Sleazy Debating Tactic: Force Your Opponent to Wear Himself Out Disproving Your Lies or Proving His Facts

I used to be on Jewish and Israeli newsgroups that were full of Super Jews. Well, Super Jews and hardcore antisemites, who in my opinion fully deserve each other, as they have a lot in common. I can’t figure out which group was worse! I think they were both equally bad!

The Super Jews lied constantly, all day and all night, especially about Israel, and challenged every fact we threw out there, even those they knew were correct. They forced us to go track down everything we said, which took up all of our time. This was dirty because they knew full well that we were right but they were making us track down stuff just to wear us out.

They themselves put out lies all day long of course as is their wont. The lies were often about relatively obscure things that most people don’t know about, so these supposed facts were a bit shocking for us, as they added good weight to Israel’s arguments. But when we tried to track down the Jews’ “facts,” in almost every single case, they were lying.

But they were forcing us to spend all our time proving that they were lying and once again they were tiring us out. I think “tire them out so they quit” was just one of the many very dirty tactics they used on those groups, and they used every dirty trick in the book, trust me.

Alt Left: In Russian Lore, Ukraine Has Always Been the Land of Thieves, Bandits, and Savagery

Polar Bear: East of Dniper or Galicia was bandit land in Russian lore? I think you mean West of Dniper. This is fascinating, so I’d like to be 10

He didn’t say, but I assumed he was talking about the area west of the Dniper. It was in a novel written around 1917 by Bulgakov, and the East was only stuck onto Ukraine by Lenin in 1917, so no way is he talking about the East because that was never Ukraine. It was always just Russia. Those are Bulgakov’s words from his novel.

Also, the soil in the West is low in iodine and iodine deficiency affects the brain, lowering IQ. A lot of the anti-Bandera people say the people to the West of Kiev are retards, and that is due to the low iodine in their food.

Between the Dniper and Kiev is Central Ukraine. It’s in between the Nazi West and the Russian East. There’s a difference between west of the Dniper, which it all is, and west of Kiev, which only part of is. But Central Ukraine is full of thieving oligarchs too. That’s where (((Kolomoisky))) comes from. Central Ukraine is Ukrainian and quite anti-Russian but not as fanatically anti-Russian as the West.

Languages Complexify with Isolation and Primitiveness and Simplify with Increasing Civilization

In reference to his (unproven) theory that languages closer to the homeland of the language family are more complex and become less complex the further away they are from the Uhrmeit:

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: It really is if it’s true. I doubt we can prove it to the degree of certainty we’ve proved the Indo-European family but it’s fun to dream.

I’m sure that if I brought that up in one of the Linguistics Academia sessions I get invited to I would be laughed and shouted down. I doubt if they believe it.

Languages Simplify With Increasing Civilization

Languages do tend to simplify as the people who use them become more civilized and as civilization advances. And by the same token, the most complex languages of all are often found in extremely isolated places like the Papuan Highlands, Amazonia, the Caucasus.

In Papuua and the Caucasus, people have been speaking their tongue in their isolated valley forever. It’s surrounded by extremely high mountains. Over the mountains are other people speaking other, often very different, tongues, but no can remember the last time anyone climbed over one of those ridges because nobody has to – they have everything they need right there in that mountain valley.

Due to the islandization effect, the lack of contact with other languages causes languages to spin out of control and go off on their own genetically, whereas languages in contact with other tongues have their evolution modified by constant interaction with other languages which keep them in check.

One of my professors told me that less civilized or even primitive people speaking very complex languages like to spend a good part of their time playing language games with their fiendishly complex tongues. I’ve told this to other linguists and they laughed in my face, as is their wont with any remarkable linguistic popular theory. But they have to prove it’s not true. So go do it. They don’t even try.

After all, even primitive humans are very smart. Go out to the Amazon and meet some of those Indians sometime. You’ll be amazed at how smart they are.

The Lost Human Psi Skills

The Bushmen of Africa are even reported to have psi skills. Everyone who spends any amount of time with them comes back saying, “I swear to God those people have ESP. I’m positive they can read your mind!”

These are the most primitive humans out there and perhaps they have retained psi skills now lost in modern humans. After all, it’s well known that lower animals like dogs, cats, and even lions have obvious psi skills. We retain some like “the feeling of being stared at.” Many experiments have shown that when someone is staring at people behind their backs, the people being stared at act uncomfortable, fidget, and start moving around.

Time Is Money So Languages Simplify with Increasing Civilization

Why? Because time is money. Because the more people around, the less time you have to get your point across. Saying what you need to say in the shortest way possible is best for business and moneymaking. Civilized people don’t have much free time.

Primitive Humans Spend Most of Their Time Sitting on Their Asses and Screwing off

Primitive peoples spend only 3-4 hours a day taking care of whatever work they need to do to sustain life. The rest of the time is spent in either idleless or play activities. Therefore, for most of human evolution, we’ve mostly been sitting on our asses, playing games, and screwing around. So this is apparently what God intended for us. At least this is what I would like to believe as I am retired, no longer go to work every day or even do much to make money, and sleep, rest of screw off the rest of the time.

It feels so much better knowing that God willed it and the rest of these materialistic rat race cage treadmillers are sinning against God Himself.

 

Alt Left: Modern Humans Can’t Figure Out the Difference between Wants and Needs

Modern Humans Can’t Figure Out the Difference between Wants and Needs

What are you clowns going to do with all your shiny toys when you are dead, suckers? See? Materialistic accumulation is based on the fantasy that we live forever. Once it kicks in that your time is short, it starts to seem silly to work your ass off for a bunch of stuff you don’t even need. Americans are funny. “I need a second home…I need a four wheel drive…I need a bigger flat screen TV.” Or if your female, “I need a new outfit…I need some new makeup…I need a boyfriend who makes more money.”

Get out of here! You idiots don’t really need any one of these things. Another problem with materialistic accumulation aside from the grass is greener state or perennial envy, frustration and unhappiness that results when you are never quite keeping up with the always-increasing Joneses passing you in the fast lane is that it confuses wants with needs. You all fools want every one of those things above.

You don’t need any of them. What’s going to happen if you don’t get that bigger TV? Will you get sick? Will you starve? Will you die of thirst? Will you not be able to sleep? Will you lack for human company? Will you not be able to earn a living? Will you lack a roof over your head? Will you not be able to clothe yourself? Will you not be able to bathe? Will you truly lack peace of mind? And best of all, you gonna die?

None of these things are going to happen.

Your ego will sicken with humiliation, starve itself of affection, become thirsty with greed, pace the floors of its mind at night, isolate itself with shame and poverty, fail to provide for itself, wander adrift with a sense of homelessness, disrobe itself in poverty of pride and treasure, sully itself with the stain of immiseration, fidget and fuss to no end with envy, and finally, fake a suicide of the soul to try to force you to buy that damned needless TV!

The worst that will happen is your silly little ego (and it is silly and is small – very small – trust me) will suffer a petit mort, and not the fun kind, the kind called a narcissistic injury named after the child-like adult who suffers from it.

How many moderns can truly figure out the difference between wants and needs? How many people buy it by their own hand because they can’t afford that second home, that better car, that bigger flat screen. Who knows? Surely each one of is in vain, absurdly so.

Alt Left: Bros before Hos!

This was previously posted as a page, whereas it is just a post, so I am reposting it.

Polar Bear: I’ve been called creepy by a women that really liked me or want to sleep with me. Creepy or creeper is thrown around freely by young women nowadays. In day to day casual encounters I believe it’s better to look good than be rich.

Homely rich men seem to swear by prostitutes, college girls that would see them as creepy in the streets. Blue collar, older, and homely you’ll be labeled a creep more for sure. I’ve heard women say, “He looks like a pedophile” about the same type. I’m getting by on faded but still above average looks. Western women need to be less superficial.

LOL what about poor, older, and good-looking? Women say I look better than 9

I’d say any man viewed as “unattractive” for whatever reason – money, age, job title, looks, or weird, awkward or geeky/nerdy behavior is automatically labeled creepy.

All creepy means in bullshit woman-speak (and most things women say that we men don’t say are definitely bullshit) is “an unattractive man who shows sexual interest in me.” I’d venture I’m not creepy at all, but the minute they think I’m paying attention to them, looking at them, etc., I’d imagine that could well be what they think of me.

After age 30, women somehow miraculously grow a brain where none existed before. Don’t ask me how they do it! Perhaps it’s divine intervention. Who knows? But they get a lot more sensible about this stuff. Women over 30 are unlikely to call you creepy.

Men shouldn’t call other men creepy at all unless the guy is seriously out of line. Men! Do not call other men creepy unless they seriously deserve it! When you do that, you sound like a pathetic Normie faggot! Don’t do it!

When you do that, you go over to the other side. This is basically a War. The War of the Sexes*. In the War of the Sexes, as a man, you choose the side of the men. Men who don’t are faggots, sissies, girls, wimps, girlymen, cucks, and feminists. They’ve basically defected to the enemy, and they need to be treated as the traitors they are.

I’ve noticed that gay men or faggoty or wimpy guys of unknown sexual orientation are truly horrendous as far as this goes. I have had them literally try to stop me from talking to young women. One time a young woman smiled and wanted to serve me and this faggy idiot (sexual orientation unknown except he’s a huge pussy) got in front of her and totally cockblocked me. Sometimes I have a word or two with a young woman and he acts completely outraged. If he doesn’t stop, I swear this cuck is going to get hit.

I don’t mind gay men, but when they start cockblocking us in front of women, they can just fuck off or get hit. Generally the more wimpy and pussy the man is, the more feminist he is, the more he talks about sexual harassment, rape culture, toxic masculinity, and other bullshit, and the more he cockblocks you in front of women and white-knights (to save them from the predators!) and acts as Captain Save-a-Ho for women.

Any ideas on why gay men white knight for women, cockblock us men, and are totally feminist cucks? Gay men should be for the men. One thing I really appreciate about gay men is that they really really love us men. They’re worth keeping around for that reason alone.

Men, do not do this! If you’re a pussy or not a very masculine guy and you feel comfortable that way, please don’t go over to the enemy! Fuck that. The only brothers you have in this world are the men. We’re the only people who will ever have your back. Masculine or feminine, pussy or macho, gay or straight, none of it matters as long as you with the boys, and there’s one rule and one rule alone for all:

Bros before hos!

*Men and women want different things in life and hence they are always at odds in a sense. So in a sense they are our enemies and we are their enemies. This is true even if you completely love the opposite sex. Some women go over the side of us men, and generally, those are the best women of all. I don’t blame women for being on the side in opposition to us men. They’re probably just wired up that way naturally and it might be hard to get out of that programming.

I don’t think they’re going out of their way to be evil bitches and scream harassment, assault and rape anytime a man so much as looks at them. That behavior is probably biological, but Clown World and in particular, America or Cuckistan has gone way overboard with female thinking in this regard.

Generally a world where women get everything they want is bad for us men. Probably a world where we men get everything we want is bad for women. Maybe that’s what a patriarchy is. Both sexes have opposing needs and wants and giving either sex carte blanche to impose their “Imperative” won’t work because each sex will end up fucking over the opposite sex when their agenda is maximally fulfilled.

The needs of men and women need to be balanced in any decent society. How to do just that is frankly a never-ending battle, The Battle of the Sexes as it were. The Battle of the Sexes is probably a normal feature of most societies like Class War is normal under capitalism.

Alt Left: A 100 IQ Doesn’t Mean Much of Anything, Really

Although American Whites (100) may collectively seem smarter than the Blacks(85) and Hispanics(90), they too are fucking stupid. An average IQ of 100 is nothing special. Even an IQ of 115 is nothing special when compared to people with IQ’s 125+. A whopping 8

Although those are the official numbers, I refuse to believe American Whites have an average IQ of 100. Europe’s White trash left for the new world. Sure there were some aristocrats and geniuses that may have made their way over here, but most of those people weren’t exactly high quality Whites. I estimate the average IQ of White Americans to be about 95. Europeans just seem more cultured and intelligent in comparison.

This disparity becomes readily apparent when you are in a flyover White trash red state. Everything is so rundown and the people are noticeably dirtier and uglier looking. You may not agree that White Americans as a collective have an average IQ of 95, but you have to admit that Middle America is blatantly dumber than Coastal America (east and west). Everybody, or at least the smart and talented people leave for the major cities, of which a disproportionate amount of are located on the East and West Coast.

There is a problem with your analysis.  First of all, a 100 IQ score means just about zip! Let us suppose that the average IQ scores doubled in the next 100 years. IQ’s rose on average of 100 points in the US. What would the average IQ in the US be? 100! So in that case, a 100 IQ score would be twice as high as it is today and we could no longer say that 100 IQ is not that smart. You follow? 100 is just sort of a placemarker or a tag. It all depends on how you are norming your population.

Also, you would think that an  IQ like mine (147) would be 4

Average IQ is 100 is because they’ve always normed these tests on US populations. Lately they switched to US Whites = 100 and that makes the average US IQ = 98. Our average IQ used to be 100.

So we’ve dropped 2 IQ points with all of this unrestricted low-quality immigration. Nothing wrong with immigration per se, but the last thing this country needs is more uneducated low skilled peasants and workers from the 3rd World. They’re a drag on the economy and they absolutely do increase the crime rate, run down cities, create gangs, etc. I speak about unrestricted Hispanic immigration, which is just stupid. With 10 fewer IQ points, of course they are going to drag places down, lower test scores, increase crime and probably gangs, etc.

That’s just a given. Now if you wanted to important Hispanics with average IQ = 98, I’d be right on board. In fact all of our legal immigration should be average IQ = 98 or maybe better yet, minimum 98 IQ to even get in in the first place. Letting in millions of dumber people to crash your country’s IQ score has to be one the stupidest things a country could do.

