The Best People Feel the Worst and the Worst People Feel the Best

A lot of nations and peoples commit genocide. Genocide is almost normal human behavior. But good people and nations feel bad after they Holocaust a group. Sometimes it takes them a bit of civilizing to get there, but get there they do.

These psychological types act the worst of all but feel no guilt. As an example, psychopaths are wildly aggressive and show absolutely zero guilt. Obsessionals on the other hand, are the least aggressive people on Earth and are overwhelmed with guilt. This seems bizarre until I learned this in my counseling practice.

The best people feel the worst. The worst people feel the best. Why the Hell do good people feel bad? Because it is their extreme guilt itself which keeps them acting good! Why to bad people feel great? Because it is precisely their lack of guilt which makes them act so bad!

It seems totally confounding until you sit down and think about it.

This is also why I think clinicians attacking their clients’ guilt and self-help types urging us to get rid of our guilt are worse than charlatans. Not only will their tactics achieve their goals – the theory is that ridding someone of guilt will make them a better person – but actually backfires and makes people worse, so it’s iatrogenic. They claim to make better people by dissolving people’s sense of guilt but instead they are making people worse.

One of the first things I do with my clients, who typically come to me overwhelmed with guilt, is to congratulate them for their extreme sense of guilt and conscience. I also tell them that their guilt is what is creating their illness, so too much guilt is not necessarily a good things. But I tell them that the very reason that are ill in the first place is because they are good people. In fact, they are actually too good!

Yes, it is indeed pathological to be too good. Former Jew Catholic convert and virtual saint Simone Weil starved herself to death during World War 2. The world was a very evil place then, and Weil was simply too good for this world, so she checked out.

And like Weil, I tell my clients that their problem is that they are good people in a bad world, and worse that they are simply too good for their own good. There’s no reaso to be a saint and being too good can actually lead to social pathology because we simply did not evolve to be saints. In fact, in the past, primitive people who were too good probably were the first to get killed.

Alt Left: The Iranian PMU “Militias” Have Not Done Any of the Rocket Attacks on our Bases Tht We Have Accused Them And Iran of Doing

There was a rocket attack on the US base in Taji, Iraq the other day. 30 Katyusha rockets were fired at the base from a rocket launcher positioned in an abandoned pickup truck. 3 troops were killed,  2 Americans and 1 British, and 10 more were wounded, some badly. The US immediately blamed the PMU Division and Iran, specifically accusing the Kataib Hezbollah Battalion of the Iraqi Army for some reason, whom they have blamed before.

The Kataib Hezbollah Battalion is part of group of militias of the Iraqi Army called the PMU Division. These militias are now actual battalions and divisions of the Iraqi Army. The US stated “all intelligence points to Iran as being the source of the attack.” They also said that the attack was “beyond the capabilities of ISIS” and that only the PMU Division among the country’s armed insurgents and militias have the ability to carry out such an attack.

We will examine all of these claims below.

First of all, the PMU Division (Iraqi Army) didn’t do it. They already said they didn’t do it. They also said when we start attacking, we will announce it. This makes sense as the PMU Division generally claims all of its attacks. However, the Kataib Hezbollah Battalion of the Iraqi Army congratulated whoever did it. So what?

The previous attack on Kirkuk which Trump used to murder 30 members of the Iraqi Army and later Soleimani and Muhandis was proven to have been done by ISIS. The US lied and said Iran and the PMU Division did it. The Iraqi Army investigated and said it was an ISIS attack. The (((New York Times))) investigated and said the same thing. The (((Jew York Times))) has zero motivation to lie about this and they would love to blame Iran and the Shia militia Division.

Despite my name-calling here, I would like to commend the New York Times for not giving in to  (((ethnic chauvinism and lying))) and for telling the truth for once, even if the truth isn’t good for the Jews. Thank you, (((Mr. Shulzberger)))!

Journalistic integrity ought to come first and (((ethnic solidarity))) ideally ought to come last, but humans are emotional and that is why humans will always be a frequently irrational species – because emotions and facts go together like oil and water, and many truth-statements that people arrive at are derived by emotions, and  hence they are false.

This is very important to understand because most of us have views of the world that depend on seeing ourselves and fellow humans as rational beings, while the truth is that people are not very rational at all, and they are often quite irrational. The more emotional the subject is, the more irrational people will tend to act about it, and this includes determining what’s true and what’s false.

After we killed 30 of their men, the PMU Division then stormed embassy because…well…the US just murdered 30 of its men? Is that hard to understand? Of course they were mad.

I have a good source, a journalist, who is close to the Iranian and Iraqi governments as well as the IRGC, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Shia militias in Syria and Iraq. He stated that Iran had nothing to do with the embassy storming. It was a PMU Division decision to storm the embassy. Nevertheless Trump murdered Soleimani who had nothing to do with it and Muhandis, head of the PMU Division, who was only protesting the murder of 30 of his men. US lied and blamed Iran.

Next came many rocket attacks on US embassy, My source told me that the Shia militias didn’t do any of them as they wanted to give the US time to leave. The US nevertheless blamed the Shia militia division and Iran for all of these embassy attacks and other attacks on US bases. Neither the PMU Division nor Iran had anything  to do with any of them.

And note that the the rockets fired at embassy always came from Sunni parts of Baghdad. Why would the Shia PMU Division fire rockets from Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad who are utterly hostile to the PMU?

Now we have this latest attack on the base in Taji. The Kataib Hezbollah Battalion said they didn’t do it and asked whoever did it to take credit for it so the US would quit falsely blaming them. The PMU Division denied doing the Taji attack, and they claim all attacks. The US once again lied and blamed Iran and the PMU Division for the rockets and death of the US soldiers.

Keep in mind that the PMU Division is nothing but the Iraqi Army, a division of the army. They answer to Central Command in Baghdad, not to Iran. Iran doesn’t give orders to any of its allied militias. They get to do what they want within limits.

These rockets were launched from an area east of Taji called Rashidiyah. Tarmiyah is to the north. The entire area is made up of Sunni tribes who practice Sufism and were strong supporters and members of the former ruling Baath Party. The Sunni resistance against the US was here for years, and the US and Iraqi government never could clean them out. The original armed factions were made up of Sunni tribes with a strong adherence to the  Naqashbandi Sufi Order, the main Sufi order in Iraq.

After resistance died down, this area became an ISIS hotbed. In fact, ISIS weapons caches were found at the precise location that these rockets in this Taji attack were fired from. I have a hard time believing that Shia militias went to an utterly hostile pro-Baath Party Sunni neighborhood of former Sunni guerrillas and ISIS supporters and shot some rockets.

Nevertheless, we still no idea who did this attack. I would bet once again on Sunnis and/or ISIS. The US presented zero evidence for Iranian and PMU Division involvement. The Pentagon said the attack was beyond ISIS capabilities.

This is a complete lie because this was the exact same setup ISIS used in the earlier Kirkuk attack. ISIS also did an attack in Afghanistan three days using this setup, and ISIS used this setup endless times during the heavy fighting in Iraq several years ago. The US is lying that ISIS does not have this capability. Of course it does.

There is a good argument that Sunni groups and/or ISIS are doing all these rocket attacks. These Sunni folks utterly despise Iran and the Shia PMU Division.

They know that the US automatically blames Shia militias and Iran with every rocket attack no matter who shot the rockets. So they may shoot rockets at the US taking no credit for them (as that would spoil the trick) to frame the PMU Division and Iran for the attacks. If this is what is going on, it’s working great. Muhandis, Soleimani, and scores of Shia soldiers in the PMU have been killed by the US in retaliatory strikes for something  they didn’t even do.

Game/PUA: One Great Thing About Being a Woman: The Right to Complain

From a conversation on Reddit:

Other Man: Part of the gift of being a woman is always finding something to complain about. No matter how good a day is for them they always find something without fail. Its almost a niche at this point.

RL: I envy women for that though. They get to complain. We men don’t. It’s basically illegal for us men to complain about anything, and women enforce this deal way more than our fellow men do.

How would women like it every time they complained, someone called them a whiner, told the they’re not real women, called them dykes, and told them to shut up? They would not like it one bit.

Women like to go on about how easy it is to be a man and how we men have life dicked, but if they had to live their lives as we men do, they would not be able to handle it. You would see mass female suicide epidemics. I’m serious.

Other man: Nah, they couldn’t handle it. When people have been validating your hateful opinions and actions since your teenage years primarily because they want to sleep with you, there’s no incentive for you to be a decent person. And yes, people need incentive. Why do you think religions and laws were created?

Also have women ever considered (this is where the empathy comes in) that at least some of the violence men commit is because we’re expected to shut up and take action. Instead of talking it out, we’re expected to just do it. Make it happen. You’re asking a person to make a hasty decision when they’re not in an optimal state of mind. Nothing good is going to come of that.

But I digress, man bad and woman good. It’s almost primitive how arguments like this are not viewed with more nuance.

PUA/Game: What Men Think When They Hear Women Complaining about Men Being after Them All the Time

Ok, women: just imagine what it is like to be a man. If women had to live the sort of lives that men do, they wouldn’t be able to handle it. Most of them would blow their brains out.

Women take it for granted that they can basically have sex with an attractive man anytime they want . Just snap your fingers and there he is. With men it’s just not like that.

I’ve dated ~200 females, and still, I could never just snap my fingers and get a date or have sex like a woman can. I also had many long dry spells. Women don’t have to deal with incel periods like we men do. There’s literally no such thing as a female incel. They wouldn’t be able to cope with this.

Women don’t realize how good they have it in so many ways. Women bitch about the fact that dozens of scores of men act horny around them every day. A woman has her pick of dozens of attractive men who would like to date or fuck her every single day. If it were the other way around, we men would be living in paradise.

The life of a woman is like being a kid in a candy store where all the candy is free, and they call this perfect world names like hate, oppression, discrimination, humiliation, misery, and violence. Can you imagine a kid in a candy store where all the candy is free describing that situation as hate, oppression, discrimination, humiliation, misery, and violence?

The stuff women bitch about is laughable to us me. We can’t stop laughing at how ridiculous and absurd women are when they complain about this. Every women is literally a walking slapstick comedy routine whenever they start talking like this.

“Every day scores of the opposite sex act like they want to fuck me! I’m so oppwessed! This viowence! It’s hatez! It’s disquimination!”

Ha ha! Oh, poor babies! You expect us men to take you seriously when you bitch about that? You women literally live in the ultimate paradise every day, and all you do is cry about it. You’re all a huge fucking joke when you complain about this sort of thing.

PUA/Game: Women Always Want the Best

“Women always want the best.”

– Oscar Wilde

There it is, hypergamy in a nutshell.

Female hypergamy will always exist, as it is simply female nature biologically to be hypergamous. Only societies that seriously restrict it in the form of more or less mandatory marriage (Arabs, Muslims, Russia and Eastern Europe, Latin America, tribal groups, etc.) escape this doomed path.

Women are basically “cavewomen” once you unleash them, just as men are pretty much “cavemen” once women stop controlling us. It is to the advantage of each gender to put in some serious controls over the other gender. Otherwise each gender simply pursues the zero-sum game dictated by its biology.

If you somehow had a hypothetical society where all of the men were named Chad and 8-10’s on the looks scale, I don’t think women would act much different.

Granted most men would be a lot better to look at from a woman’s point of view than most men are nowadays, so at least for women the scenery would improve a lot.

And women might be a lot less likely to freak out and creep-shame the lesser Chads for giving them attention because after all, they are named Chad, and women do give goodlooking women a break when it comes to flirting, making passes, and asking for numbers and dates. They tend to be a lot more gracious about it. I’ve experienced this myself endless times although that era seems to be over for me now.

But let’s think about this seriously for a moment. In a society of Chads, women would constantly be meeting men who are hot enough to turn them on. So women would be seeing tens or hundreds of thousands of men who turn them on in an average lifetime.

What’s a girl to do? Now do you honestly think that your average women is going to end up with lifetime N-counts in the Wilt Chamberlain territory? Would your average women really fuck 10’s or 100’s of thousands of men in a lifetime? Are you kidding?

I am certain that in a society like this, women would simply put the top 20-25% of Chads (the 10’s) in the Alpha Chad category and try to monopolize them.

They would resign the 65% average Chads (9’s on the Looks scale) to the Beta Chad category and treat them as women always treat Betas.

And for the least goodlooking of the Chads who would nevertheless be 8’s on the looks scale, women would simply designate these Chads as Omega Chads and treat them the way women always treat Omegas.

*********

Let me tell you a story. This is a true story, but I made up the part about all the rock stars being named Chad for obvious reasons. A friend of mine knew a lot of rock stars and used to hang out backstage and a lot of events with big name groups. Once he was backstage with a band.

All of the men in this band were hot, sexy, very goodlooking, and also had Fame, Power, Money, and Status. Furthermore their Game was spectacular, having been honed by countless interactions with literal swarms of groupies.

There were four guys in the band backstage (all named Chad), and the groupies had arranged themselves so that ~1/4 or 3-4 of the groupies were surrounding each man. So the women had arranged themselves equally around these extremely high-value Alpha rock stars, all coincidentally named Chad.

Yet one man was missing. He was the lead singer. By a strange trick of fate, he was also named Chad. He entered the room. He was more famous and well-known than any of the other men, and women (and men) everywhere swooned over him and talked about how much they wanted to fuck him. He was a huge sex symbol, much more of one than any of the rest of the band.

