was rushed to the hospital in Omsk. The story quickly unfolded that Navalny was poisoned by his coffee that he ordered at the airport. There are photos and video of him ordering the coffee and drinking it with his entourage.

Problem? A member of his entourage ordered Navalny’s coffee for him. He didn’t tell the server though, so for all the server knew,  it was for the associate. How could the server have known that the coffee was really for Navalny? Also, wait a minute? Putin has FSB agents working behind the counter at airports conveniently? How the Hell does he do that? How does the server put the Novichok in the cup of coffee? He has to put it in after he fills the cup, right? Right in front of everyone? That didn’t happen.

Next, if Navalny had Novichok in that tea he’s drinking at the airport, he would have been dead in 10 minutes. Not only that, but one or more of his friends at that table would have also been dead at the same time, killed by the fumes. Obviously that didn’t happen. So there was no Novichok in the tea at the airport snack bar.

That story blew up, so they went on the next one. In this story, Navalny has some water bottle he brought with him on the plane. It has Novichok in it. He takes a swig. He gets poisoned, etc. Except he’d be dead in 10 minutes again. Now he’s been killed twice already. And anyone around his seat on the plane would be dead too, from the fumes.

Also, crucial. The descriptive reports of Navalny’s poisoning symptoms as reported by passengers were not the symptoms of Novichok poisoning, the symptoms of which are well known. None other than the inventor of Novichok himself said the attack was fake because not only was Navalny not dead but his symptoms looked nothing like Novichok poisoning. At all.

Well that story bombed too, apparently. Time to come up with a new story! Now Navalny’s hotel room at the airport gets searched, and a soft drink bottle is found. It has Novichok in it! Obviously poisoned in his hotel room! Except again, he’d be dead in 10 minutes. Along with anyone in his entourage near that bottle. Ok,  so now he’s been poisoned and killed three times over, along with a few of his entourage. This Navalny guy’s better than Jesus! He only came back once for Chrissake!

Well, I guess that story didn’t work either. Because next thing we know, Elliot Higgins otherwise known as “Bellingcat,” the fake “citizen journalist” who is actually a fellow at the ferociously anti-Russian NATO-linked Atlantic Council and is also apparently working for the MI6 and probably the CIA too, came up with a doozy, elaborately sourced as it is. Keep in  mind that Higgins’ stuff is so well sourced because he gets all his data from the MI6 and CIA intelligence agencies. And they know a lot of stuff. Higgins is their cutout.

He released a tape of Navalny of all people phoning up an FSB agent. Apparently Navalny just called this spy up on the phone and the spy didn’t even recognized his voice. The voice of Alexei Navalny, CIA and MI6 asset in Russia, who’s probably under surveillance most of the time. This agent, who is named, then gives up the ghost. All the three previous stories were fake. Well, we knew that.

What really happened, the agent said, was that Navalny’s underwear was dosed with Novichok, the dried powder kind. Well, that was a mistake. Being dried, it didn’t kill him. Except his sweat would have activated it. And I suppose “dry” Novichok kills you as good as any other kind. So his shorts poisoned him on the plane but didn’t kill him because the Novichok was “dry.” The FSB messed up! Except if he got poisoned by the stuff at all in his shorts, he’d be dead. You don’t survive a dosing with weapons-grade Novichok. Along with people next to him on the plane.

Now he and his associates have been poisoned with Novichok and killed four times over. The guy has more lives than a cat!

More problems. Wait a second.  This FSB agent  didn’t recognize the sound of Navalny’s voice, a voice known well by half the country? Uh huh. This FSB agent picks up the phone in his apartment and reveals top secret information to some clown on the phone  he’s never met,  posing as an FSB agent? Uh huh. This FSB agent has any secret conversations at all over a damned unsecured phone line? Sure. The FSB agent takes this guy’s word that he’s an FSB agent, though he gives a name no agent has? The FSB doesn’t even check this guy out? Come on.

However, this part of it was well done. Bellingcat released the names and fake identities of some FSB agents, which is a pretty ugly thing to do. Obviously he got this from the CIA. Supposedly the agent’s voice is even well done. The FSB only comments to say that the whole mess is a well done fake.

None of this matters because the FSB never dosed Navalny with Novichok four times, or even one time, and certainly didn’t by putting it on his underwear. We are talking about something that couldn’t happen so it didn’t happen. End of story.

Anyway, Navalny gets rushed to a hospital in Omsk. Because of course, if Russia tried to murder the guy, the first thing they do is rush him to the nearest hospital, right? Oh, come on. The doctors are very good. The toxicology doc there is the best in Russia. At first they suspect poisoning. They run a toxicology screen on everything, including Novichok. Nothing, blank, zero. Clean.

They run through a bunch of other tests and conclude he’s in diabetic shock. Which can be fatal. Turns out he was diagnosed with diabetes a few years back. He’s almost dead and has to go on a ventilator. By the heroic actions of the docs, this ingrate traitor’s life gets saved. They also put him on a standard drug that people get when they’re on a ventilator.

Agents from Germany show up in Russia and race into the hospital room. A hospital plane is flown to Russia at a moment’s notice, all decked out in the latest gear. Boy, that was quick! It’s almost as if…the Germans knew something was up?

He’s rushed onto the plane to a German hospital. First, breathless pronouncements are made of a drug residue being found, apparently the poison. Except that’s just the drug the Russians gave him on the ventilator, standard procedure! More tests. More tests.

The Germans run a toxicology screen. I guess it’s the best toxicology screen on Earth because it finds Novichok where even the best minds of the Russians missed it! Do the Germans even know what Novichok is? The Russians are baffled. The Russian docs request that the Germans send Navalny’s blood samples with “Novichok” to them so they can look it over. Of course, the Germans tell the Russians to go pound sand! Very suspicious. Why not send a sample to the Russians? What’s the harm? Fishy as Hell.

Next we get a captured phone conversation between two high ranking government officials, one in Germany and one in Poland. The German is recorded telling the Pole that the whole Navalny poisoned by Novichok saga is made up, a false flag done to set Russia up as a patsy.

I suspect the German BND is the party behind this mess. Why this time? Notice these false flags always happen at the least opportune moment, the exact time when Russia doing that would  be about the stupidest thing they could do? Well, turns out that the Nordstream gas pipeline from Russia to Western Europe only needed 10 more miles of pipe to be laid.

It’s supposed to end in far northern Germany. NordStream has been controversial and the US, UK, and Atlantic Council have been falling all over themselves trying to stop it, all to no avail. Merkel has made all sorts of noises, mostly to the effect that it’s a done deal and quit trying to sabotage it.

So the fake Navalny Novichok poisoning false flag was done to set up Russia in a desperate last minute attempt by the BND (who are very deep in with NATO, especially NATO intelligence) to stop the pipeline. Which failed; the pipeline is going forward. And pile some new sanctions on Russia for more fake reasons. Which was done. Which was to be expected.

Notice that in all of these stupid false flags how the stories keep changing? That’s how you know you’re dealing with another fake story. Real stories don’t change every other day. They change all the time because they’re made up in the first place.

The Russian hospital would have reported if they had found Novichok. Why wouldn’t they? If the poisoning was such a big secret, why do a toxic scan? What for?

The inventor of Novichok insisted that the whole drama was nothing but a big fake. See his comments above. Further, when Navalny emerged from his coma weeks later, the inventor noted that his pupils should have been pinpointed because a telltale sign of Novichok poisoning is pinpoint pupils, and the pupils would still have been pinpointed 3 weeks later.

The inventor said that even if he was dosed with 1/300th of a standard dose, which is the size of a grain of salt, he would still have had pinpoint pupils. Novichok has never been used in an attack.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Why the World Bank and IMF Push Structural Adjustment on Countries That Request Loans from Them

The World Bank and the IMF (both of which are basically run by the US) forced the Third World countries that requested loans to gut and privatize their public sectors in order to get the loans. The stated reason was to lower the state’s expenditures so they would have more money to pay their loans back.

But it often came with a lot of other demands like opening up the country to foreign investment (rape, rob, and ruin exploitation) cutting the wages of workers, attacking labor unions and gutting labor protection law, lowering or eliminating the minimum wage, etc. It’s hard to see how any of these things enables the state to pay their loans back easier, especially as the attack on the incomes of the 80% majority  would lead to much lower tax revenue for the state.

I’d say the World Bank and the IMF have an ulterior motive, the same as the US – to promote neoliberalism, if need be by force, the world over because the neoliberal model is what’s best for the US oligarchy and the corporations.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: A Look at Partial Drug Legalization Efforts in the US

Rambo: I wonder what percentage of these murders are in some way drug-related? I’ve never seen actual numbers but would have to guess those numbers would be pretty high. It just seems that in so many of these cases drugs were at least the “chain of events” starter that led to alot of these murders; an ever present link in the chai

RL: Most of these Black on Black shootings in our big cities these days are gang warfare. And what sustains the gangs? The drug trade. Legalize the drug trade and for what purpose will the gangs exist? How will they make money? They may just fold up altogether. Those gangs are primarily money-making operations.

So since most of the shootings are gang related and the gangs exist because of the drug trade, I would say that probably the vast majority of these murders are drug-related in that sense. Not so much related to the consumption of drugs as in people getting high and crazy and blowing each other way but more related to the sale of drugs.

Rambo: Which brings up the question once again: should all drugs be legalized? A lot of Libertarian types say it’s the obvious solution to halt murderous gangersterism, but since Libertarians never get elected to anything, aren’t they just banging their heads against the wall? If all drugs were legalized, how would hardcore drug addicts get the money to acquire the narcotics they desire? Would drug-related crimes increase? Since addicts aren’t likely to be long-term job holders, how would this affect the society at large? It’s not an easy issue to address.

Good question.

This has already been tried in a sense in Seattle and in some ways, it is being tried in other places like the city of Fresno very close to where I live.

In Seattle, possession of small amounts of heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine are legal. However, drug dealing is still illegal.

In Fresno, meth addicts state that police are not prosecuting meth possession crimes of under a certain amount. So users are carrying precisely this amount with them and possibly dealers are delivering packages in this precise amount. It’s not a tiny amount of meth either.

Legalizing possession of hard drugs in Fresno and Seattle has not led to a decline in drug use, of course. And since drug sales are not targeted and remain illegal, the problem of drug trade-fueled gangsterism obviously carries on regardless.

Legalization of cannabis promised to put a stop to all cannabis-related crimes, but now illegal street sales of cannabis are somehow competing with legal cannabis sales in cannabis shops. I’m not sure on what basis the illegal sales are competing. But legal cannabis is very heavily taxed, possibly taxed so highly that the price has become noncompetitive, and street sales can beat the cannabis shops on price. Border Patrol agents are still seizing huge amounts of marijuana at the border and arresting people for trying to smuggle it across, but this strikes me as absurd considering that restricted use and sales of the drug are already legal in much of the US.

In Seattle, police were arresting street people and the homeless, the vast majority of whom had either mental illnesses or drug addiction issues, regularly for all sorts of petty crimes. The local jails were overcrowded and typically they would be jailed for a month or two and then released. Police complained about a revolving door involving these petty offenders, but it’s hard to see what else could be done. This situation is very much ongoing.

Since use is legal, entire sections of downtown Seattle streets have been taken over by mostly homeless addicts using meth, cocaine, and heroin right out in the open. Low level drug dealing is also ubiquitous.

As a result of all of this, Seattle has become a magnet for homeless people all over the country who are flooding there due to the good treatment the homeless receive there. Nevertheless, downtown streets are now full of homeless people sleeping rough on the sidewalks. People going to work have to step over these human eyesores as they negotiate their way to their jobs very morning. Mentally ill homeless people regularly act loudly and frighteningly crazy right on the sidewalks and streets, creating huge embarrassing and scary scenes. Not much seems to be done about these lunatic ravers.

Perhaps most importantly, now that drug use is legal, addicts have swarmed to the city, and petty theft rates in local businesses have skyrocketed as addicts steal goods to pawn to buy their dope.

So, sure, partial legalization solves some problems, but it also creates a whole  lot of new ones.

As usual,  I have no ideas on how to ameliorate this situation. I’m going to throw up my hands on this one like I always do.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: About That White Ethnostate The White Nationalists Want

She’s in Parties: All White state/country

Good luck attracting White liberals or Jews. How many Whites would support an all White state? 5%? 1%? Are most of them gonna be xenophobic, racist rightwing reactionaries? Count me out. An all-White nation would blow.

Can I get an amen?

Amen!

I think maybe 6-9% of Whites might support a White state. Nobody ever polls it for some weird reason. Maybe they are afraid of the answer.

They will all be xenophobloic racists, that’s for damn sure.  And extreme racists as far as racism goes. Say racism is on a spectrum, especially nowadays with theses fool definitions. These White nationalists are ultra-racists. They’re wildly racist. They’re so racist that they are so dramatically out of touch with everyday society as to be near cartoon caricatures.

The overwhelming majority of them will be reactionaries too, and particularly crazy ones at that. Not only that but almost all of them will support Jim Crow, the Confederates in the Civil War, apartheid in Rhodesia and South Africa, and the Nazis in WW2. They will all say slavery is no big deal. They will all oppose Brown vs. the Board of Education, and the Civil Rights, the Voting Rights, and Housing Rights Acts.

They will all support legal segregation and oppose all integration on the dubious basis of freedom of association. They all (even the White nationalist liberals, and there are a few) want to wipe out all social programs, which they call welfare. To them all social programs just means taking the hard-earned money of Whites and giving it out in freebies to a bunch of stupid, criminal, worthless niggers and beaners. They don’t see that many Whites use these programs too. In fact, if you mention that Whites use these programs, they will all say you are lying and laugh at you.

And they will be anti-liberal and especially anti-Communist fanatics. They will basically be fascists, in other words. Almost all White nationalists are pretty much fascists.

In a word, these people are wildly, cartoonishly ultra-racist fanatics. They are not good for Black people! They are not good for most Hispanics. They are not even any good for Asians. They are especially bad for Black people, for whom they reserve much of their ire. No Black person should have anything to do with these maniacs.  They hate you. Every single one of you. Trust me. I know these people very, very well.

TIL that everyone who likes being White, like the commenter and me, has to be an extreme rightwing fanatic! Can’t you like being White and be a Centrist? Or a liberal? A progressive? A socialist? Hell, even a Communist? Why not?

Why all “Whites” have to be ultra-rightwing fanatics is something I will never understand.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Four Types of Transgender People

Interesting post from Claudius about transgenderism. I don’t completely agree with it, but it’s more right than wrong.

Transgenderism is mostly a fad because not all gay men who “transition” become hookers. In fact, many are too ugly and masculine for straight men. These I would call “fad trannies.” Not technically insane though the cult itself is suffering from collective insanity, mostly as a form of political and emotional rebellion against conservatives.

So there are four groups:

  • Gay hookers
  • SJW gay fags
  • Autogynephiliacs
  • The vanishingly small number of people truly suffering from gender dysphoria

The latter two groups are truly insane, but only the last one is deserving of our sympathy and collective medical and legal effort, to wit, they should be legally considered the gender they feel like and actually be encouraged to take hormones and chop off their dick. I doubt even 0.1% of the population would meet the criteria for real gender dysphoria.

Autogynephiliacs should not be legally considered their gender of choice under any circumstances. Why? Because they are straight and thus attracted to the opposite gender. These trannies are potential rapists of women, although I don’t think they pose an overall large threat to anybody save themselves. But you’re right about them having many comorbid paraphilias. These are truly sick fuckers. Look at ContraPoints’s YouTube channel..