Alt Left: Two Populations with IQ’s of 87 Are the Same, Right?

Two groups with IQ’s of 85 will probably behave about the same, right? Nope!

That is because we are leaving out something very important, and  that is race. And race is absolutely real in a biological sense and you can make whatever you want of that. An 85 IQ US White, Persian in Iran, Chinese in China and US Black are going to act pretty different, though the American White and the Persian might act fairly similar. The races act different! I’m sorry but it’s just true. Open your eyes and ears. It’s only obvious.

A good IQ researcher over at Unz has written a number of articles where he claims that the IQ of your average human is  ~81. That’s terrible. It’s thought that you need a 90 IQ to create a decent modern society. That’s probably not completely true, but there’s something to it.

It also depends on the population. An Arab, North African or Central Asian IQ of 85 is simply not the same thing as a US Black IQ of 85. Go look around in Arabia, North Africa or Iran and get back to me. Even Pakistan is fairly civilized.

If those countries were full of US Blacks, the cities would look like Detroit, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Chicago, Oakland, etc. That’s why I get so upset with White nationalists snarly at Blacks that they only have 85 IQ’s. First of all, it’s probably 87 now. Second of all, that IQ score is no fault of their own. It is some sort of a product of genes and environment. Let’s put it this way. I don’t think the US Black 87 IQ is their fault at all! That’s simply the way they end up getting wired up.

If Tehran and Detroit have the same average IQ, there is something more going on with US Blacks.

I believe that is psychopathy. Your average US Black has a psychopathy score twice as high as the average White on the PCL. Say the average White score is 4 out of 0-40. Everything below 20 is considered in normal range, but you can be quite psychopathic and still be in the normal range. What can I say? We are apex predators, meat eaters and killers of our own kind from time immemorial. He aren’t like cows. We are more like bears or mountain lions.

Anyway if your average US Black has a PCL score of 8 to the average US White score of 4, that is going to make a tremendous amount of difference. That’s because there is a universe of difference between a PCL score of 1 and one of 19! They’re both completely normal non-psychopaths, but I guarantee you that folks at 19 on a PCL are going to act way worse than people with a PCL of one.

Blacks also seem to have elevated testosterone levels, and that is absolutely genetic. But they are only higher until age 32, after which they fall and are actually lower than Whites! I suspect that elevated testosterone plays a role in the extremely high crime rates of US Blacks.

Let’s not get too hung up on IQ.

Repost: I Admit I’m a Misanthrope and It’s One of my Worst Flaws

Good old post getting comments. I reiterated in a post today that I don’t hate good people who simply aren’t real sharp. That’s no fault of their own. We are all God’s children and we are at his mercy when it comes to handling out whatever gifts or handicaps He so cavalierly distributes among us. I know some pretty dumb people on Facebook, and I talk to them sometimes. They are a bit hard to talk to, but they are nice enough anyway.

But I really, really hate lack of wisdom, which is it seems like 9

But as far as my haters go and all these people trying to figure me out, the take-home point is that I’m pretty much of a misanthrope and I think you’re all a bunch of idiots! Definitely my haters. They’re pure morons, every one of them. I almost hate them more for being stupid than for being haters. And if you study my life and my writing, you will see this theme – “You are all idiots!” repeated over and over, so it’s sort of the theme of my life.

Once you figure out that Lindsay thinks people are basically stupid goddamned fools, you will finally be onto me. “Lindsay thinks we are all idiots.” Bingo! There ya go. You got me. Another thing about my haters is they peg me wrong, but your haters will always do that if you are halfway decent because if they were objective about you, they wouldn’t have an argument to hate you. In order to hate you, they must distort you. Actually that’s a good thing to remind yourself if you are dealing with haters. The only reason they hate you is because they distort you. The only way they can hate you is to distort who you really are.

One of my haters on Reddit said a while back,

“Lindsay styles himself as this radical individualist type. On the other hand, maybe he’s just a weirdo. I think he’s just a weirdo.”

Well, fine, but at least one of my haters figured me out. I do see myself as a radical individualist type who deliberately takes unpopular decisions to portray bravery. I also take unpopular views because I like to show that what everyone believes is common knowledge is often a bunch of total horseshit. I like the “society is full of shit and is filling your head with lies” view. That’s sort of the purpose of this site – to write about very thing.

I’m pretty disgusted by humans. I don’t even really like them. Actually, I hate to admit it but I am a misanthrope. And I hate to say it even more, but the majority at least here in the US deserve every bit of my hatred. I hate them because they are stupid, and stupidity itself is a little bit dangerous by its very nature, so they frighten me.

They’re idiots. I hate idiots. Actually they’re worse than idiots. They’re dangerous idiots, and that’s the worst kind of idiot of all. So, yeah, I hate most Americans because they are goddamned dangerous idiots who threaten my peace of mind, well-being, reputation, and maybe even ability to earn a living.

If you study people with very high IQ’s around my range and up, you will see that they almost all feel this way. Worse, as IQ rises, misanthropy seems to rise in tandem just like clockwork. On Quora they often had people asking questions for people with certain IQ ranges. It was one of the only places you could talk like this because IQ is a very taboo subject in the US. The question would be, “People with IQ’s over 140, what you do think about bla bla bla?”

One thing I noticed is that once people got above 140, they seemed more and more misanthropic. And it was all tied up with the idea that they thought people were idiots. “I feel like I’m surrounded by retards!” was a comment I saw over and over. I suppose it just goes with the territory when you get up into that high of a range.

Above IQ 160, it’s not to find a complete misanthrope. They hate people because they think people are stupid. And to them, most people are stupid. Check out the classic article, The Outsiders about people, mostly men, who had IQ’s of over 160. Most of them were not in very good shape. They were typically unmarried and worked at low paying jobs or even lived in poverty,  and tended to dwell alone in apartments. Lack of girlfriends or wives and even out and out celibacy was very common. They were all thoroughly disgusted by having to live in a “world full of retards” as they see it.

When you are up here in the stratosphere, every people with average intelligence almost seem literally retarded. It’s disgusting but you feel bad about it for hating them and keep beating yourself up and trying to be nice to them and turn off the misanthropy. Which can  be done.

But when it comes to close friendships or meaningful relationships, about 30 IQ points is the limit. If someone is 30 IQ points above or below you, you will have a very hard time communicating. Some say that meaningful communication is either very difficult or even impossible. Yes, you can become friends, but it will be quite difficult. Leaders who have IQ’s 30+ IQ points above those below them are poor leaders. Their underlings don’t listen to them, and rebellions are common.

The best leaders are not geniuses. The best leaders for White people would have an IQ below 130. Above that and you will not be able to connect with your followers.

I Think People Are Idiots Because They Lack Wisdom, Not Because of Their IQ Scores

Shetland: Fascinating perspective. Heck, I clock in with a modest IQ of 115, and I often feel like I am surrounded by complete dolts. I cannot even imagine what it must be like at IQ 140+.

Do you have any strengths in say, verbal or mathematical? One of my smartest commenters had an IQ of 115. It would be very hard for me to say that I am smarter than he is. He later told me he had a verbal IQ of 135 and was weak in math, and then it all added up.

Some of my smartest commenters had IQ’s of 117, 123. One had an IQ of 108! One of my clients has an IQ of 123, and he seems like he’s smarter than I am.

My basic attitude towards the world is that it is full of morons and idiots. By that I mean they lack wisdom, but sadly, absent a significant IQ, wisdom is hard to obtain. Even the wiser people with lower IQ’s often succumb to emtionality and emotional logic. I hate to say but emotion is the enemy of wisdom. It’s great to feel things, but emotion distorts reality and causes you to take irrational positions that make no sense at all simply because you’re so upset about them.

Also emotion prevents cognitive dissonance. I walk around with cognitive dissonance 24-7 because to me that’s simply the natural state of the world of man. Things don’t really make a whole lot of sense and we often have to take some pretty weird and even contradictory positions just to accept some weird truth about the world. I simply do not wish to believe falsehoods about the world, outside of my own personal life of course. I want to believe that truth about everything. Why should I wish to believe crap and lies about anything at all? I don’t get it.

I don’t mind good people who just aren’t real smart. One of my best friends has an IQ of 92, but we can talk about most things. In part because he has spent his life filling up his brain with facts and ideas. For example, he’s very well-read. So it’s not so much the gift that God gave you, it’s also what you do with it.

One problem that good people who aren’t real smart are not real common, at least in men. Lower IQ seems to be mean declining moral values in a lot of people, especially men. I’m not sure why that is, but it’s not a very encouraging thing to believe about us humans. I also can’t handle people who can’t think beyond the next 24-48 hours, and I see that all the time when IQ’s get down around the 80’s. I’m not saying they are bad people. They just drive me nuts is all.

On the other hand, I live with someone with an IQ of 145 who is one of the stupidest people I know. In part this is because he’s mentally ill, but he also has a pure shit Cluster B personality (“Asshole Personality Disorder”) to go along with it. His behaves with blatant irrationality day in and day out in my own house and it drives me nuts. I guess ultimately it might be rather harmless, but I just can’t handle people acting irrationally all day, even in rather harmless (but annoying) ways. Mostly, it’s just totally fucking stupid!

Game/PUA: What’s up with the Female “Creep Detector?”

Interesting comment. I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. Women always say, “Trust your gut, ladies! It’s never wrong!” Oh, yes it is! It is very, very commonly wrong, as in all the time. The main way it is wrong is false positives. Women label a lot of men as “dangerous” who are simply “unattractive.”

As Manuel suggests, in the female mind, ugly or unattractive somehow translates into “dangerous and he’s going to rape me and wear my skin.” I have no idea why they think like this, but Manuel offers some reasons.

Do women get too many false negatives about dangerousness too? I have no idea, but they gleefully hook up with psychopaths all the time, and those are the most dangerous men of all. We men keep warning these women that these guys are psychopaths and to stay clear, but women just laugh and tell us to shut up and get taken in by their hypnotic charm.

I myself get taken in by the charm of psychopaths myself very easily, but when I figure out they are psychopaths, I pull myself out of it and stop paying attention to them. On the other hand, unlike most people, I can actually spot a lot of psychopaths, though it often takes me some time.

There is a guy who is a big deal in the Delphi Murders community named Anthony Greeno. He’s a classic psychopath. Not a controlled one at all, but he’s not severely uncontrolled. It took me some time but I finally figured out that he’s a psychopath. But women love him and have formed Facebook groups to ogle and worship him. We men keep trying to talk sense into these ditzy broads, but alas, it is to no avail.

I turned on a video of him recently and was taken in very quickly, within half a minute. Then I realized what was happening and pulled myself out of it. I’ve been telling people he’s a psychopath forever now, but everyone just laughs and says they like him anyway. Especially women, they get taken in by him so easily. He’s finally going to jail again (he’s constantly in and out of jail on minor charges) and a lot of the community is finally saying they’ve had it with him. LOL I could have told them that a long time ago.

One thing I have noticed is women think “awkward, nerdy, geeky, doesn’t know how to act around women” = “creepy” = dangerous. That’s hardly the case. I have seen so many harmless men labeled by women as dangerous that it’s not even funny. I agree that most of them were a bit weird. Mostly they were just anxious, nervous, or a bit nerdy or geeky. They were quite socially awkward. I studied these guys for a while and figured out they were completely harmless.

You see, there is “harmless weird” and “dangerous weird.” I guess most people can’t tell them apart but I can. I think as women get older (past 30) they can figure it out, but young women as a rule are completely hopeless as they are in thrall to the Feminine Principle. After age 30, women figure out that their crazy brains are lying to them half the time, and they quit listening to their emotional brain so much, or better yet, they test the theories of their emotional brains against their logical frontal lobes. Yes, women actually have functional frontal lobes. I know it’s hard to believe but it’s true.

Manuel Rodriguez: There was a thought that I suddenly had when I woke up a few days ago.

As you know, there are instinctual and innate characteristics in humans. People have an adversity to corpses because that protects us from the bacteria of decomposition.

Women mate for two main reasons: to obtaining good genetics and obtain resources and secure their constant provisioning.

So, what if women had an innate, albeit unconscious, awareness that older men have lower quality sperm and genetics? This would explain why the only contexts where is seen acceptable for men that reach a certain age to get younger girls and women is to have a high status and access to resources as an compensation. The bigger the difference in ages, the more he has to compensate in resources.

—————————————————

One thing that I noticed is that women considering a man “creepy or scary”, this actually means a male that has failed to show minimal social skills and normal behavior. The woman additionally tells many women about this, including complete strangers.

It’s interesting because not only said conditions lead to her to react adversely and to consider him as an aberration and a failure for mating, but she also feels compelled to warn many other women that this man is completely unsuitable as a mate.

The irony is that the very worst and more dangerous type of men for women, precisely have high social skills and charm as their very definition (cluster B personalities.)

I guess it makes sense for their ancestral mating interests for women to do the following:

Women like men that display aggression and dominant towards other men but act kindly towards the woman. The problem is that with asshole men and Cluster B’s is that the typical displays of antisocial behavior they show towards other people is their real persona, which you should note to get to figure out who he really is, while their display of kindness to the woman is just a mask.

Maybe it’s possible for women to avoid the painful early stages of obliviously selecting abusive men by giving them some training in selecting mates and spotting real danger. Of course, it would be more unrealistic to expect some women like teenagers to not be impulsive, but warning them of some of the more obvious red flags would definitely help like watching out if a man is starting to separate you from your family and acquaintances (isolation tactic).

Maybe it works like food. Humans in ancestral times have gone trough times with severe food shortages, leading humans to have a likeness to consume salt, fats, and sugar. People don’t eat that delicious salt and fat all the time because we tell people that is bad for them and explain why. So they consume them in moderation.

Some women do learn to detect certain obvious dangers and signs of sexual harassment. But their evolved gut feeling of seeing charming men that as a type of desirable candy is most of the time unsuitable for assessing the real dangers of men.