Then a remarkable thing happened.

The 3-4 women who had equally distributed themselves among the four super-stud rock stars quickly left the rock star they were arranged around and all migrated over to the biggest stud of the rock star super-studs, the lead singer. Why? Because he was an ultra super-stud rock star and the rest were just mere super-stud rock stars. See the Wilde quote above for an explanation of this phenomenon.

Nevertheless, I still think that in such a dream world, the bottom 80% of these Chads would be getting more sex than the bottom 80% of men in our present setup simply because these are so attractive. After all, remember that every man in this new society is named Chad. And I definitely think that despite the depressing scenario above, most men nowadays would benefit from acting more “Alpha.”

I’m President of the United States!

I was president of the US last night for a short time. It was pretty fun, except sometimes I showed up to meetings wearing only pajamas. They told me that pajamas were not acceptable for meetings with my Cabinet and I was surprised for some reason.

Other times I dressed well, but they told me it still wasn’t good enough. I told them I didn’t have enough money for good clothes, and they were sympathetic. They said to wait for my first check – it was $14,000/month. That pretty much covers rent in New York City nowadays, so I figured it would be enough.

I met some former presidents too. I tried to shake George Bush’s hand, but he almost refused to shake it because I wasn’t dressed properly. Later I had a long talk with him, and afterwards he said I was all right.

You know what, Lindsay? You’re all right.

Exact words.

He later met with reporters and told them that he had spoken with Lindsay, and he thought Lindsay was all right. The public was relieved for some reason. I guess they were worried about me.

There was a bit of a problem being president because I changed into my pajamas and watched porn every night at 9 PM sharp. I got caught a few times. They told me that my job lasted past 9 PM, but I didn’t believe them and kept changing to pj’s and watching porn anyway. A man’s got to have a life, you know!

I was some sort of a substitute president for the real president. I was sort of this undercover or hidden president for some unknown reason. I had heard that the press was researching my name to figure out if Robert Lindsay was even my name. I wasn’t too worried for some reason.

All in all, it was an interesting dream! This was pretty cool! Never been president in my dreams before. Maybe my unconscious self-esteem is going up. Usually most people hate me in my dreams, and they hate me a lot worse than they do in real life. Apparently I have some deep fear that most people really hate me deep down inside even though they don’t show it.

Because after all, that is what your dreams are about – your deepest fears. That’s also why they are fucked up a lot of the time and about unsolved or unsolvable problems.

In dreams, your brain is trying to solve your problems. Most of them have no solution of course because as humans we are pretty much fucked in a lot of ways. Face it, man, we’re doomed. Pour yourself another drink and try to forget about it. Your subconscious recognizes this but doesn’t like it because it’s idiotically utopian like a woman, hence all the dreams with unsolvable problems.

Coming next: I Fucked Four Different Women Last Night! Not a dream or anything like that. /s

Just Watched Dead Man

I just watched Dead Man (1995) directed by Jim Jarmusch. It was simply incredible. Not only was it one of the best movies of the late 1990’s as some critics said, but it was also one of the greatest movies ever made. Simply stupendous. It’s been called an “acid Western.” You will like it if you like Jarmusch, who makes some very weird movies.

Previously I saw Stranger than Paradise, one of the funniest movies ever made, an actual movie that shows what life is really like, in all of its utter banality. It also shows that movies aren’t real life because real life never acts like the movies. If it did we wouldn’t be able to handle it. But if movies acted like real life, no one would watch them because they would be too boring.

We can only bear to watch movies because they are so far removed from daily existence. We can only deal with quotidian life because it is so banal. And even in all of its utter banality and lack of consequence, a lot of us still can’t handle it. Look how many people check out via their own hand every year. Look at mental illness rates, mental illness in part being a symptom of not being able to cope with life at all. Look at how many people commit slow suicide via alcohol and dope.

You really need to see Stranger than Paradise in a movie theater where everyone will laugh along with you, otherwise you might not laugh at all.

I also watched Down by Law, Jarmusch’s next movie. It was excellent but I have pretty much forgotten it by now and may just watch it again.

Anyone ever seen any of Jarmusch’s very weird movies? If so, speak up or forever hold your tongue. I will list them here for anyone who’s memory is as bad as mine is getting in these dear late years:

Permanent Vacation (1980) – His first film school project – a lot of critics did not like it. Shot in black and white.

Stranger Than Paradise (1984) – Absurdist, deadpan comedy. Possibly his magnum opus. Stars jazz musician John Lurie. Shot in black and white.

Down by Law (1986) – Jailbreak movie with Tom Waits, Roberto Bagnini and Lurie. Superb movie. Shot in black and white. This was his last black and white movie.

Mystery Train (1989) – Three vignettes all set in Memphis. Has that great Stranger than Paradise feel of the banality of life. Very good, watching now. First movie shot in color. All subsequent movies were shot in color.

Night on Earth (1991) – Comedy-drama with five vignettes all taking places in taxi cabs. Mixed reviews, either good or awful.

Dead Man (1995) – Acid Western” with a superb, out of this world Johnny Depp playing the lead, a man named William Blake. And no, the name’s not coincidental if you catch my drift. The other fellow, the man of letters, is also part of his identity. Also Iggy Pop and Billy Bob Thornton. Also possibly his best movie.

Year of the Horse (1997) – Neil Young tour movie. Regarded as one of his worst movies. Apparently his rock show movies just don’t cut it. Maybe he should quit making them?

Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (1999) – Crime film about the Mafia with a most unlikely Mafia hit man. Said to be very good.

Coffee and Cigarettes (2003) – 11 vignettes. Either good or terrible, with the latter opinion being the consensus. Then again, the worst Jarmusch movies are still probably pretty good.

Broken Flowers (2005) – Comedy-drama about an aging Don Juan. Also very good, stars Bill Murray.

The Limits of Control (2009) – Spy/assassin movie, generally regarded as one of the worst if not the worst of his movies.

Only Lovers Left Alive (2013) – Vampire movie. Oddly enough, a movie about a love affair between two vampires. Well-regarded.

Paterson (2016) – Regarded as excellent.

Gimme Danger (2016) – Stooges concert movie. Generally seen as one of his worst movies of all.

The Dead Don’t Die
(2019) – Zombie horror comedy movie with Bill Murray. Well-regarded.

What’s Wrong With a 115 IQ?

JBS: Scored a 115 FSIQ on the WAIS-IV. I said I was pissed because the psychologist administering the test said I had learning disabilities or whatever. Not true – just a bad day lol. If I recall accurately, you were kind to me and said not to worry about my score lol. Plenty of above average folk getting on fine.

Oh yes, of course! I remember you now!

Exactly. 115 IQ is just fine. Now if you want to be a physician, attorney, any doctoral profession, or a PhD, it will definitely be a cold, hard slog, but there are definitely physicians with 115 IQ’s. That’s about as low as they go though, and those people had to work their asses off to get that degree.

First of all, what’s wrong with being average? I mean most folks are average. Average is your typical, everyday person. I don’t understand why anyone is ashamed to be a typical ordinary person. I mean I get that they don’t want to be below average, but saying you are average is just saying that you are like everybody else or your average human.

America is very weird. Americans are never satisfied unless they are above average. It’s like Garrison Keillor’s (from Polar Bear’s native Minnesota) Lake Wobegon, the all-White community where everyone is above average. Of course that’s not possible. 90% of Americans say they are above average drivers. 25% of Americans believe they are in the top 1% income bracket (the rich). 50% of Americans say that they are going to be millionaires at some point in their lives.

About the commenter, at 115 IQ, he is in the top 20% of human intelligence. He is in the 80th percentile in terms of IQ. He is smarter than 80% of his fellow human beings. And in terms of Blacks,  he an even higher percentage, but I don’t have good data on that.

He might be in the top 4% of Blacks, but I wonder if that is true. He may be smarter than 96% of Blacks. That’s pretty amazing. A lot of corporations are looking to fill diversity goals. They’re not quotas and it’s not affirmative action. They just want to seek out as many qualified members of minority groups or genders as they can.

So he is basically a gold mine to a lot of corporations. And he may just go to the top of the government line too. Government loves to hire very smart Blacks.

Why this is something to worry about, I have no idea.

PUA/Game: Statistical and Behavioral Alphas, Betas, and Omegas

Polar Bear: Some PUA guys on Youtube were triggering my gaydar. Not that big of a deal. Even in the most ideal European societies, there will be flamers and hillbillies. Even in the strict Middle Eastern countries, there are gays, as you detailed.

Think about it. PUA’s devote their entire lives to getting laid, getting pussy, seducing women, dating and fucking women. That’s all they live for. Exactly how many gay men would such a lifestyle appeal to? About zero. Don’t you realize that a lot of straight men set off people’s gaydar. If I had a dollar for every straight man I’ve known who many people thought was gay, I’d be a rich man. You can’t go on behavior.

Polar Bear: Geez, wonder how Omegas fare in a wolf pack.

I suppose there is room for Omegas in a wolf pack, if they even have Omegas. Maybe they don’t. Maybe they just have the Alpha and his Beta followers.

Polar Bear: Wonder if married men are Beta. By the time they have kids many seem whipped. In The Departed, the Alpha married man, Alec Baldwin, says, “A wedding ring lets women know your cock still works.” The Alpha single man, Jack Nicholson, responds, “You get your period yet?”

Statistical Betas and behavioral Betas are not the same thing.

Behaviorally, yes, a lot of married men are behavioral Betas as you describe. Once they are pussywhipped, they are behavioral Betas all the way.

And most men period are statistical Betas. Probably 65% of all men are statistical Betas. Most men are neither statistical Alphas nor statistical Omegas. There’s nothing wrong with being a statistical Beta. Your father, mine, your brothers, mine, yours and my uncles and male cousins are mostly statistical Betas. They used to do all right, but the sexual contract is fraying.

I am thinking there can never be more than 20% statistical Alphas in a society. Think about it. Will you ever have a society where more than 20% of the men are slayers trying to break Wilt Chamberlain’s record. Everybody can’t be a winner. Life is like a footrace. There’s winners and last place losers and a lot in between.  Every straight man cannot be a super-stud. It doesn’t work that way. Maybe in the gay community they can, but women are not so easy

Now we are getting to the point among young men where 30% are statistical Omegas. I doubt if more than half of those are behavioral Omegas though. Most are just normal guys getting shut out by increasingly picky women in the age of female hypergamy. It’s supposed to be only 15%. So that’s weird. That’s what the whole incel and PUA phenomena are all about – dealing with that reality of female hypergamy.

On the other hand, you have societies such as Latin America, the Arab World, North Africa, Iran, Turkey, the Mediterranean, Eastern Europe, Russia, maybe Africa where most of the men are behavioral Alphas. Those societies are not ideal but have you noticed that sexually they seem pretty good for men?

Personally, I think that most men could probably benefit from behaving in a more Alpha manner. Some are already doing it, so they don’t need help, but for a lot of men, it should help them with women.

Do you all follow me on the difference between statistical and behavioral Alphas, Betas, and Omegas?

Game/PUA: Pure Androgyne Game

I think Mystery has some gay outfits. All the PUA guys out there, some gays slip in through the cracks. I seen one on ROTK say he passed as a woman when made up to game guys he knew. The ones of note are straight though.

That gay man is almost a transvestite or tranny if he can pass as a woman. Maybe a drag queen.

I guess there are some gay PUA’s out there. Never heard of one though. Really, I have been around the PUA scene forever, and it is insanely homophobic. I’ve never even seen one bisexual guy in that scene. It’s toxic masculinity and that type of masculinity has as one of its components heavy- duty homophobia.

Mystery is just an androgyne, a pure androgyne. He’s totally straight. A lot of women will go for straight pure androgynes.

Pure androgyne = strong/very strong masculinity, and then, well, there is a feminine side layered on top of that.

So he could have some pretty strong masculine and feminine vibes going on at the same time. People don’t know how to react to men like this because they are confusing. I have known guys like that and people would say:

Are you gay or bi or straight or what?

You don’t make sense!

You’re too sexy to be straight!

Running Pure Androgyne Game

Personally I think it’s hot. I used to try to be a pure androgyne because it just came naturally, and women ate me up like candy back then. It’s not a turnoff at all for a lot of women.

The important thing is to run that strong masculine vibe because otherwise you are just being a feminine man, which definitely has some drawbacks. Notice I said feminine, not effeminate.

A lot of straight men are feminine, and it’s no big deal, but women might react badly to it. Basically, they will try to dom feminine men. Push them around, bully them, henpeck them, bitch them out, make them pussywhipped. He’s not really domming her, so she’s going to dom him.

I am convinced that one party has to dom the other. Unless you want to be dommed by your woman, you need to dom her at least a little bit. You can do it in a kind and gentle way though. You don’t have to be a cruel bastard.

However, effeminate (acts like a woman) straight men are rare indeed. A recent study found that 70% of gay men were effeminate and only 3% of straight men were.

Feminine men do not act gay. They are just soft, have soft voices, are gentle, sensitive, often pretty, maybe thin, don’t work out, like to read, write, play music, cook, etc. Maybe really into clothes. A lot of them feel very close to women because their brain is sort of like a woman’s brain. This enables them to understand women pretty well and connect with women in a strong way.