“She” is a lesbian tranny. Lolz.

Also note that the first group, gay hookers, don’t chop off their dick. Almost all tranny prostitutes here, in Thailand, or wherever keep their dick because men like to play with it and sometimes be fucked by it. The economic incentive is quite strong, casting doubt as to whether these tranny hookers ever even had gender dysphoria in the first place.

From what I’ve read, men with gender dysphoria are appalled by their own penis and truly want to get rid of it. The prospect of keeping it to make a few bucks on the side by forming non-emotional relationships with straight men doesn’t add up.

RL: It seems to be an extreme form of homosexuality, and their brains are actually female-shifted. That is, they don’t have female brains or male brains.”

I didn’t know this. Interesting. It matches up with what I said. They are just super-duper gay. I like these trannies. They seem very nice, albeit a bit gold-diggerish, but whatever. I could be friends with these people.

Psychotic autogynephiliacs like ContraPoints or Caitlyn Jenner who killed someone with “her” SUV while escaping paparazzi, Hell no! BTW it was an accident, the SUV crash, but still.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Civilized and Less Civilized Cultures: Differences in Impulsiveness, Forward Planning (Thinking Ahead), and Deferment to Higher Orders of Logic

Polar Bear: Of course, letting women dominate men is worse. Men should play the role of loving father to women but be damn sure not to let her hold the reigns.

Men have to dominate. Or at least they have to be seen as dominant. Or at the very least, as masculine. One thing I will never do is seriously insult a man’s masculinity. I won’t call a man gay either. I never do that. I don’t call men faggots, even if they are. If they are, it’s just mean, and I don’t torment homosexuals. If they’re not, no matter how wimpy they are, they might attack me. Any man, if you call him a homosexual or attack his masculinity and say he’s not a man, is liable to hit you, or perhaps worse. It’s a perfectly natural, normal, logical, and sensible reaction.

That it’s illegal doesn’t matter. A lot of perfectly normal and sensible reactions are highly illegal. Quite a few of them might land you in prison for life. That’s why you don’t act normal and sensible all the time. At times we must submit to a higher law or at least a higher level of logic. Of course it’s logical to assault or even kill a man who attacks your masculinity or calls you gay! What could be more reasonable than that? On the other hand, if we do that, then a higher level of logic comes in – the logic of the law and society.

And in this case the logic of the law and society trumps the logic of the primal man of which we are no longer. The higher logic says that if we do that, we will probably get caught and sent to jail or possibly prison, maybe for a long time. So in this case, the higher logic predominates.

Probably the main difference between civilized societies and less civilized or uncivilized societies is that the more civilized societies, men tend to defer to the higher law more often.

In a more primitive society a man simply acts on his whims as the primal man inside of him demands. There are few or no higher orders of society or law to constrain him. This is why you see so much crime, violence, homicide, and general disorder in such places. Too much primal, low-level thinking and not enough civilized, higher-level thinking.

This also has to do with impulsiveness. In less civilized places, people are more impulsive. One of the best things that civilization brings is a decrease in impulsiveness. Instead of just getting an impulse and acting on it, people in more civilized places tend to think it over, at least a bit, before they decide whether to act on it or not.

They think, “Suppose I act on this impulse, what will happen then?” If something bad will happen to them if they act on the impulse that is worse than acting on the impulse, then they often will not act on it. This is called forward thinking, thinking ahead, planning, or thinking for tomorrow.

The less civilized people are, the less they think of tomorrow. They can think maybe 24 hours ahead and that’s it, if they can even think for that long. Increased forward planning and thinking ahead is associated with more civilized peoples. Perhaps the most civilized people on Earth, the Asians, think ahead not just in terms of years or even decades, but in terms of centuries or even millennia! Compare that to an Amazonian jungle tribe, perhaps the least civilized people on Earth, where no one thinks beyond the next 24 hours, if that long.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Liberal California? Californians Voted Rightwing on Eight out of 12 Propositions on the Ballot

Why people keep saying California is liberal is beyond me. My city is 80% Hispanic. But my county voted Trump +13. As soon as you get outside of the city limits here, all the precincts went for Trump. And the Whiter wealthier areas in my city also went for Trump. The Central Valley is not very liberal at all! Yeah my Congressman is a Democrat, but he’s a crappy rightwing Democrat, a Blue Dog Democrat who might as well be a Republican.

Let’s look at the ballot propositions. Either Californians are dumb and get swayed by the big money and their fake lying campaigns on the propositions or they’re just not that liberal. Because the vote wasn’t very liberal.

Californians Voted Rightwing on Eight out of 12 Initiatives

Proposition 15: A fake privacy law bolstering law written by criminals like Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, and the rest of the Silicon Valley crooks that actually weakened privacy laws passed! “Liberal” Californians sided with crooked tech billionaire enemies of the people to screw over consumers!

Proposition 16: Bring back affirmative action in employment failed badly. I like that result, but face it, it’s rightwing. So California “liberals” supported an anti-affirmative action proposition.

Proposition 18: Allowing 17 year olds to vote in primaries if they will be 18 in the general in the fall (Big deal!) failed. That’s a very rightwing vote. California “liberals” voted rightwing again.

Proposition 21: Putting in some common sense rent controls in this insanely overpriced housing market failed again. It always fails! Some liberal state! The Legislature won’t pass it either because all the “liberal Democrats” in there are bought off by extremely wealthy landlords. Some liberals!

Proposition 22: Reclassifying gig workers are contractors so their crooked billionaire employers can keep ripping them off and paying them $5/hour, which is what Lyft and Uber pay their drivers (!) passed! “Liberal” Californians voted for big business crooked bosses and ripped off poor workers!

Proposition 23: Regulating the criminal dog capitalists who run crooked dialysis facilities preying on poor workers suffering kidney failure terribly! They’re not regulated at all right now and that’s terrible for sick workers. California “liberals” voted to keep the dialysis crooks unregulated!

Proposition 25: Changing the cash bail system which keeps workers accused of crimes in California’s”liberal” jails that are as terrible as a Hieronymus Bosch painting before they have even been convicted of a thing, sometimes for years, to let non-dangerous people who haven’t even been convicted of a thing out of jail until they go on trial failed! “Liberal” Californians voted to keep poor workers in California’s Dantesque jails just because they’re not rich enough to afford bail!

Californians Voted Liberal on Four Initiatives

Proposition 14: Funding stem cell research barely passed.

Proposition 17: Restore voting rights for felons on parole passed.

Proposition 20: Increasing penalties for some crimes failed.

Proposition 21: The vote to make some large property owners pay the going rate for their property taxes barely passed. The only “homeowners” it applied to had three or more houses! If you own 3+ houses, you’re a “homeowner?” Get out.

There were 12 ballot initiatives. “Liberal” Californians voted rightwing on eight of those 12 initiatives and voted left on only three of the 12, and two of those barely passed with the skin of their teeth!

California “liberals” are not even all that liberal. They’re more like liberal Republicans. The only way they are left is Fake Left which means SJW Left, which isn’t even left at all. It’s just a bunch of bourgeois “fake rights,” most of which attack Whites and men and vastly privilege sexual degenerates and mentally ill freaks who think they’re the opposite sex against people who are normal sexually and do not have a psychosis about their genitals.

Anyone who thinks that is “left” is insane. Remember the Communist countries of the 20th Century? Remember how socially conservative they all were?

Homosexuality was often illegal. Castro put gays in prison.

Trannies would be sent to an asylum where they belong.

Men were free to be men and women to be women.

No Communist country on the face of the Earth was anti-White. In fact, the USSR and the East Bloc were some of the most pro-White countries the world has ever seen.

Porn and gross, open sexual degeneracy and perversion were banned.

That’s the Real Left. The Real Left is left on economics but fairly conservative on the BS social issues..

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Voting “Liberal” and “Progressive” on Heavily Financed California Ballot Initiatives Usually Means Voting Rightwing

Let’s look at the awful California ballot initiatives this year.

Proposition 15: Making businesses pay the market rate for their property tax, like – Everyone else? – will drive out Mom and pop businesses all over California. Mom and pop! Oh no! Poor Mom and Pop! Poor corner market!

Proposition 19: Making big rich landlords maybe pay the market rate for property tax, like – I dunno? Everyone else in the country? – will massively increase taxes on poor homeowners like Mom and Pop, forcing them to sell their homes and go homeless! Poor Mom and pop! They’ll have to move! But only if they have three houses already!…But that means they’ll have to sell one and move into the other two. But that will mean poor Mom and Pop will only have two houses to live in except for three! How will they survive? They’ll probably have to eat cat food or go homeless!

Proposition 21: Voting for putting some sane controls on the insane rents bankrupting Californians actually meant voting to increase your rent. It will drive rents sky high! You don’t want that, do you? Besides your poor landlord will have to sell one of his yachts! Oh noes!

I know the landlord-criminals always rent control makes rents go up, but how does that even work anyway. Rent control literally sets limits on your rents. I’ve met people who lived in rent controlled apartments in San Francisco and their rent was much lower than their non-rent controlled neighbors.

Ok, so rent control makes your rent go up! So, instead, let’s...not have any rent control! Then rents will totally go down and stay affordable and stuff! Whoops, I was wrong. They went sky-high because there were no limits on them.

So…no matter what you do, your rent’s going to go sky-high while your landlord gets to add new rooms to his mini-mansion! We can’t win! No matter what we do, we’re fucked! Time to pour another drink.

Proposition 22: Voting for giving Uber drivers some rights meant an all-out war on poor Uber drivers, forcing most of them out of their jobs! Help save the Uber drivers! Vote yes! Thank you Uber and Lyft!

Proposition 23: Voting to put a regulation or two on the dialysis industry meant an all out war on those poor suffering dialysis patients! Poor patients! They’re all gonna die! Oh noes!

Proposition 24:Voting for increased privacy on the Net actually meant voting for less privacy. Sponsored by Facebook and Twitter, the best friends of consumers who are totally out to protect your privacy!

My brother’s a hardline partisan Democrat, and I think he even voted rightwing on a couple of those crappy initiatives.

Every time I get fancy mail telling me to vote some way on a proposition, especially to be please vote liberal and progressive on this measure, I’m immediately suspicious. I figure it’s some Big Money scam tricking me into voting for their greedy BS, and I’m almost always right. That’s why I need those voter guides. Without those I’d be dead. But who reads one? It’s pretty hard for me with a genius IQ to figure out those evil initiatives written by (((crooked, lying, cheating, thieving lawyers))).

The initiative process has been completely upended. It was initiated ~1910 in this state to put measures on the ballot to control out of control scumbag robber baron corporations like Southern Pacific Railroad, which seemed like they owned half the state.

The initiative process was supposed to be a way for the ordinary working person to have a voice against the rich and the corporate tycoons because like Hell was he ever going to get a voice in the Big Money-controlled state government. It was supposed to be a progressive, grassroots citizens’ voice thing. Now half the propositions were put in there by huge corporations, usually totally deceptive propositions where they tell you to vote “liberal” except if you vote liberal, you actually vote for the rightwing big money initiative!

I was originally fooled by most of these BS initiatives. Most are written to be as dishonest as possible and the No campaigns are always very dishonest. You can always tell which ones not to vote for because those are the Big Money campaigns flooding your mailbox with slick campaigns telling you to vote for some groovy liberal and progressive things which is always neither. The good campaigns actually but out of the Left never have any money of course, so you hardly ever get brochures from them.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Childhood Never Ends: Why Large Groups of Adults Continue To Engage in Childish Games of Sadistic Dominance of Hated Inferiors

Alpha Unit: OK, Jim Crow laws were proposed as a solution to a problem: White Southerners were being ordered to treat newly freed slaves (and free Black people) as equals, when it was clear that newly freed Black people were in no position to live as their equals.

Their solution? Forget all this “equality” stuff; it’s costing us too much. Let’s bring back the old, tried-and-true way we used to do things: Blacks subordinate to Whites and kept in their place. We’ll make sure it’s “legal.”

Occam’s razor. Look for the simplest explanation. This makes the most sense to me. The whole idea that Claudius is putting forward that White folks are just too nice to do this sort of thing, well, nope. Humans have a need to dominate others. The strong dominate the weak and the weak dominate the weaker. See countless works of literature, drama, and cinema, or, Hell, just read Nietzsche if he makes sense to you.

Also there are different types of sadism.

The First Type of Sadism – the Raw Animal Lust for Cruelty and Love of Humiliating Others Seen Most Prominently in Boys

I’m thinking this type is genetic or biological. This is a pure sadism that can be seen in boys, non-human mammals, and in  adults, most especially in Black adults, especially African Blacks (US Blacks have had a lot of it enculturated out of them, but you still see it a lot).

Sure, all the other races display this raw sadism too, especially in times of war, but you see it most prominently in Blacks to the point where some feel it is an essential aspect of the Black Character, Personality, or perhaps, I would argue, Black Principle (if Black is a Principle like Masculine and Feminine are Principles).

This is extremely prominent in Black children, especially boys, and they are much more sadistic than White boys (Yes, I know all boys are sadists). It gets slowly enculturated out of Black boys as they grow up as with most of us males, but you still see it a lot in the ghetto types in young adult men and even women sometimes, where the basic Black Personality is at its rawest and least enculturated.

This is a raw delight in torture, torment, inflicting pain, violence, and even death on a suffering and tormented Other. It includes the love of observing a victim’s suffering.

Of course, you also see this same sadism in young White men (college boys in particular can be terribly cruel), but it’s just not as prominent as in Blacks.

Also, White culture profoundly dislikes displays of childish sadism in White adults. As an man, you’re supposed to have grown out that boyhood crap or had it beaten out of you if you were particularly diabolical.

In some ways, this sadism can be fun. I recall a Black man I knew named Michael. He hung out with this other Black artist, William, who was very introverted and odd. He couldn’t get laid with God’s help. His name was Charles and he had a university degree in art.

The cool guy’s name was Michael and he was a White-acting Black artist with a university degree in art. I was over at a mutual friend’s house and our friend commented that William had a date.

William was a very shy guy with low-self esteem and a hurt and somewhat confused expression on his face. I believe also had a strange high-pitched voice. He was extremely weird but completely harmless, and once you figured out how harmless he was, you mostly just wanted to laugh at him because he was such a nerd that he was a laughingstock, a comical figure.

He also couldn’t get laid with God’s help, even though he was quite straight. I’d never known him to have a girlfriend or even a date. At age 29, he was not only undoubtedly a virgin, but he’d probably never even been kissed.

I was absolutely dumbfounded.

“What?!” I nearly shouted across the room. “No way does William have a date! No way! That’s not even possible! Tell me you’re joking!”

This was a pretty mean thing for me to say, but I can be a dick. The Black guy, Micheal, roared with laughter so hard he nearly rolled on the floor for ten minutes. As you can see, he was laughing his ass off at the cruelty of my comment.

So Blacks can be a lot of fun if you want to get down with some mean, no-holds-barred humor. A lot of humor is cruel – face it – but Whites’ distaste for sadism limits their potential for humor a lot. We see this especially in the dour, party-pooper, no-fun SJW crowd, where every other joke is an evil bigoted crime that someone needs to get fired over.

In many ways, Idi Amin was the ultimate primal Black man. He displayed most of the raw material of the Black personality to an exaggerated degree. Not all of it is bad. He was wildly extroverted, always smiling and happy, had a nearly inborn sense of humor to the point of being a natural humorist, loved to party and have fun, and had a tremendous love of promiscuous sex. Idi Amin was a good time! As long as you were on his good side, that is.