Women are like a person that has a dog and several bodyguards. The person invites a recently befriended person to their house. The dog barks incessantly towards the friend like he has some sort of hidden inner evil, leading the owner to punish the dog. The bodyguard warns the person about some of the signs of the the friend that indicates that he might be dangerous, prompting the person to tell them to leave them alone. The friend she invited in uses the opportunity to harm the person.

One thing I noticed about conservative families’ boogeyman stories they tell little girls is that their aim and purpose in a roundabout way is to make the girl won’t give sexual access to boys too easily.

Game/PUA: Repost: Are Most Womanizers Gay or Bisexual?

Very old post still getting some comments. Interesting post though.

A commenter, apparently a crazy woman, suggests:

Most womanizers are gay or bisexual…don’t believe this B.S.

This commenter must be a woman. This is one of the ways that females get their revenge on the enigma of the womanizer: the only reason he is doing this is because there is some secret homosexual bugbear lurking somewhere in his psyche. The Don Juan is in desperate flight from his latent homosexuality.

I think this crap originally came from psychoanalysis, and the whole concept of latent homosexuality doesn’t make sense. As Otto Weininger would say, homosexuality is one of those A or not-A things. Something one either is or is not. It’s a pair of concepts. All humans, except the asexual, are either homosexual, heterosexual, or some combination of these these things (what we call bisexual). There is no third category. There is no such thing as latent homosexuality. One is either gay, straight, or some combination called bisexual.

Anyway, what a nutty idea! I’ve never met a gay womanizer in my life! How ridiculous can you get? They idea of a gay man sleeping with half the women in town is preposterous. Why? Why would he waste his time? Are womanizers bisexual? Hard to say.

Most of the ones I’ve known were not, but two of them were, one a very dear friend of mine. He originally was a wild womanizer, one of the most insane I’ve ever known. But he did have a gay side. I know because he used to whistle at me when we were changing to go swim in the pool. Not really whistling as a joke either. Yikes.

Later on, he moved in with this queer in West Hollywood. Then he lost his job. The queer said either put out or get out. Disgusting, huh? I told everyone the fag was a scumbag, and my whole friend circle screamed at me. It’s perfectly acceptable to force a straight guy to screw a fag or else live on the streets!

He came and stayed with me for a while, but then he mysteriously went back. I was up in LA hanging out at nightclubs with him trying to pick up model/actress types, and I went back to his place. I woke up in the middle of the night, and he and the fag were going at it in the next room. Don’t ask me how I knew. I said, “Oh well,” and went back to sleep.

I woke up the next morning, and he was a bit defiant. I temporarily lost a contact lens, and the fag made a fake show of tying to “find it” by putting his hands all over me. Even my friend got in on it. I guess he had come to discover the pleasures of men. I ignored their crap and let them carry on and get their vicarious thrills. Later we found the damned lens.

We had breakfast, and the fag laid some bizarre and ugly psychological trip on me to try to seduce me. Didn’t work.

Later that morning I left, and I said a very warm goodbye to my friend. I decided, in my progressive and multicultural humanism, to love him whether he was fagging off or not. We had a long history together. But I never went back.

I saw him a few times later. A friend of mine saw him too. He was living with the fag and hanging around with this crowd of queers. They would go on trips together, like down to Laguna Beach. No idea what they did down there. Yikes.

Once he passingly remarked that he has a fistula in his anus. He got it from “driving a truck.” Yeah right, dude. He was drinking more, now in the mornings, but he’d always been a bit of a drunk. He had a cute girlfriend with him, a drunk herself. Later I heard he moved up to Santa Barbara to live in a house with her. He might have even married her.

Another guy was basically straight, but I’m sure he was known to do it with guys if times got desperate. I know this because he asked me once.

Repost: Alt Left: IQ in Israel and Palestine

Old post currently being commented on.

Jason writes:

This brings up another deep thought. Ever wonder why high IQ Jews and Palestinians can’t get along? Could it be because the Arab IQ is so inbred and low? How much can one blame on the Jews?

Needless to say, I strongly disagree with the thrust of this argument. The Palestinian people are native to that land, and their IQ figure is about in line with other Arab nations in the region. The problem is not that Arabs are dumb. The problem is that that is the Arabs’ land and the thieving, murdering Jews stole it and are currently stealing more of it at gunpoint, and they shoot and kill any Arabs who tries to stop these degenerate kleptomaniacs. 10

However, it does bring up an interesting question regarding what the IQ’s are of the Israelis and the Palestinians. After a bit of Googling around, I found these figures:

Ethnic group               IQ
Israeli Ashkenazim         107
Israeli Jewish             100
Israeli Sephardic           99
Israeli total               98
Israeli Mizrachi            93
Israeli Arabs/Palestinians  85

Most figures are from here. Israeli Ashkenazim figure is from here. Better figures including a study by James Flynn are here (Flynn 1998; Kaniel and Fisherman 1991). This page seems to prove that Lynn’s widely cited 94-95 figure for Israel is wrong and a better figure is 98. The figure for Palestinians is a result of a recent study done by Richard Lynn (Bakhieta and Lynn 2014).

Feel free to discuss and make of these figures what you will.

References

Bakhieta, Salaheldin Farah Attallah and Lynn, Richard ( 2014). “A Study of the IQ in Palestine.” Intelligence 47: 10-11.

Flynn, J. R. (1998). “Israeli Military IQ Tests: Gender Differences Small; IQ Gains Large.” Journal of Biosocial Science 30: 541-553.

Kaniel, S. and Fisherman, S. (1991). Level of Performance and Distribution of Errors in the Progressive Matrices Test: A Comparison of Ethiopian Immigrant and Native Israeli Adolescents. International Journal of Psychology 26: 25-33.

Repost: Alt Left: The Indian Personality: Superiority and Inferiority Complexes Intertwined

Another old post getting posted around the Net:

A fine new Indian Hindu commenter named Janardhan has appeared on our blog, and he repeats some of the same things that other insightful Hindus such as ILOR, Rahul, and Pranav have said. This shows us that not all Indian Hindus are bad people and that some of them are capable of looking inwards and trying to better their society. I consider both Rahul and Pranav at least to be strong Indian patriots who simply want the best for their country. As they see it, getting the best for India is going to require some massive changes, hence their critical patriotism.

Hindus have a strange mix of superiority and inferiority complexes. Deep down they massage their ego about how their civilization was ‘da greatest’ with a total ignorance about other civilizations and their achievements.

According to Hindus, Ancient India compared to the rest of the world is equivalent to comparing the city of Vienna during Mozart with highlanders in Papua New Guinea. As if Ancient India was like this huge Vienna while the rest of the world was primitive.

But during the last centuries they were first enslaved by Muslims from Central Asia/Persia (whom they consider savage bloodthirsty barbarians, ignoring the intellectual side of Islamic civilization, which itself was plagiarized to a good extent from Greek learning) and then by Europeans.

One difference was that in the case of Islamic invaders they could hide under the carpet the invaders’ intellectual side, and they are thus dehumanized as savage bloodthirsty monsters (this label is justified though, as the Islamic rulers were quite brutal). But when the Europeans, especially the British, came they could not ignore their obvious technological superiority with their steam engines and telegraphs.

Thus the conflicting superiority/inferiority complex feelings.

They were as per their myth Numero Uno Civilization in the world, but now they are nearly at the bottom. White people with their strange but seeming superior looks and behavior give us an inferiority complex.

Besides, even the Japanese/ Koreans are way ahead of us, and now the Chinese are racing ahead. Mainland Indians just cannot accept the rise of China:

“Those Chinkis like the Chinkis of Nepal and North Eastern Indians going ahead of us, not possible,” we say.

Thus the desire to prove ancient India being as technologically advanced as the modern world, since the modern technological world is 9

I think this is same with the Arabs with their Islam. Islam, the last word of God and having an Arab as its last and greatest prophet, has fallen behind the White nonbelievers. Oh, the horror.

Blacks? Well, most Indians consider Blacks as some savage monkey people anyway.

I would say we Indians are some of the most racist people in the world, but our racism is very subtle.

As someone who works in mental health, I would like to point out the obvious. A person with both a massive superiority and inferiority complex going at the same time is a common creature.

This is typical for Cluster B personality types: especially Narcissistic and Borderline Personality Disorders. But it associated more with narcissism than anything else. In fact, all proper analyses of narcissism begin with the supposition that what is going on in narcissism is often a huge inferiority complex which is apparently being compensated for by its opposite, a huge superiority complex.

My view is that the worse the narcissist’s inferiority complex, the greater their superiority complex must be to compensate for it. Whereas if one feels only a bit inferior, one has only to feel a bit superior to compensate, as all human beings are trying to equalize things and get at what I call the “zero state” of perfect equilibrium where everything is ok.

Many analyses of the Indian personality on this site have noted the profound narcissism apparent in most Indian Hindus. In many cases, this also looks like solipsism, but then narcissism and solipsism tend to go together anyway (Look at the Jews, the most solipsistic people on Earth).

PUA/Game: Some Women Simply Want to Be Mistreated

Polar Bear: Some women like meanness. Women out of abusive relationships often want that abuse repeated. Robert has mentioned a girl forced to wear diapers by an uncle developed a diaper fetish. Rape victims I’ve met want a man to take charge even more.

Many women like Ashley Bennett from Ink Master let their emotions takeover. I’ve met many women like this, they often want a man to stabilize them.

Being too good is a turnoff for many women. I know a guy who does everything women say they want and many women are encouraging him. Yet, none of these cheerleaders step-up and date him.

A woman’s ideal can do whatever he wants. Women tend to understand weakness more than strength. Weak men are exploited by women often, and even a very weak man can overpower most women physically. Being weaker does give some women a foxy cleverness.

You know how many young women, as in 18-20 years old, have dumped me recently for being too nice, or really for not being mean and evil enough? There have been a number of them! I keep wondering if I should start acting evil and mean just to screw some barely legal hotties, but I just can’t do it. I don’t have it in me.

They seriously wanted to be mistreated. They literally wanted a guy who treated them like shit.

It’s no secret that women eroticize their abuse. Lots of females who get raped develop rape fantasies and even rape fetishes. They only like sex is it’s rapey-type sex. And a lot of girls who got molested eroticize their experiences and develop older man fetishes. They often become promiscuous too.

I knew one who’s uncle had started molesting her when she was 9, he brought these friends in to join him when she was 12, and then it went on until she was 18. A lot of gangbangs. They took a ton of photos and movies of it too. She was all screwed up from it for a while, but then she decided, “Hey, I need to get over this. I’m just going to say it was fun and I liked it to help me get over it.”

So she did just that. When I met her she was 24 years old and hot, and her sex life was having sex with all these different older men, and I mean 20+ years older. She was a bit of a robot but I guess she was healthy. As she had eroticized all of those experiences, they were part of her fantasy life. She had even become fascinated with all the photos and video they took of her and she had gone on a quest to find some of it.

Obviously it would be totally illegal but how many cops would arrest you for having child porn of yourself where you’re the minor having sex with the adults? A number of people had sent her stuff that they thought might have been her, but none of it was. I guess it was “teenage girl” CP but that’s typically hard to prove because with a lot of them, you can just say she could have been 18. Perhaps some of it was with teenage girls who were obviously too young.

A lot of girls who get molested develop older man fetishes, and the men are often 20+ years older.

And a lot of normal women want to play age-play games in sex. You know how many women have asked me to act out that stuff with them? “Ok, I’m the teenage girl, and you’re my father…” Do teenage girls really want to fuck their Dads? If not, why do so many have this weird fantasy?

Alt Left: The FBI Is Full of Shit

This is the sort of thing I read for sheer kicks. That is a 152-page document called Child Molesters – A Behavioral Analysis For Law Enforcement Officers Investigating the Sexual Exploitation of Children by Acquaintance Molesters, written by the FBI’s top expert on child molestation, Kenneth Lanning. I read about this stuff because I am very interested in sex offenders and paraphilias. I’m a teleiophile, and I’ve never molested a kid, thank God. And I never got molested myself. Similarly, I know few people who got molested. It’s just something that interests me.

I will say though that that document is hard to get through. I’ve had it up there forever and I still haven’t gotten through it. Trying reading about  child molesters for 152 pages some time. It’s pretty hard to do and it gets to you after a bit.

About this paper, I don’t think too much of Lanning or his document.

The “Pedophile As a Word with No Meaning” Bullshit

First, he doesn’t seem to know what a pedophile is. He keeps lumping in pedophiles with a preference for small children who molest kids with men who engage in statutory rape with adolescents. The two crimes could hardly be more different, and people who commit them are often extremely different. Few pedophiles even have an interest in a 13 year old! There is no mention of hebephiles. There is no mention that it is quite normal for adult men to have sex with adolescent girls, as we’ve been doing it for 9

Second, he’s a pig. A real pig. A fed pig, by far the worst pigs of them all. I actually don’t mind a lot of local cops. But I truly despise feds.

He has an extreme attitude towards child pornography and claims that if a  pedophile is using a photo of a child to masturbate, it’s child porn! So a pedophile has an innocent photo of a kid in a bathtub taken by some doting parent. He’s using it to masturbate. According to Lanning, it automatically becomes child porn. Typical fed pig.

Further, he twists himself in endless circles trying to justify bans on child porn.

First of all, the real deal is a record of a crime. This is a fact.

It’s also a record of horrible abuse. This part is much less certain.

He says the child is victimized by having their photos passed around the world among pedophiles. I agree to a point. However, suppose the child has died? Sure, it’s a record of a crime, but so what? The victim is dead. As the victim is dead, they’re hardly being harmed by their photos being passed around. So there are issues with even the standard justification for making this stuff illegal.