PUA/Game: What Is PUA? What Is Game? Nothing More Than the Skills of Seduction and Running a Relationship or Marriage

My view of PUA/Game or especially Game is that Game is simply all of the things that any man does to make himself attractive to women, to talk to women, to flirt with women, to get dates with women, to get sex with women, and even to have relationships and marriages with women.

It’s about how to get women and then do what you want with them, dump them or try to keep them around. Relationship Game is huge. It’s about how to keep a relationship going.

Seduction Game is simply all of the things and techniques a man does to try to get women, from the way he dresses, grooms himself, social skills, how he carries himself, conversational skills, on and on. That’s all it is. Therefore I hazard a guess to say that really most men run some sort of Game if they are trying to get women at all. It’s not cheap or sleazy or anything like that.

Sure, a lot of PUA’s are assholes, but PUA is just Game really. It’s about how to get and keep women if you wish to do that. PUA is the skills of seduction. Can someone explain to me why so many men are opposed to the skills of seducing women? Is there something wrong with perfecting the skills of attracting and seducing women?

Really most men need to run some sort of Game or use some sort of PUA just to get a woman in the first place. I mean that’s how you get them. They don’t exactly throw themselves into our laps, you know.

There is also Married Man’s Game. All it is is how to keep your marriage on the up and up, how to run your marriage so you are getting what you want out of it and hopefully she is getting what she wants out of it.

Why people are so opposed to this is beyond me. Please stop seeing this whole thing through the lenses of PUA morons and start seeing PUA and Game as helping guys (and ourselves) to get women. Phrasing it that way, would you be opposed to it?

Polar Bear: Honestly don’t respect it. The guys on Youtube I’ve seen go beyond acting gay for women. I suspect many are secretly gay. It’s abandoning or disconnecting from women in a way. Bro this, my man that.

“Forget the girls, my PUA bois in the Jacuzzi right now!” That’s what I pick up on them, more excited to meet other men. Not accusing anyone here but I wonder if the path leads to another man’s anus.

Few if any PUA’s are gay. There’s no homosexuality in the scene. Instead there is frightening misogyny, toxic masculinity (I hate the term but it applies here), and extreme homophobia. It’s like the ultimate anti-gay macho community.

Polar Bear: It’s also cheesy and childish to brag how much puss you get. “I smashed the whole club dude.” Ok Sitch, you dumb motherfucker.

It depends how you do it. Most of the guys I grew up with were slayers, and they definitely discussed their success stories. There is a bragging way to do it and a modest way to do it which could be called false modesty.

If you do it in the modest or false modest way, no one seems to care, and a lot of people get animated and praise you. If you do or did well with women, act embarrassed or even ashamed of it. Shrug your shoulders and look at the ground like it’s nothing. Talk about it like you talk about drinking a glass of water. Don’t act like you are better than other men. If you do it like that, it generally works pretty well.

I grew up with huge studs, players, and slayers, so I am used to guys talking about getting pussy, and it doesn’t really bother me unless they are actually trying to act like they are better than I am, which is not common.

Polar Bear: Chads are the easiest men to get along with. They get enough lady attention and are not threatened by other males, so they don’t have to compensate by being a dick.

This is absolutely perfect. This has been my experience too. Exactly.

Well, some Chads are assholes and are threatened by other men, but the best ones are not. Their attitude is “Male competition? What male competition LOL?”

They’re not thinking about the other guys and competing with them. To these Chads, when they are in a room, the only people in the room are Chad and all of the attractive women in the room. No matter how many men are in the room, none of them are really there. Any unattractive women are not in the room either. Since the other men are not even there, there’s nothing to compete with.

There is a type of Alpha called a Sigma that is like this. He is a sort of antisocial or artsy type, maybe a drug dealer. Whereas a lot of Alphas care a lot about what others think, Sigmas don’t give a damn what anyone thinks of them. They are the ultimate outsiders and rebels and that is their appeal.

Not saying I am Chad (though apparently I am lookswise), but this is how I have operated for a long time. I walk into a room full of people, and the only people there are me and any attractive women. Any men in the room, no matter how many, are not even present. Unattractive women are not there either. And I sort of treat each of them like they aren’t there.

However, any slayers or players in the room might be present and it’s good if you can find one and then you can be “the two slayers in the room checking out the babes,” and you work together as a team. I never or rarely compete with or get jealous of other men because I arrogantly don’t even think of them as competition. It’s not that I am better than they are, it’s more like they are not even in the room. I’m not insecure or worried that the other men are better than I am.

But this is correct. A lot of the best Chads don’t compete with other men at all. Why the Hell should they?

Polar Bear: How many of the big PUA’s are Chads? Likely none.

All of the big PUA’s were Chads. All goodlooking to very goodlooking men and all slayers. Mystery supposedly fucked 500 women and I believe him.

Chad is just a goodlooking man. Any man who is a 7-10 on a 1-10 scale is Chad, so up to 30% of men might be Chad. Chad or Alphas are the guys who is attractive to many or most of the women much of the time.

Normies or Betas are simply men of 4-6 on a 1-10 looks scale. Average. You know, like most people. Betas are attractive to some of the women some of the time. High tier Normies are men who are 6’s, and some women do find them attractive. With good Game they can do ok.

Omegas or subhumans (ha ha) are men who are 1-3 on a 1-10 scale. These are men who are unattractive, homely, or ugly, pick your adjective. They are attractive to almost none of the women almost all the time. They can get a woman on their same level though.

Hot women, 7-10’s, are called Staceys or Stacey.  Average women 4-6 are called Beckys or Becky. Unattractive, homely, etc. women are called unpleasant names like hambeasts (homely), ha ha, or landwhales or fatties (fat), ha ha.

Polar Bear: A Chad doesn’t talk about women, they talk about him. “Yeah, he can take his pick of any of us or all three,” A grandmother says to her daughter and granddaughter. That’s the power of a natural born Chad.

This is true in a sense, but Chads do tend to talk about women. They just don’t tend to brag about them. They will definitely discuss their conquests of successes with women, but it’s not a continuous subject. It’s more something that casually comes up now and then. There’s no need to brag because Chads already think they are hot shit, so there’s nothing to prove to anyone and nothing to be insecure about.

Alpha, Beta, and Omega can be statistical, as in Alphas are 20% of men, Betas are 65% of men and Omegas are 15% of men. That’s just a typical statistical breakdown and says nothing about behavior. It refers to how attractive they are to women.

However, there is also Alpha, Beta, and Omega behavior. We all know what Alpha behavior is. There are societies where most of them engage is behavior that is quite Alpha. Beta behavior is less masculine, more submissive, nice guy bullshit, wimpy, meek, passive, etc. Omega behavior is total or near-total fail with women.

Game/PUA: A Bit about the Finer Points of Social Rules and Communication

SHI: How’s it going nowadays with your rotten little SJW fruitcakes, the ones with a major entitlement acquired after a lifetime of feminist brainwashing?

Oh, I am going to a new Fagbucks now and everything is pretty much all right.

If People Act Shitty, Act Shitty Right Back to Them

If they’re shitty to me, I’m kind of shitty right back to them. I am doing this in other places too. Sometimes I even get aggressive with people. Some people totally back down and kiss my ass when I get aggro with them. So weird. I’m usually scared to fight back against people because I am afraid of a scene or a ban, so I don’t do it, but it really does work. You do need to fight back against people!

And I am learning new social rules bullshit. I mean you keep learning this stuff your whole life, really. I had blown off a lot of the rules that I thought were moronic (most of them) for most of my life, but I am finding that life really does go a lot smoother if you follow more of those rules.

The rules are extremely subtle and hard to figure out, but if you’re smart, you can do it. Now, I am quite socially aware, but I can see how an autist would go completely insane with this stuff. I mean they cannot even understand normal human communication, much less this weird, undercover, near-subliminal stuff.

Be Careful How You Talk to or Even Look at Young Women, Especially If You Are Older

One thing I am doing is being very careful about talking to young women.

How to Look at Hotties without Staring

Or even looking at them. I don’t even look at them all that much. And I am careful about looking at the baristas. If there’s one that’s hot, I look at her a bit, then I look away for a bit, then I look back for a bit. That’s the only way to do it. Otherwise you are staring. I learned this from a PUA site post on social communication. This actually works pretty well.

Or you can look above them or to the side of them. You can’t see them perfectly because you are not focusing on them, but you can see them fairly well.

You can actually look at a whole room this way by just looking at a spot on the wall over everyone’s heads. You can’t see anyone well but you can still actually see everyone in the whole room all at once in a panorama view, albeit a bit off-focused, so if anybody did anything odd, you would see it right away. I guess cops, soldiers, etc. need to monitor groups or crowds like this.

You can meditate or just let your mind go blank while you look at the spot on the wall. I guess some Normies might think it’s weird, but so what? Fuck em. People will throw you out of a store for looking at a spot on a wall and meditating? WTF. What, you hurt the wall’s feelings?

Wait for an IOI, Especially with Young Women

With young women, I don’t say one word to them unless they give me an IOI. They have to look at me and smile, maybe even more than once. If I say something and get a cold response, I don’t say anything more.

Punish People for Blatant Assholery

I was next to a hostile young woman who refused to look at me the other day. I was in front of her in line. I deliberately took my time in line putting my stuff away very slowly so the bitch would have to wait extra longer. She and the barista both gave me these very puzzled looks. I just smiled a bit to myself and thought, “Hey bitch! If you take that hate look off your stupid face, I’d put my stuff away a lot quicker!”

Don’t Even Look at Bitches Who Hate You No Matter How Hot They Are

The young women who hate me, I mostly refuse to look at them, or I look to the side of them with this really evil, mean look. I’m not looking at anything really – just a window or nothing at all a bit to the side of or over their heads. It looks like you are looking angrily at a window or wall, and no one really cares. But they seem to get the message.

Before, I kept looking at a chick if I thought she was hot even if she hated me, which many of them do. Now I don’t do that anymore.

Beware of the “Unconscious Cope” We Men Have about Women

Also, if I get what might be an IOI – like a stare – I think again and consider maybe it wasn’t done for a friendly reason, so I am not interpreting everything as an IOI anymore.

This is a good idea as we men have unconscious bias which is sort of an unconscious cope where we always tend to think positively in terms of “this chick likes me” no matter what she does. I think our minds just do this unconsciously as some unconscious cope or optimism bias, but it pays to be aware of it because it makes you think women like you even if they don’t, and it misconstrues innocuous or even unfriendly behavior as friendly. Which results in creep-shaming.

To Women, Every Comment, Remark, Question, or Joke said to Them by a Man Means “Want to Fuck?”

I complimented a barista on her makeup the other day as she had changed it. She took this as a come-on. We’ve known each other for years.

She’s fat and I wouldn’t fuck her with my worst enemy’s dick, but you say hi to a stupid woman, and to them that means, “Want to fuck?” It’s  narcissistic and self-centered of them to assume that all these guys want to fuck them when half of us wouldn’t touch their fat asses with a 10 foot pole and an 11 foot extension.

Now that she did that (interpreting my makeup comment as an inappropriate come-on), I am cold, often refuse to tip, and don’t look at her, and definitely won’t say anymore stuff about clothes or makeup.

Make a Point of Acting Particularly Friendly to People Who Are Nice to You, Especially in Front of Hostiles, to Send a Message to the Hostiles “Look What Happens When You Act Nice”

Baristas who are friendly get the tips I saved up from the hostiles, often with a compliment like, “This is for good service. You always give me good service” (with a pointed emphasis on the “you” and the “good service”). See how that works?

You Can’t Go Around Starting Questions with Everyone

Basically, you can’t start conversations with everyone. Especially if a woman is next to you and refusing to look at you with a cold look on her face, a conversation is probably not going to work out. Don’t try to talk to bitches who have cold, shut-down faces. Those faces mean “Don’t talk to me, asshole.”

Figure out When a Conversation Is Being Shut Down and End It

There’s a guy I know there who I have talked to a few times. He’s a fat pig and he’s quite unfriendly for some reason I never understood and never will. I tried to talk to him again recently, and he gave me the same thing. Now I am never going to talk to him again. You need to punish people for being assholes, not just keep coming back for more punches.

One thing I need to do is to shut down conversations that seem a bit hostile. If you say something, and you get a one-sentence answer, and they turn away, it’s a shut-down. They don’t like you or they don’t want to talk to you. Warm, friendly, two-way conversations don’t work like that.

We tend to keep talking to them because a  subconscious cope in favor of “thinking people like us versus thinking that they don’t” comes into play, and we keep thinking they will get nice if we just talk to them a bit more. Hate to say it but nope.

Also, it is quite insulting when you try to talk to someone, and they act like they don’t want to talk to you. It’s an insult and your mind does not want to believe this insulting, rude response is actually true because it’s hurtful to think this person dislikes you so much they won’t even talk to you. So this subconscious cope comes in where your mind simply refuses to see this as an insult, as it hurts your ego to be insulted. So your ego says it wasn’t an insult after all! See how it works?

If They Don’t Like You at First, They Won’t Change Their Minds Later on

In other words, haters never change. Once again, this is unconscious optimism – “She was a dick before, but this time, she’s going to like me because I really am a cool, good person.” Nope, if someone acts like doesn’t like you, they don’t like you. Period. You keep trying over and over to see if they will change their mind, and basically they just never do. So just stop. Recognize the subconscious cope here and nip it in the bud.