And then there was his bad side, also in spades.

Whites and most other races probably used to be like this too, but centuries of civilization may have bred it out of us culturally and genetically. We can surely see a lot of examples of horrific sadism in Whites and Asians only centuries ago. One argument is that for a thousand years of civilization, most White criminals were quickly killed, often by public hanging. The idea is that this bred a lot of the criminal genes out of us.

Blacks from Africa, never having good through this process of weeding out criminal genes by execution, didn’t experience such a cleansing. On the other hand, perhaps White and Asian cultures have also accelerated so much in civilizational terms that this behavior is enculturated out of us.

That this love of sadism and cruelty appears so normally and freely in boys of all races suggests that it’s still part of the raw human personality. Although the dramatic morally superiority of US Blacks as opposed to African Blacks suggests that 300 years of exposure to White Christian civilization has had a calming, civilizing, and perhaps eugenically intelligence-increasing effect on US Blacks, which argues for the effects a more advanced civilizing culture can have on a population of a less civilized race.

The Second Type of Sadism – The Dominant Lording It Over Their Brutalized Inferior Victims

I’ve thought about this a lot, and there is another sort of sadism, that of the dominant inflicting their sadistic lordly violence against those they see as inferior.

Look at the delighted faces of those German policemen tormenting Jews in the street. You can say it’s revenge, but isn’t it more than that?

Look very closely at the faces of those Whites at those lynchings – boys, girls, men, women. There’s that same look as you saw in those Nazis above: the wicked gleeful look of the dominant bully inflicting torture and/or death at a contemptuously hated inferior. This poor Black sod’s hanging from a tree with his neck broken in a sickening way, and these Whites who look like your nice White relatives at Thanksgiving are having the Goddamned party of their lives.

What was all that habit of calling Black men boys and Black women girls about?

Why were Black children forced to apologize to White children they bumped into by addressing the White children as Mr. or Mrs. as if the White kids were adults and the Black child was still a child?

Why were the schoolbooks given to Black schools the refuse of the White schools – ripped, torn up, wrecked, and coming with a sticker on them saying that they were too destroyed to be of use to White kids, so they were only worthwhile for Black kids?

What was up with the torching of the Black business district in Tulsa?

Why were Black men lynched and murdered for the crime of standing up to White men and fighting back against them, even if the Whites were trying to kill them? In this case, the message was that of the bully: We will attack you in any way we choose, and if you dare to fight back and hurt one of us, you will die.

Why did White children torment their Black “friends” by forcing them, like slaves, to carry the White kids’ books to and from school for them?

Why did White boys manipulate and laugh behind the backs at their Black male friends and encourage them to commit crimes, so if anyone was caught, the Black would take the blame?

Why were Blacks waited on last in stores, and, even after waiting an hour, passed over again if a White person walked in?

Why did Whites whose land had been sold to Blacks long ago return to their land 50 years later and demand that Blacks hand over the sold land to its original owners, or else?

Why did even White women tell Black men who talked back to them, “I could have you hung from a tree just like that.”? See Of Mice and Men – and this was California in the 30s!

This is all nothing but raw, naked cruelty, and furthermore, there’s a brutal logic behind it: the societal enforcement of White dominance and superiority over Black submission and inferiority. That’s all it is. No need to conjure up fancy theories. Back to Occam’s again.

They did all of this abject and unnecessary cruel stuff because otherwise Blacks would commit a lot of crime? Get out. If anything, such treatments are designed to push people to their limits. Look at how Gypsies are (deservedly) treated in Europe? Does it stop them from committing crimes?

No, all of these punishments were done to enforce the sort of gleeful domination you see on the faces of the schoolyard bullies in 8th grade as they torment their designated victims.

And no, adults are not too mature to regress to childish games of sadistic dominance. I’ve seen so many cases of adults the world over delighting in the sadistic dominance of a hated inferior Other to believe otherwise.

They’re not doing it to stop crime. They’re doing it to get off. To get a rush. To get that glorious sadistic delight in tormenting an innocent victim you remember from boyhood. Remember how fun that was? Remember how tall it made you feel?

Well, those adults are doing the exact same shit for the exact same reasons.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: A Discussion about the Motives for Instituting Jim Crow in the South

Claudius: I think their explicit intent was just a moral justification for their practical solution. That’s how politics works. The name or expressed mission bears no realty to the actual motivation or outcome which in this case was, keep non-wealthy Whites separate from lowly blacks.

This is literally what they said. Claudius’ explanation doesn’t follow. He says that Whites have a hard time being so evil, yet evil was pretty trivial to come by for White folks 150 years ago. They had a very different moral compass than we had. Also Claudius claims that the real reason was understandable and reasonable – stopping Black crime. But the stated reason was diabolical – to keep the niggers down.

For God’s sake, if I am going to do something halfway reasonable, why on Earth do I lie and say I am going to do something wicked instead. It’s the other way around. Humans do monstrous things while couching them in terms of at least reasonableness. A favorite among genocidal aggressors is “We were just fighting back.” But of course every bully on Earth is always fighting back even if the victim has never lifted a finger against him.

In fact, the freed Blacks were so poor and unemployment was so bad that they were besieging their former masters’ plantations pleading for work doing something, anything.

Claudius: I suspect many smart Blacks fled the south and went North leaving behind a slightly dumber freed Black population for regular Whites to contend with. And interesting snippet corroborating this hypothesis:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-25/what-happened-when-blacks-moved-north-during-the-great-migration

Your facts are not wrong, Alpha, but I think the general common wisdom about what was in Whites’ hearts when they did this is dead wrong. I’ve known too many American Whites to believe they could be so stupidly cruel. Only Cultural Leftists are so cruel en masse. When conservative Whites do “bad” shit en masse, it’s usually for a good reason.

Yes, but Whites in the South used to be just that – stupidly cruel. And they really got off on it too. Look at the party atmosphere at those lynchings, the sadistic grins on the faces of men, women, and children alike. Humans get off on being evil if you only let them. The trick is just don’t allow it in the first place! Our demon child personalities of childhood never left us. They just went underground and can come out quite easily. Mine’s locked in a maximum security prison in my gut, and the Hell he’s getting out, but a lot of people are not so cautious or guilty-minded.

Alpha responds to Claudius’ theory: The architects of Jim Crow were explicit about why they were instituting it. It was all about maintaining what they considered the God-given superiority of Whites and keeping Black people “in their place.” They particularly didn’t like the fact that Black people in the South were rising to positions of authority during Reconstruction.

The thing is that Alpha is probably right. We sit here at our vantage point in time looking out over the Hellscape of Black crime, especially violent crime, and assume that the architects of Jim Crow were trying to stop just this very thing by constructing their apartheid system. But they probably weren’t. We are trying to transport 22nd Century minds, methods, and motivations into the heads of Whites of the 1950’s to a century before. They say hindsight is 20-20 but in other ways, it’s often not accurate at all.

By the time that Jim Crow was instituted, the freed Blacks were mostly too terrified and terrorized by a century and a half of slavery to be much of a problem. The crime rate was pretty low back then. Also people, both Whites and Blacks, were very religious, and this tends to make people act pretty good.
Black people don’t automatically act bad, you know.

Yes, some bad things happened after the Civil War. Some freed slaves murdered their former masters and other White men. There may have been a few rapes of White women here and there. But overall, there was not much of this going on.

But the few cases that occurred literally struck terror into the hearts of the Whites. This was their worst nightmare – the Blacks returning to exact revenge on them for the crime of slavery. There has been quite a few slave rebellions in the US over a century and a half, and they tended to be bloody affairs. The Blacks spared no White – women, children, and old men were all fair game and were often killed in horrific ways. Beheading was common.

Also the Blacks put into positions of power were completely incompetent, not the least because they typically had zero education. So you had Black mayors, school boards, police, the whole nine yards, and they were so incompetent it would be laughable if it were not so tragic. It was downright stupid to throw out all the Whites and put a bunch of incompetent Blacks in charge.

The purpose of this was to punish the South. Look what happens when you punish losing parties in a war. The losing party Germany was punished after World War 1 and look what happened. It didn’t take much of this nonsense before the KKK was riding at night. The sun had scarcely set on the Civil War before the first nightriders appeared a mere three years later in 1868.

I’m not sure lynching was done to stop Black crime either. There wasn’t that much of it in the first place. The Black man during Jim Crow was a beaten-down soul. You still see many obsequious Blacks like this in the Deep South, especially in places like Mississippi. They act almost ridiculously friendly and helpful. Black hotel workers are typical in this regard. A terrorized man is a well-behaved man.

I suggested to my mother that lynching was done to stop Black crime, but she said the Whites were just doing it to terrorize Blacks and assert their dominance over them. Humans really get off on blatantly lording it over others if you haven’t noticed, even to the point of humiliation and rubbing it in. I think my Mom was right.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Another Republican Lie: The War on Poverty Failed, Made Blacks Poorer, and Much Worse Behaved

Doug: Jason, the compassion comes after we see facts clearly. I’ve mentioned countless times that we need vocation schools at the high school level to train those kids that are not college-bound in some kind of useful profession.

The Left will never allow it because those schools would be about 1/2 Brown/Black and 1/2 White kids…in other words, too much for them to admit. Instead we keep denying the obvious. Teacher’s unions, a pillar of the Left, would also not allow it either. They literally don’t want any choice for kids–from charter schools to vocational schools.

Another rich example of compassion would be to admit that Johnson’s $21 trillion “War on Poverty” has not only failed but it’s INCREASED poverty amongst Black persons. At least 30% of this $21 Trillion, or $7 trillion was spent on the Black population in a very real attempt at “reparations.” It was also the beginning of “free stuff” for Blacks to keep them voting for Democrats.

There’s TANF, Section 8 housing, Food stamps, Medicaid, AFDC, Head Start, hiring quotas, set-asides, and sharply lowered standards in police and fire departments and colleges and grad schools. “Free money” student loans that will never be repaid. We have free breakfasts for Black children and even free lunches.

Taken together, US Blacks live in a state of “custodial care” by Whites because they can’t take care of themselves.

Nothing has worked. Nothing ever will. This money is paid to the most unworthy people in the world by the most worthy people in the world. Until people take responsibility for themselves, families, and communities, nothing will ever work.

All this because our society cannot admit that Black intelligence is too low, they have a bad attitude, and have too little logic. Black criminality is far too high to support any higher level of civilization.

But what’s worse is that all this money and it’s perverse incentives (to break up marriages) has worsened Black life in America since 1964 and we can’t admit that either!

Since the start of the War on Poverty, black kids are not doing better in school, housing projects built for ghetto blacks are all slums (a complete lack of personal responsibility), drugs, gun violence, incarcerations, STD infections, and abortions remain at epidemic levels. Black high school completion rates are about the same as ever, ie., <50%.

Black culture is actually much worse now. Black culture is in virtual collapse with 72% of Black babies born without a father in the house. Compare this to only 25% when the “war on poverty” was started. I can’t think of a single more devastating statistic to describe a cultural collapse than the 72% figure indicating that the institution of marriage has collapsed. Single parent families are nearly all in a state of poverty. That’s where we are after 56 years of “reparations.”

“Reparations” has help cause a complete and utter Black cultural collapse.

The result of the cultural collapse is evident from appalling crime statistics, 70% of new AIDS cases being Black, gonorrhea infection rates 13-18 times the White average, and black men committing 56% of homicides even though they are 6.5% of the population. Blacks commit crime at 6-7 times the rate of Whites (higher in urban areas) and are incarcerated in that same proportion. Now we have “flash mob robberies” and “knockout assaults” that are overwhelmingly Black crimes.

You can throw all the money in the world at social programs, but laziness, addiction, bad attitudes and decisions, low intelligence, little impulse control, and high levels of violence, they will override any and all social programs. Of course the Left never wants to hear about personal responsibility when they are the most irresponsible. They want to blame our economic system and take more and more of your tax dollars and piss that money away on programs that aren’t working.

Black kids will never be hired when they often can’t speak or dress right and have no self-respect, no discipline and no education. This is the problem today, and it was the problem yesterday and 50 years ago. No amount of money or bureaucracy can fix this. Why don’t we admit that we’ve failed?

Instead, you get 100% denial, 100% of the time, and a punch in the face. A little humility would go a long way with me.

First, the parts where I agree with you.

hiring quotas, set-asides, sharply lowered standards in police and fire departments. Sharply lowered standards for college and grad school admissions. “Free money” student loans that will never be repaid. We have free breakfasts for black children and even free lunches.

There aren’t any hiring quotas or set-asides. They’re mostly illegal. I know Affirmative Action is banned for the federal government. I also know it is banned here in California, the most liberal state in the country. Some private businesses and corporations have their own goals or whatever, but no one is forcing them, and all evidence indicates that this has not caused a lot of problems for US businesses. If it did they would stop doing it.

Standards have not been lowered for much of anything, although they are still being lowered for Blacks and Browns to get into elite universities. Standards have been lowered for the Bar Exam in California, but that applies to everyone. Most tests to get a police or fireman job are still pretty hard.

But I absolutely oppose all mandated affirmative action by the state and and all lowering of standards on testing to let more non-Whites in. I’ve had to take tests all my life. Had to take an SAT test. Had to take tests to graduate college with a BA. Had to take tests to get into grad school. Had to take more tests to get into education grad school. Then I had to take more tests to get a teaching job. Then I went back to grad school. I had take tests to even get through the program. Then I had to take a truly murderous test to get my Master’s Degree.

I don’t think people realize how significant those tests are. I had to pass them. If I didn’t pass them, I flunked. I wasn’t admitted to the program. I didn’t get the degree. There was no coddling, no, oh Bob is disadvanted and part of some dumb race of people so we have to lower standards for him. Hell no. I don’t pass and I’m gone. It’s do or die. Pass or fail. And I passed, without anybody lowering one damned standard to let me through. If I had to go through all that crap, the rest of  you have to go through the exact same thing. I never got a break or a lower barrier to jump over.

Why the Hell should you? Because you’re dumb? Bad answer. Because you’re part of a dumb race of humans? Bad answer. You’re not all dumb. I see smart Blacks, Black attorneys, physicians, Blacks doing every high level job Whites do, every time I turn on my TV. In my recent courtroom adventures, I saw four Black attorneys, two male and two female. They graduated law school. And they passed the damn bar. If they can do it, maybe you can do it. If you don’t do it, don’t cop out and blame racism. Go into some field where you can do well. It’s not that hard.

I’ve mentioned countless times that we need vocation schools at the high school level to train those kids that are not college-bound toward some kind of useful profession.

The Left will never allow it because those schools would be about 1/2 brown/ black and 1/2 white kids…in other words, too much for them to admit.

I definitely agree with you here, but I have no solution to this whatsoever.

Teacher’s unions, a pillar of the Left, would also not allow it either. They literally don’t want any choice for kids–from charter schools to vocational schools.

Charter schools don’t work. That’s now conclusively proven. The idea is that with charter schools, we get rid of the teacher’s unions, and then the kids will perform so much better. In other words, somehow teacher’s unions cause kids to fail in school!

It didn’t work because getting rid of teachers’ unions and presumably cutting their pay and benefits doesn’t make teachers work harder (Shocking!), and getting rid of teachers’ unions doesn’t make students perform better (Duh!). Teachers’ unions could care less about vocational classes. I taught school for many years. I met many vocational teachers. No one cares about them and their classes. Nobody wants to get rid of them.