The “Child Porn Is Whatever the Cops Think It Is” Bullshit

In the past 30 years, due to mass hysteria about the subject, courts have bent over backwards to endlessly redefine child pornography. It’s now like the feminist definition of rape – as big as the Atlantic Ocean, expanding all the time, and constantly changing so no one can even define it anymore. Child porn means whatever the pigs think it means. Rape means whatever some feminist thinks it means.

It turns out that if a pedophile has perfectly legal photos of nude kids, but writes lewd things on them or has balloons showing the child making lewd statements and he’s using this stuff to masturbate, it’s child porn! Oh, for God’s sake! Don’t these poor sods have a right to jerk off in peace? Life must be difficult enough for someone with an orientation like this. As you can see, the “photo of a crime” and “kid in the photo is being victimized as the material is used by pedophiles” arguments wash out completely in these cases.

Turns out we need to make up some new arguments to cover this stuff! When you have to keep making up all sorts of different arguments to keep something illegal as circumstances change, chances are the illegality of the behavior is on pretty shaky grounds.

He also agrees the pedophilic cartoons should be illegal, though once again, the child in the cartoon doesn’t even exist and is a fictional character.

By the same token, he wants 2-D CGI child porn to be illegal.

He also wants child sex dolls to be illegal.

And apparently though the FBI has said that child porn must depict nudity, Lanning argues that there are cases where a clothed child is somehow child porn.

Child porn fiction has always been legal until earlier this year, when suddenly it wasn’t. The fact that no one even knows the definition of child porn and that things are perfectly legal until one day the pigs decide without telling anyone that they’re not is very disturbing. Vague laws are unconstitutional. Laws that constantly change their definitions without being so changed by a Legislature or court are unconstitutional. In order to not break the law, you have to know what the law is. If there’s no way to even figure out what’s legal and what’s illegal and where the line between the two is, it’s unconstitutional.

I figure that anything that doesn’t show an actual kid being molested should be legal, sorry. If there’s no kid being molested, there’s no record of a crime. The kid in the pic is not being harmed either, as nothing is happening in the photo.

Anyway, Lanning ends up having to make up more and more new arguments to keep more stuff illegal. Turns out that photos of kids in bathtubs, child porn stories and cartoons, legitimate photos with lewd writing on them, and kid sex dolls all need to be declared child porn and be made illegal because…get this…pedophiles use them to masturbate! Apparently everything a pedophile uses to masturbate is illegal! That’s just crazy.

The “It Makes You Dangerous So It’s Illegal” Bullshit

He also says that all of these things that the pedophile uses to masturbate increase the likelihood that he will offend and molest a kid, which is justification for wanting to send them packing for everything they use to jerk off.

The problem is there’s no evidence of that.

In fact, what little evidence exists from countries in which child porn was legal for a while before being made illegal shows that molestation rates were quite a bit lower when the material was legal and went up significantly when it became illegal. I know the Netherlands is one such case. Apparently as rapists watch porn instead of raping, and porn makes rape rates go down, pedophiles look at child porn instead of molesting, and molestation rates go down.

The “It’s Illegal to Be Dangerous” Bullshit

So these guys are being arrested for the crime of “dangerousness.” I wasn’t aware it was against the law to be dangerous. Generally speaking, any law allowing cops to arrest people for “dangerousness” is unconstitutional. Of course there are some exceptions, mostly in terms of red flag laws.

In most other cases, you can’t be arrested because people think you’re dangerous. You can be as dangerous and scary as you want, and it’s perfectly legal.

However, if you are crazy and dangerous, we can hospitalize you.

The MDSO Ultra-Bullshit

This was the basis for the ridiculous and unconstitutional Mentally Disordered Sex Offender laws, where, incredibly enough, people who have served their full terms and paid their debts to society are re-sentenced just before they get out on the grounds that they are “dangerous.” Hell, 9

And because it’s perfectly legal to be a menace, the courts have twisted themselves into Octopus-like positions to claim that these men are both mentally ill and dangerous because if they are nuts and dangerous, we get to hospitalize you. These laws also operate on the bizarre and insane notions that locking these guys up for the rest of their lives after their terms are up on “dangerousness” chargers is…get this…not a form of punishment! Because if it was a form of punishment, it would be illegal!

I guess it’s actually a huge gift and a favor to these shmucks to lock them up for the rest of their lives on bullshit “dangerousness” charges.

Turns out that you don’t even have to be seriously mentally ill to get locked up this way. Most of these folks aren’t the tiniest bit crazy. All you have to have is a mental disorder that makes you dangerous! In practice, these are paraphilias, typically pedophilia. However, non-pedophiles keep getting socked away under these laws, particularly hebephiles.

The “Let’s Make Up Some Mental Disorders” Bullshit

Turns out that when you can’t figure out what paraphilia the person has, you get to make one up! So the hebephiles go down on Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified or Paraphilia NOS. Turns out that hebephilia is not even a documented paraphilia in the DSM. Turns out it’s not even mentally disordered behavior. Turns out it’s not even abnormal! Nevertheless, it can get you socked away forever on some bullshit law after you get out of prison.

One more thing. Locking people up as they are walking out the door for made-up crimes, or really for the crime they went down on, is obviously convicting someone twice for the same offense. They get around this by saying they’re not punishing these folks. Instead they’re doing them a favor!

This is just abuse. They’ve also invented brand new paraphilias where none exist. They’ve invented some Paraphilic Rape Disorder where the rapist is specifically and preferentially aroused by the thought of raping. Turns out this sort of thing is quite rare, and rapists, like most men, get turned on by a million things. Furthermore, the American Psychiatric Association says there’s no such thing as Paraphilic Rape Disorder. No problem! Just make up a diagnosis! They simply say the man has Paraphilia NOS, and he goes down on that. Who knows what Paraphilia NOS even means. As with child porn above, apparently it means whatever some prosecutor thinks it means!

Game/PUA: Do Left/Liberal Male Feminists Really Get Much Sex?

RL: Liberal White snobs with money beating up poor White proletarians and lumpens. If anyone is being oppressed in our society, it’s these poor sods. I’m for the oppressed and against the oppressors. White liberals and the Left in general have demonized these poor shmucks, and it’s disgusting. They’re literally oppressing these poor guys.

There’s also a thing from liberal White males along the lines of, “Ha ha. We get laid a lot, and you guys don’t!” Wow, so this is the Left right now. Sex-havers showering contempt on the sexually unlucky? How pathetic. Anyway it reminds me of rich snobs gloating in their success and hating the poor for being financially successful in life.

1-800-Whatever: Just my 2 cents, but I don’t think these “liberal” or (pseudo) leftists are getting laid all that much. Most I’ve seen are pajama boys. I think they get married more, but I don’t know they are getting laid all that much. I could be wrong of course.

I’m not sure myself because they are all male feminists! And a lot of them are really angry about PUA’s on the Left who are “oppressing” the women of the Left by trying to fuck them! How dare they! I call them fags, girls, and cucks even though most of them are straight because I want to attack their masculinity for abandoning their brothers and going over to the other side. As it’s uncool to act like a real man on the Left and masculinity is seen as toxic, it’s a mystery to me how they get laid or why leftwing women put up with this pussy, faggy bullshit.

I really don’t know if they get laid or not. I know they despise PUA’s. They say all PUA and Seduction Theory is a lie, which seems crazy. You mean there are not better and worse ways of getting women? There are not men with great Game and men with zero Game? There are not men who can improve their Game or who lost their skills?

It’s madness. Everyone knows that some guys are very good at this and other guys can’t get laid with God’s help, and YES, Game does matter. A LOT. Maybe not as much as Looks, but if you are Chad with shit Game, it’s not such a great thing. I have Game-less Chad’s go years, maybe even over a decade, without a single date.

One guy was the best-looking man in town for his age and he went a decade without a date. No one liked him. All the women hated him and thought he was a weirdo. I’m not sure what was wrong with him. He seemed to have some sort of an anxiety disorder. Often had a weird blank stare on his face like he was in his own world. But you sat down and talked to him, he was completely normal. Everyone thought he was “dangerous” too, but I spent some time around him, and he was the most harmless guy you ever met. People can’t read others for shit a lot of times.

They also really hate Alpha, Beta, Omega, etc. Everyone knows that those categories are completely true. I knew it by high school. But they say it’s all just fantasy and they laugh about and make fun of it. How the Hell do you get laid at without understanding the very basics such as Alpha, Beta, Omega, etc.?

I did see one of these idiots on a Left thread asking how to flirt with women without being seen as a creep and getting #metooed. Of course it’s impossible because metoo makes all flirting potentially illegal because you never know if an advance is unwanted or not. It’s also reclassified all dating as sexual harassment because you can’t date women without grabbing or touching them at some point, and no, you don’t ask permission to grab, touch, or kiss a woman on a date. You just do it! If she doesn’t like it, she’ll let you know.

I’ve dated hundreds of women and I did this with most of them, and I rarely got a negative response. It’s all about reading the vibes which are completely unspoken and almost like an electrical feeling you can sense in the air. I imagine a lot of folks find that sort of thing completely baffling. It’s also about reading the situation in what she says and does and even how she is thinking. You tell what she is thinking by studying her and trying to read her mind, which can actually be done to some extent.

Of course, I know how to do it and I don’t completely jump them unless I’m pretty sure it’s going to go over well. I read accounts of these guys getting metooed and I thought, “Damn these guys don’t know how to talk or act around women!” I would not have acted like that at al. Also a lot of them were way, way too rapey. A lot of others were pretty sleazy about how they went about trying to get laid.  Over and over I found myself cringing and saying, “I wouldn’t have done it that way.” I suppose I could go over some of those cases and show where those guys screwed up if you want.

And most sex is apparently rape.

He got a bunch of really stupid answers that showed that these idiots had shit Game and didn’t know their asses from a hole in the ground. One woman suggested, “Well if you want to flirt with a woman, just ask her if it’s ok to flirt with her.” LOL! That’s the stupidest crap I’ve ever heard. Don’t ask for permission for anything from a woman if you’re not in bed. In bed it’s a bit different, but you still don’t ask permission! Fuck this “Momma may I!” There’s a way to do this, but “Momma may I” ain’t it!

Alt Left: A List of Better Terms for “Pedophile” and “Pedophilia”

It would be interesting to talk about female pedophiles and how they are different from men.

Apparently, there are no female pedophiles, pedophile meaning someone who has a preferential interest in children under 13; that is, they are more attracted to children under 13 than they are to adults. Any female child molesters are likely to be non-pedophilic molesters or situational molesters. Apparently only men are preferential molesters; i.e., pedophiles.

The use of the word pedophile for anyone other than a preferential child molester or someone with a preferential sexual interest in children under 13 is simply false.

In the overwhelming number of cases where the word pedophile is being used nowadays, the person is either teleiophilic – that is, completely normal in age orientation, being maximally attracted to females 16+ and attracted to adults. That is 8

Pedophile is also false when it means “attracted to girls 13-15.” Even teleiophilic men react to pubescent girls at a very high level of 8

Attraction to very young girls under 13 is not necessarily pedophilic either. Normal men are attracted to little girls at 6

Adult men having sex with 13-17 year old girls is not pedophilic behavior. In fact, the American Psychological Association has said that it is probably a part of normal male sexuality if we speak in historical or anthropological terms. Legally speaking, this behavior is often statutory rape, and men who do this are called statutory rapists. In cases where it is legal, it is properly considered legal and normal behavior in a psychological sense anyway. Granted, many people have moral objections to this at least at certain ages anyway.

Most child molesters are non-pedophilic or situational child molesters. So pedophile isn’t even a correct word to use for most child molesters! The crime itself is called child molestation, not pedophilia. Child rape is a different crime. Child molestation should not be referred to as child rape because child molestation is often psychologically consensual, whereas child rape never is. Further, child rape is a much worse crime than child molestation in most cases.

Sex between teens 13-17 is never pedophilic or even child molestation. It may be statutory rape but mostly it’s just completely normal sexual behavior. You simply cannot molest a teenage girl. Nor can you molest a woman.

Any sex between an adult man and a girl under 13 is properly termed child molestation. In a minority of cases, the adults who do this are pedophiles, but in most cases they are non-pedophilic molesters. The best way to describe non-pedophilic molesters is to call them criminals. They are driven more by antisocial behavior than by deviant sexual interests.

Since nobody seems to be able to use the words pedophilia and pedophile correctly, we should just stop using them. Every time you want to say pedophile, just say child molester. Every time you want to say pedophilia, just say child molestation.

Pedophilia is simply a way of thinking or a sexual orientation like homosexuality or bisexuality, and it is biological in all cases, like a lot of homosexuality. It’s 10

PUA/Game: Pre-Flirting, Approaching, Flirting

Hari Seldon: So I have to ask, where do you meet these girls? How do you pick them up? You said you have a 98

Mostly meeting them on the Net these days. In Meatspace, it’s about zero. Literally nobody wants me. I go to porn blogs and Kik groups and meet women in there. Even young ones, too! In those places there are lots of young women who have an older man thing.

The Various Stars and Looks

This never happens to me much anymore, but if she stares at you or catches your eye every time you look at her or keeps looking at you off and on, it means something. It probably means you turn her on on some level. But nowadays I have young women who look at me off and on in a way that always meant she liked me in the past, and now I go talk to the Lookers and it turns out she hates me! So women who hate me are looking at me and staring at me now.

But this just started in the last few years. Before that, if she keeps looking at you, catches your eye every time, or especially if she stares at you, it means she likes you on some level. I think it means you turn her on.

The Robot Hypnotized Entranced Stare

If she goes into this stunned, shocked, robot, automaton stare when she sees you, especially the first time, it means you absolutely turn her on. Often the stare is mixed with hate and fear. That’s because women hate and fear the men they like. I’ve all sorts of theories on that.