Figure out the Fake “I Didn’t Hear You” Message

I am also getting better about this weird subliminal communication where you say something, and the person hears you but pretends not to hear you. People do this crap a lot, and I always think they didn’t hear me, so I repeat myself, sometimes more than once. Apparently this is a social faux pas. A very tricky, high-level one but a social faux pas nonetheless.

Another thing they might do which is a bit easier to figure out is to respond to your speech with an angry, outraged and often rather loud, “What!?” that means, “Um, I didn’t hear that!” I don’t always get that either, and sometimes I repeat my words. It’s always a bad idea, as their response, if they have one, only gets worse.

They also might put up both arms up in the air and wave them back and forth while saying, “Ain’t gonna go there.” They might smile as they do that. End that line of talk right then and there. You’re not going to convince them to “go there” by continuing the line of conversation, which I tend to do sometimes.

It doesn’t really work to repeat the statement, as they just act annoyed and don’t answer or give some weird and also very subliminal response that is hard to figure out, as it’s all coded and masked. The response tends to say something like, “I didn’t hear that (but I really did)!” or, “I really don’t want to talk about this!”

If you say something and it seems like they should have heard you but act like they didn’t, figure out that they are playing this “I didn’t hear you” game and don’t ask again. In particular, think about what you said said or asked. Is it the sort of thing that might seem sensitive, and the person might not want to discuss it because they see it as inappropriate, insulting, or a come-on? Usually you can figure out how they might not want to answer due to the nature of the statement or question.

Certainly don’t say it again more than once. When people do this, by not answering, they are saying, “That question is annoying, inappropriate, or possibly racist/banned, etc.,  – i.e., something I don’t want to talk about, so I am pretending that I didn’t hear you.” In my 60’s, I am just figuring this out for the first time, though I have somehow known for a long time that people do this.

It’s a bit hostile and dicky. It’s better to say that you’d rather not discuss that or something along those lines with a smile, but people like to be dicky. I do this myself sometimes if someone asks me a retarded question that’s meaningless or silly, especially if asked in a hostile tone. I simply don’t respond. I never did that before but I am starting to do it now.

This is a real tough one from a social communication point of view because the automatic tendency is to assume that the person didn’t hear you and repeat the comment, except if you do that, it’s a social error.

I talked to my Mom and she said that if it seems like they are doing that, don’t say it a second time and don’t say it on another occasion, as it’s some sort of banned question or statement.

And anyway, we both agreed, even if they didn’t hear it, then obviously they were not too concerned about what you were saying as they weren’t listening to you, so why should you repeat it for someone who won’t even give you the dignity of listening to you? She also said that it’s a bit shitty and hostile (she called people who do this “jerks”) to do the “pretend I didn’t hear you” thing. She said it’s more polite just to say you’d rather not discuss it.

In case you all didn’t know about this weird social rule, here you go. I know all of you have experienced this before, so maybe you want to take notes.

Comments to Non-Native English Speakers about Their Linguistic History

I asked a barista recently if he spoke another language, as he definitely has an accent (I didn’t mention the accent, of course). He really did not want to answer that, as maybe he found it insulting or inappropriate or whatever.

Most people tend to answer that question if you ask it nicely enough. If someone has an accent or speaks broken English, and you wish to discuss it, it’s best to ask, “Do you speak another language?” other than bring up the fact of their accent or their broken English, which they might see as an insult.

If their English is nevertheless excellent, after they explain to you that they speak another language and English was not their first language, you can compliment them on their English to soften the blow a bit because in the US, it’s seen as a possible racist insult to imply someone doesn’t speak English as a first language.

You can also ask them how old they were when they came here, and most will answer. I usually throw in the bit where I am a linguist who is fascinated by languages, and they relax and stop thinking I might be a racist.

Sometimes I might notice that they have an accent, but I will shrug, smile, and downplay it and say that if you come after age 8, you just get an accent, and that’s all there is to it. Most people don’t mind this conversation, since you are asking them about their life as if it is interesting, and most people love to talk about themselves.

Always try to shrug, smile, or downplay any comment or question that could possibly be taken as an insult especially if the other person act a a bit taken aback by it. I find that this generally calms them down, and they stop feeling possibly insulted.

Alt Left: Most Adults Have Mixed Feelings about the Opposite Sex

@Jason, responding to this post, says:

Jason: Are the guys saying this watching porn (hint: hypocrite – LOL!)?

Anyway, often the women have good reason to be angry because they’re with men with “no honor.” In other words, they cheat, they don’t do things on time – they just don’t act like “real men.”

Ha ha. Real men don’t cheat? I don’t think so. Cheating is normal for men. And the more masculine the man is, the more he’s going to do it.

You like manhating bitches? Ever dated one? Would you? Are you with one now? Ever even spoken to one? It’s easy to say that until you meet these women.

And most women have some normal anger or even hatred towards on those things @Jason mentioned. Even women who love men have a bit of hatred towards them about that stuff.

Other than a few young people who haven’t had enough life experience yet, few people purely love or hate the opposite sex. Most of us have complex feelings ranging from love (or something positive) to hate (or something negative) and everything in between. That’s not a problem. What’s important is the ratio of those feelings to the other feelings.

Alt Left: White Supremacists Hate the Idea of Black People Being Improving Their Lot

Jason: Yes, of course, Blacks need to accept responsibility. But then they would be better Americans, and that wouldn’t be good for White Supremacists, would it – LOL?

Exactly.

Sometimes I think White Supremacists are evil. For instance, at American Renaissance, probably the mildest and most civilized WN site, they erupt with absolute fury and rage to any good news about Blacks. Posts about rising Black IQ in the US and the Third World fill them with fury and hate.

When I saw that is when I started thinking White Supremacists are simply evil.

I made that post earlier showing that Blacks are 13% of the population but only 16% of the killers of Whites, which shows that Blacks kill Whites at about the Black percentage of the population, which would be normal for any ethnic group.

The post also showed that at the moment, Whites are not at very much more risk of being killed by any random Black as they are by any random White. So Black homicide, at least at current rates of White caution around and avoidance of Blacks, poses little risk to Whites, about as much as other Whites do.

I showed that post to a White Supremacist, and he reacted with intense rage. He accused me of covering up for Black crime.

What are you trying to say?

He kept saying. He kept arguing that Whites were at extreme risk of being murdered by Blacks, even when I showed him they weren’t. He needed to be afraid of Black people!

See? It really pissed him off. He’s emotionally invested in hating Blacks due to Black crime, and then we show him that Black crime, at least homicide, is no more risky to Whites than White homicide, and this blows up his whole reason for his precious hatred of Blacks.

Hatred that he needs to hold onto for some reason because it’s part of his identity. He wants Blacks to be extremely dangerous to Whites. He doesn’t want Blacks to be little risk to Whites crime-wise. It blows up his whole world.

The White Supremacists complain that Blacks fuck up, and then people show how Blacks are getting their shit together, and these guys go off like volcanoes. Black people can’t win! They’re hated if they fail, and they’re hated if they succeed. These guys really don’t want Blacks to do better. They don’t want them to be smarter and I don’t even think they want them to commit less crime.

It messes up their White genocide theory. The better Blacks act the more they will mingle and breed with Whites, so more “White genocide.”

It messes up their beloved racism. All of their hate for Blacks is tied up in this idea of Black people acting bad, so when Blacks start acting better, that screws up their whole racist hate thing, which they love and cherish so dearly for various reasons, in part because it’s so much fun, but they have other reasons too. These people have a deep need for Blacks to be inferior – to be less intelligent, to be crime-ridden.

It ruins their feeling of superiority to Blacks. When Black inferiority in certain respects starts to lesson and Blacks start to close various gaps with Whites, guess what? Whitey’s not superior anymore! He’s no better than a nigger ha ha. Oh noes! The niggers are catching up to us! We can’t have that!

Feeling superior to Blacks, hating Blacks, and keeping the White race pure are far more important to them than Blacks being more intelligent or educated or committing less crime, which would be good for Blacks, Whites, and society at large.

What kind of people react with furious hatred towards good news? What a bunch of miserable, misanthropic, pessimistic scumbags.

Alt Left: The Values of My Mother’s Greatest Generation of Middle to Upper Class White Women

Jason: No offense, but often women into “higher values” are snobs. Also, of course, not all minority women are sluts and whores. Give me a break!

Now what’s better? A clean snob or a dirty person with a good heart?

Also, finally, how did they become sluts and whores? More than not, it was victimization by the dad or others.

My response:

Jason: Also, of course, not all minority women are sluts and whores. Give me a break!

Oh of course. It was not so much about being a sexual slut, although none of my Mom’s friends were like that. Nevertheless, one of her sisters was and my Mom acted like she didn’t care. I imagine you could be wild in bed with your husband but you weren’t supposed to be promiscuous. Anyway this “woman of the street” thing was more about behavior than sex.

Jason: No offense, but often women into “higher values” are snobs.

I am not aware that my Mom’s friends were like that. At least I don’t remember any of them being like that. Some were really into money and status like graduating  from a top school, but they never married rich men so it was a bit of a pathetic joke.

One of my Mom’s friends thought a woman should marry only a Harvard or Yale man who made at least six figures. None of the men she married were rich. None graduated from Harvard. Then she started demanding that her daughter marry such a man. Her daughter is a homely nerd. Now a fat homely nerd. She could never get such a man either.  So her snobbishness was just stupid.

Jason: Now what’s better? A clean snob or a dirty person with a good heart?

Most of my Mom’s friends were “clean” because was just how a proper woman was supposed to be. And back then, most women of her class and race were like that. My Mom didn’t associate with dirty or promiscuous women. She didn’t necessarily hate them. She doesn’t like prostitutes though. I will tell you that. She considers that the lowest a woman can go.  I suppose they could leave the business and reform but one of my Mom’s sayings was:

Jason: You can take the girl out of the whorehouse but you can’t take the whorehouse out of the girl.

She’s sort of right of right.

Also my Mom’s group were both clean and goodhearted for the most part. Women were not supposed to be evil-minded or vicious. That was the world of men. Women did not inhabit that vicious world.

Also, finally, how did they become sluts and whores? More than not, it was victimization by the dad or others.

Like I said she didn’t really care about sluts. She’s been told about some of my girlfriends and she basically doesn’t give a fuck. It’s more that her and her friends did not act that way and they did not associate with women who did.  My Mom doesn’t like whores, but I don’t think she  gives a damn about whores. My Mom knows a lot of women, especially younger women, are horny as Hell. She has acknowledged that.

It’s just that my Mom associated Black and Brown women along with poor and working class women with “women of the street”. That meant not so much that they were sluts but more that they fought with their men, screamed at them, insulted them and put them down, attacked their masculinity, and even got into physical fights with them.

To my Mom’s women, a proper White woman of her class simply did not treat her husband that way. You had to respect your husband and in return he was more or less decent to you. That was the trade-off.

Also basically the women in my Mom’s generation were not Forever Children, golddiggers, borderlines or drama queens. The typical female scenario of chaos and drama was not there. I’m sure my Mom’s crowd would have loved to have been that way, but back then, a proper White woman of a certain class was supposed to be “mature” and to “control herself.”

That meant sublimating, suppressing, or repressing a lot of typical female emo and stupid behavior BS. These were “controlled women.” You were supposed to control yourself. An out of control woman was very much looked down on by my Mom’s crowd. That would be a feral woman.

My Mom’s crowd of women were supposed to be proper, decent, civilized, sane, and controlled. The opposite of all of those things was “woman of the street” – a woman with no class or especially self-control. Women like that were literally disgusting to my Mom’s crowd of women. Almost viscerally so.

The Ronettes, “Be My Baby”

The night we met, I knew I needed you so
And if I had the chance, I’d never let you go
So won’t you say you love me
I’ll make you so proud of me
We’ll make ’em turn their heads every place we go

So won’t you please be my, be my baby
Be my little baby, my one and only baby
Say you’ll be my darlin’, be my, be my baby
Be my baby now, my one and only baby
Wha oh oh oh

I’ll make you happy baby, just wait and see
For every kiss you give me, I’ll give you three
Oh since the day I saw you
I have been waiting for you
You know I will adore you ’til eternity

So won’t you please be my, be my baby
Be my little baby, my one and only baby
Say you’ll be my darlin’, be my, be my baby
Be my baby now, my one and only baby
Wha oh oh oh oh

So come on and please be my, be my baby
Be my little baby, my one and only baby
Say you’ll be my darlin’, be my, be my baby
Be my baby now, my one and only baby
Wha oh oh oh

Be my, be my baby, be my little baby
My one and only baby, oh oh
Be my, be my baby, oh
My one and only baby, wha oh oh oh oh

Be my, be my baby, oh
My one and only baby, oh
Be my, be my baby, oh
Be my baby now

From 1963! Sometimes I think this song is better than either of the previous two. I had no idea they were making such great music in 1963 for Chrissake.

From the complete psycho but legendary genius Phil Spector. He was always nuts. He was even nuts back in the 60’s. People hated working for him because he was so crazy and unstable. And he’d been into guns for a long time before his bizarre murder conviction in 2009.

He treated Ronnie Spector like complete crap and almost ruined her life. He did weird sexual things with his sons like forcing them to simulate sex acts on his girlfriend. They’re probably screwed up by this idiot too.