Since the start of the war on poverty, black kids are not doing better in school…

A lot of falsehoods here. Black achievement has skyrocketed since the War on Poverty. Blacks have closed 1/3 of the achievement gap. Black Computer Science students saw their scores improve every year through the 2010’s. Black IQ’s skyrocketed since the War on Poverty. Their IQ’s are now 16.5 points higher than they were in 1965. Incredible!

Now we have “flash mob robberies” and “knockout assaults” that are overwhelmingly black crimes.

Anti-White flash mobs and the knockout game are not going on much anymore that I know of. That seems to have been a few years ago.

There are two groups of Blacks. One is ghetto culture, maybe 1/2 of Blacks. Obviously this culture is failed in all sorts of ways, but I can’t see any way to improve things. Surely cutting off all their money and making them vastly poorer won’t help a thing.

The other group is middle class Blacks, which may be up to 50%. This group, well in evidence on this site, doesn’t act a whole lot different from White people. And this group exploded since 1965. Before there was the Talented Tenth. Now 50% of Blacks function at a decent enough level. The number of Blacks who function at a pretty good level has risen by 5X or 400% since 1965.

Black culture is actually much worse now. Black culture is in virtual collapse, with 72% of black babies born without a father in the house. Compare this to only 25% when the “War on Poverty” was started. I can’t think of a single more devastating statistic to describe a cultural collapse than the 72% figure; indicating that the institution of marriage has collapsed. Single parent families are nearly all in a state of poverty. That’s where we are after 56 years of “reparations.”

Why did the single parenthood rate skyrocket? Because this is how Black people act in a free society. You want them to act better? Ok, put them in chains again like under Jim Crow. That’s literally how you do it. The single parenthood rate supposedly rocketed up due to “welfare,” but Blacks already had welfare since 1935. The Great Society didn’t increase welfare payments one nickel.

There were food stamps, Section 8, and Medicaid in the Great Society. So Black parenthood collapsed because now Black mothers could afford enough food to eat, to rent an apartment and to go to the doctor? Well, that’s just terrible! How dare they get all those things necessary for them to survive!

Black crime has collapsed. Sex crimes are 63% down from even the early 90’s. Everyone else’s crime rates have collapsed too. Crime in general and violent crime in particular were far higher among Blacks in the 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s to my knowledge. If anyone has better data, let’s see it.

Section 8 housing

Section 8 rentals are not slums. They’re tearing down the housing projects. Now Section 8 is just a voucher that you take around to any renter who will take it. In this complex, a certain number of apartments are Section 8. I don’t know which they are or who rents them, but there are not many Blacks in this complex (thank God). It’s mostly Hispanics, a very few Whites, and yes, there are a few Blacks here and there and they’re at least a bit Ghetto too.

This is a beautiful complex, looks brand new, very well kept up. And there are Section 8 people here. The landlord does not tolerate any crap from anyone, and any tenants who act bad are quickly tossed.

The result of the cultural collapse is evident from appalling crime statistics, the fact that 70% of new AIDS cases are Black, gonorrhea infection rates are 13-18 times the white average,

AIDS cases are mostly Black? Well, those are mostly Black gay men I assume. Please tell me how the War on Poverty made Black gay men catch way more AIDS than non-Black men. By letting them survive? So if you let Black homosexuals survive, then they turn suicidal, go get fucked up the ass by a hundred guys, and get AIDS. Right? Just checking on your logic here.

STD rates are high among Blacks everywhere on Earth. A lot of Black people screw anything that moves, and they probably don’t take many precautions to keep from getting an STD. They also don’t go to the doctor like they ought to. This behavior is typical amongst the Ghetto Blacks. I’m not sure middle class Blacks are sexually any different from the rest of we White sluts and manwhores.

STD rates are extremely high in the Caribbean. They’re off the charts in Africa, where no Black gets a dime of social spending.

Fine. Take all the money away from social programs for Blacks and yell at them to take responsibility for themselves. Like millions of Bill Cosby’s like me haven’t been yelling at Black people every day for years to get their shit together? Is it working? I don’t think so. So your project to pull all that evil survival money away from Blacks so they have no money, no food, no place to live, and no way to go to the doctor.

And this will make them act better.

Yeah right.

And then you will holler at them, “We took all your free money away, now you’re on your own, and you have to get your shit together!” And Black people are suddenly going to act way better and get their shit together.

This is the Republican fantasy about Blacks, and it’s about as insane as the Left’s fantasies about Blacks seen via Critical Race Theory.

The Great Society was never intended to turn Black people into White people. All it was intended to do was to allow people of all races to survive at a basic subsistence level. Do you know what it is like to live on one of those programs? Or even be to poor enough to qualify for them. You never have any money. Life blows, every day, forever. You are living in a world of shit in a sense. Why the most pathetic people on Earth are the subject of all this vitriol is something I will never understand.

Head Start

Head Start is preschool. That’s all it is. It’s preschool for poor people. I know a guy who drove a bus in Eastern Pennsylvania. Part of his route was taking the kids to and from Head Start. 100% of the kids he was transporting were White. Although a conservative, he was dead set against getting rid of Head Start. What’s wrong with giving poor people preschool? You got a problem with that? Or you got a problem with niggers getting preschool? Preschool is only for Whites. Niggers just don’t deserve it. Well, I don’t agree.

Also, if Head Start doesn’t work (false), then preschool doesn’t work. Then why on Earth are all these White parents so insistent on preschool for their kids? Are they are all stupid? What about all the studies showing how preschool benefits kids? They’re bad science? If preschool doesn’t work, a lot of Whites are wasting their money.

And it’s not true that Head Start doesn’t work. The intention was never to turn Black people into Norwegians and Japanese. That’s not going to happen (though my co-blogger is about as deferential and polite as a Japanese woman). You can’t turn Blacks into Whites, not with our present tools. The only thing we can do is try to turn Black people into the best versions of themselves that we can.

Let’s try another one. Head Start works great for White people, but it doesn’t work for niggers for “whatever X reasons.” Why doesn’t it work for them? And they are different species? Are they all born with an anti-preschool gene? Come on. What works for Whites works for Blacks too because Blacks are humans. What works for one group of humans works for another group of humans.

Head start works. Not only that but it’s cost effective. Blacks who go through Head Start are less likely to drop out of high school, be incarcerated, go on welfare, or have an IQ below 70 (so it even lifts IQ’s at the low end). It seems like what Head Start does is lift up the group of Blacks that fall on the tail end intellectually and behaviorally. It lifts up the bottom. And as I said, it even pays for itself.

TANF

Welfare (TANF) pays $300/month. You trying to tell me that women actually don’t keep men around because it’s so easy to live on $300/month? You’re crazy. Tell you what. You Republicans say it’s easy to live on $300/month. Cool. So you do it. Live on $300/month for a while and then get back to us and let us know how it went, ok?

A lot of White people use all these programs. The lie is that this is White people’s tax money going to a bunch of no-good niggers and beaners. However, lots of Whites are on all of these programs. 39% of the women on straight up welfare are White! I live in a poor city, and there are many Whites around here who use Medicaid and food stamps. I see them all the time. It’s sort of normal around here to be on Medicaid or food stamps, and there’s no shame at all in doing so. No one is going to look at you like you’re a derelict leech for doing so. There are too many people doing it, so it became normalized.

The biggest lie of all is that the War on Poverty failed. I’m sure people on food stamps are eating a lot better than they were. I am sure that people on Medicaid are getting more and better medical care than they were. I am sure that people on Section 8 are happy to be able to rent a place rather than being homeless. I am sure that women’s little kids on WIC are eating a lot better than they would.

None of these programs were intended to solve any basic problem with Black people or with any race of people. We weren’t throwing money at any problem. The programs were intended to give some very poor people a basic, very low, no-fun level of existence so they could survive.

There were some problems that got solved.

Food stamps was because a lot of people didn’t have enough money for food. Now they do. Problem solved.

Section 8 was for people too poor to even rent an apartment. Now they have a roof over their heads. Problem solved.

Welfare (which was started in 1935, not by the Great Society but anyway) was based on the idea that all children must be supported. By taking welfare away you are saying that kids have no right to be supported and they should just die if their mother is poor. It’s not about the mother at all. It’s all about the kids. Problem solved, basically.

Welfare didn’t cause single parenthood. We’ve had welfare since 1935 and there were no problems. It’s not some new thing that the Great Society started.

Medicaid was for people who could not afford to go to the doctor at all. Now they can. Problem solved.

WIC was initiated because a lot of women were so poor that their kids were not eating right. So it enabled them to buy food to feed their little kids. Problem solved.

All you people who object to WIC, I’ve got a question for you. You got a problem with little kids getting enough food to eat?

Not one nickel has been thrown at the education system to try to lift up Blacks and turn them into White people. All schools get the same amount of federal dollars. They are funded by local property taxes. If any money was spent it was simply to support schools in Black and Brown areas at a level similar to that of White areas , in other words, to provide Blacks and Browns with a basic low level education. What’s wrong with that?

“Welfare” hasn’t caused any of those problems you described. Let’s look at welfare, now TANF. We got rid of it. Yay! That was cool, man! Why didn’t I think of that! The idea was just like above, take the free money away from those damned niggers and yell at them that now they’re on their own and they have to get their shit together or else. That’ll show em! That’ll make em get their shit together!

Guess what? It didn’t work. At all.

It didn’t improve any social pathology factors, not even one. There were no societal benefits at all. The only thing that happened was that those women (and their kids!) got even more poor. A lot of them went homeless along with their kids. It was a huge failure.

Tell you what. Let’s try an experiment! Let’s look at places like the Caribbean and Africa where there are none of these evil social programs at all. There’s nothing, no social programs, zero. No money, you don’t eat, and then you die.

Ok, Blacks should be free of pathology right? Nope! They act way worse! The fewer social programs they get, the worse they act.

Let’s look at Blacks in Brazil. Few social programs. They act far worse than they do here.

Let’s look at Blacks in Europe. Especially those from Africa act at least as bad as our Blacks and probably even worse.

Fact: Black people have these pathologies you describe everywhere they exist on this planet.

Now why that is is up for grabs. Maybe it’s genes, maybe it’s environment, maybe it’s something in the air. I don’t know. That’s for the social scientists, if there are any honest ones left, to untangle. Not my job.

I figure these social programs are sort of “buy off” programs to buy off Black people who would ordinarily act pretty bad. The more we support them at basic levels, the less poor they are, and they happier they are. If you take away these programs, they would probably act far, far worse and they might even riot so much that they wreck the country. We are buying them off, giving them money with the caveat that they need to act better now, and it seems to work.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Birth of the Cultural Left Analysis: Did the Black Panthers Hate Whites?

I think the Panthers are still around, but they are not very active. I actually don’t mind them. They did a lot of really cool things like free breakfasts and lunches for school children. They have been superseded by the New Black Panther Party, an explicitly racist organization that actively promotes hatred of Whites. The real Panthers recently criticized the NBP for hating Whites, saying that the original Panthers were never about hating Whites; instead they just wanted equal rights for Blacks.

The rightwing recently has published some articles suggesting that the Panthers hated Whites. To my recollection, they did not. They helped the Weathermen break Tim Leary out of prison, and they visited him in Algeria, where some of them (Kwame Ture nee Eldridge Cleaver of Soul on Ice fame) had also taken refuge. A lot of radical Whites worked hand in hand with the Panthers.

The Panthers were Marxists (actually Maoists) of that particular er, which would coincide with the Cultural Revolution period in China. Think of how culturally conservatives the Chinese Communist Party was at this time. That’s what the Panthers were like.

They were strongly against degeneracy of any type as most Communist parties (CP’s) were at that time. Some Panthers were openly homophobic, saying homosexuality was a bourgeois vice, a popular view among CP’s of that time (See the Cuban leadership’s position on this subject in the 1960’s). They certainly didn’t promote Black crime, drug use, or even irresponsible behavior.

I will say that Farrakhan’s (whom I very much dislike) people are huge on social responsibility too, and I appreciate them for that. They are very much into clean living and non-degeneracy, and they despise Black crime.

I came out of the cultural revolutions of the 1960’s, which is why probably why some people are shocked at how leftwing I am. They’re blown away when they figure that out about me. “Wow, I didn’t realize he was so leftwing!” Well, I am. I’m race realist though and hate the Cultural Left. I’m a “conservative socialist.”

Hell, I was on the mailing list for the Weatherman at one point not even long ago! Well, their above ground organization that is (the Prairie Fire Organizing Committee), which frankly has strong links to this BLM movement right now. So, yes, the present Weathermen (now given up arms as a peaceful organization) are very much behind BLM.

My friends were drug dealers who hung out with Tim Leary and the Brotherhood of Eternal Love in Laguna Canyon in Laguna Beach where the BEL made and distributed millions of tabs of Orange Sunshine LSD.I remember my friends telling me about going to parties in the canyon and how they had lookouts high up in the eucalyptus trees to watch out for cops. I did go to a party in the Canyon once, a real hippie party with real hippie chicks and lots of pot smoking. Love was definitely in the air.

I have supported Latin American guerrilla groups. I actually gave to the “weapons fund” for the Salvadoran guerrillas for some time. So I’m actually a real dyed in the wool terrorist supporter or even financier if you will, although I stopped giving them money long ago.

If I did that now, I would be violating the Patriot Act by giving Material Support for Terrorism (Whatever the Hell that means!), and I could be looking at 10 years. But alas, those were different times. Even the 80’s were far more laid back, relaxed, and anti-authoritarian compared to now when we seem to be on some weird authoritarian trip due to fears over “terrorism” which is about nonexistent in the US.

Anyway, this was a time of peace, love, dope and all that. Everyone was very much into nonviolence to the point of near-passivity. Any aggressive behavior was “uncool.” Every hippie man was your brother, and every hippie woman was your sister. There was magic in the air. And Yoko brought her walrus, don’t forget that.

Plus there was lots of “free love.” I still have fond memories of hippie chicks. I will say it was a lot more loving and friendly than things are nowadays with all this weirdness, antisociality, fear of strangers and single men, “pedophile” hysteria, #metoo insanity, and general fear or even terror of men – and this at a time when major crimes like rape have crashed 63% since  1993.

Sometimes I think the lower the crime rate goes, the more paranoid people get about crime. Don’t ask me to figure it out. I have no idea why humans do whatever irrational thing du jour they happen to be doing.

Bottom line is that humans are basically irrational and illogical at their core and we tend to be driven around all through life by our emotional needs and beliefs, which often seem to be pulling us through life blindly on a leash like a dog ownder, not even why we do or feel certain things.

I can’t tell you how many of my female clients have asked me, “Why do I feel this way?”  The answer was not readily apparent. Obviously it’s happening for a reason, probably an  unconscious one. Then they ask me, “How do I stop feeling  this way (getting dragged through life with their emotions like a dog an a leash)?” It’s hard to answer questions like that. The solutions are there no doubt, but they are more tangled up in the forbidding jungle of the psyche than we want  to admit.

The only answer I would have to taht question would be to develop some “emotional literacy,” to try to develop and cultivate at least some  emotional control. My emotions don’t drag me through life blindly, baffled at why I am doing or feeling  this or that. I

t’s more the opposite. Whereas with many people, including  most women for sure, their emotions are dragging through them through their lives blindly, with me it’s the other way around. I have my emotions on a leash and I drag them around. I’d rather drag my emotions through life in my own leash than the other way around. Control gets a bad rap, but a lot of forms of it

Anyway, the Panthers were just Black hippies. They hung out with the White hippies. Black hippies were “brothers,” or “soul brothers,” if you will. There were some problems with them of course (they are Blacks after all), but most of them were quite well-behaved or at least much  better behaved than they are now. I suspect the demand for nonviolence in the hippie movement weeded out the bad ones. There may have been some self-selection going  on.