She’s Acting Nervous

Another bad thing I’ve noticed lately is some young women act nervous around me. It’s usually when I’m approaching them pretty hard or escalating the flirting. She often asked for by stopping what she was doing with the message “Come talk to me.” Of she was just super-friendly and now you are taking it beyond super-friendly into the sexual flirting realm.

Lately, nervousness is a disaster. She’s uncomfortable with you on some level. Maybe you’re making her uncomfortable by escalating the flirting. Maybe she has mixed feelings about you. She acts like she wants you to talk, then you go over and talk to her and now that you are next to her, she gets scared.

I’m not sure what nervousness means around a younger man. Women don’t typically get nervous around men they like. You would think they would but they just don’t. Actually they get less nervous and more calm because she likes you and you are turning her on and charming her, and that is fun, exciting, and also very relaxing.

Just because you’re turning her on doesn’t necessarily mean she wants to go out with you! It doesn’t even necessarily mean she even wants to be friends.

Women Are Either Friends or Enemies. Know Your Female Enemies, Fear Them, and Leave Them Alone

At my age, I can’t really approach any woman directly anymore. If I try I just get the brushoff. I usually approach and say something, especially if they are behind a counter helping me or ringing me up. I’ll ask their name or something. Lately I get a hard brushoff right there. I just make a note of it and consider her an “enemy” because that’s basically what a young woman is if she brushes you off like that.

You need to stop bothering her and stop hitting her up with even basic orders. I was returning something in Walmart last night and I asked the clerk her name. We talked as bit more and I started to get the brushoff. I get the brushoff from almost all women these days. When you class her as an “enemy” it really keeps you away from her. When they do the hard brushoff, they don’t even want to be friends. If you ask for help, they won’t help you. They will act like you’re not there. When they get like that you need to stop interacting with her 10

Some People Just Like to Flirt, Don’t Read Too Much into It

Some of them flirt with me a bit, but I figured out that they don’t want to go out with me or even be friends. They just like to flirt with me. I’m supposedly still goodlooking for my age. A lot of women will flirt with a hot older man because he kind of turns her on. But it’s fake. She doesn’t want to go out with you and she doesn’t even want to be your friend.

Keep a Constantly Updated Database of All the Women You See Regularly so You Know Where You Stand with Them

I make mental notes of every woman I interact with regularly to figure out where I am with her. If she’s fat or homely, I don’t care, but if she’s cute or hot, I want to keep a scoreboard. Say she flirts with me when she first meets me. I go back and see if she keeps doing it. A lot of them will flirt with you the first time, and then they go cold. You have to figure out exactly where you are with every woman you interact with so you know exactly how to deal with her. Otherwise you will mess up act “creepy.” I hate being called creepy so I’m very cautious.

Never Proposition a Stranger of a Woman You Don’t Know Well. Only Proposition a Woman if You’re Pretty Sure She Wants to Fuck

You can never openly proposition any woman anywhere ever. Just don’t. Actually I don’t even proposition girlfriends. Sex is best unspoken. Just start doing things to her, or she will start doing things you to you. I learned a long time ago never to ask a woman if she wants to have sex, especially if you’ve never done it with her before. That will get her thinking, and that’s bad. The whole idea is to shut off her brain the hamster wheel stops spinning and she’s gone over into pure body reactions, as in let her body take over from her mind.

Flirting, Escalating, Etc.

Just sit back and throw out feelers to see how she responds. If she likes you, SHE will bring up sex pretty quickly, usually within the first 20 minutes. If she derails the conversation off into sex after 20 minutes or less, it means she likes you, and now you can start saying sex-type stuff. But even then you have to be careful. Just follow her lead. Read the conversation and see where it’s going the whole time. Note if what you say gets a good or bad response and then adjust on that basis.

PUA/Game: How to Understand and Negotiate That She’s Horny and Wants to Fuck

Bedroom eyes absolutely means you’re making her horny! And it literally means she wants to fuck right now. Bedroom eyes plus the weird robotic stare means she’s going into a sexual trance and she wants to fuck you. You have to go after any woman who looks at you like that, period.

In order to make bedroom eyes or hooded eyes, put your head down and now look up. That’s bedroom eyes. It’s a bit uncomfortable and you can sort of feel hate and fear in yourself when you do it.

The bedroom eyes mean you put her in a trance, a sexual trance. Women often go into this weird sexual trance when they want to fuck. It’s like they’ve lost control of their bodies and their bodies are just acting on their own. Plus she looks like a weird robot. That means her brain’s not controlling her actions anymore. You’ve sexually hypnotized her, which is how women get turned on, pretty much.

If you have sex with her a first time and you get up to leave and she follows you to the door with the weird robot stare bedroom eyes, she really likes you. She might even be falling in love. A woman in the early stages of love stares at her man. Sometimes you will both be sitting in a room on separate couches and you look at her and she looks at you and you just sit there and stare at each other without saying a single word. This can last up to 15 minutes. It’s actually extremely calming and relaxing especially if you are starting to like or love her too. The whole world shuts down and it’s just you and her, staring, silent, in love. Life and the world doesn’t mean more thing.

She’s basically completely lost control of herself, which is what happens when women get horny and want to fuck. If she’s robot staring you to the door, she absolutely wants to see you again! She’s not necessarily in love. It means she wants to fuck you again. You’ve hypnotized her, sexually hypnotized her. This is the basis of seduction. When you seduce a woman, you are often literally hypnotizing her.

Seduction in general is underhanded and sleazy. The fact that you are hypnotizing her is sleazy right there. But this is you do it. Seduction is a scam, a trick, a con, a lie. Men know it is. Women complain about it but they know it’s a scam too, and with the right guy, she will allow herself to be tricked or scammed.

That’s part of what makes them so submissive in bed. You’ve hypnotized her, tricked her, scammed her, fooled her and she knows it. Her reaction to that is just to go completely submissive and give herself over to you. The female sex drive is all based on submission, and often the more submission, the better. This is what they like, what they want. They want to go completely submissive and lose themselves and give themselves over to this scary bad boy rather psychopathic caveman.

Sex is probably pretty scary for women. We can literally kill them with our bare hands and any time. It takes a lot of trust for a woman to make herself so vulnerable as to have sex with you. She’s scared. In a sense, she is almost risking life and limb by going submissive to this dominant, maybe dangerous, aggressive, and maybe violent maniac caveman. She’s a cavewoman. A lot of times women will negotiate.

“I don’t really care what you do to me. Just don’t kill me, please!”

I’ve had a number of women say that to me. They were all crazy in love with me. It’s actually good because it means she fears you, and woman want to fear the man they are in love with. Don’t ask me why. It’s some cavewoman stuff. The girlfriend who was most terrified of me fell deeper in love with me than any other woman.

A conversation with a girlfriend. We had broken up. She calls me. What are we doing? I ask her if she has a guy because she usually does. She says she does but he’s boring. And she wants to get back with me.

Me: So who is he? (not getting jealous or angry, just acting like I could care less).

He’s just some boring old man (in a tired, bored voice)

I see (no particular emotions still no jealous anger)

I like you better. You’re scary, but scary’s hot (philosophical tone of voice, like she’s admititng some uncomfortable truth.

See that?

You’re scary, but scary’s hot.

Why do women like bad boys. Why do they like men who abuse and mistreat them? Why are so many of them weird masochists in one form or another. Why do they like psychopaths, ex-convicts, and convicted serial killers. Same reason.

He’s scary, but scary’s hot.

I’m not telling to scare your woman. I’m just saying some interesting things start to happen when the woman who loves you also starts to fear you. Like fear you a lot.

She’s giving herself over to you, but you don’t get to take her life. And she will often tell you whether she likes pain or not. A lot of women don’t like physical pain. They don’t want you to inflict physical pain on them. They might be open to verbal of psychological pain and aggression. But they don’t want to give themselves over to physical pain and the concurrent aggression.

She’s totally submitting to you but she’s putting down some hard lines. She’s also assuming complete trust that you will respect her boundaries. You need to respect women’s boundaries. If she doesn’t want to do something, don’t pester or bother her to engage in some sex act. It’s shitty. If you connect well you negotiate in bed, often before sex. Ok we are going to do this and that but not this other thing. I always say, “If I ever say or do anything you don’t like, just tell me and I will stop.” They always say ok. Then I proceed to dom them hard and they never say they don’t like anything I said or did.

Alt Left: Does Getting Molested and Raped Always Cause Intrinsic Severe Long-Term Symptoms in Females?

Polar Bear: What would you do if your perfect little angel, that you love more than anyone, is violently raped by a grown ass man?

Child Molestation and Child Rape Are Two Completely Different Crimes

Most child molesting isn’t violent rape.

That’s usually a different crime called child rape. And child rape does occur. It happened to my sister at age 11. Guy pulled a knife on her and her little friend while they were walking in this fairly wild area. We never heard that this had done anything bad to her. Certainly she never talked about it. But she flips if you say the words “rape” or “molestation” and shuts down the conversation. So I spell the words out sometimes when I’m around her. But other than that, I’ve never heard that she suffered any long-term harm from this very violent rape.

Much child molesting is more or less consensual. That is, the kid goes along with it. Of course kids can consent to sex past a certain age. Psychologically they can. They can’t legally though. I think 9

What If My Daughter Got Molested or Raped by Some Man?

It depends. If it was actually child rape via a stranger and a weapon, sure it would be bad, and I don’t really know how I would deal with it. If he was molested with coercion, that’s also very bad. I’m not sure how I would deal with that either. But if she was molested consensually and had a neutral or even positive attitude towards it, I would act differently. And believe me, it’s very common for kids to react to consensual child molestation by saying it was fun of pleasurable. Neutral actions are also extremely common.

Not every kid flips out and gets horribly traumatized by getting molested. I think I would tell her that I didn’t want her letting any more grown men to do that to her. I would say it’s weird, strange, and not right. You really need to stop. If you keep doing this, it could be harmful to you. Mainly I would want her to start resisting if a man did this to her.

If she had a neutral or even positive attitude towards getting molested, I would be very happy because there’s usually no long-term harm in those cases.

I would say:

Look it’s not bad or awful or horrible or anything like that. It’s nothing! It’s no big deal. It’s not something you should make a big deal out of. That’s just something weirdo men do. Ever seen weird men doing weird stuff with kids, like yelling stuff at them or doing creepy stuff? Well, it’s like that. Weird idiot men are everywhere and they often try to do weird, stupid things to kids.

I would tell her not not see it as a trauma and freak out and make a big deal out of it because that what causes the harm. I would just brush it off with a great big attitude like this:

It’s nothing, forget about that stupid idiot, let’s move on. Don’t even think about it anymore. It was just a stupid thing some weird idiot man did to you. But it wasn’t harmful.

But I would tell her to be careful who she told about it. I would also tell her not to feel guilty about it as she did nothing wrong. I would tell her that girls who freak out about getting molested and adults who run around screaming how horrible it is is what causes the harm in cases of consensual molestation.

If it was consensual and she had a positive or neutral attitude towards and did not incorporate any negative feelings about it, by college she would be completely over it. Maybe even a lot sooner.

In a sexology book, I read that consensual child molestation used to not cause much harm back before 1950. They treated it like it was no big deal, brushed it off, and told the girl to forget about it. My mother told me that my aunt got molested as a girl when she was ~7. This might have been ~1940. I will have to check. I told my Mom about how people used to treat it like it was nothing, and the kids suffered little harm. She said my aunt had gotten molested at age 7 and everyone just brushed it off, told her it was nothing and to forget about it, but to not let any man do that to her anymore. My Mom said my aunt suffered no long-term serious harm from getting molested. In fact she may have suffered little to no harm at all!

Most of the Harm from Consensual Child Molestation Comes from Everyone Freaking out and Making a Big Deal out of It

In cases of consensual molestation, everybody running around screaming:

How horrible! You got ruined! You’ll never be the same! He stole your innocence! He committed a terrible crime against you, a horrible violation! He violated your body! Your personal space! You need to go to the police and then go to court to testify against this evil man who did this evil thing to you! You got abused!

He abused you! You got molested, one of the worst crimes of all! Pure evil! You got raped! He raped you, the worst crime of all! He’s the worst evil maniac on Earth! Here, we have to send you to a psychologist right now because many or most women who got molested as girls can suffer long-term lifelong harm, and we don’t want that to happen to you!

Then they shuffle her off to a bunch of therapists. I’m not sure they would even say the last sentence because the popular nonsense nowadays is that child molestation causes intrinsic and automatic harm to any kid who gets molested:

It causes trauma! And the trauma lasts a lifetime! No woman who ever gets molested as a girl is ever over it! It effects her for life!

First of all, this is not true. It’s not automatically and permanently harmful, and up to 5

Four Women Who All Got Over Being Raped, Molested, Beaten Up, Imprisoned, and Horribly Abused by Men

I knew four women around age 50 who all got molested as little girls.

One was a 50 year old woman who I got involved with for a short bit who was molested at church at age 8, church youth leader, apparently a pedophile. She told me she was totally over it. She said, “It’s weird because it feels so good but it’s wrong.”

Another was a 50 year old woman who I dated for a bit. She got molested by an uncle or a family friend, probably a pedophile. She was a little girl. She told me she was totally over it.She’d also been raped violently a few times. One time the guy broke in and almost killed her. Another kind was a date rape gone bad. She was over the molesting and she told me she was over the rapes too.

She’d also had a number of men pull guns on her in cars and burst into her house with guns pointed at her. She had a husband who beat the shit out of her for years. She told me she was pretty much over all this abuse men had done to her in her life. Weird thing was she still totally loved men.

And when she talked about a particularly horrific rape where she was beaten, imprisoned, tied up and raped for hours, she had a weird twinkle in her eye and a sly sexual smile on her face as she talked about, like it turned her on! I thought, “What the Hell is wrong with this chick?” Women tend to eroticize their sexual abuse, either molestations or rapes. That’s just the way they are.