In 2009 he shot a woman dead in his mansion for no apparent reason. But he’d had a habit of pulling guns on women for some time. I hate to say it, but I really think that men like Phil Spector hate women. If you love women, why would you pull guns on them all the time?

How many times have I told you that artists are crazy? And the real geniuses are often the craziest of them all.

Alt Left: Geniuses, Male/Female and White/Black

Geniuses, in addition to being brilliant, are often either weird (Einstein) or nuts (Sam Peckinpah, Hemingway, Phil Spector).

Because in order to take the creative process to its ultimate heights, you really have to leave this earthly world and ascend up beyond that to the world of Gods, as the Greeks used to say.

And when you truly leave the Earth, you enter the world of the sky, Gods and spiritual beings good and bad, madness, strangeness, and otherworldly-ness. In a sense, you sort of have to go nuts to produce truly great art. If you’re not nuts enough, you’re just to normie to ascend like that.

Sanity, in addition to all the great things it is, is, after all, also mediocrity, the quotidian world or work, home, strict social rules, and complete suppression of dreams, feelings, and really anything wild. The 9-5 world of rush hour and cubicles doesn’t tolerate wildness very well. One reason I usually get fired after a year or so, I suppose.

Check out Otto Weininger on genius and Nietzsche on the ubermensch.

Traditionally from the Greeks on it was thought that only men could access this sort of perfect Platonic concept of genius because men were of the sky, beyond the earth to the airy world of pure ideas which most women, even those with genius IQ’s hate like the plague.

The world of the woman is the world of people, babies, children, friends, lovers, husbands, sons, daughters, and parents. In order words, the world of the earth.

The Greeks said that women were “of the earth” and that men were “of the sky” or at least could try to be. Which one is closer to God? Get it?

This is often thought to be a misogynistic attitude, but I think it’s just true. Of course there are many brilliant women, including geniuses, but have you ever noticed how many of the female pure geniuses in the above sense (the airy world of pure ideas) are rather mannish, masculine, or even full-blown lesbians? Start with genius Laurie Anderson, and she’s not even a dyke. Female philosophers? Try Anita Rondell. Lesbian.

Weininger actually said that women were simply incapable of genius. He thought that if there ever to were to be a female genius, she would probably be a lesbian. Bang on.

Now I am not saying that being of the sky is better than being of the Earth or any of that. Women surely don’t feel that way. They think the world of the sky is the world of men. They also think it is unsufferably boring and find it incomprehensible how and why men would even endeavor to live in such a world. I’ve had brilliant women ask me this?

Why would you even do something like that?

About my crazy herculean projects like cataloguing all of the German and Chinese dialects or languages? To her it was incomprehensible. Why would anyone waste their time doing such a stupid and boring thing. Makes no sense.

This is why most women, even those with IQ’s over 140, are not pure intellectuals in the male sense of the world meaning the airy world of ideas and pure concepts torn loose from all of their Earthly moorings.

But who cares about geniuses anyway? What’s a genius?

There are plenty of brilliant women out there, and the female genius tends to a performer of pure emotion. I listed Marianne Faithful as a teenager and then in her 40’s as an example of “the female genius.” So it’s not that female geniuses do not exist, but it’s more that they take a different form of “pure emotional (feelings)” genius rather than “pure intellectual (thought) genius.”

I also think that Black people have a certain type of genius that I call “the Black genius.” It’s also quite different from the “White male genius.” It’s not inferior, it’s just different, and there are few if any male geniuses who seem to think and behave like the Black male genius.

A shocking number of brilliant Blacks, usually men, embody this rather strange type of genius. Few if any Black women do so this is really the Black male genius.” But to search for the “Black female genius,” perhaps once again we have to look into the world of pure emotion, like Ronnie Spector above, Billie Holiday, Tina Turner, or Pam Grier, the actress.

Catch my drift?

Alt Left: Humans Are Actually a Lot More Primitive Than You Think

We discussed in a previous post how your wife or girlfriend becomes your surrogate mother.

But there are other choices.

If she’s 20 years younger than you, she becomes your lover and your daughter! You become her lover and her father.

Nobody talks about this stuff, but humans are pretty damned primitive. We are basically these giant hairless monkeys walking around on two legs trying to fool ourselves into thinking we aren’t animals, or at least mammals, anymore. It’s a conceit.

Freud was right in a sense that human deep psychology at the psyche level is extremely primitive and doesn’t operate on a logic at all. I mean it does but it operates on “crazy logic,” not “sane logic.”

Anyway this is just the way we are. This the trap we are in. This hole was dug for each of us before we were born, and we’re stuck in it your whole life.

Once you acknowledge that you are nothing but a Goddamned lowly animal, a mammal like those things running around in the woods or flopping in the ocean, it’s such a liberating feeling. Living a lie can be toxic at times. Throwing off a lie and embracing the cold hard truth can often be like lifting a 75-pound back off your back.

Alt Left: Face It, Men: Your Girlfriend or Wife Is Your Surrogate Mother

Sometimes if you want to role-play with your girlfriend, you can go into “little boy” mode where you’re the little boy, and your gf is your Mom. You talk like a little boy and to some extent act like one but not too much. It’s not serious or real. It’s just a big joke.

I’ve done that with a few childless girlfriends aged 29 to 49, and they all loved it. I was their son! You would think they would make fun of and ridicule me, but they really got into it. Some women hate it though, think it’s stupid, and won’t play the game.

Anyway, your girlfriend really is your mother. Face it, your girlfriend or your wife replaces your Mom. We men go from Mom to girlfriend or wife, and really nothing changes.

A few men are ridiculous about it. I could give you examples, but the wife actually didn’t mind and still loved the guy to death, though frankly he was a huge pussy.

Men are too macho to admit that their girlfriends or wives become not only our lovers, yes, but also our Moms. When men become elderly, this idea of the wife turning into the Mom becomes much more obvious, often glaringly so. Some men don’t even try to hide it much.

We men are not good at taking care of ourselves. A lot of divorced men can’t even fend for their own. They fall apart quickly when they live alone, and quite a few get sick or die fairly quickly. These guys are like little boys without a Mom living on their own. How long would a boy last in the woods without Mom? These men literally need a wife or girlfriend to stay alive. We men like to think we are self-reliant, but we need to think about that.

Actually bachelors fend a lot better on their own than divorced men. And the longer they have been bachelors, the better they get at it. Most of the long-term bachelors I know are fairly decent cooks. Most can do their own laundry. Most are good about going to the doctor, and they are almost female about it.

And I know bachelors who keep in contact with their mothers regularly, so even though they don’t have the surrogate mother in terms of wife or girlfriend, they still keep the real thing around on some level anyway.

Some even talk to Mom almost every day. They usually live away from her, but they’re on the phone to her a lot, or she’s on the phone to them. The mother doesn’t usually run the guy’s life if he’s a real man – he’ll tell her to piss off if she does, and most mothers will back off because instinctively they know that being party to a Momma’s boy is not cool.

So most bachelors more or less do whatever they want, especially sexually with regard to women, and their mothers have no say in the matter. My Mom’s been my playboy cheerleader most of her life. She’s like:

Go get em, stud! I’m so proud of my playboy son ha ha.

She even used to fix me up with her friends.

Mom: Hey Bob, you know my friend XXXXX?

Me: Yeah?

Mom: She wants to go out with you.

Now she’s turning into a prude in her old age (80’s), and I have been told she does not want to hear about my exploits anymore. In particular, she doesn’t want to hear about me being with teenage girls and young women. That pisses her off.

But these bachelors are still in a way being mothered by their Moms. Some still bring their clothing over to do laundry if they live close. Others have Moms that give them food or help them out with money if they need it. More typically, they have their Moms call them and remind them of stuff they need to do, like doctor’s appointments or important affairs that they tend to blow off.

I actually do all of these things, and I am not embarrassed to say so. Why should I be? She doesn’t tell me what to do. I live my own life. She’s not my Mommy anymore in that sense.

Alt Left: Women Are “Forever Children” Because They Evolved That Way to Raise Children

Polar Bear: Women are “forever children” as has been said here, perhaps to better raise children.

Exactly! Perfect.

I was thinking this just the other day. I was discussing it with my Mom carefully (she’s a feminist), and she agreed with you and me on this issue! We both agreed that in order to raise kids best, a woman has to think like a child or relate to a child on a child’s level. Most men see an infant and think, “Like Hell I’m taking care of that little shit. At the very least it’s boring. At worst it will puke, piss, or shit on me. Plus it won’t stop crying.”

I had a girlfriend once who was a married woman. She talked to me about when she had her first kid. She would actually climb in the playpen with that kid and play goo-goo gaga with it all day long. She told  me:

That was a very special time for me. Just me and the baby.

Face it, no human can do that unless they think like a child on some very basic level.

I could not imagine myself spending all day in the crib with some idiotic infant making faces at it. I’d be bored out of my skull, and I’m sure most men feel the same. But for women, they’re in their happy place.

On an instinctive level, women love kids. If they don’t have kids, they develop surrogate children with pets and such. Or they become foster mothers. I dated a woman who had never had kids but had been a foster mother to maybe five kids.

I can’t tell you how many times I have seen  a woman with a baby in a public place. Look around at how the other women look at the baby. I have seen huge smiles burst onto the faces of even older women in their 50’s.

When my sister was very little, my Mom took her to the toy store. She saw the dolls and she grabbed one and cradled it to her chest. She said, “Daaaa!”

It’s a damned instinct.

I had two long-term girlfriends recently, one 48 and the other 51. Neither had had kids, though one lost a kid via a miscarriage. They both had dogs which were essentially surrogate children, especially for one of the women. He was her baby! She also talked all the time about this little boy she had taken care of for a long time. She couldn’t stop talking about him.

Get it?

PUA/Game: The Lowdown on Dating Much Younger Women If You Are a Middle Aged Man

Even though I am over 60, I still date young women at times, all the way down to their 20’s or even 18 or 19. But it’s is extremely hard, with like a 98+% rejection rate. It’s like climbing a mountain. Yeah, you can do it, but most guys won’t bother because it’s so hard. It also gets harder every year, and most guys definitely cannot pull this off. Vast majority of young women are not into men 20-40 years older, but there are a few, that’s for sure.

I have to fight a tsunami of rejection and even anger and hatred to get those few with Daddy issues who will go out with me for free. I’ve been banned from establishments for merely talking to young women, not even flirting with them or asking them out.

Nevertheless, I have young women age 18-29 coming to me almost every day asking to be my sugar baby. They want me to be their sugar daddy. I’m as broke as they are though.

Woman on the Net who is opposed to these relationships: You can maybe get away with it if you are already very attractive or you have a lot of money.

Supposedly, when I was young I was very handsome. I lived Chad’s life for many years. People kept saying this about me into my 50’s, and even at my age, I hear it all the time.
Even women age 18-23 tell me all the time that I am handsome, very handsome, cute, sexy, or hot. I don’t get it, as I think my looks are shot. So I guess in my case it’s looks.

How to Pull It Off

It helps to be in the top 10-20% of looks for your age, not be overweight, be well-spoken, well-groomed, hygienic, and very polite or even classy, and dress halfway decently. It absolutely helps to have any kind of status at all, be it Power, Fame, Money, or Status, in any dose at all but the more the better.

It also helps to be wise and intelligent, as these young women are looking for a mentor to be “the adult in my life” as a 20 year old hottie with model good looks recently told me.

You definitely need great Game, helpfully honed over a lifetime. And you need to not be creepy in the rational sense of the word that even most men would agree is creeptastic. Anyway if you are that creepy, you automatically have shit Game anyway.

Woman on the Net who is opposed to these relationships: Women are not attracted to receding hairlines, wrinkles, or a flat tire around the waist.

I don’t have a receding hairline. Not even 1%.

I have few wrinkles, some around my belly that you never see.

I do not have a beer belly or at least not much of one. I was in bed with a 19 year old recently and I complained that I had a belly and she said, “No way! Most men your age are overweight, some by a lot!”

Problems

There are problems.

Potency and sexual ability issues. At my age, tragically, there are potency problems. I’m not impotent but it’s touch and go if you catch my drift. Yes, you don’t need a cock to please a woman, but a lot of young women want to be fucked and even get creampies. They’re disappointed if it’s not working. Also a lot of young women are cumsluts nowadays (ha ha), and they want huge loads. Loads that we cannot supply.

We can’t fuck as long as when we were young. I used to be able to keep it up for 3-4 hours at a time. Not nowadays and I often get off quick too.

Sex drive mismatch. Most young women have raging sex drives, especially nowadays with all this online porn. They’re almost all masturbating, often every day. Some watch a lot of porn or even have their own porn blogs! Her sex drive will be way stronger than yours. That’s a problem.

The relationships are highly unstable, characterized by a lot of wild love/hate fluctuation. She’s basically a huge drama queen. The relationships tend to blow up, often very quickly, and  after that, she’s just about your worst enemy.

The young women who go for older men are often not right in the head. 75% of the ones I have been with were actively suicidal, at least at times.

Peer pressure is a problem. I was with an 18 year old girl who fell crazy in love with me at age 59 (believe it not), but her friends saw her with me and openly ridiculed her. Relationship over.

Prepare to get called “pedophile” a lot, especially by young men. Of course you’re not, as you are adults, but still, steel yourself for a lot of name-calling.

Prepare to lose friends. I had a good friend, a physician, dump me when I told him I was dating a 19 year old girl at 60.