Bottom line is I really disagree that the Panthers were White-haters. It’s BS.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: A Look at the Kenosha Victims: Joseph Rosenbaum, Anthony Huber, and Gaige Grosskreutz

Now onto the justifiable victims of Kyle Rittenhouse’s justifiable homicide on the 3rd night of the Stupid BLM/Antifa Riots for No Good Reason in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

For background, see here.

First of all, all three of these men were absolutely antifa, but antifa is not a group. Instead it’s an idea. It’s like saying they were all Communists or anarchists. Are you going to make an organization called “Communism” or “anarchism” illegal? See how dumb it is to try to make antifa illegal? Antifa’s not an organization, and you can’t ban an idea. At least not yet. Don’t worry though, the SJW’s are working on it!

First, 37 (not 38 as everyone says) year old Joseph M. Rosenbaum, later Joseph Don Rosenbaum, after a name change. His race is often given as White, but prison records actually list it as Wigger.

I learned quite a bit about this fellow in doing in depth research into this charming fellow yesterday afternoon.

Born in Texas. At some point moves to Pima County, Arizona, where his father appears to be an attorney.

At age 16, he appears to have married in Arizona. He seems to have divorced afterwards, but there’s no record of it.

Around age 18, he enrolls at Pima County Community College, but his time there is short.

At age 18 in 1992, he is sentenced to 12 years in prison on what looks like two counts for Sexual Contact with a Minor, 10 years for one count and 2 years for the other count. I have revised my view of this crime, and I now think he raped a 15-17 year old girl with either force or drugs.

Anyway, he goes to prison for 12 years. In prison, he racks up a seemingly endless series of offenses and write-ups. He’s trying to win Worst Prisoner of the Year Award every year.

He ends up suing the state for prison conditions a couple of times, once because his toilet overflows. The toilets are terrible in those places, I must say. I think they are designed to overflow.

He gets out in 2014, now aged 30. But he hasn’t learned much as the first thing he does after he gets out is get arrested for absconding on parole. He’s sentenced in 2016 and apparently serves one year for this offense. He seems to act better this time in prison. I did find some documents on this case, but nothing much of interest.

I think for all of these cases, someone would need to go to Pima County Superior Court and do a record search.

He moves to Wisconsin at some point, and he ends up being the father of a two year old child. The girlfriend and child live in Waco, Texas, Rosenbaum’s hometown. When he moves to Wisconsin, he has to register on the Sex Offender Registry, but he’s listed as non-compliant.

To make matters worse, just a month ago, he’s charged twice only a month ago, once for domestic violence (battery and disturbing the peace) and ten days later, for jumping bail on the same charge. These cases had not yet gone to trial at the time of his death.

At age 36, Joseph Rosenbaum has now spent 13.5 of his 18 adult years, 72% of his adult life, in jail or prison.

At any rate, he’s dead and 13-14 year old girls across the land heave a sigh of relief.

Anthony Huber

Now for the next fine upstanding young man. Anthony Huber also seems to have a criminal record.

Huber had been arrested twice on domestic violence charges. He was convicted of false imprisonment and choking or strangling the woman he was fighting with in the first case in 2012. In a second domestic violence case in 2018, he was convicted of domestic violence with a repeater clause. Huber is also assumed to have been a White man, but court records also list his race as Wigger as in the case of Rosenbaum.

Gaige Grosskreutz

He has a conviction for Carrying a Firearm while Intoxicated. He also has a record for the minor crimes of Disobeying an Officer and Disturbing the Peace (Excessive Noise). He was affiliated with an antifa grouping called People’s Revolution. A member of this group has been accused of shooting at a police officer in Wawatosa, Wisconsin. He’s generally considered to be White. We tried to find information to see whether his race was White or Wigger, but we were unable to find any. Please comment with any updates on Grosskreutz’ race.

I find this quite shocking that so many of these White rioters have criminal records. It’s almost like antifa are a bunch of criminals!

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: A Men’s Rights View of Pedo Hysteria: It Was Created by Feminists To Demonize Normal Male Sexuality

This is so perfect. I found this on a men’s rights site. It’s brilliant and I think it explains this latest moral panic about pedophilia and child molesting (and more importantly, the sexuality of teenage girls, which is what it is really all about).

The “popular usage” of the term pedophilia is basically the pedo-scare created by feminists to criminalize healthy and normal male sexuality as many boys who are either in jail or on sex offender lists have now discovered. How many? We don’t know since there are no federal stats on who is actually on those lists, but some local studies point to a very significant percentage of “sex offenders” being kids just fooling around.

Just like the definitions of “rape,” “assault,” “domestic violence” that have been redefined to include pretty much anything a female finds convenient, “pedophile” now effectively means “any guy who is attracted to a woman younger than me.”

Then why have we suddenly felt the need to protect young females from sex more now that feminists are in charge?

Why has there been a sudden ramping up of the legislation ‘protecting’ teenage girls from “abuse” since feminists started gaining real power at governmental level, particularly since 2000? Isn’t a simple EP explanation that it is in feminists selfish gene reproductive interests to limit sexual competition from younger girls by raising the age of consent and creating pedohysteria memes?

And it was 19th century feminists who largely determined that 14 year olds are children – something that would have been considered ridiculous in most of human history and even in much of Europe before 2000.

Pedophilia got hijacked by feminists, expanded well beyond its clinical definition or even basic common sense (like jailing consenting kids or guys who had no reasonable way of suspecting the age of their partners), criminalized to the point of absurdity (sex offender lists for consenting kids having sex with each other? Really?) and used as a “scarlet letter” that needs no proof (RL: And hence is not falsifiable and is also tautological).

It’s the same strategy that led to do the absurdly broad definitions, lack of due process, and blatantly sexist criminalization of “domestic violence,” “sexual assaults,” or “sexual harassment.” They not only smear an entire gender but also keep individual men in a permanent state of subjugation to women. Note that most men would think twice before arguing against an abusive female because they can easily get expelled from school, or lose their job, or get evicted from their home.

The root is deeper in my opinion: the “men only want one thing” is just a special case of “male sexuality is bad” which itself is coming from “men are evil”.

The decades-old smear campaign of lies spearheaded by feminists has basically left the general public with an appalling opinion of men:

Men are considered as pedophiles. Never mind that being attracted to a healthy fertile female is a perfectly normal behavior, and Romeo and Juliet were 14 yrs old or so.

Men are considered as perverts guilty of sexual harassment for looking at a girl with her tits and ass hanging out, but having your tits and ass hanging out in the workplace is somehow not considered perverted or sexual harassment.

Men are considered dangerous to children. Never mind that biological fathers are protectors of their children and have an absolutely incredibly positive influence on them.

If you redefine male sexuality as evil and perverted, then it becomes a rhetorical question. (RL: Absolutely perfect and immaculate.)

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

The US and the West May Have Some of the Lowest Rates of Verbal, Psychological, Physical, and Sexual Abuse of Children

Fine, so why are we making such a big stink about it then?

The rest of the world does not care about child abuse.

You mean child sexual abuse or the rest of it, physical abuse, verbal abuse, psychological abuse?

I do have a feeling that child molestation may be quite common in the rest of the world.

I have heard Indian women say that on reservations, “All Indian girls get molested.” A friend told me the same thing about Indians in Canada.

He also implied that all French Canadian girls get molested.

The notion that pedophilia and child molestation is a White man thing is a big lie made up by White-hating Blacks and anti-White racist woke types. You simply don’t hear of molestation in the ghetto because it’s ubiquitous. Black and Hispanic girls are twice as likely to be molested as White girls are. So much for the “White male molester” meme. I read a few articles on this, and the women were quite honest.  A common refrain was “All girls get molested in the ghetto.”

So we see once again very high levels of child molestation in impoverished non-White communities in the West such as ghetto Blacks and reservation Indians.

53% of East Indian girls get molested. Few if any men are ever arrested for this.

We had an actual pedophile on here, and he had relocated to Mexico where he could get away with his behavior better. He posted on the comments about how he was molesting little girls. Probably some of the most shocking comments that ever showed up on this blog. The other commenters all jumped on him and beat him up badly, which was probably appropriate. I didn’t turn him in. He’s in Mexico. That’s not my country. Anyway, I’m not a cop. If police want to go investigate this guy, I’ll help them but I’m not into turning people in to the police. Fuck that.

Anyway this guy did have some interesting things to say. He is the first predatory child molester that I’ve ever conversed with, so his conversation was interesting because you never meet someone like that, and it’s hard to figure out what they are thinking.

In Mexico, he molested a 5 year old girl next door in the bathroom a couple of times. Her mother told her to quit hanging around with him and looked at him suspiciously.

Then he molested a six year old girl next door a couple of times. If you must know, he got these girls to jerk him off in the bathroom, which is probably fairly low on the damage scale. Same thing. Mother said quit hanging around with him and looked at him suspiciously.

He implied that it was basically normal for poor and lower middle class Mexican girls to get molested at some point. It’s just something that happens to girls there and women in those classes just figure it’s something all women go through as girls. Apparently most of them just get over it or accommodate it.

I don’t like the idea of this happening (I’d rather it did not happen at all), but where it’s rife, a lot of women probably just adjust. He said it is so common among these classes that if you go to the police, they just shrug their shoulders and say, “Keep the girl away from him.” Prosecutions are rare, apparently because it’s so common. So most women don’t even bother going to the cops if their girls get molested.

He went to another city where he met some runaway prostitutes who were living in a house together. He told them he was a pedophile, and they said, “No problem,” totally nonchalantly and brought an 8 year old girl out of the house for him. They acted like they did this as a special request pretty regularly. They went under a bridge. She got him off. I don’t want to go into details here but it was fairly similar to what happened to the girls in the bathroom.

The 8 year old girl appeared to be into it, perhaps because she’s come to enjoy it for some odd reason. Perhaps it was fun for her. Girls that age have no sex drive, but perhaps they can learn to enjoy sex like playing on a playground, chasing around with other kids, or swinging on a swing, on that level. I still don’t approve even if they enjoy it. I’m just trying to theorize why they enjoy these activities with no sex drive.

But this got me to thinking. How common is this in the 3rd World? Mexico is heading out of the 3rd world into the 1st. If it’s that bad there, think of how bad it might be in the real 3rd World?

I’m wondering how common this is elsewhere. I’m told that in poor Filipino households, molestation of girls is rampant, possibly even taking the form of rape. Nothing much happens because these slums are such hellholes of crime and despair anyway.

I assume that verbal and psychological abuse is simply normal and legal in most of the world. God knows physical abuse of children may well be too. A lot of tribal people beat their kids pretty bad for no good reason. The kids seem to grow up fine anyway. Thing is in those societies, it’s normal to get beaten as a kid. No one thinks anything of it. So if you say you got beaten as a kid and it fucked you up, everyone looks at you like you’re nuts.

The commenter may be correct that in the rest of the world, psychological and verbal abuse of kids is probably almost normal, and even physical abuse is probably quite common. Remember back to our parents generation? How many men in that generation told you that their Dad used to beat their ass up regularly? Lots of men in that generation got their asses beat by their fathers. I don’t approve of it, but the WW2 generation seemed to come out ok.

I’ve dealt with sexual abuse above. I have a feeling that in the 3rd World, this is perhaps way more common than we want to think.

I think what you are getting at here is that levels of psychological, verbal, certainly physical and definitely sexual abuse are more proscribed here than anywhere else on Earth. We’ve declared war on all of these things. Who else has? No one.

So the levels of such things in the US may well be very low by world standards. Still the scolds won’t shut up about it and go on and on about the “child abuse catastrophe” now somehow morphing normal late adolescent consensual sex into 18 year old “grown men” “molesting” and “raping” 17 year old “little girls” (equivalent to toddlers I guess) who “cannot consent and are therefore always raped every time they have sex (!!),” all teenage girls who get fucked by adult men (the # must be very high) have been “molested” like little girls, and all of them are now somehow damaged for the rest of their lives!!

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

A Good Deed Never Goes Unpunished

Greg Rambo: Has Highbrow ever taken on the subject of Scientology? They seem to think that whatever you accuse them of, that means you’re guilty of the accusation yourself.

I don’t know much about it.I would like to look into it. I have a book on it and I dipped into it, but you know me. I’m reading like 200 books at any given time probably.

I’m running into this “What you accuse other people of, that’s what you are.” It’s really upsetting to me.

I stumbled across a child porn pic the other day on Queera I mean Quora of all places.

Ok, the pic was this little girl on a bed. Who knows, maybe she’s five years old? Bare-ass naked. Not necessarily a big deal. Humans are animals and when we take off our clothes, we are naked. That’s called our natural state. There’s nothing obscene or evil about some kid with their clothes off. It’s a perfectly natural state for a young human being to be in. Not evil at all. You think it’s evil every time some kid takes their clothes off to take a bath or a shower? What’s in God’s name is wrong with you?

Anyway, she’s on all fours. With her ass to the camera. Peering over her shoulder and looking at the camera. And, yeah, her legs are spread a bit. So it was pretty gross and it hit me like a kick in the stomach. That pic is illegal because it is probably posed, somewhat uncomfortable, pretty unnatural, an unlikely position for her to have gotten into on her own, and, yeah, involves lascivious display of the genitalia. Dost test. Bingo. Illegal as all Hell.

Below that he had two posts which are instructive for showing us how these guys really think.

The first post is a fantasy of his that I doubt took place. He describes graphically how when he was 12 years old, he had sex with his eight year old sister. It was pretty explicit and I could reprint that here legally, but I won’t because it’s gross. Most 12 year old boys have not reached semenarche yet, so I doubt if the story is true. More likely a fantasy. Then he says something about how he wants to do this to an eight year old girl right now. This is typical thinking for these guys.

Next was a comment about how lots of men want to have sex with teenage girls (no shit), and then he adds that lots of men even want to have sex with pre-pubertal little girls (probably not a whole lot, but also probably way more than you want to think). He then added that a lot of little girls are horny as Hell, get very wet, and are dying to have sex with adults. If you spend any time around these guys, you hear this over and over. Fantasies about wanting a little girl to come onto them. Endless testimonies about how little girls are horny as Hell and come onto men all the time.

I got so mad that I called up the hotline and reported the sonofabitch. No good deed goes unpunished. My brother heard about and called up my Mom and told her, “Bob looks at child porn.” My Mom was and is absolutely hysterical about this. “Don’t go to those websites!” Except Queera is a just a regular website like Facebook. Is Facebook a child porn site? Queera doesn’t even allow real porn or even erotica.

Some sick fuck pedophile (the real kind) put that pic on his profile along with two other completely pro-pedophilia (the real kind) posts. I’m sure that all of my enemies who read this are going to run around shouting that Lindsay admitted that he looks at child porn.

Look what happens when you try to do the right thing. You run across some sick shit on the Net, so, like a good citizen, you report it to the authorities. The fact that you did this makes you a proven pedophile and a consumer of child porn.

I swear every day I hate people a little bit more than the day before.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: What’s CP and What’s Child Erotica or Harmless Material?: Legal Dilemmas of Child Pornography Law

There’s legal or softcore child porn (CP) and illegal or hardcore CP. Most people are idiots and don’t know the difference, including this fool who reported a bunch of perfectly legal sites.

Bottom line is creepy pictures of little girls don’t cut it. There’s plenty of that out there. It’s hard to describe but it’s pretty little girls often in some rather skimpy clothes. They are often posing seductively and sometimes they have their tongue hanging out of the side of their mouth. Gross, huh? Sure, but it’s all completely legal.