Another was 55, a girlfriend for 5 1/2 years. She was 11 and a 13-14 year old boy on her street had sex with her. I don’t think that even counts! That’s practically childhood sex play. She also got raped at age 18-19. Almost date rape. It wasn’t violent. Black guy in Jamaica. She told me she was over both of the incidents.

One was a 52 year old woman, a  girlfriend with 1 1/2 years, who had a brother who had sex with her when she was 5-8. I think he was 13-17. It was their “little secret.” Unfortunately this crap goes on a lot. They usually don’t even call it molesting if it’s another minor doing it.

She was into really perverted, dirty sex where she liked to be totally dominated and even degraded. She liked to be “treated like a slut” as she put it. Pretty quickly after I met her she referred to herself as a slut and a whore casually.

She liked the idea that I “owned her” as property like she was some sex slave. She wanted me to “mark” her or “leave my mark on her” to show that “I owned her and she was my property.”

She told me she was over the molestation but she had had a very rapey, weird, and sick relationship with a sexual sadist with serious sociopathic tendencies who was definitely dangerous to women over a 5 year period. She said she got raped every day over 5 years. How is that even possible? And she didn’t even try to stop him. “It would be no use,” she said. She claimed that this was a time of horrific rapes but she always talked about all the extremely dirty sex they had and she had this look of fondness in her eyes as she talked about the sex. And she always talked about the sex during the five years of horrible rape when we were having sex. I think she eroticized her abuse.

I told her I liked to hear about the dirty sex she had with this guy, and she flipped out and told me I was fantasizing about her being raped! That’s bullshit. No one lives with someone and gets “raped” every day for 5 years if you’re not even fighting back or protesting. Fight him off! Resist him! Hit him! Call the police on him! And for God’s sake, leave him!

Also he had some very dirty sex acts she liked to practice and she was always asking for me to do that stuff with her. So she had basically eroticized getting “raped” over 5 years. That relationship turned abusive and he turned very mean. She told me there might be five good minutes in a month. The rest was just pure evil, living with a hostile monster. Yet there was still continuous sex!

She had a bad bone condition where she needed regular operations or her joints might literally fall apart. Once she needed an operation so she told him to go easy on part of her hip. Well, he started specifically making the sex where he singled out this hip area and almost attacked it during sex. If the joints would have broken, she might have died. She said he was basically trying to kill or at least seriously harm her.

She ended it after 5 years and had to move back into her Mom’s house to put herself back together.

I don’t think she was over this trauma, but she didn’t seem all that screwed up by it and she never talked about any bad symptoms she had from it. In fact, she had eroticized it and she often talked about this horrible monster rapist maniac with an attitude of fondness in her face, eyes, and voice.

She did suffer from depression and had attempted suicide before I met her. And she was suicidal part of the time I was with her. But I could never make any connection between her depression and suicidality and this rapey relationship. I never asked her if she had any trauma symptoms from this relationship, but I knew her for 1 1/2 years and she never mentioned having carry-over trauma symptoms even one time.

Alt Left: Discussing Adult-Minor Sex, Chronophilias, Child Molestation, Rape, Child Porn and Other Taboo Subjects

What’s the message here? I don’t know the exact science of whatever men really feel, but they should be quiet, and especially they should know if they do something with kids, the consequences could be fatal, and the vigilante etc., might not be punished.

Yeah, I refuse to keep quiet about this stuff. My conscience is clear. I’m a teleiophile and I’m no more interested in little girls than any other man. I’m not even into junior high girls. Looks like way too much of a young girl. Of course I don’t molest little girls and I’ve never done anything like that in my life other than some weird childhood sex play with girls who were around my peer age around puberty. We were 13 and she was 11, if you want the details. My conscience is clear.

I advocate that all men not molest little girls and not collect obvious child porn because you can harm the girl and also I think it’s weird and you can go to prison hard. I don’t care much about CP except that the real thing is evidence of a crime. The main thing is if you have that crap on your drive, you can get arrested and you will go down hard.

I advocate that all men respect the statutory rape laws of the state or country where they reside, if only because I don’t like to see my brothers going to jail on this stuff. And I’m not wild about men having sex with 13 year old girls. A lot of places call it child molesting and let’s face it, that’s an awfully young girl.

Other than that, of course you can think anything you want or do anything legal you want to with any willing minor of any age.

This is what I advocate. Why would I get murdered by a lynch mob for advocating something reasonable and law-abiding like that? I don’t get it. And no one who kills or hurts me over this stuff is going to get off the hook by some judge because he talked about weird stuff like pedophilia, child molestation, rape, child porn, and statutory rape. So what! Anyone can talk about anything. No judge is going to let someone of the hook for “killing some guy who talks about weird stuff.” Forget it.

As you can see below, the things I do in my life are pretty much legal and I don’t do anything outrageously bad or illegal. I don’t download and save CP on my drive. I don’t engage in any sort of sexual behavior with jailbaits. Sometimes I talk to them as they are in those Kik groups below. But in California it’s perfectly legal to talk to teenage girls. I usually don’t want to get too sexual in my conversations with them though.

I don’t know if it’s my looks, but if I talk to one of those girls for 20 minutes (and I’m very careful how I talk to them), I can guarantee that the devious little nympho seductress will figure out a way to shift the conversation over to sex! See? They go after us men! A lot of those jailbaits are horny as Hell and they love men. I prefer to see them more as dangerous than anything else. They’re almost a menace.

I’ll talk to them after that. A few have sent me pics, but the pics were mostly legal as far as I’m concerned. Erotic but legal. I try not to get into actual sexting with them, though I did it a lot (mostly with women but also with a few 14-17 year old jailbaits) in Yahoo groups 20-25 years ago, but all this stuff was way more wide open back then. Nobody was worried about anything. The situation has completely changed now 20-25 years later. Everyone is paranoid, cops are arresting men on all sorts of vague, weird, and stupid sex law bullshit, and this whole area has gotten a whole lot scarier.

I absolutely like to look at 15-17 year old girls because they are highly sexual to me, and they really turn me on. I haven’t touched a jailbait since I was 21, and I don’t anticipate doing so in the remainder of my life.

I don’t collect child pornography and when I see the really bad stuff, I report it right away. I have pics of teenage girls on my drive. Most I knew were 18 or 19. I get photos like this quite a bit. I have a huge folder full of pics young women, mostly 18-23 but up to 27, sent me.

A couple wouldn’t tell me their age. They just sent me nudes with a message, “Me Daddy” and went away. I look at it closely, and if she could possibly be 18 by any stretch of the imagination, I keep it. Once girls get into the 12-14 year old age range, it’s pretty obvious that they are way too young and I don’t touch that stuff and I block anyone who tries to send it to me.

I see that stuff posted in Kik sex groups once in a while, and idiots on Kik try to send me pics with that stuff that they are selling. I delete the pics and I don’t download any of those videos or photos. I’m not putting any of that stuff on my hard drive.

I was in a Kik group the other day and someone posted a video with a very young as in way too young teenage girl sucking her boyfriend’s cock and him cumming in her mouth.

The group was literally run by a teenage girl, a 16 year old girl. It was mostly just her, a few other mostly women and girls, and a bunch of men. Those groups are all called something like Younger Women for Older Men. Another group like that is run by a 13 year old girl!

These are just jailbait teenage girls who like to talk to adult men. They pose pics of themselves now and again to show off or get likes, but the pics are never pornographic. They tend to be cheesecake-like, maybe her in a bathing suit. Any kind of porn is rarely posted in the sites run by those girls because they’re not really into porn. If you post porn or dick pics in there, the girls who run the group throw you out right away. And the conversation is not supposed to stray into overtly sexual territory because the girls don’t really want to talk about that stuff.

But with a name like that, idiots post obvious CP or what we call “way too young” teenage girl (13-14 years old?) videos and photos now and again.  The girl who runs the group will say, “Whoa that looks way too young,” and they usually just throw the guy out right away. I might look at it, but Hell if I am putting that crap on my drive.

A Model of Introversion on a Scale from High- to Low-Functioning

The best analysis of all of this stuff that I have seen is from high to low functioning:

Introvert: We all know what this is, can function markedly well ->

Severe Introvert: Possibly odd but can be robustly healthy psychologically otherwise ->

Schizoid Personality Traits: Some coldness, apathy, distance re: human relations and lowered sex drive, otherwise can function very well, reduced functioning ->

Schizoid Personality Disorder: Marked coldness, apathy, and distance re: human relations and strongly lowered, apathetic, confused and baffled sex drive, “something is off about them but you can’t put a finger on it because they seem otherwise healthy,” otherwise some can function extremely well ->

High-functioning Autism or Asperger’s: Something seems very much off, possibly just looks like extreme introversion with marked anxiety but others can appear markedly normal and the condition only becomes noticeable after a few hours with them, problems with excessive seriousness, “sciency” type explanations for emotions, emotions seem off, some flapping, etc, baffled by human emotions, somewhat robot-like behavior, rocking motions, baffled by social skills, do odd things that violate social rules because they don’t understand them, possible gender identity confusion, often denies or minimizes their condition, can have strong sex drive, many females) ->

Medium functioning Asperger’s/Autism: Very weird, something is extremely off, can still function well at certain jobs, often low sex drive and desire for human relations, can be distracted by say a strobe light to where they seem to be entranced, weird ordering rituals with objects, very robotic to the point of being un-human or android-like, possible gender identity confusion, often male ->

Lower functioning autism/Asperger’s: Can still work, maybe a computer job for family, nonexistent friendships, sex drive or romantic partners, keeps asking the same question endlessly in an obsessive fashion, strange to the point where they need help understanding stoplights, severe meltdowns, possibly dangerous or criminal at times, markedly “nerdy,” something very clearly off about them, sex drive retained, possibly sexual orientation or gender identity confusion, some simply cannot work or live on their own at all. ->

Nevertheless, all Aspies often display a strong core of human feelings. Can get their feelings hurt. Capable of righteous anger, sense of pathos or tragedy about situation, in other words, there are times when you realize that they are just as “human” as any of us, and they can seem sad or tragic at these times.

“Pure autism” category: Appear mentally retarded, strong decline in intelligence/IQ, marked repetitive actions, cannot function or work, must live in group homes and have things done for them, nevertheless, a hard core of human awareness such that they can tell if you are ignoring them or not being nice to them and they get their feelings hurt, desire for human action, strange, retarded-like speech, weird body movements.

Game/PUA: Sure, Men Like ‘Em Young, but How Young?

Warning: Long, 18 pages.

This is a comment from Bumface, a regular commenter from the UK. He’s a bit of a volatile fellow, but I’ve kept him around anyway because he’s also nice sometimes, and he can be interesting. I might as well point out right now that it is more than obvious to me that Bumface is a hebephile, that is, he is preferentially attracted to girls in the pubescent 11-14 age range.

However, the American Psychiatric Association has stated flat out that Hebephilia is not a mental disorder. They also said that it’s not even abnormal! The APA said that hebephiles who act on their feelings and have sex with girls in that range would in most countries be called criminals. So if you just have these thoughts, it’s nothing, but if you act on them, in most places, you would be a criminal.

I’ve done some research and hebephilic attractions are very common in men. In fact, 1

I suspect this is what most such men do, and actually, I would advocate this for anyone in this category. Nevertheless, there are hebephiles who have no attraction to girls over 15! I’ve been on their forums. People post photos of 16 year old girls and the hebephiles start yelling, “Ew gross!…No grandmas!,” etc. It’s actually pretty hilarious. That doesn’t strike me as real normal behavior, but I’ll defer to the APA on this one.

I was just reading the hebephile forum for research interests, and there’s nothing illegal on there anyway. At any rate, going to those forums is no big deal. All open pedophile/hebephile forums are about half pedophile/hebephile haters cursing them and saying they’re going to prison and half pedophiles/and hebephiles. In other words, those forums have as many pedophile and hebephile haters as pedophiles and hebephiles.

For self-disclosure purposes, I’m actually a teleiophile. Teleiophiles are maximally attracted to mature females aged 16+. The vast majority of straight men are teleiophiles.

7

Everyone screams about men having sex with 13-15 year old girls and of course about men having sex with children under 13. Just reading around, there sure seem to be a lot of men engaging in this behavior. Perhaps a good explanation for why this sort of thing is so ubiquitous is that so many of us men have strong attractions to younger girls. Why do we do this all the time? Because young girls turn us on so much, that’s why! Seems like the best explanation for me.

I’m a teleiophile, although I’m also very attracted to 15 girls. As we go down from there, I start getting less interested, and it looks more and more like a “little girl” to me, and I’m not into that.

In particular, 13 and 14 year old girls have what I call “little girl faces,” or baby fat in their cheeks. I don’t like that. Among 15-17 year old girls, the more she looks and acts like a grown woman, the more attracted I am to her. The more she looks and acts like a kid, the less I’m attracted to her. I suspect that my desires are typical for teleiophilic men.

Given that 2

If we truly are going to “kill all pedophiles” as everyone recommends, we will have to kill 24 million men. I’m sorry, I’m not willing to condemn 24 million of my fine brothers to death just because a bunch of feminist screechers and moral hysterics demand it. I’m willing to let all these guys slide as long as they only remain thought criminals. If they molest little girls, they need to be incarcerated, as in many cases, the girls get harmed. Even where the girls are not harmed, I don’t wish to live in a society where men can molest little girls.

Since there is no evidence that a majority of girls are harmed over the long term by being molested, I have mostly an ethical, not psychological objection to child molestation. However, many are still harmed anyway, so I do in part have a psychological objection because you might hurt the girl.

About men have sex with 13 year old girls, I mostly don’t like it, not for any particular reason except I think it’s gross and weird and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

About men having sex with 14-17 year old girls, I don’t see the harm if it’s consensual, and I have no problem at all with it if it is legal, but US society doesn’t agree with me and regards this behavior as morally objectionable to the extreme.