Prepare for hate from older women. And it will be really bad too. They really hate us cradle robbers.

You will never meet her parents because her Dad might punch you or try to kill you.

You will never meet her siblings because she will be too embarrassed to introduce them to you.

Prepare for possible legal consequences. A 19 year old girl I was dating had a 17 year old friend (total knockout) who also wanted me and kept trying to send me dirty pics I had to delete. She  kept bugging me:

I want you to eat my pussy! Pleeeease!

It was rather hard to keep turning her down. Part of me really wanted to do it. They both wanted a threeway. That’s probably every man’s dream: to have a threeway with two hotties, one 19 and the other 17, when you are 60 fucking years old!  How many guys  get to do that?

I said no and the 19 year old really pestered me about it. A weak man would have given in.

You have to be strong not to mess with an underage girl. You can be friends with them, but you can’t do anything sexual. I met an 18 year old girl two weeks shy of her 18th birthday and she wanted in. We hung out a lot, held hands, hugged, put our arms around each other, and kissed on the cheek.

She had never been kissed and of course was a virgin. Both of these things are way more common at that age than you think. She kept pestering me for a makeout session or at least a tongue kiss, and it took all I could muster not to cave and do it.

The Good Side

As you can see there are a mountain of problems with these relationships.

But there is a great bright side. Most middle aged men will never fuck a teenage girl or woman in their 20’s again. Maybe 10% can pull it off. And all men that age want to do it. So if you pull it off, you are living the life of Riley that most men only ever dream about.

Other men will treat you like a hero. If you are not arrogant about it, the praise feels damn good.

Quite a few women are turned on by the fact that you can pull this off.

Quite a few women are turned on by the fact that you can pull this off. Of all ages. Even older men. I’ve had women in their 40’s hear that I do this and start addressing me as “hey stud.” You get a lot of this.

You can be her father and her lover. Get over it. You’re her Daddy figure. She will call you Daddy in bed all the time, and this time she means it.

A lot want to do weird age-play where they are younger than they are – teenage girls down to 12-17. If you are creeped out by incest play this is not for you.

You are her mentor if you are a good man. You can teach her all about life! She doesn’t know shit really so you will be teaching her basic life skills every single day.

If you are highly intelligent, that’s good because now you are her teacher, and her head is getting filled with new facts all the time.

You can be her counselor and play therapist with her if that’s your thing. She’ll need it anyway. So a lot of psychological self-help.

You are imparting a lot of wisdom to her. Like every day, more wisdom and aphorisms. She may fall in love with your mind if you are intelligent, and tell you she’s fucking you for your mind. She will also saw in awe that you are very wise.

I used to be a teacher, so I love this. You will never see a young person learn more than this. Every day she gets her head full of all these new things and it’s cool because you can watch another human learn at a monumental pace.

If you are good, she will actually end up smarter and will be life and social skills than most of her peers so it’s good for her in that sense. You are teaching her all about sex too. Most are pretty inexperienced.

You are her cheerleader. She has a ton of insecurities and typically with the Daddy issues comes serious low self esteem. So you are always trying to boost her up and get her to feel better about herself.

Is it worth it? Do you like to live dangerously? If you like to live dangerously and have all sorts of bad things happen to get the good things (like a hike in the jungle), then it’s worth it. But a lot of older men probably don’t want all the typical drama and chaos that comes with your typical young women. They probably get enough of that crap with women their own age, and it’s way worse with young women because so many are quite unstable.

I still date women my age and women in their 30’s-50’s, and honestly they are superior to young things in a lot of ways!

Jews and Communism Redux

Polar Bear: What little Communist literature I’ve read seemed very pro-German, Ehrenberg?

I don’t understand. Ilya Ehrenberg was one of the most anti-German people who ever lived.

However, after the war, the USSR had excellent relations with East Germany. Communism was quite popular in East Germany, and nostalgia for the GDR is still a big thing there. A lot of people reminisce about the old days and are not happy with the new capitalism. A lot of West German Leftists left and moved to East Germany after the war. Incredible, isn’t it? People actually moving to a Communist country.

Of course Marx was extremely pro-German. He was a German man after all. Marx didn’t really consider himself to be a Jew. Neither did Trotsky. That’s just bullshit made up by anti-Communist antisemites, which is like 95% of them. Pro-Communist or Communist antisemites are rare indeed, despite the blatherings of super Jews, anti-Communist Jews, hardcore Zionists, and other professional liars.

Polar Bear: No, I believe it was Engels. He was also very soft on Jews.

Ha ha ever read The Jewish Question by Marx (1843)? It’s hard to read but a lot of super-Jews really hate the paper. They think it’s antisemitic. I don’t think it really is. It’s anti-Jewish religion. He says there is no Jewish religion – all the religion is is capitalism and love of money ha ha. Good times, good times! Marx didn’t like Christianity either. He didn’t like any religion. I don’t think he disliked Jews ethnically. After all he was Jewish himself. Marx’s father was a rabbi!

Polar Bear: Maybe the great unifier early on was Jews.

There were not that many Communists from Marx’s death until the Russian revolution. The early pre-Soviet Communists were not particularly Jewish. Stalin was a bank robber. Lenin spent most of his time abroad in Germany. They were all wanted men.

Yes, there were a lot of Jews among the early Bolsheviks, but in 1917, 70% of Russian Jews voted for the Zionist party, not the Communists. Also the other socialist parties were also full of Jews. But almost all of the popular parties in 1917 were Left. It was just a question of how far left people were going to go. Most of the Russian people were dirt poor workers or peasants and they were all for the Left.

Hardly anyone wanted the old Royalists back. There were definitely pro-royalists all right though. Those were the Whites in the Russian Civil War. But they lost. Even the Russian Army and especially the Intelligence Services all went over to the Reds.

And the Whites killed a lot of Jews during the Civil War. The Reds probably hardly killed any. Even in the USSR, yes, Jews were prominent in some fields. The NKVD ended up being very Jewish in the 1930’s, but it was run by a Georgian named Beria.

Old Soviets said that ethnicity never mattered in the USSR. You were not supposed to care or talk about things like that. A lot of Jews just drifted into that position at that time for whatever reason. A lot of Russian Jews really hated the Czar, so quite a few of them took to Communism well. But the majority of the people in the USSR supported the Communists. How do you think they won the war?

And there were just as many Latvians as Jews among the early Bolsheviks. Does anyone  talk about evil Bolshevik Latvians? Of course not. It’s like the old adage: Maybe one out of ten Jews is a radical, but five out of ten radicals are Jews. Get it?

Polar Bear: Seems like a lot the men that married Jews ended up hating them.

I don’t know about that. I had a Jewish girlfriend for 5 1/2 years. She was kind of a bitch and she sort of talked down to me and yelled at me a lot to the point that even other women were complaining about how she treated me.

But she adored me and she was a real “stand by your man” and “live your life through your man” type. Almost like a Filipina or Thai woman in that sense. I never expected Jewish women to be like that maybe a lot of them are. They also have a reputation for being nurturing.

As an aside, there are a lot more “stand by your man” and “live your life through your man” types than you think. It’s fairly normal if she’s crazy in love with you. Maybe it helps to be goodlooking too, no idea.

The people who don’t like Jewish women are Jewish men ha ha. I’m not sure if Gentile men even care that much. There’s sort of a war going on between Jewish men and women, sort of like the war between Black men and women.

And I don’t know if it was a factor in Marr’s case.

I think Marr is hilarious. Guy married three different Jewish women, divorces all of them and then forms the Anti-Semitic League, the first openly anti-Jewish organization in modern history. Ha ha! I have no idea what effect his wives had on him. Maybe none. But it is pretty funny just to tell the story because it seems like his Jewish wives drove him so insane that he founded the first modern anti-Jewish organization.

Lulz all around!

Ethnic Nationalists Who Only Love Their Own Kind and Don’t Hate the Other Are Just Fine

PB: Yes there are. My favorite Youtuber is one. The other side isn’t innocent. Are Whites to be saints while coloreds behave like savages? Silence the great White minds for Jewish psychobabble? It’s a stupid anti-White witch hunt.

They’re fine but they’re rare. And they’re not getting more common because they can’t. Think about it.

You know what? If you are a White Supremacist or White Nationalist or even an NS, and you don’t hate the other races much or at least you don’t talk about it, you know what? I honestly don’t mind if you think that way! That’s just fine.

You love your own kind. You feel most comfortable with them. You’d rather not deal with outsiders for whatever reason you don’t want to talk about. Or you think they’re not to blame for their bad behavior, so you don’t hate them.

All you do is love your people. That’s all you care about. Hate’s not for you because you’re a positive person, and hate poisons the soul. I know it’s a cliche, but trust me, it’s literally true. Been there and done that.

And if all you want to do is talk about how great your own are and how much you love your own people and you don’t diss the outsiders or act like they’re disgusting and inferior, you know what? Good for you, man. I will even support you. I’m glad everyone doesn’t feel that way, but if a few do, fine. I don’t know if it makes me an evil racist for letting these guys off the hook, but if it does, so what? Fine, I’m an evil racist then. So be it.

There’s nothing to worry about this catching on and becoming scary popular because it will never catch on because it can’t. This is due to the nature of such thinking. “I love my own kind and don’t really hate others, just prefer to be with my own kind is all” is a very difficult mental tightrope to walk on without falling into the net all the time.

People don’t like doing or engaging in cognitive crossword puzzles or Triathalons all day long. We’re lazy. We’re lazy thinkers. And I don’t blame us. I’m a lazy thinker too. We all are. Life demands it. If you had to ponder everything, you’d hardly be able to get out of bed.

Plus most folks like this like hating too much. Hating is actually pleasurable for these people, almost like a sensual experience of the body like hiking or dancing or listening to music or sex. It’s that much fun. A hatefest is like a Caribbean cruise for these types. So this attitude above ain’t never catching on, so quit worrying about it.

And yes, I have met a few White nationalists like this. There used to be as few on Amren, which is on the moderate end of White nationalism. They are quite uncommon though. 1%? 2%? Something like that. It’s too hard to do and plus most don’t want to do it because that kills all the fun. The fun of the hate. And hate literally is good times for these types. If you don’t believe me, go hang around their sites.

New Theory: What Makes a Racist Dangerous Is the Level of Supremacy for His Own Race, Not So Much His Hatred of the Other Race

Jason: The NPD is certainly high with racists. Well, beyond the personal level, they certainly have racial narcissism. But of course they excuse it as “love for their own race”.

I think Jason makes an interesting  point that racial supremacists are narcissists in a sense – their racial supremacy being a form of narcissism in which their own narcissism is enlarged and placed on the entire group. In this sense, they are seeing their entire race as part of the self.

I would certainly agree that most true hardcore racists like White Supremacists or White nationalists are very angry people. And a lot of them are just flat out mean. Even the ones I thought were well-controlled had a deep meanness or even homicidality about them. Racists are not very nice people. And the hardcores, if you get to know them outside of their racism, they are often very mean people.

And a lot of racists do look rather “Cluster B,” that’s for damn sure. All that rage and hate looks Cluster B-ish. In particular, a lot of hardcore racists appear rather psychopathic. Most are not true psychopaths, but I assume that they have elevated scores on the PCL. They also act paranoid. They’re also projecting like maniacs.

And their racism does appear as egotism. Nationalism is like egotism writ large, with all of the same problems of egotism – I’m perfect, blaming everybody else, black and white thinking, no insight, the whole nine yards.

Really racism is just another Identity Politics. Most racists who are for their own group in a huge way are IP’ers. Others are not. Some White guy who says, “I don’t think much of White people, but I really don’t like Black people!” is not doing Cluster B, narcissism, psychopathy, or egotism. I think he’s just a cynic. Or perhaps a misanthrope. He’s unlikely to hurt Black people though. Cynics don’t usually shoot up malls. They’re too cynical to do anything that stupid.

It is the combination of extreme supremacy for their own race and extreme hatred for the other race that makes a racist dangerous. This looks like a paranoid. A paranoid has a grandiose sense of self and a vast hatred for the others, who are persecuting him. And racists definitely feel that they are being persecuted by the other race.

In that sense, it is so much of the level of hate that the racist has toward the others but more the degree of their own supremacy towards their own kind that predicts dangerousness in racists. Damn, what an interesting theory!

Also note another theory that racists are basically paranoids! Damn, I am on a roll tonight, huh?

Why Does Everyone Engage in Black and White Thinking, Have No Insight, and Think They Are Perfect?

Polar Bear: I feel if you admit guilt or show vulnerability to them, they will latch on to you in agreement, “Yes, you should be ashamed,” and lick your tears. No uplifting or quarter given.”

A lot of people are like this. I’m living with one now. We have a lot of political arguments though we are both pretty much liberal/Left Democrats – he’s more of a Centrist Democrat though. It was the same thing with my father. He was a liberal Democrat and I was a leftwing/progressive/Leftist, but we fought about politics all the time. My Mom always shook her head and commented on how stupid it was:

But you both basically agree with each other!

As far as this person I am living with, I argue fairly. He doesn’t. He never gives in and never admits he’s wrong. You see, I admit that my side is wrong or bad sometimes. His side is always 100% good. The people against him are always 100% bad. But with me, I might say my side is 70% good. And I will often admit that my guys do bad things, and I will come right out and say so. Whenever I do that, he jumps all over me, and does this:

I feel if you admit guilt or show vulnerability to them, they will latch on to you in agreement, “Yes, you should be ashamed,” and lick your tears.