If they have their clothes on, it’s pretty much legal. Nevertheless, there have been some recent very bad rulings that found that even pics of clothed little girls could be CP. These rulings were very bad because just looking at the rulings, it would be very hard to say exactly what is legal and what is illegal.

Even nudes of little girls are often legal if they look natural enough. It’s disturbing but it’s quite legal. There are nudist sites all over the Net with pics of kids, teenagers, and adults bare-ass naked.  All completely legal.

To be illegal it has to appear posed, unnatural, uncomfortable, a position the child was unlikely to get into on their own, and most importantly, must display lascivious display of the genitalia. This is called the Dost Test. The Dost Test has never even been litigated all the way to the Supreme Court, so we don’t have any idea how constitutional it is. It resulted from a case in California that laid out exactly what CP had to contain in order to be illegal and not simply child erotica, which is 100% legal.

That’s for children’s pics with no sex involved. Once you get sex involved, it’s a whole new ballgame, and any photos of kids having sex, either with themselves (masturbation photos are illegal), each other, or with adults, are absolutely illegal. They can’t even be posed with an adult looking like they are about ready to have sex. I could describe pics like that I saw and reported, but I don’t want to gross you out.

CP cartoons (including manga and hentai) and 3D are mostly legal. In some places like Germany they are illegal. In other places like Japan they are completely legal. In the US, it’s mixed. Apparently it’s illegal to create them but it’s not illegal to possess them, as if that makes sense. The clothed models have been a mess ever since the terrible Black Cat Scans case. In that case, the men who created the website went to prison, but the 25 million who went to the site and downloaded the pics got off scot free.

It’s generally considered a miscarriage of justice, especially because when those men, who happened to be of a certain (((type))), made that site, they checked out the law and figured that the site was completely legal. And it was. But after the site had been up a few years, the government decided absolutely criminally to try to redefine CP to include the Black Cat Scans which had previously been excluded. So those guys got blindsided. It’s as if spitting on the sidewalk has always been legal. So you spit on the sidewalk from time to time.

One day the Feds decide to reinterpret some vague law called “Antisocial Behavior” to include “Spitting on the Sidewalk,” although that act had never been included before. So you get taken to court and the Feds make the case that under their new interpretation of the Antisocial Behavior law, they now include Spitting on the Sidewalk, though it was always legal before. They try the case and some hack judge convicts you for a crime you weren’t even aware was illegal.

Bottom line is you can possess all the clothed model pics you want to (But why would you want to?) but I guess you can’t make websites putting them up there and charging people to see them. I guess.

Clothed models are usually little girls around pubertal age (11-13) dressed up in some pretty dirty clothes (like lingerie) and posed in some pretty dirty positions (guess). They’re creepy as all get out, but it’s not CP. Most of the girls were from impoverished families in rural Russia. In every case, their mothers got them involved in the modeling.

A number of the girls got followed up and by 18-20, almost all of them had married the local rural Russian thug and already had at least one kid. Some were single Moms already. There was an uproar when the men went to prison. 20-40 former models all made videos testifying to the fact that they were not harmed at all by this modeling and how well the photographer had treated them.

The photographer had treated all of the girls and their mothers very well and there had been no sexual behavior at all between him and the girls. The girls and their mothers were all very fond of him. The videos are still sitting up on Youtube if you are interested. It’s a pretty sorry case all around.

Central to weird CP theory is that CP is the portrayal of a crime and hence is illegitimate. Except shooting clothed model pics isn’t a crime, so strike that one out.

Next is the argument that the girls are harmed by being photographed even if there is no sex involved. This applies to pics of girls alone nude and posed in various ways. Merely by getting posed that way and  having  photos taken and certainly if they know the photos are on the Net for anyone to see is enough to cause harm. That’s an interesting argument.

But for the clothed models, the photographs were basically legal, the girls were clothed, and no girl was harmed by getting pics taken of her.

Where’s the crime?

Next we see how CP law keeps creeping upward and upward to encompass more and more things.

No crime? No matter. Girls not harmed at all and quite willing? No matter.

Because a brand new idea has been thrown out. The concept of a record of a crime and harm to the girls is dead because now we have new reasons!

The new reasons say that “CP” is bad even if there is no crime, no girls were harmed because the material is being used by pedophiles to masturbate to. Which I guess is evil or something. This is how they roped in the cartoons and the 3D stuff. No crime of course. And no harm of course. Hell, there are not even any real humans to be victims of a crime or to be harmed! The things being victimized by crime and harmed are pictures, drawings,  and 3D graphics. They’re not even real people! They’re completely fake!

But now they’re illegal too because they turn pedophiles on. That seems a dubious reason to make something illegal.

How bout if a man takes photos of boys walking to and from school?

How about a man who orders a video of little girls during majorette exercizes?

And how about if these men are pedophiles who use these perfectly harmless photographs to masturbate to pedo fantasies? So what? What’s wrong with that? But, guess what? Feds (FBI jerkoffs) have arrested men for possessing photos they took of boys walking to school and for ordering videos of girls doing majorette exercizes.

Because pedos were using them to jerk off. That misinterpretation of the law seems very wrong, sorry. That’s absurd. Also, you are arresting men for thought crimes. After all, the photos and videos are only illegal because of the thoughts that go through these men’s heads when they look at them.

Ridiculous. If I look at those same videos (not sure why I would but anyway) I would most certainly not experience sexual fantasies about either the girls or the boys. So I get to possess this material because it doesn’t turn me on (because I don’t have illegal thoughts), whereas these pedos go to prison for possessing the same material, apparently because they have illegal thoughts while looking at the material.

Back to the female who got solo photos of her taken as a child. What if the female is not aware that her pics are out there? People are looking at them and she hasn’t a clue? How is this automagically harming her? Osmosis? Via another dimension? Some psychic mechanism. Clue me. She’s not being harmed by the people looking at her pics.

Another argument is that even if the female is not aware her pics are out there, the mere memory of her having those pics taken as a girl is going to continue to harm her, assuming she even remembers such things. That’s a better argument,  but that harm is going to take place whether the pics went up in flames and are gone or whether they are in 10,000 places on the Net, right?

Als,o believe it or not, I met a woman who was molested and later had statutory rape committed against her by her uncle and his friends from ages 12-17. They took videos of the whole thing. She has reconciled herself to what was originally a trauma by deciding that this was fun and it turns her on.

She’s actually looking for the videos now, which seems a bit dangerous. Well, there’s one woman who had pics taken at age 12 and doesn’t care. Furthermore, she presents an interesting case. Yes, the videos portray a crime. Sure, she was legal from 16-17 so all this sex was legal at that point. But shooting videos of it wasn’t. She was still underage and although she can consent to sex, she can’t consent to making porn, which is probably a good idea.

We need an 18 to do porn law because as soon as we start lowering that number, the Net will be flooded with the newly legal girls. Now you can do porn at 17? Fine. Except in a week the damned Internet will be flooded with “17 year old girls doing hardcore porn!!!” Because pornographers have no basement on sleazy. They’ll go as low as you let them. I don’t particularly care about teenagers making this stuff consensually and people looking at it at home. But keep it off the damned Internet!

But the girl was going along with it quite happily, so one wonders what the big deal is. Further, the girl is not being “revictimized” by this videos being out there because by her own admission, she likes these videos.

I don’t know what to say. Considering her age, most of those videos could well be floating around anyway. After all, hardcore with 14-17 year old girls is said to be everywhere on the Net,  mostly unlabeled.  No one seems to care much. But the early stuff is creepy. I don’t want videos of grown men having sex with 12-13 year old girls legally floating around on the Net. I don’t care if she likes them. I don’t care if she didn’t get hurt and isn’t getting hurt by them. I just don’t want that crap out there on the Net. Maybe if you keep it your drive to yourself, it might be ok. But I don’t want that garbage floating around legally.

What about the case of creep shots and surreptitiously taken photos of little girls and teenage girls. That stuff’s out there too. In this case, the female doesn’t even know anyone took pics of her. Furthermore, she probably doesn’t even know if her pics are floating around. It’s really hard to make a case that she got harmed at all by some creep using a hidden camera. Sure it’s an invasion of privacy but the person doesn’t even know their privacy got invaded, so what of it? I guess it probably ought to be legal but I’ll be the first to say the pics are creepy and uncool.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

The “Tom Hanks Is a Pedophile” Charges

I watched a video of some Qanon conspiracy theorist going on about the “Tom Hanks is a pedophile” story. He wouldn’t be a pedophile even if it was true because he seems like regular women just fine. Also the girl was 13 if what she says is even true. That’s too old for pedophiles. That’s called statutory rape, although, yes, in some states like California, it’s called child molestation.

That’s a bad law though because 13 year old girls are almost all pubertal. Menarche in the US now hits at age 13, and the physical sex drive comes on about four months before menarche. Prior to that I do not believe that girls have any physical or psychological sex drive at all. Kids simply don’t have a sex drive like we adults do. I don’t think boys have a sex drive either. I sure didn’t. I think I thought about sex maybe five minutes a year as a boy.

Anyway, there’s a woman out there who says that her father sold her to Tom Hanks at age 13 as a sex slave for Mr. Hanks. Well that’s one thing. Not only that but a mind-controlled sex slave, which is a concept I find dubious. I have no idea if she’s telling the truth. You’ve got me.

The video tries to make the case that Hanks puts international pedophilic codes into his tweets. I have no idea if that is true or not either. He tweeted a photo of a lost glove next to SRC USA. You put that into the Russian search engine Yandex, and you get a bunch of (apparently legal) pedophile sites. The man in the video proceeds to report all the sites to the hotline, but all of those sites were legal because every pic I saw on there was 100% legal.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Left Libertarianism and a Rejection of Carceral Liberalism and Leftism

I’d say I definitely have some serious Left Libertarian tendencies. Are you familiar with the term “carceral?” I am seeing that used a lot now. Carceral feminists (100%, obviously), the Carceral Left (way too many of them), carceral liberals (all of them). A lot of conservatives are carceral too. That’s their whole raison d’etre after all. Centrists? What’s that? That’s just a carceral liberal with some economic conservatism.

I hang out on Reddit a lot, though I am banned repeatedly. That place is sickening. They’re all liberals or Left, but they’re the Carceral Left or Carceral Liberals. They’re constantly screaming to throw more and more people in jail in prison, mostly men for either having sex with women or trying to do so. Apparently there’s no worse crime for a carceral libbie than trying to get laid. I think they’ve never met a law they don’t like. They’ve never met a jail or prison they are not ecstatic about.

Which is why I don’t understand why they hate cops so much. Wait. You never met a law you didn’t like (and in fact libbies are constantly screeching for more laws, greater penalties and toughening up laws). You can’t get enough of prisons and jails, especially since they’re full of men and there’s nothing libbie faggots hate more than men. So they love laws, love prisons, love jails…but they hate cops?! They yell about defunding the police but they want to throw all of us men in jail for even looking at a woman. Forget flirting and dating. That’s all harassment now. Forget sex. It’s all rape and abuse now.

I’d say that the  Alt Left, if anything, should be a civil libertarian movement. We should be an anti-carceral movement. The problem isn’t so much cops. Sure, they enforce the laws,  but they don’t write them. The problem is the whole shitstem. The cops, the DA’s, the judges, the bailiffs, the jail and prison guards, the parole and probation officers, the jails, the prisons, and more than anything else, the goddamned legal code.

These maniacs have already made half of ordinary life illegal, but that’s never enough. Every year on January 1, I wake up and there’s 50-100 stupid new laws in my state, supposedly one of the most liberal states in the country but actually the home of Carceral Liberalism.

I advocate, for starters, wiping lots of laws right off the books. Anything that doesn’t obviously and directly harm an innocent person is an objective way needs to go. I want to make it do prisons and jails cannot be filled past capacity. Our California penal institutions are still 121% full, and we just let a lot of them out due to  overcrowding. The courts allow our prisons to be 133% of capacity. Many of our county jails are under court mandated overcrowding mandates. I want the prisons to be capped at 100%. Fuck 133%. What is this 133% crap? You don’t like it?  Fine. Build more prisons. Good luck with that.

This is my dream. We’ve reduced all the jails and prisons to 100% capacity max. They’re usually close to being full. The police go out on their rinky dink calls for the petty chicken shit crap they waste most of their time on and a lot of the time, they decide not to make an arrest. “Hey, the jails are full. We don’t usually make arrests on this petty crap. We have better things to do.”

I was alive back in the 1970’s and 1980’s.  Cops had a reasonable attitude back then. They would often arrive at places where people were breaking the  law but they would simply choose to not do anything about it. I was there on several occasions when police came out and said,  “We don’t usually waste our time on  this crap,” or “We don’t usually like to get involved in this stuff,” or “Look, we have better things to do than waste our time with this BS.”

That seems to be gone now.  Cops nowadays seem to be itching to arrest anyone they can for spitting on the sidewalk. I don’t get it. Someone clue me here. They bored? Change of culture? Not enough action?

There was a sense of finesse, of nuance, of reason, logic, rationality, and sense. That’s how the law is supposed to be, from the cop on the beat all the way to robes in the courts. The law is a grey area. It’s supposed to be enforced and and prosecuted that way. It’s supposed to be an area free of heated emotion that distorts cold logic and reason.

I actually read legal journals. You might want to try it some time. It’s not as hard as you think. One thing they keep talking about is keeping emotions out of the laws and courts. The ways they do this is to write hard legal codes into court decisions that tie the hands of judges and force them to rule as logically as possible, the reason being that of course judges to say nothing of juries are subject to the worst whims of emotions that distort, warp, twist, and wreck both law and justice.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: What Crime Did Prince Andrew Commit?

In the Epstein/Maxwell affair, the accusation from Virginia Giuffre (VG) is that she was ordered by Epstein to have sex with Prince Andrew a couple of times in order to gain blackmail material on him.

The faggots and cucks on Reddit are all screaming that Andrew committed “child rape.” “He raped a child!” they scream. What a bunch of homos. A recent post on Reddit ordered everyone to stop calling the “victims” of the “abuse” young women. “They were little girls!” the gays all screamed. Really? A 17 year old girl is a “little girl?” Have any of these dickwads ever met, spoken to, and spent time with an actual 17 year old girl? I have. They’re virtually adults. Hell, a lot of 16 year old girls and even a few 15 year old girls are practically adults for all intents and purposes.

Especially past 17 1/2, there’s not a whole lot of difference between them and an 18 year old adults. They’re inexperienced, they don’t know what they are doing, they’re awkward and clumsy when it comes to flirting and sex, but they’re very enthusiastic. Getting down to brass tacks, they are often quite immature, but I would call them more “very immature women” than girls. It’s far more of a woman than a girl, that’s for sure.

Next we look at the rape allegation. Supposedly Prince Andrew “raped” this girl! These Reddit “men” actually believe this feminist shit where half of all normal sex is rape. Good God, they’re queers.

She never tells us how the sex started with Epstein and Maxwell. Was she raped? Was she talked into it? There are allegations of “sex trafficking.” Sex trafficking means you are being held prisoner, you can’t really leave, or they are making it hard for you to leave by coercing you into staying somehow and threatening you with consequences, often violence, if you try to leave. Sex trafficking is sex slavery. You’re being held prisoner. It’s very much tied in with pimping, and Epstein was mostly a pimp before he was anything else. Maxwell was a madam, in effect a female pimp.