Societies have a right to have whatever reasonable morals they wish. They are free to encode these morals into laws as they see fit. We must live in society. If you break these laws, you might be incarcerated. I don’t like to see my brothers behind bars. I’ve always recommended to all my male readers that they don’t break the statutory rape laws wherever they live because you might end up behind bars.

I also strongly recommend all my readers not molest little girls (under 13) because to me it’s simply immoral behavior. You can also hurt the girl and end up “behind gay bars” yourself for a really long time.

Everything factual I stated above has been proven by science and is straight up scientific fact. Yet if you say it, it’s such a hate fact that you will have a lynch mob at your door screaming “Pedophile!” in ten minutes.

As you can see, my views on adult-teen and adult-child sex are more than reasonable. It’s beyond me why these views have made me into such a pariah. I’m not advocating anything bad.

On a final note, I don’t completely agree with much of Bumface’s hebephilia defense below. Nevertheless, I concur with him that hebephilia is not pathological or even abnormal for that matter.

Hello, I’ve been reading some evo-psych and sexology, and I’ve come across some things I think are very wrong. I just want to explain what I think is wrong about these ideas. Most of what I say will probably just be ignored by people in the field, but I’ll say it anyway.

I’ve often seen it claimed in the Evo-Psych literature that the best females for men to go for in ancestral times were those in their late teens at peak reproductive value. Many people just nod their heads in agreement with this claim without knowing that this is not really how it works in the real world. In primitive foraging societies the girls are actually married off quite a bit younger than that. Most girls are married off by the time they’re 16, so focusing on girls after that age would obviously not have been the best strategy.

In order to stand a chance at monopolizing the females’ reproductive lifespans, the best females to go for are those just prior the onset of their fertility, not after it, and this is what we see happening in primitive foraging societies. The girls are usually married off, and the men start having sex with them a few years before they become fertile.

By getting a female slightly before the onset of her fertility, you can guarantee she hasn’t been impregnated by any other males and still has all her reproductive years ahead of her. The price you pay for doing that is that you’re going to have to wait several years before she starts giving you offspring, but it’s not a big problem.

I’ve seen some Evo-Psychs claim that women about 20 would have been the best for long-term relationships in ancestral times. Now, this is completely out of touch with reality. Girls in foraging societies usually start reproducing before they’re 20, so what these Evo-Psychs are saying is that the best females to go for would have been those that are already married off and up the duff by some other man in the tribe. Complete nonsense.

The best females to go for would have been those that weren’t yet married or starting to reproduce. The typical age of a girl’s first pregnancy in foraging societies is about the mid to late  teens, so men would do best by aiming for girls under that age. If focusing on 20 yr olds is such a winning strategy, then how come we don’t see men in foraging societies using it?

Instead, we see girls get married off much younger than that, and it’s certainly not 20 yr olds that sell for the highest price in bride markets. It’s usually girls much younger than that. In a recent study into child marriage in Tanzania, they found that girls about 13 were selling for over double the price of 20 yr olds. If these Evo-Psychs are going to keep on ignoring real-world data like this, then they can’t call themselves proper scientists.

In his paper arguing that hebephilic preferences are maladaptive, Blanchard claimed that taking on pubescent wives would not be a workable strategy since you’d have to wait a few years before they’d start reproducing, but this argument is just more nonsense that ignores real-world data. We know the strategy works fine because we see it working.

It’s common practice in foraging societies for men to marry girls several years before they reach reproductive age. The most common age is about 14, but that’s only the age they’re officially married. The relationship often begins several years before that.

Sure, the men have to wait a few years before they start getting offspring from their wives, but it isn’t much of a problem and is easily outweighed by the advantages of getting a female who is guaranteed to have all her fertile years ahead of her. If it was as big a problem as Blanchard claimed, then it wouldn’t have become common practice to marry girls that young.

12 yo girls in HG societies on average live into their 50s, so claims that your 12 yo wife may die before she starts giving you offspring are more nonsense. Sure, she might die, but the chances are she’ll live all the way to menopause and be able to give you plenty of offspring along the way. Again, real-world data is being ignored. Two other ridiculous claims in his hebephilia paper are first about the fact that pubescent girls in foraging societies are often closely guarded to protect them from sexual harassment and rape, and second about the reproductive statistics from the Pume tribe.

Blanchard mentioned that pubescent girls are often guarded by their male relatives and claimed that this is somehow evidence that being attracted to pubescent girls is abnormal. Wait, what? If they didn’t have to be guarded that would be evidence that the men aren’t interested in them. The fact they have to be closely guarded just goes to show how much the men want them.

When a girl in a primitive foraging society comes into puberty and sprouts some perky eye-catching boobs, she has now entered her most attractive time of life, and all the men notice. She’s now a perky little Lolita, a young maiden, her body is tight and fresh, her boobs are pert, and her face is young and cute.

She is now at the age she where she will suffer the most sexual harassment and is most likely to be sexually assaulted or abducted by raiders who want to keep her for themselves. That’s why she has to be closely guarded at that age. By the time she gets to about 20 and has started reproducing, she’s past her peak, the men lose a lot of interest in her, and she no longer has to be closely guarded.

Her boobs have started getting saggy from breast-feeding, she has stretch-marks on her stomach, pregnancy has made her fatter, and her face has lost its youthful freshness and sparkle.

The risk of sexual assault follows the same pattern in our societies. Girls are most likely to be victims of sex crimes between the onset of puberty and the beginning of adulthood. The males in our species are focusing on the females just prior the beginning of their reproductive lifespan when their long-term reproductive potential is at its highest.

We can see that rape and other sex crimes against females peak in the teenage years.

Another graphic.

A bunch of idiot fool women who don’t understand the reality of human male sexuality and that being attracted to girls from 12-17 is 10

At the end of his paper Blanchard shows some reproductive statistics from the Pume tribe and thinks he has proof that hebephilia would be maladaptive. Basically, the statistics show that girls who start reproducing under 14 are reproductively less successful overall than those who start at 16+.

He thinks this means that men who commit themselves to girls under 14 would also be reproductively less successful than those who commit themselves to girls 16+. This just does not mathematically follow because the girls don’t start reproducing at the age that men commit themselves to them.

A man may marry a 12 yo girl and start having sex with her at that age, but she won’t typically get pregnant until several years later. If a man married an 8 yo girl, she obviously won’t start reproducing at that age, apart from maybe one time in ten million. You can’t presume that a girl would start reproducing at the age a man commits himself to her because that just isn’t what we observe to happen in the real world.

Men in primitive societies marry young girls, but they don’t start reproducing until a few years later. That’s the whole point of the strategy. In order to stand a chance at monopolizing a girl’s reproductive lifespan, you need to claim and commit yourself to her sometime before she reaches reproductive age. What those statistics are really telling us is that it’s a bad idea for girls to start reproducing in their pubescent years. If a girl starts reproducing at 12, she’ll leave behind fewer descendants than if she starts at 17.

It’s a bad idea to start reproducing at 12, and that’s why it rarely happens. Evolution has selected out a lot of the genes that cause girls to start reproducing at 12, though not completely because it does still happen sometimes. Selection happens on a gradient, it’s not just on or off. What makes Blanchard’s theory even more laughable is that the Pume are actually a good example of how adaptive hebephilic preferences can be.

The typical age of a girl’s first pregnancy in the Pume is about 15, so in order to stand a chance at monopolizing a girl’s reproductive lifespan, Pume men need to claim her before she’s 15. Which is exactly what happens. It’s common practice in this tribe for men to marry and knob girls about 12. Whoops.

I think being gay makes it difficult for Blanchard to understand normal male sexuality. One thing he doesn’t seem to understand is that straight men find cuteness sexy.

For example, Belle Delphine.

Belle Delphine

He seems to think that men should only find adult features sexy, but this is just wrong. There’s no law of evolution that says males must prefer the fully developed adult form. The only thing that ultimately matters in evolution is reproductive success.

If the males in a species can achieve greater reproductive success by going after the immature females, then they will evolve to do exactly that. This has happened to a degree in our species. It makes sense for men to go for females who are a bit immature and haven’t quite yet reached reproductive age because they still have all their reproductive years ahead of them.

The female physical features that men find the most attractive are often those that indicate a certain level of immaturity. The facial proportions men find most attractive are those of girls about 13-14. Men find soft, smooth, hairless skin highly attractive. The skin of adult women is usually a bit coarser and a bit hairy. Disproportionately long legs are highly attractive to men.

During puberty when a girl has her growth spurt, her legs grow faster than her torso, making her legs out of proportion with the rest of her body. It’s not until adulthood that the rest of her body catches up. The general petiteness and slimness men find highly attractive is not typical of adult women but is instead the physical proportions we’d expect to see in teenage schoolgirls.

The BMI men find most attractive, for instance, is the typical BMI of girls about 13. The female genitals men find most attractive are those that look a bit immature, with small inner labia and overall petiteness – the kind of genitals we’d expect to see in girls about 12-14. Men find pert boobs the most attractive. In primitive foraging societies the boobs of adult women have gone saggy due to breast-feeding. It’s only the young adolescent girls who haven’t had a baby yet that still have nice pert boobs.

This state of breast pertness men find highly attractive is naturally an immature feature, not adult feature. In modern societies women retain this immature pert state longer into adulthood due to having babies at a later age and wearing bras that push up their boobs making them look perkier.

The male preference for blonde hair may be another example. People’s hair is often blonde when they’re kids and then goes darker when they’re adult. In cartoons and CGI the female characters are made more attractive by making them look immature, while for the males it generally goes the other way. And, of course, the image of the schoolgirl is popular in the porn industry all around the world.

Popular female figures in fairy tales tend to be rather young.

Fairy tale men below.

As you can see, fairly tale men seem to be older than fairy tale women.

So when sexologists like Blanchard and company claim that men prefer fully developed adults, we can see that this is not true. That is what they want to be true, the way they think men should be. They think men should have preferences for fully developed adults 18+, but that is just not what the data shows or what biology predicts.

The most popular age for girls in the porn industry is 18, but that’s because they’re not allowed to go any lower. Obviously, what the market really wants is girls under 18. It’s like in that Chernobyl drama when the Geiger counter measures 3.6 Roentgens because that was the highest it would go to. The evidence is that if there were no legal restrictions, the most popular age for girls in the porn industry would be about 14.

A few years ago, the most popular porn genre was the barely legal stuff in which they’d use petite 18 yo girls with cute faces who looked about 14. They’d often dress up in school uniforms or role play as a young girl. This practice has since stopped because porn like that is now classed as child porn in most countries, but that’s what the market wants.

According to “experts” like Blanchard and Seto, a preference for girls that age is an abnormal evolutionarily maladaptive sexual disorder. They are clowns. They don’t understand the very basics of how the human mating system works. I think it’s only a matter of time before social attitudes change and some studios are granted a special license to produce porn in which the actresses have been made to look under 18 with machine learning.

Some country, probably in Europe, will decide to legalize this pseudo-CP in an effort to cut down on demand for the real stuff. It will have its own category on porn sites, and each video or photo will be electronically licensed to distinguish it from real CP. I predict that when this happens, it will become the most popular category on porn sites, and the most popular age will be about 14.

The most popular AI girlfriend in China is Xiaoice. She’s officially 18 years old, but she’s clearly modeled on a girl about 14. She has a cute face, a petite little body, and wears a school uniform. We can see what the market really wants.

Popular hentai figurine.

In this video she explains how she hopes to mature in the future, meaning that she’s immature at the moment.

Samsung getting in on it too. They’ve just brought out an immature-looking virtual assistant Sam.

Sam, Samsung’s young-looking female assistant.

This preference for immature females can’t be unique to our species. I imagine that in species in which the males try to monopolize the females’ reproductive lifespans, the males have a preference for the slightly immature females just prior the onset of their fertility. One example we see this in is Hamadryas baboons. They live in communities of several hundred out on the savanna.

Within these communities males keep small harems of females with their young. When the males enter maturity and are able to start building their harems, they become interested in the young immature virgin females and want to take possession of them. They often kidnap them from neighbouring communities.

What we see in Hamadryas baboons may be something like the way our Australopithicine ancestors used to live and mate out on the savanna. Over the past few million years of evolution through Homo Erectus and archaic humans, the harem size has gotten smaller and smaller, approaching monogamy.

But…but…don’t the highly scientific willy tests show that most men prefer fully developed adults? I don’t think we should take these primitive dick-meters too seriously. There are a ton of problems with them, the biggest of which is that the way people behave in the lab is not always the same as how they behave in the real world.

According to these dick-meters men find 30 yo women more attractive than teen schoolgirls, in complete contradiction with both real-world data and what biology predicts. Teen schoolgirls have double the number of reproductive years ahead of them than 30 yo women, so biology predicts they would be much more sought after, and this is exactly what we see in the real world.

The schoolgirl image is much more popular than the MILFs in the porn industry, teen girls are targeted for sexual assaults much more often than 30 yo women, young teen girls sell for a much higher price in bride markets, and in fairy tales and mythologies around the world, young teen maidens are the most highly prized, etc.

If these tests say that men find 30 yo women more attractive than teen schoolgirls, then we just can’t take them seriously. I think the sexologists who like to rely on them so much are suffering a bad case of physics envy. They like the idea that they can take some scientific measurements of men’s attractions and put them in a graph or equation like they’re doing Real Science. One day we’ll have the technology to do that, but these primitive dick-meters just aren’t it, and if they’re in conflict with real-world data, then we should go with the real-world data.