If you admit your side is even 1% wrong, you basically lost the argument because their side is 0% wrong!

And this person went to university and even got a Masters Degree. He criticizes black and white thinking and says most people don’t engage in critical thinking. But he uses black and white thinking all the time and doesn’t engage in critical thinking.

He has absolutely zero insight.

My father was the same way. Zero insight. My sister too. No insight and she’s always right and never wrong. My NPD brother is the same. No insight at all, though oddly enough, he’s the only one who might have some. He goes into these “NPD depressions” sometimes, and in those periods, he gets quite down on himself. And my other sibling is the same. My Mom does have some insight but not a tremendous amount. She sort of thinks she’s perfect.

And to this person, the US government is always right, 100% of the time. US foreign policy is always 100% right. He never criticizes it, and when he does, he does so in a very soft voice and acts like he’s ashamed.

My Mom is a liberal Democrat, and she is exactly the same. Supports US foreign policy 100%, and acts ashamed, quiet, or embarrassed when she opposes it.

Americans are so weird. What’s wrong with Americans and US foreign policy? My Dad was the same way. He was a very liberal Democrat, but he always supported US foreign policy. He did oppose the Vietnam War though, and he criticized the overthrow of Allende. But he was quiet about the Allende overthrow, like he was embarrassed or ashamed to feel that way (see above).

He swore by Time Magazine, a rightwing publication. But he and everyone else I know describe rightwing Time Magazine as centrist, saying it resembles liberal Republicans or conservative Democrats.

My father, a super-liberal Democrat, swore by rightwing Time Magazine and described it as Centrist! All of these people are only liberal on domestic policies, and even there, the Republicans always wrong because they’re 100% evil, and the Democrats are always, always right because they are 100% good.

If I ever agree with anything Republicans do (which I do sometimes because I am not an ideologue kook like everyone else), the person I’m living with asks, “So you’re going to vote for Trump now?” Like it’s not possible to absolutely despise Trump but actually agree on a few of his policies? Totally black and white thinking. If I agree with one thing Trump did, that means I’m going to vote for Trump! See how they think?

It’s Ok to Believe That Racists Are Nuts

I am having a hard time understanding why people who deny that racists are crazy are some sort of bad people, especially when we say they’re not crazy, but they are bad.

Neither is flattering.

It’s not flattering at all to call someone nuts, but it also sort of lets people off the hook. After all, crazy people aren’t really responsible for their condition, right? In that case, racists, being nuts, are no more responsible for their condition than people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or major depression. They’re not bad, they’re just ill. Do you really want to say that about racists?

Further, I don’t understand why it is outrageous or offensive to say, “Racists aren’t nuts, they’re just being immoral or bad.”

Both sides are saying racists are not cool. And it doesn’t really matter if someone is nuts or evil. Does it matter if a psychopath is nuts or evil? Of course not. We deal with them in the same way regardless.

So people who say racists are bad and people who say racists are nuts are both saying some pretty unflattering things about racists. In fact, it’s a lot more condemning to say that racists are bad than to say they are nuts. Crazy people are not responsible for their behavior, and bad people.

I don’t agree that racists are nuts, but if people want to take that position, it’s fine with me. People who say racists are nuts and people who say racists are bad should be friends, not enemies. They’re on the same page. They’re both looking at the same ugly picture. One person is saying that the ugly picture is caused by one thing and the other says the ugly picture is caused by another thing. At the end of the day, it’s not much of a disagreement.

I respect people who take the position that racists are nuts, not evil. I think they’re wrong but I respect the position. In the end the two positions are not particularly different anyway. See my analogy with psychopaths above.

Recently we have been dealing with someone who is a huge asshole. Like the biggest asshole in the galaxy. It’s controversial why he’s such an asshole. He has a mental disorder, bipolar disorder to be specific.

This person is at least a little bit manic all the time. The problem is that many manics are not happy manics. In fact, many are angry, irritable, aggressive, hateful, confrontational and even violent manics.

A lot of these manics look “Cluster B”, “narcissistic,” or especially psychopathic when they are manic.

In this sense Axis 1 conditions (true mental illnesses) can perfectly mimic Axis 2 conditions (personality disorders). In fact, if someone has a serious Axis 1 disorder such as a mood disorder, I would not diagnose a personality disorder until you clear up the Axis 1 disorder.

Only when that’s cleared up can the true personality shine through. Otherwise you are just looking through a fogged up mirror. You can’t see much of anything, and anything you think you see is probably wrong.

Anyway, discussing this person and others I have known with this going on, such as an aunt of mine, I told my Mom recently:

You know what? I really don’t care why someone acts horrible. I don’t care why someone is a total asshole or a monster. I don’t care if they act horrible because they’re mentally ill or just because they’re bad people. What difference does it make? All I know is that I need to get the Hell away from this horrible person. What’s causing their horribleness is ultimately irrelevant.

Dangerousness in Humans: You’re Either Pushing Energy out or You Are Pushing It In

In order to keep up with the loony SJW trends, it’s a requirement that I get increasingly crazy every year. Trust me, I’m already way too nuts. Last thing I need is get more crazy. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.

By the way, if you can help it, please don’t go crazy. I had a neurotic break but that was bad enough. I didn’t get any special credit. I may as well have gone psychotic for how people treated me.

Everyone’s going to treat you like shit. You will get fired from job after job simply for being nuts. You will get dumped by woman after woman.

You will get accused of crimes and especially being a criminal – particularly a sex offender. For some insane reason, if you look a bit out there and are male, the automatic assumption is that you are a rapist, child molester, or serial killer. I can’t tell you how many times I got accused of that.

The truth is that most men who have some obvious mental disorder going on are not sex offenders in any way. Most are not killers. In fact, many of those men are the most harmless men you will ever meet.

That’s because there’s dangerous crazy and harmless crazy. There’s also dangerous weird and harmless weird. Normies are shitheads, so they can’t tell the difference, although when people get over 40, it seems like a lot of them can sort it out, and most people over that age act like I’m harmless no matter how crazy they think I am.

Yes, a lot of Normies actually start to get sane after age 40. That’s because they figure out what life is really all about, and they realize that a lot of the things Normie society says is true are actually completely false, and they’ve rejected this Normie indoctrination reject it in favor of sanity. But under 40, forget it. They’re all the same.

The truth is that mental illness is variable. People with anxiety disorders, frequently referred to as psychos and accused of being sex criminals, are probably the most harmless people you will ever meet. Their crime rate is dramatically lower from that of a Normie idiot. That is due to the nature of the sort of person who gets an anxiety disorder and the effects of the anxiety disorder itself, which are hugely inhibiting.

Most depressives are harmless, especially women. They’re mostly dangerous to themselves. Some depressive men are dangerous but once again, mostly to themselves. The problem is anger. Once a depressive starts to mix a lot of anger or agitation into the depression, they can get dangerous, mostly to themselves but once again not always.

That’s because depression, like introversion and anxiety, is what I call a “freezing agent.” Introversion and anxiety seem to freeze me in place. They cause me to sink back into my chair. I don’t want to leave my chair, much less leave the house. Fear actually seems to propel me backwards from the world. It literally drives me backwards into my chair. In introversion, anxiety, and fear, all of  your body energy is going backwards, right into the self. You’re shooting little if any energy outwards.

This is because fear is a freezing agent, especially the anxiety type of fear.

The paranoid fear is different, but most Normies can’t figure that out because Normies are idiots. A Normie sees an anxious person, and the first thing they say is that that person is paranoid. But they’re not.

Paranoid fear and anxious fear are different, though at times it can be a bit difficult to entangle them. The paranoid fears that other people are actively trying to harm him.

The anxious person doesn’t think that. Sometimes they think that people don’t like them. But they think that that is because they themselves are weird or unlikable, and people are just being normal for rejecting them. They may see or even imagine rejection everywhere. They definitely overreact to it.

Now most Normies are too dumb to figure this out, but when all or most of your energy is going backwards into yourself, you are not putting out much if any energy into the world. This is why introverts and anxious types seem difficult to get to know or talk to.

In order to engage with other people and be social, you need to put out energy into the environment. This is like a welcoming signal that says, “Come talk to me.” Otherwise it is like talking to someone who seems cold, closed-off, or distracted. Most of these people are not unfriendly at all.

In fact, they are often desperately lonely as many introverts are. But the introversion/anxiety makes it seem like one is talking to a wall, so the person “appears” cold and unfriendly, when actually they are so lonely that they are desperately trying to be friendly.

Now the obvious thing that no Normie can figure out is this: When all of your energy is going inwards with introversion, anxiety, or deep depression, you are completely harmless. Now why is this? It is due to the obvious: in order to be dangerous, you have to be putting energy out into the world.

The anxious person is literally too paralyzed to move, much less attack someone, god forbid an innocent person. Now if you are unreasonable and aggressive, sometimes you can rile them up, and they can get a bit aggressive or violent, but even then, they won’t do much damage due to the fact that they are not pushing out enough energy to hurt someone. And you have to be an extreme asshole to set someone like that off.

Anxious people blame themselves for other people disliking  them. It’s all their own fault.  The people who dislike them are good, normal, healthy people. They’re just rejecting the anxious person because he’s weird or whatever.

On the contrary, paranoids think they are innocent.

In fact, a lot of the time it goes along with grandiosity. After all, if all these people hate you, you must be pretty damned important, right? The paranoid realizes the silliness of the notion that vast numbers of people would not bother to hate someone who is utterly important. Why would they waste their time? In that sense, the paranoid is quite sane.

But no, everyone’s just picking on the paranoid. Why? Who knows? The paranoid is a dindu. He dindu nuffin. He was just walking along, minding his own business, when all of these evil people started hating him and plotting to harm him for no reason at all.

So the paranoid has the same mindset that the antiracist, Jew, or Black does. They’re all completely innocent and all of these bad people are just picking on them and trying to harm them for absolutely no reason at all.

In this sense, antiracism is actually a form of paranoia. And indeed, Jews are well known for being paranoids. Not clinical paranoids, but paranoids nonetheless.

Also, paranoids are dangerous. They are dangerous because they think they are innocent. If you were totally innocent and all these maniacs started picking on you and plotting against you for no reason at all, wouldn’t you get mad? Wouldn’t you feel like going and getting your revenge against these evil maniacs? Well, of course you would.

Also though the paranoid is terrified, and that is inner-directed fear, he is reacting to this terror with innocent, indignant outrage and fury. He wants to go punish these bastards who done him wrong. Since he is putting a lot of energy out, and it’s typically some serious rage, the paranoid indeed can be dangerous.

In contrast, the anxious person’s energy is all going inwards. They blame themselves for people not liking them. Whereas the paranoid is innocent and his persecutors are guilty, with the anxious type, it’s the other way around.

The anxious person is the guilty one, and the people who don’t like him are completely innocent. Being innocent, the haters are completely justified in feeling this way. Any anger is all being directed inwards as self-hate.  And while inner-directed anger can be dangerous to the self (suicide) it’s not dangerous to others at all. In part this is due to the  nature of energy.

Think about it. If you are pushing almost all of your energy inwards, how much energy is left over to push outwards? Just about 0%. You literally do not have any energy left over to push outwards. And pushing bad energy inwards and outwards at the same time is rather difficult. Think about it. When you are down on yourself, are you mad at others? Not usually. When you are mad at others, are you down on yourself? Not generally. Rage in and rage out are somewhat mutually exclusive.

      • You’re either innocent or guilty. Pick one.
      • Your haters are either innocent or guilty. Pick one.
      • Your energy is either going in or out. Pick one.
      • If you’re innocent, your haters are guilty, and your energy is going out as hate or rage at others.
      • If you’re guilty, your haters are innocent, and your energy is going inwards as self-hate or rage at the self.

Why Do I Talk So Much about Black People, Jews, Indians, Etc. on Here?

A lot of people want to know this. The fact is that I am absolutely fascinated by racial issues! And I’m also a race realist for better or for worse. At the very least I would like to point out that at the moment there are some serious behavioral differences among races, ethnic groups, and religious people. I’m not saying what caused it. I’m just saying it’s there.

But you can’t say that nowadays because everyone’s a dindu. Everyone except for straight White men that is. We’re pure evil.

So my task as a race realist is to try to look at race realism (and ethnic, religious and for that matter gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity realism) in a liberal, progressive, or even Leftist light. Now a lot of people would say that’s impossible and that by being a race realist, I am automatically a rightwinger, conservative, reactionary, Rightist, or fascist.

I am absolutely fascinated by Jews! In a way, I am obsessed with them but not in the way that Judeophiles and anti-Semites are. I’m not in either category.

And keep in mind that I was going to convert to Judaism recently! Obviously I’m a huge antisemite if I was going to convert! I had a Jewish girlfriend and I told her I wanted to convert and she was going to help me. I have no idea why I wanted to convert. Probably just to be perverse. Or to stick it to all the idiots screaming antisemite at me.

My Mom was flustered:

Mom: Why do you want to convert to Judaism? Nobody wants to convert to Judaism. If you go to a rabbi and tell him you want to convert, he will look at you like you are nuts and ask, “Why on Earth do you want to be a Jew?” It’s like no sane person would actually want to be a Jew.