Was VG really a sex slave? How? That means she was being held prisoner? She was? How was she a prisoner? Giuffre was coerced into staying? How? Giuffre was threatened if she tried to leave? How?

I’ve been over this story for a long time. Giuffre never states that she was raped one time. She just says Epstein told me to have sex with this guy, so I did it. That’s perfectly legal because she was legal when he was doing that. Apparently this girl likes to follow orders. She’s a grown woman now, right? She still likes to follow orders? Tell her to come over and I will give her some sexual orders to obey, ok?

It’s not enough to say “I was Epstein’s sex slave.” She was legal. How exactly did Epstein make her his sex slave? He said, “You are my sex slave. You shalt obey me, miss.” And this fool girl believed that? Well, that’s legal.

Prince Andrew had sex with this girl in Virgin Islands. She was legal, 17. AOC is 16 in Virgin Islands. Someone explain to me how it is rape and sexual abuse to have consensual sex with a perfectly legal girl. I’m dying to know. VG was legal everywhere she had sex with Andrew. She was legal in New York. She was legal in New Mexico. She was legal in the UK. Please explain how consensual sex with a perfectly legal girl is rape in any of these places.

VG was a “sex slave” from 17-23, apparently, so most of this was when she was a grown woman. Why all the focus on the one year when she was a girl, albeit a legal one? Between ages of 18-25, was she being “raped” or “abused” the whole time? Most gay media stories on this subject say she was “abused” from ages of 18-23. How in God’s name can a grown woman be “sexually abused?” She can’t. Even teenage girls can’t be “sexually abused.””

Sexual abuse only refers to child molestation, generally but not always sex with a child under 13. The media also says that VG was “abused” when she was 17. Every time she went off to have sex with some guy Epstein told her to, she got “abused.” How in the Hell did she get “abused” by having consensual sex with all of these men? Keep in mind she was completely legal.

I’m not feeling a lot for this silly woman. She got paid $15,000 for getting “raped” and “abused” by Andrew, and apparently she got paid big money every time she had sex with someone Epstein told her too. Sounds like she’s making pretty good money for a girl working on her back. I never knew getting “raped” and “abused” paid so well. Hell, at rates like that, I might even let myself get “raped” and “abused.”

But really, I’m feeling terribly sorry for this woman. I’m sure that must have been horribly traumatic to get all that money for one consensual sex act! If some hot chick gave me $15K for sleeping with her, I’d be traumatized for years! I’d have PTSD for the rest of my life!

People are saying that Andrew may have bought this girl. No one knows if Andrew bought her. Epstein was probably just giving this girl away to his friends. I doubt he was charging anyone. This seems to be about the worst they have on Andrew. If he bought her, Andrew is guilty of the crime of – gasp – buying a prostitute. Like this doesn’t happen millions of times every day in the US. Like rich men don’t buy prostitutes all over the world all the time.

On the other hand, she was a minor. It was legal to have sex with her but not to pay her for it. So if he knew she was underage, he’s guilty of the crime of buying an underage prostitute, which apparently some sort of a crime, even if it’s not called that. We now know that he knew she was 17.

Fine, but did he pay her or not? That’s the important part here. Even if he did, frankly, men who buy underage prostitutes are almost never convicted. You have to prove they knew she was underage, and that’s hard to do. Generally they go after the pimps who are pimping these girls out, not the customers. Men probably buy underage prostitutes tens of thousands of times a day in this country.

They are also saying that he committed some crime called “Buying a Trafficked Prostitute.” But that’s only if he bought her. There’s no such crime as “Having Sex with a Trafficked Prostitute.” You can have all the sex you want with these trafficked women. You just can’t pay them for it.

Neither of these are even crimes. Show me where there are crimes called that. As I said, cops don’t worry about the buyers. They have a hard enough time keeping up with the pimps and the traffickers.

Ok, VG’s a prostitute. She’s a whore. Nothing but a little teenie whore, and a well-paid one at that. Epstein is pimping out an underage prostitute, and he may also be trafficking her. And pimping out an underage prostitute is indeed a crime. I forget what it is called, maybe something like “Profiting from Underage Prostitution.” I recently looked over the sex laws in some European countries and a number of them had crimes along those lines, phrased in different ways.

The problem with the trafficking laws is the way they were written. As noted above, the trafficking laws are designed to prevent human slavery of various kinds. The sex trafficking laws are designed to fight what is better known as sex slavery. These women are imprisoned. They can’t leave. They’re being forced to prostitute themselves or forced to work for some particular pimp.

But the law was abused by the pigs at the same time it was written. It applied to not only the sex slavery, as was proper, but it threw in  the notion that anyone pimping underage prostitutes was automatically engaging in sex slavery. So the law is designed to prevent trafficking in prostituted sex slaves and also underage prostitutes.

The problem is that the addition of “and also if they are underage” part to the law is that this goes against the spirit of the law – that it was designed to prevent sex slavery. There’s no proof that all underage prostitutes being pimped out are sex slaves, though tragically quite a few probably are exactly that. It’s just more pigs abusing laws and writing laws based on emotional hysteria rather than clear-eyed, cold, legal logic.

But anyway, Andrew just had sex with some legal girl, probably for free. He may have had no idea she was a prostitute or not, and if he didn’t pay her, it doesn’t matter. He knew her age but she  was legal. He probably had no idea she was being “trafficked,” and it wouldn’t matter if he did unless he bought her and even then, nobody gets prosecuted for such a crime.

Precisely what crime did Andrew commit here?

Inquiring minds wish to know.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: 16 and 17 Year Olds Are Not Children or Kids!

Think  about it. No way in Hell is a  16 or 17 year old girl or boy a “child” or even a “kid.” Not really. Children and kids are those humans that run about acting like children from birth to age 12. The behavior of an 8 year old is so different from a 17 year old that they might as well be different species.

Indeed in the UK and Germany, where the Age of Consent is 15-16, they laugh at us and call us stupid puritan fools (which is exactly what we are in this bizarre and sexually mindfucked nation) for calling 16 and 17 year olds children. They call 16 and 17 year olds “young adults” or “little adults,” which is about what they are. If you spend a lot of time around them, what they resemble more than anything else is a very young and extremely immature adult. And adult that has just hatched out of the childhood egg and is fumbling its way around in the world awkwardly like a baby with its first steps.

Now granted in Germany and the UK, 16-17 year olds do have some  restrictions on them. They are seen as such immature adults that they are not allowed to buy or consume alcohol or go to bars or nightclubs where alcohol is served. Their immaturity renders them unable to handle alcohol reasonably.

16 and  17 year olds need to be kept out of the military. They’re much  too immature of adults  to be in  the military. They would be discipline problems and we don’t like the idea of minors being killed in battle.

There are certain other things you cannot do until the age of majority (18). Sign a contract? Take out a loan? Anyway these need to be kept in as these little adults are too immature to handle such things.

In addition, it is acknowledged that they still need protection.

Hence, in these countries, 16-17 year olds cannot be prostitutes or act in porn movies. I believe there are also restrictions on men with power over those girls not being allowed to have sex with them because it’s seen as an abuse of power over a very immature and naive adult who should not be taken advantage of.

Of course, when she hits 18, she’s not protected from power differentials anymore, except that many professions and workplaces have rules saying that those in power over others are not allowed to have sex with those they are in charge of.

So university professors are not allowed to have sex with students. Doctors and therapists and not allowed to have sex with their clients. Supervisors are not allowed to have sex with those under them. In the military, fraternization rules mean that officers cannot have sex with enlisted people.

In general you won’t go to jail for these power and trust violations, which is proper, although there are some very stupid laws now whereby high school teachers having sex with an adult high school student has committed a crime and can go to jail. Screw that. Fire them and pull their licenses. For God’s sake, we’ve already made half of life illegal. Can we please stop now?

Rather than going to jail, instead you will be fired or lose your license. A teacher will be fired and lose their license. A physician or therapist will have their license pulled. Professors and supervisors will simply be fired. I don’t know what happens in the military but there is some punishment.

If 16-17 year old girls were allowed in porn, very quickly the entire Net would be awash with 16 and 17 year old girls doing porn because “16 is the new 18” would be the motto, and the thrill, danger, and forbidden nature of it, in addition to the lure of youth, would drive millions of mostly men to watch these 16-17 year old girls doing all the crazy stuff a porn star does.

It would happen overnight because pornographers are the worst scumbags with just about zero morals. They are always pushing the envelope of the acceptable towards wilder, sicker, and more perverted stuff. I am starting to wonder how porn can even get more perverted and sick than it already is. Isn’t this about the limit? What’s not been done yet? Shit-eating? Child porn? Snuff films? You get to the point where all that’s left are things that are too awful or horrific to contemplate. We’ve maxxed out or sick, perverted sex in porn.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t  want to live in a world where the Net is flooded with 16-17 year old girls engaging in all the crazy sex acts of a porn stars. Forget it.

These restrictions are completely proper. All of these restrictions are completely proper. Sure 16 and 17 year olds are little adults but they are extremely immature adults, so immature that they need to be restricted in a few ways because they’re too immature to do certain things. We also need to protect them from power and trust abuses by those over them. We need to keep them out of prostitution because that’s just gross. We don’t want 16 year old prostitutes on the streets. And  we need to keep them out of porn because we don’t want to live in a world where 16 year old girls having sick, perverted sex on camera are a click away from  anyone who can get on the Net.

Yet still…

16-17 year olds aren’t kids! 16-17 year olds aren’t children! Quit calling them that.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Sex Trafficking: What Is It?

What are the sex trafficking laws all about. You realize that when that term was first invented it referred to people who were prostituted by basically a pimp or a procurer who they work for? Bottom line is they are not free to leave at any point. The employer is keeping them there by threats of violent harm or death if they ever try to leave. They’re basically “sex slaves” in that sense. It’s fairly common.

Girls and women tricked and sent to countries like the US and Israel from Korea, Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe after being promised a legitimate job like waitressing are also being trafficked. Once there, their passports are confiscated, and they are told that there is no waitress job and that they now work in a brothel until they pay off the transport fee. Typically Organized Crime and often has strong links to law enforcement who are presumably paid off.

There is way too much of this bullshit in the prostitution industry, and this is one reason by some feminists have taken up prohibition.

However, there has been gradual language rape concerning the term “sex trafficking” which now cover all sorts of nonsense that the original definition never covered. Some feminists grotesquely abuse this term to say that all prostitutes are “trafficked.” The FBI seems to have been involved in this language abuse. God knows what the Feds or anyone means when they talk about “sex trafficking” these days.

Bottom line: if you are free to leave at any time, you are not being “trafficked.” Lots of prostitutes have pimps who move them around the country, but as they can take off any time they want, they’re not being “trafficked.”

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Were Epstein’s Girls Sex Trafficked?

Epstein and Maxwell were charged with sex trafficking. “Child sex trafficking” actually, but that’s crap because teenage girls are even less children than they are adults. Trafficking of minors” would be a better law.

I think a number of Epstein’s girls (And boys!) were sex slaves in one way or another. A boy tried to run away from Epstein’s mansion in Switzerland and was caught and taken back. So he was being trafficked for sure. There are rumors that he may have been murdered too. Murdered and possibly eaten! What in God’s name is with these elite fucks anyway?

Why fuck kids? Why molest children? Why want to fuck the youngest teenage girls of all? That’s not pedo behavior but it’s getting there. You’re supposed to be attracted to teenage girls based on how mature and womanly they are. That is 100% normal behavior. To be attracted to them based on how young they are is weird. The whole “the younger the better” attitude is pedo-ish.

What’s with the Satanic rituals. What’s with all this apparent child sacrifice? What’s with the eating of children. A lot of these elites are into Sex Magick. Why? I told you a while back that I stumbled town a pedophile blog rabbit hole in Tumblr once. I turned a lot of them in, but I also looked at them. Over and over I saw the combination of pedophilia or especially non-pedophilic molesting, methamphetamine abuse, and Satanism. Why? Why are these things connected? Someone clue me.

So, were the girls trafficked? That depends on whether they were free to leave or not although federal law says any pimping of underage girls is automatically trafficking. That seems like an abusive law. The sex trafficking law was all about stopping what is in effect sex slavery. If you are free to leave you are not being trafficked, period.

For instance, Epstein and Maxwell took those girls’ passports when they came to the US. Is that holding them prisoner? Well, not exactly but for all intents and purposes, it is. If you take a minor’s passport and then pimp them out to people as a prostitute, yeah, they are being trafficked. They’re not exactly free to leave and they’re more or less imprisoned. Was Virginia Giuffre sex trafficked? Was she free to leave? Once she tried to swim away from that island, but they caught her and threatened her to not do it again.

Was she being trafficked at that point on the island? Yes.

Before? Who knows?

Afterwards!? Maybe!

Those little teenie whores in Florida though? Forget it. The first girls who did that were two stoned little sluts, whoops I mean totally innocent total virgin 14 (going on 30) year old girls, who were innocently stoned out of their minds on Ecstasy that some evil person probably forced them to take!

They accidentally stumbled upon his mansion at 1 AM, and he invited them in. The girls happily accepted. Poor girls! Poor stoned girls! Poor virgins! Forced to take drugs and jerk off guys for $400 a pop! How evil? Their (nonexistent) innocence was destroyed. LOL! Little teenie whores have “innocence?” Right. About as much innocence as a streetwalker.

Those were just high school girls who did not have a lot of money (like all high school girls) and were being offered $400 to jerk off Epstein. Afterwards they could leave and then come back any time they wanted to. Some of those poor little teen sluts went back willingly up to 20-40 times at $400 a shot to get raped and abused over and over again. Horrible! So much rape! So much abuse! Poor girls? Poor permavirgin sexless teenage girls! Their (nonexistent) innocence was destroyed!

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Stupid Reason Why I Was Multiply Banned from Reddit, Probably Soon to Be a Permanent Ban

I said it’s not a disorder for men to have sex with teenage girls. It’s not DSM-5 Pedophilia. Not only that but it is not any disorder at all in the DSM. There’s no disorder in the DSM called Adult Sex with Teenagers yet. Not yet.

If someone comes to me and says they had sex with a teenage girl, if I dx them with DSM-5 Pedophilia, I am committing malpractice.

That’s how anti-scientific this conflation of normal male sexuality with child molesting and pedophilia is.

I also said, not only is it not disordered behavior, it’s not even abnormal! This is true and you will find little argument about this among clinicians.

The argument against adult-teen sex is a moral and legal one, not a psychological one.

Adult-teen sex boils down to a moral matter. Perhaps it is immoral. Perhaps it is not. Society has decided it is immoral. That is their right. As for whether it is or not, clinicians leave that up to the moral philosophers, sociologists, and society as a whole.

We don’t get involved in things that are only right or wrong or even crazy or nuts because society says they are. In fact, in many cases, presented with what looks like psychosis, if it is normal within their culture to present this way during stress, we say they’re not psychotic. In fact, they are normal. Perhaps an Adjustment Disorder. If someone from our culture displayed the same symptoms, we would absolutely dx some form of DSM-5 Psychosis.

This is where, in a small sense, the anti-psychiatry people are right that the whole thing is a crock. It’s not a crock, but it is definitely true that what is normal and what is abnormal is in many cases constructed by society.

In fact there are complete psychological syndromes unknown in the rest of the world that have long histories, and even special names in certain countries or regions. There is a particular type of psychosis peculiar to Norway and the Scandinavian countries. It’s not seen outside of there. It has its own name, history, studies, on and on. This is simply one of the “appropriate Norwegian ways to go crazy.” Yes, even when people go nuts they don’t to do so in societally constructed ways!

Furthermore, clinicians don’t get involved in crime or moral questions of right and wrong. As I said, we leave that stuff up to the moral philosophers. You guys do it. We’re out. Stealing, rape, mugging, burglary, wife-beating, Hell, even murder or serial murder is not diagnosable under the current system. Most of these people are not the slightest bit nuts anyway.  They’re completely sane.  They’re just bad people. It’s a question of right and wrong, good and bad, not sane or crazy.

We might not even say that those crimes are abnormal behavior. I can think of circumstances where it would be just fine to commit any of those crimes. We probably wouldn’t say whether it’s normal or abnormal. Obviously it’s not adaptive and any society that allows that to go on willy-nilly is not a healthy one. But it might persist anyway. Last time I checked, Nigeria is still on the map. Instead we would just say that these are moral and legal matters, not psychological ones, and clinicians don’t deal with that sort of thing; instead, they deal with crazy and sane.

Furthermore, these matters, like teen-adult sex are legal matters. Society has decided that they hate it and that they wish to punish men who commit what they see as an immoral act. As far as whether these things should be illegal or not, clinicians throw that over to the lawyers, legislators, politicians, legal theorists and Hell, even public intellectuals because these are the people who, with input from the public, decide what is a crime and what is not. Whether something should be illegal or not is not a psychological question, nor should it be.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Teenage Boy Bullshit: The Fake Catholic Priest Pedophile/Child Molesting Epidemic

In short, it never even happened! There were no priests molesting kids*. There was no “kidfucking*.” There was no “child rape.” There were no pedophile priests*. There were not priest child molesters*.

*To be fair, 5% of the cases did involve actual child molesting. And a few of the priests, surely less than 5%, were pedophiles.

We are now in the midst of an idiotic mass hysteria and moral panic about the sexuality of teenage girls. I call it the Teenage Girl Bullshit. In contrast, in the cases of the fake pedophile priests, we are dealing with what I call the Teenage Boy Bullshit.

As noted above, there was either no child molesting or only very little. 95% of it was straight statutory rape, or as I prefer, illegal intercourse.

Kidfucking or child molestation: sex with children under 13.

Statutory rape or illegal intercourse: sex with teenagers 13-Age of Consent.

As it turns out the illegal intercourse in the case of the priest scandal was a particularly ugly kind because it was creepy and coercive. It had to be creepy and coercive because almost of the boys were straight boys seduced into gay sex. In general, straight teenage boys do not want to have gay sex, and thank God for that! Thank you very much, teenage boys! However, they can be manipulated into gay sex via creepy and coercive means.

There’s a problem here: Being seduced into gay sex can be very traumatic for a teenage straight boy and it may indeed cause problems extending into adulthood. Not because a straight teenage boy had sex (God forbid!) as the hysterics say. Instead it was because the sex was gay sex and not straight sex.

If the boys were gay, this scandal would not even exist. No one except the sex hysterics would give a damn because a majority of gay teenage boys are either fucking adult men already or they want to. Most if not all gay men who had sex with adult men when they were teenage boys look back on the experience with fond nostalgia.

Also there was no “kid rape.” There was illegal intercourse and child molestation. Statutory rape per se isn’t really rape. It’s really illegal intercourse. Child molesting per se isn’t rape either. Child molesting and child rape are two completely different things and the latter is a lot worse and more dangerous than the former.

As it is, it doesn’t look like anyone forced anyone to do anything. Rape is forced sex. As my mother pounded into my head a million times as a teenage boy and young man, rape involves force or the threat of force.

I have no idea of the sexual orientation of the boys. Most I heard of were straight. I have no idea if some were gay. I’m quite certain that any gay ones weren’t the ones complaining because gay boys never complain about consensual sex with adult men. They always say they like it.

But most of the sex in this scandal was bad it involved straight boys and not gay boys. The straight boys were tricked into gay sex and this is often bad for their psychological development.

Of course the 5% of cases involving little boys getting molested was very bad. I certainly don’t approve of adult men molesting little boy-children. I don’t know how harmful it is, but I doubt if it’s a good thing. It’s certainly bad for little girls under 13 to get molested by adults, and in quite a few cases the harm lasts into adulthood.

Probably none of the complaints involved gay boys.

The question was posed to me, Would I care if any of those boys the priests had sex with were gay? Of course I wouldn’t care! Other than possibly an abuse of a power dynamic and something a priest should not be doing as part of his job description, it’d be fine with me, and I’m sure it would be fine with the boys too! It’s not rape if they love it. Gay boys almost universally love their teen-adult sex, so I don’t understand what the problem is.*

*They like it if it’s consensual. There was some #metooing of gay men in the movie business by gay teenage boys, but that’s because those men were rapey and coercive towards teenage gay boys, not because they had sex. In a number of cases, those boys were actually raped. On the other hand, some of those gay boys #metooing those Hollywood adult men were teenage male prostitutes. I’m sorry they got coerced into rapey sex but they weren’t exactly paragons of moral value.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Undefined and Undefinable Feminist Definition of Rape

As I noted in another post, my Mom brought me up right. She taught me that under no circumstances was I to rape girls or women. She drilled into my head over and over that rape was force or the threat of force. Her message was, “Don’t do it, dammit!” She pretty much said everything other than that was fair game, which is the only sane view of rape.

My Mom’s a feminist, and a pretty bad one at that, getting worse as she ages. But nowadays feminists (most women) would call my Mom a rape apologist and a handmaiden because of the way the feminists have blown up the definition of rape and the fact that feminism gets increasingly insane every year, as is the case with all Identity Politics.

Of course the feminists and their fag “male” allies have no expanded the definition of rape to about the size of the Indian Ocean. Not only that but apparently no one can even properly define it as it’s as vague and  undecipherable as the Linear B inscriptions.

As it is, if a woman thinks she got raped, she got raped. That’s now the definition of rape!

Women actually believe that crap. When you put women in power, the first thing they do is  make vague, unenforceable laws to bring about their desired utopia.

Of course this never works, therefore all through space and time, whenever women are put into power over men, the result is simply complete chaos. People tire of it after a bit, and pretty soon, the sane people say, “Let’s have some sense here. Let the men take over!

And then some sort of patriarchy, benevolent or otherwise (typically otherwise), is reimposed. Society’s not fair after that, but it wasn’t fair under Female Rule either. Pick your poison. You will either be ruled by women or men.

Look around you at the Anglosphere, the UK, and Scandinavia to see the dystopian chaos of idiocy that ensues under Female Rule.

I’ll pick men any day. Women are incapable of ruling societies.  Women can do a lot of things,  but that’s not one of them. It’s fine really. Hey, women can’t do everything. Sometimes the ladies just need to step aside and let the boys take over.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Teenage Girl Bullshit

We are now living in a Pedophile Mass Hysteria. It’s really mass hysteria about the sexuality of teenage girls and to a much less extent, teenage boys. Teenage girls and to a lesser extent teenage boys are denied agency and conflated with little girl children and little boy children. A 17 boy is the same thing as a 7 year old boy! A 17 year old girl is the same thing as an 8 year old girl! It’s all the same. They’re all just “kids,” and “children.” No distinction whatsoever.

Actually teenagers are not children at all. Instead, as we knew in the Middle Ages, teenager are “little adults.” Teenage boys are just what high school coaches call them: young men. Teenage girls are just what their high school teachers call them: young women.

In truth, teenagers are neither children nor adults. Children are under the age of 13. No argument there. Adults are over the age of 17. None there either. However, people from 13-17 are in between, in a transitional stage, transitioning from children into adults. Teenage boys are what I call boy-men. Teenage girls are girl-women.

We are now in the midst of a panic over the sexuality of teenage girls. Basically they are being treated like 8 year olds, denied all agency. Their powerful sex drive, easily as strong as a woman’s, is denied and reverted back to the non-sexuality of little girl children.

Teenage girls are fully sexual beings. Fully sexual beings have a right to fulfill their sexual desires and destiny of any proper way – either with masturbation or with sex. As it is, not only is ubiquitous sex between teenage girls and adult men criminalized, pathologized, and conflated with creepy child molesters diddling little girls, but teenage girls in general are not even allowed to fulfill their sexual destiny with boys their age. In general, it’s not legal.

My position is that teenage girls are fully sexual beings who have the right to fulfill their sexual destiny through either masturbation or sex, which ever they choose, and these options must be legally available to them.

This mass hysteria is what I call the Teenage Girl Bullshit.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Semantic Entropy Is Here: We Are All Lexicographers Now

Definitions of crimes, thoughtcrimes, or offenses against this, that, or whatever social norm creep steadily upward ever year.

Rape? It’s as big as the Atlantic Ocean now.

Assault? What is that? You looked at someone wrong. That’s assault.

Sexual assault? The definition spreads every year like a kudzu vine. In my opinion, sexual assault is simply another word for dating. It didn’t used to be, but that’s how the ladies have it set up now boys, and the girls make the rules now in this world, and don’t you ever forget it.

Battery? What’s that? I tapped a woman on the shoulder. That’s literally battery nowadays.

Sexual battery? What’s is that? Can someone explain to me what it is so I don’t do it because it sounds kind of fun, and I might try it. They want to get pounded anyway, and that’s kind of right battery now that I think of it.

Sexual abuse? What does it even mean? It means any time an adult human had sex with an adolescent human ages 13-17, the poor teenager got abused. Oh boo hoo. Not only that, but the little lass now needs 20 years of therapy for that time she got sexually abused by seducing that 25 year old man at that party and grabbing his cock. She seduced the guy, so I guess she abused herself. Oh well, self abuse is fun. I prefer to do it with some porn though.

But no matter. Abused she was, and abused she will be! The inevitable damage is already there. We can’t see it or measure it, but women tell us it’s there, so we have to take their word for it. Damaged how long? Forever more. Because of the scars that won’t heal.

All women are not only Permanent Children but they are also Permanent Victims.

The victimization starts on the first day when any men around, if there even are any that is, start misogynisting the newborn girl. Because that’s what males do to little girl babies. They misogynist them in all sorts of microaggressive ways. The microaggressions are hard to see or measure, but if you get an electron microscope, you can make them out all right. Wicked men. Turning their misogynist abuse into nanotech!

Because that’s what we men to do females. We misogynist them. Every day. All day long. Like a rocket barrage that never ends. Poor women! Poor babies! Women are crying! Women are babies!

Quick, someone get that lady a handkerchief to wipe her tears. That man over there walking away just misogynisted her, and now she’s going to cry for half an hour!

The misogynisting goes on all through the wretchedness we call the Life of Woman, even in those retirement villages where those evil old men who can’t even get a hardon anymore still misogynist those little old ladies all the doggone day. What’s a lass to do?

Grooming? What’s that? I guess you can groom anyone now. Men can groom 40 year old women. Who knew? Turns out I’ve been grooming females my whole life. And I had no idea! I heard lower primates like to groom each other as a show of affection, but I had no idea I had so much chimp in me!

Illegal looking! Watch those eyes! It’s illegal to look at women now in California! Stamp out that male gaze! We’ll put out your eyes and send you to Purgatory to stand on a cliff for half of eternity till you work it off!

Pedophilia? That’s probably 90% of all sex now, especially now that all women are shaved as bare as 12 year olds. It’s mass hysteria and a moral panic. So half the population are effectively psychotic at least on the issue being hysterisized.

Hitch a ride on the moral panic train! It’s a fun ride, folks. Full of thrills and spills and an outrage around every bend. You’ll be scared from the moment you hop on til the moment you disembark, if you ever do. But that’s the whole idea.

Pedophiles? Well that’s 100% of us men for sure because if you get turned on by 17 year old girls, nowadays you’re literally a pedophile. Well not all men. Dead men and gay men don’t count, but the rest are disgusting pedos!

Trespassing? What’s that? I don’t even know what that is anymore.

Breaking and entering? That includes reaching inside someone’s door to knock on their door now. You broke into their house with your hand to knock on the door. I got the cops called on me the other day for that. A cop came to my door and threatened to arrest me for putting my hand into someone else’s doorway, and thereby breaking and entering their residence. I tell ya, we got one Hell of a serious crime wave in this country!

Sexism? What’s that? Define it. Another word with either no definition or any definition, whichever you prefer. Take your pick! Or just make up your own definition. DIY!

Misogyny? It’s everywhere. How do we know it’s everywhere? Because it’s misogyny. How do we know it’s misogyny? Because it’s everywhere.It’s a great theory because it’s not even wrong. There! I just saw some misogyny crawl under the bed! Get a broom and stop it before it kills again!

Racism? What’s that? Define it. Ever notice that no one can even define that word? It’s literally a word with no meaning at all or a meaning that encompasses half of life, so it’s everything and nothing both at once.

Nazi? That’s 42% of the population now. Didn’t I know that? Silly me!

Hater? That’s half the population. Well, now you can feel better as you stew. Know you’re not alone.

Homophobia? Nowadays we are at the point where if you won’t suck another guy’s cock, you’re a homophobe. Another word with no meaning. Define it. If you’re going to accuse half of society of it, the least you could do is define it. Nope. No one knows what it means, or worse, it means whatever the person uttering the word thinks it means. Everyone gets to define their own words now. Fun, huh? We are all lexicographers now!

Sexual harassment? If a woman was made to feel uncomfortable, she got harassed. That’s literally the definition. Crazy, huh? How to avoid giving the crazy the lovely lass a wild hair up her ass? Easy, just read her mind. Easy as pie. Anyone can do that, come on!

Sexual harassment means whatever the woman who says it thinks it means. If the little lady thinks she got harassed, she did.

Rape? It’s all rape, baby! What is? Sex! All of it? Well, not all of it, sure.The vanilla stuff isn’t rape at the moment, but don’t worry, the feminists are hard at work on it. Inventing new crimes every year!

But most of the fun kind of sex is rape, or rapey, or grey rape, or acquaintance rape, or spousal rape, or rape by deception rape (otherwise known as “seduction”), or rape by handing her a beer before you  have sex with her rape, or regret rape the next morning or 20 years later rape, or coercive rape by talking or better yet arguing her into it rape (my specialty).

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: I Regret to Inform You That I Am Now a Rapist

I’ve just been informed that I’m a rapist. I’ve also been told I’ve been raping women my whole life. Well I admit I’m a bit befuddled. Never got accused of that but once. Never been arrested for it.

But no matter! Rape they said, and rape it was! Believe women! I know I sure do! If she said she got raped, she got raped. How do we know it was rape? Because she said it was.

Because words have no definitions now that Semantic Entropy has taken over, and we all get to make up our own meanings of every word! What’s wrong with you, you doubt the word of woman?  Women never lie! Believe women! I believe women!

I did get accused of rape. Well, she was 14 years old. I usually leave it at that just to troll the world, but I’ll let you guys in on the punchline. Come on: I was 16.

But that’s rape too, I got told. Because we were both underage! Well, she lied, like women do a documented 46% of the time they cry rape. We were drunk, both of us. Off our asses. She accused me of rape afterwards to keep from being a slut, I guess. Can’t think of any other reason.

I just got told by a bunch of women that I raped that girl. Because, they said, if you ever got accused of rape, that means you raped someone. An accusal is a fact! Well, damn. Why bother with trials then? Waste of time.

Anyway I had no idea I’d been raping these ladies my whole life, but I don’t plan to stop doing it. Because it’s the only way I know how to have sex. Because it’s fun. Because at the end of the day, when all’s said and done, and they’re ready to rest, every woman wants to be ravished. Asking permission is for pussies. Just jump her, rip her clothes off, and pound her. They all want it like that anyway.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20