Me: I don’t know, Mom. I just want to be a Jew. Xxxxx is Jewish and I want to convert for her. She’s going to help me convert.

Mom: Well, another thing. You’re going to get a lot of prejudice. A lot of people are going to hate you. There will be discrimination. You want to be discriminated against? Why?

Me: I don’t care about discrimination, Mom. A lot people act like they hate me anyway. So not much will change.

(Shakes her head like I’m out of my mind.)

I am also absolutely fascinated by antisemitism. I had no negative feelings towards Jews at all until I was 44, and I started to find out what they were really like. But I had been around them most of my life. Now that I look back, they were pretty typically Jewish, but for some reason that never bothered me at the time.

I was always mystified. “Why on Earth to people hate the Jews?” I simply couldn’t figure it out. We were brought up in this silly Judeophilic family. Both of my parents had grown up with Jews and had many Jewish friends. Every time the subject of Jews came up, my parents acted like they were the greatest thing since Kleenex. They got these huge smiles on their faces, and it was like the Jews were some sort of super-race. Which of course is exactly what Jews think.

I still find antisemitism absolutely fascinating. I still wonder why on Earth people hate Jews. Why did they hate them in the past? Why did they hate them in Europe during World War 2? What did Jews act like back then?

Why were they hated and persecuted in Europe in the Middle Ages, Renaissance and Early Middle Ages? Why on Earth did they get thrown out of 109 countries? How did Jews behave back then? What could they possibly have done to get tossed out of nation after nation? I’m baffled.

The antisemites will say it’s because Jews are pure evil. Well, I’m not buying that, sorry.

Everyone else will say that Jews were dindus who dindu nuffin, and everyone just picked on them for no reason at all and scapegoated them when bad times hit. For some reason this doesn’t resonate much with me, though this is the only view you are allowed to have, as it’s the only (((approved view))).

If you meet a guy who tells you he’s been to 109 bars in your city, and he gets thrown out of every bar for absolutely no reason at all, what do you think? Is he really getting thrown out for no reason at all? Yeah right.

If you meet a guy who tells you he’s lived in 109 cities and towns all over the world, and everywhere he goes, everyone hates him, and they get together and try to throw him out of town for absolutely no reason at all, what do you think? Yeah right. I’m sure you got thrown out for no reason, dude!

I also find Blacks fascinating. Unfortunately, I am also absolutely fascinated by anti-Black racism. Why do people hate Blacks? What’s the reason?  Its’ fascinating! Why, why, why, why? Racists will say it’s because Blacks are pure evil, but I’m not buying it.

Blacks and antiracists will say it’s because people hate them because they’re different and how they look. I’m not buying that either. Forget it. No one is innocent. Remember when Ronald Biggs said that? He was right.

They will say, like the Jews, that racism against Blacks is so unfathomable that it is basically a mental illness. You’d have to be crazy to hate Black people. The unspoken assumption here is that Black people are dindus who dindu nuffin because if they did do bad things, racism against them wouldn’t be completely insane. See?

Well, that definitely lets Black people off the hook, but I’m not buying it. I’ve been observing racism and racists for much of my life, and I assure you they’re not nuts. Racism is not a mental disorder in any of the DSM’s, though there were efforts by antiracist clinicians to get it into DSM-5. The American Psychiatric Association found this so ridiculous that I don’t believe they even bothered to discuss it.

And they talked about some pretty weird stuff like Hebephilia, a preference for pubescent-aged minors. The APA agreed that Hebephilia was absolutely not a mental disorder. Not only that but they said it wasn’t even abnormal. It was perfectly normal to get aroused by minors of that age. Now if they won’t list Hebephilia for Chrissake, how the Hell are they going to list racism? They’re not, because racists aren’t nuts.

Sure, some crazy people are racists, but it’s not the racism that’s making them nuts. More like the other way around.

Now you might think I am letting racists off the hook, right? Nope, not at all. To me, racism is not a mental illness. It’s not a question of sane vs. crazy. Neither is psychopathy. I don’t buy that psychopaths are nuts either. Forget it.

Instead racism and psychopathy are questions of good versus evil.

Psychopaths aren’t nuts, they’re just bad, or evil if you will. And racists aren’t nuts either. I see racism as a moral question. I believe that true, pure, hardcore racism is bad. It’s like a sin. Racists are acting bad. It’s like a form of evil. It’s not nuts to hate a whole race of humans, but to me it does seem wrong. As in morally wrong.

If you do that, you’re bad. You’re a bad person, at least in a sense. Now a lot of us are bad people to one degree or another. I’m not here to moralfag on people. But it’s better to be more good than bad. And if you are racist, you are being bad in that sense. If you want to be good instead, quit hating whole races.

Now I have no idea why, but Black  people will not accept that racism is a form of evil or bad behavior. Nope, it has to be a form of insanity. This is possibly because if you say racism is bad or evil, it implies that the racist has some valid reason to feel this way, but it’s more that he needs to control himself and act good instead of bad.

The race question in the US, like the Jewish Question, is completely insane. You’re either a hardcore racist where you hate Blacks and think they are evil, in which case you are a White Supremacist, White Nationalist, or just a racist. That seems like a crazy position, and I don’t like to go to boards like that. I don’t like to see all that hate against Blacks. It’s upsetting.

Ok, so overt extreme racism bothers you. Good for you. That means you have to take the other default position, which is that Blacks are dindus, everybody’s always picking on them, and all of the many problems of the Black community are 100% due to White racism and not even 1% the fault of Blacks. Wouldn’t it be nice if it were true? But it’s not. It’s just not.

Well, those are your two positions.

Pick your poison. I’d like to choose a position halfway in between, sort of the Bill Cosby/Pat Moynihan position. Cosby argues that Black culture is the part of almost all Black problems. Those Blacks who are creating these problems are simply part of a bad culture. This culture causes them to act bad and do bad things.

I’ll go along with that. But if I do, I get tossed out of the second group (antis) and into the first group, the White Supremacists. Who I frankly despise.

So that’s what I am trying to do here. Work out a position on Jews, Blacks, and everyone and everything else that is opposed to the extremism of both the Left and the Right. Call it the Realism position.

Sure, Women Go With Conquerors but Usually Not with Genocidal Conquerors

Polar Bear: Women like the “winners,” from slave owners to invading NS Germans. We can’t un-close those legs. My point is being on top matters to women. This is a universal truth. When White women are invaded or conquered, it’s the same. To the victor go the spoils.

That may be so, PB, but the latest thinking is that for a variety of reasons, there was not a whole lot of slavemaster-slave sex going on, and what was going on was mostly with the house slaves. Even radical antiracist Black ultra-SJW’s are saying this, and if they’re saying it, it’s probably true because they’d be the last people on Earth to say that.

In truth, after the First Liberation (1865), 80% of Blacks were pure Black. No White genes at all. And the latest thinking is that a lot of the White genes that they did have went in during the last 20-30 years prior to the Civil War. You see, around 1830-1840, the plantation owners basically ran out of slaves. The slave trade itself was illegal and had ended ~1810, so they couldn’t import new ones.

What’s a slave owner to do? Simple, hire a bunch of those idle poor White men over there to work in the fields alongside the Blacks. And from 1835-1861, there were many Whites, almost all men, working in the fields alongside Blacks of both sexes.

A lot of these men were not married, and being dirt poor, they were not particularly racist. They got along quite well with the Black slaves. There was probably this attitude of, “Hey, we’re all fucked. We White men are fucked, and these Blacks slaves are fucked. None of us has a thing. Screw it.” There was a considerable amount of interracial sex between White men and Black women during this period.

If you consider that 80% of Blacks had no White in them in 1865, and almost 100% of true US Blacks now have an average of ~25% White in them, it’s quite obvious that there was a Hell of a lot of interracial sex going on from 1865  to the  present day.

In fact, Blacks were already heavily Whitened by the Second Liberation in 1964. And this was a period in which Blacks in the South lived under Jim Crow, and even Blacks  and West in the north lived under a lot of racial restrictions such as housing covenants, more or less legal if not mandatory discrimination in all sorts of ways, and sundown towns.

We had many sundown towns here in California. There are reportedly still a few sundown towns in the South. They are all-White towns of ~3,000 people in rural Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, etc. Apparently not a whole lot of Blacks are even keen on moving into those towns, so the sundown feature is not challenged.

Considering the extreme oppression that Blacks lived under in the South and to some extent elsewhere, it is quite amazing how much interracial sex went on in the century after the Civil War. And keep in mind that much of this sex was illegal, as miscegenation was against the law in many states.

Getting back to the original question, honestly, those slaves probably saw the slavemaster as more of an oppressor than a winner.

How many Jewish women got with Nazis? How many Palestinian women fuck Jewish men and vice versa? How many Kurdish women screw Turkish men? How many Hutu women got with Tutsi men? How many Carib women got with Columbus’ men? How many German women got with Russian men after 1945? How many Russian women got with German men after 1942?

People don’t dig genocide. They’re not into getting genocided. Sure, women get with conquerors in the modern era if the conquerors are relatively nice, especially if the war ends and the hostilities are all over. Most conquered women don’t get with genocidal killers of the other race.

Yes, a lot of German and Japanese women got with American men after the war, but we were not genocidal against Germans and Japanese. Especially after the war was over, there was not a whole lot of killing going on. There was some in Germany all right, in the camps where we put German POW’s, but those were soldiers, not everyday civilians.

Yes, some Frenchwomen got with Nazis, but the Nazis were not genocidal towards the French.

Indian women got with White men, but we were actually not genocidal towards their people, despite what you read. Most of the Indians died of disease, like at least 95% of them. The number of Indians killed by Whites was something like 7,000 in the whole history of the Indian wars.

Many Indian women in Latin America got with Spanish and Portuguese men, but the Spaniards were typically not genocidal. There was prejudice and discrimination but there was none at first when a lot of the genes went in.

Are Black Women Angry?

Polar Bear: With Black women, I don’t believe there’s method to the mayhem. They are frustrated and will lash out at anyone. The guy with an olive branch might get it the worst if she’s used to hard-knocking pimps.

Some are angry. My experience is simply that a Hell of a lot of Black women are somewhat psychopathic. Most are not actual psychopaths. Instead they are simply normal non-psychopathic people who nevertheless have a rather elevated psychopathy level. Keep in mind that the PCL goes from 0-19 before you get to psychopath level.

What were they like? Low on morals and empathy. Takers, not givers. Treat others like objects. A lot of them seemed to have some seething, deep-rooted anger in them. Or perhaps I was just seeing some psychopathy. Of course these were all more or less ghetto types, but it’s not that easy to distinguish between a ghetto Black and the middle class Blacks we have on this site, sadly.

The line between a middle class Black and a ghetto Black is fuzzy indeed, and a lot of the ghetto ones appear quite middle class at first. A lot of Blacks are “floaters.” They’re hard to put in one category, and there seem to be a lot of Blacks who sort of move back and forth between ghetto and middle class behaviors. It’s not like these are fixed qualities.

I’ve had a ton of dealings with middle class Blacks who more or less just acted like White people, and I had no problems with them whatsoever. Especially with the men. The women can be more difficult but they don’t degenerate into ghetto behavior. Something stops them, like they think that’s the lowest of the low.

Some middle class Black women are angry. The anger looks more like resentment more than anything else. Others are quite calm. They vary a lot. I got to know quite a few middle class Black women teachers when I taught school, and some of them seemed pretty pissed off.

The deeper you go into the heart of the ghetto, the more pissed off and resentful the female teachers look. In the deep ghetto, you get the feeling that a lot of middle class Black women hate Whites.

The middle class Black men, even in the heart of the ghetto, not so much. I’ve always gotten along pretty well with Black men for some reason.

I’m sort of a nigger myself (wigger) ha ha, so maybe we sort of hit it off on that basis. I’m not characterizing middle class Black men that way, trust me. I’m using that word more in the playful bad boy sense. I’m just saying that most Black men seem to like White bad boys because even middle class Black men often have a bit of bad boy in them. And apparently I come across as a bad boy.

Middle class Black men are pretty easy-going and relaxed people. They live to have fun. Plus they are not moralfags at all, more like the opposite. I don’t really deal with ghetto Black men. I don’t really like them and frankly I just avoid them. My feeling is that if you hang around with them even for a day or so, you’re probably going to lose something, particularly a bit of money at least. That’s just how it goes with such people.

One middle class Black teacher I knew always looked angry. She was really beautiful too. Dark-skinned but gorgeous and yet she always looked pissed. I felt sorry for her and I wondered why she felt so angry.

But one time I went into her room and approached her for the first time and she stopped her anger, looked very serious and became very submissive, ducked her head down, and addressed me as”Sir” in a very soft, submissive voice. I was too dumb back then to figure out that when a woman goes submissive in front you, she either wants to fuck or she’s horny. Because that’s how women act when they are horny. They simply go submissive.

I should have asked her out, but I was too chicken. Her third grade class was all Black, and they acted really bad. She was always screaming at them. Maybe that was why she was so angry, no idea.

But her submissive behavior is quite typical, believe it or not, especially the less ghetto they are. I’ve had sex with maybe 5-10 Black women, and they pretty much go totally submissive when you have sex with them, like any woman. They’re not angry or bossy in bed at all except maybe for some of the ultra-ghetto ones, and yes, I’ve been with them too ha ha.