Menarche and Mammories

In a lot of primitive societies there are taboos against having sex with girls before menarche. A man may marry a young girl, but he isn’t supposed to consummate the marriage until she has her first period. People often take this to mean that this is the way nature intended things to work, as if menarche represented nature’s age of consent. When a girl has her first period, she has now supposedly become fertile and ready to have sex. A little bit of thinking will show that this just isn’t true.

There are no dramatic changes in a girl’s appearance of behaviour when she starts having periods. If a girl sprouted boobs and became interested in sex all of a sudden when she had her first period, we would have good reason to think girls have evolved to start mating just after menarche, but we see no such thing. One month before and one month after menarche girls look and behave the same. Minus the symbolic significance many cultures put on it, menarche is actually pretty uneventful.

Also, menarche doesn’t really mark the beginning of fertility. Girls don’t usually become able to conceive until 2-3 years after their first period. These rules against having sex with girls before menarche are really just as much social inventions as the age of consent in our societies. We have a rule that says “Don’t have sex with girls before age X,” and these primitive societies may have a rule that says “Don’t have sex with girls before menarche.” But is that how people actually behave?

I grew up in a working-class town just outside London in the UK. The AOC was 16, but it was common for men to have sex with girls younger than that. I knew two girls who lost their virginity at age 11 to men in their 20’s. Girls about age 13 would often have older boyfriends in their late teens or early 20’s. That’s what happened with my mum and dad.

I was always jealous of those Bigger Boys taking our girls, but when I was 20, I had a 13 yo girlfriend for a while, so it all balanced out in the end. When she was 15 she hooked up with her 35 yo uncle-in-law, and they’ve now been together for about 20 years and had 3 kids.

I knew a girl who loved older men, and when she was 12, she confided in me that she was screwing a 50 yo man who lived in the flats. I never saw him but I had no reason to doubt her. She also had a 23 yo boyfriend for a while when she was 12, and that was no secret. He was a friend of the family and used to come around her house to visit a lot.

So this is a little taste of reality. We may have this rule against having sex with girls under 16, but it happens anyway. The attitude we basically had was that if a girl had reached puberty and got the boobers, then she was ready. I think this is the way nature intended things to work, and we see the same kind of thing happening in primitive societies.

When Chagnon lived with the Yanomamo, he saw that when a girl got to about 12 and had some boobs, all the men noticed and she had to be guarded to protect her from sexual harassment and rape. The men weren’t supposed to have sex with girls that young because they usually hadn’t started their periods yet, but in reality they did. Most girls would start having sex with their husbands before menarche. In the Ache tribe researchers found that every single girl lost her virginity before menarche, usually with an adult man.

Out there in the jungle they may have some rule that you should only have sex with a girl when she has had her first period, but in reality probably most girls get screwed before that. Boobs are nature’s signal a girl is physically ready to have sex, not menarche. A girl reaches puberty, sprouts the boobs that signals she’s ready, and all the males notice and want to have have sex with her. This is how nature intended mating to work. It’s kind of obvious when you think about it.

Girls develop boobs a few years before they become fertile and able to conceive, but this is nothing strange. Soon after the onset of puberty, chimp females start getting sexual swellings on their bums that signal they’re ready to have sex, but they don’t become fertile until a few years after that. So we’re just following the same pattern we see in other animals. The females develop sexual characteristics and start having sex a bit before the onset of their fertility.

Game/PUA: We Are All Incels Now

1-800-Whatever: No Robert, I don’t. I’ve never been on their sites, but I am familiar with their ideas based on their comments I’ve come across but more so from what their “Manospherian” detractors say about them. I try to empathize with them, even though I don’t generally endorse their ‘mood,’ so to speak. I just wanted to point out the (pseudo) cool Gametards that ‘punch down’ at and scorn them. I don’t like that sort of rigmarole.

Sure. We are all incels, are we not? How many of us men have gone for more than six months of involuntary celibacy? And suppose we say buying prostitutes doesn’t count? Now how many have gone at least six months of involuntary celibacy. My God, it must be most of us. If you look at my raw figures like how many females I dated or my laycount, supposedly I’m in the top

So in a way, we are all incels! These guys who call themselves that have simply experienced the worst possible incel experiences: they have been deprived of all or most all female affection for their entire lives, which has logically left them bitter, angry, depressed, self-hating, and even aggressive and violent. There’s a little bit of the incel in all of us is what I am saying. I look at those guys and think, “There but for the grace of God go I.”

I always thought I did well just because I was so fucking cool and had such outrageous Game that females just couldn’t love me enough. In other words, my success was due to my actual superiority to other men. However, some Manosphere types, especially Looksists, schooled me and told me that I was deceiving myself and that much of my success was probably just pure good Looks. It was a bit hard for my ego to take at first, but I handled it well because I’ve always derived a lot of my self-esteem from my Looks.

Now, for sure you need to combine good Looks with other things like good personality and especially Game. Anything else – any status, power, money, fame, intelligence, talent, sense of humor, charm, etc., – can’t hurt, but these are all “add-ons” to the basic Looks requirement. In other words, in many cases, Looks is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for success with women. And many of those other things other than the first four are neither necessary nor sufficient to get women.

I guess there are guys without Looks who do great with pure Game, but I would not want to go that route myself. Hell, even with Looks, the World of Women is a scary enough place as it is. Sometimes it feels like walking through a field of razorblades. Actually it’s felt that way most of my life, even back in the day.

The world of Women is not inherently harmful but there are so many obstacles, you have to watch every step you take or you get hurt, it’s oh so easy to mess up and cut yourself pretty bad, and when you get cut, no one soothes you or patches you up, so you have to lie and say you never got cut. If you tell the truth about getting cut, everyone laughs at you and calls you a loser. So you grit your teeth and tiptoe through the field of knives once again. Our penises that guide and control our frontal cortexes demand that we must walk the razor-sharp minefield again and again.

Why Do So Many Black Women Have a Prostitute Mindset?

There is no race of women who has the idea that men need to pay good money to access their pussies than Black women. And no race of women has a prostitution and pseudo-prostitution rate as high as Black women.

I still meet Black women who are frankly prostitutes in one way or another. This race of women also seems to think that there is nothing wrong with prostitution. 4

Let’s say White women have a Psychopathy score on the PCL of 4, which may well be their average. Then Black women would have a Psychopathy score on the PCL of 8. You need a score of 20 to be a psychopath. My point is that even among us normal non-psychopaths, people can be more or less psychopathic. And you can be pretty damn psychopathic and still score below 20. The 20+ scores are for the true outliers, the pure psychopaths and sociopaths that cause so much damage. So perhaps this more casual attitude towards whoring among Black women is due to increased psychopathy.

Depression in ManWorld

We don’t talk about it, much, but we know it. You’re just not supposed to admit it. When I’m down, it’s obvious. The older man at the store will ask me how I am doing. If I am really down, I will shrug my shoulders. That’s means I’m down in ManWorld talk. You’re saying you’re depressed, but you are saying it in an acceptable way. Then he would say, “Hanging in there, huh?” or “Surviving, right?” I say, “That’s right.”

In ManWorld you can get depressed, but you almost have to be hanging in there and surviving. That is, coping. You’re not supposed to let depression knock you out of service. That’s not acceptable and it’s also cowardly. You probably should not stay too depressed for too long, either. I always try to keep my spirits up, even when I’m down. I usually say I’m ok or all right if people, even when I’m down.

Sometimes I will admit that things are not going well for me, and other men will respond by just cutting off contact with me. That’s what we men and even a lot of women do. Depression and bad vibes are contagious. Depressed people are depressing. They make you depressed. That’s why people avoid them. Depressed people also remind a lot of people that their lives are pretty depressing too, but they are denying and smiling their way out of it. Being around a depressed person reminds them of how fake their happiness is.

Defenses People Use Against Depression, with a Note on Narcissism

Defenses work best when they are relatively unconscious. The more conscious a defense is, the less well it works.

That’s why people get upset when you talk psychology. “Enough psychobabble!” These are usually extroverted Normies, usually men who are not too young. They are dealing with life by simply refusing to look inside of themselves and denying everything that is unpleasant down there. When you even mention the word psychology, you remind them of how fake their happiness and adjustment is and how it’s all based on mass forgetting and refusing to look at a whole lot of things inside of themselves. You remind them that there’s a creepy closet in their psyche full of all sorts of scary monsters who they are too scared to even look at, hence they are acting like scared little 7 year old boys.

A lot of people also think “depression is evil.” They think people choose to be miserable and by choosing this, they are making an immoral choice. They are sort of like criminals. They’re bad people! That’s a Hell of a way to feel about depressed people like that, but it’s not uncommon. Usually seen in a professional person of either sex aged ~30-40.

After 40, you’ve seen so much depression and probably experienced enough of your own that it’s hard to call depressed people evil anymore. It hits too close to home. Also, by 40, almost everyone has had about a million bad things happen to them, and most people simply don’t think that their shit doesn’t stink anymore. There is a humility that comes with middle age, even to the most arrogant people. The weight of time and life humbles us all.

Aging and the Narcissist

If a person past age 40 is still arrogant and highly narcissistic, something is badly wrong. A lot of times you are looking at Narcissistic Personality Disorder. That said, even the narcissist can only lie to himself for so long before even he has to admit it’s all a big fake job. Time and age is hard on the narcissist. Time not only heals all wounds, but it also wounds all heels, even narcissistic heels.

There is a decline in many functions and appearances with age, not the least of which is personal appearance. You can cover it up with makeup and even plastic surgery and a lot of extreme Denial so strong that you look right in the mirror and your mind literally distorts your own reflection. Yes, defenses can cause actual perceptual distortions.

But at some point, all the patching up isn’t going to work anymore, and the narcissist will have to deal with the painful reality that he is no longer so goodlooking or hot anymore, and in fact, he is now a homely aging or old person. This is very hard for the narcissist to take, and a lot of narcissists  become depressed in middle to old age. At some point all the defenses collapse and the whole structure comes tumbling down, leaving them dazed, bruised, and forced to look at the reality of their own personal wreckage.

A healthy person can be fairly ok with this. For example, I joke:

I think my looks are shot, but a lot of women still tell me I’m hot. I don’t get it.

Of course, I don’t really believe that, but it works pretty well as self-deprecating humor, and it’s the opposite of narcissism. And I’d be lying if I wasn’t fishing for compliments* when I say that.

The woman, even a young one – Hell, even an underage teenage girl, usually says:

“No way! You are handsome!”

To which I respond,

Really? Well, if you say so.”

Humility, fake or not, tends to go over pretty well as long as you don’t act like you hate yourself. If you have egotistical tendencies (and I do), it knocks you down to other people’s level, and people like it when you meet them on their level, whether it’s genuine or not.

I’m starting to think that no one cares how you really feel about them. Life is all about appearances, and appearances are by their very nature quite fake, at least in us showboating human egoists. Walk the walk and talk the talk and you’re done. Fake it til you make it.

Everyone acts like this is an immoral way to walk through life, except that people who say that are probably doing the exact same thing. In a sense, our interactions with other humans are best seen as a series of roles that we are playing in a drama with the other humans as co-actors. Shakespeare remarked on this. Yet it’s true. How many of us is truly genuine and why in the Hell would that be a good idea anyway?

Know one but you knows what is in your mind, so your thoughts are important to you only and are never important to anymore else until you verbalize them, which isn’t mandatory and is often a bad idea. Thoughts originate in your head and are often best kept right there. Thoughts aren’t illegal yet either; though don’t fret, the feminists and SJW’s are working real hard on it, and there should be some legislation to deal with thought crime soon.

In a way, the best social actors are those who can play a variety of roles. If you always play one role, fine. But in some cases, you may need to try on a new role. I’ve played all sorts of roles in life, and I like to try new ones all the time. It’s pretty fun and it’s an escape from egoism, narcissism, and solipsism because it gets you out of your damned head for once, and it also makes you realize that this thing called “you,” your actual identity, is in a way fake too, as fake as all these roles you are play. It’s manufactured, created or socially constructed as the postmodernists like to say.

Age is painful for us all, but healthier people, as the British like to say, “manage to muddle through anyway.” But here the narcissist is in trouble  because at a fundamental level, he is simply not healthy.

It is no secret that a lot of narcissists are very goodlooking, highly intelligent, or quite skilled at this or that. A lot of narcissists really are superior to most of the rest of us. Nevertheless, you’re not supposed to act like it. If you do, you will make everyone mad because no one likes to be talked down to.

*Supposedly fishing for compliments sucks, but you know what, readers? You all go ahead and fish for all the damned compliments you want. Life’s tough enough as it is. We all deserve a break and a pat on the back now and then.

Alt Left: Sexism and Misogyny in Famous Modern Male Authors

The feminists hate Ernest Hemingway and call him a sexist macho pig, but that’s a bum rap. His women are often very good, and it’s not uncommon that they are stronger than the men. In fact, a lot of his men are rather weak and pussy-whipped and the woman is wearing the pants. Considering Hemingway’s macho demeanor, this is odd.

Philip Roth has a reputation for drawing shrewish, screeching harpies for his female characters. Presumably, his wives or ex-wives figure into this. However, an ex-wife of his was interviewed and she said he was more boring that sexist or misogynistic. He wrote a solid four hours a day and then spent eight hours reading literary fiction. 12 hours a day, all used up. He was pretty much inaccessible during those periods. Roth was also a massive narcissist, but that’s not uncommon in famous male writers. Come to think of it, a lot of male artists of all kinds are narcissistic. Sort of goes with the territory.

Saul Bellow had a similar reputation when he wrote about wives and ex-wives, but he married four times. I think it’s a bit of a bum rap in his case.

Henry Miller was grotesquely and ridiculously misogynistic. He was the classic misogynistic player who spent his life drowning in pussy even though he was a huge asshole and he was pretty mean to boot. Anais Nin, who was very close to him, once called him on his misogyny, and he protested that he loved women, after all, he was surrounded by them all the time. But all misogynistic playboys are like this. They look down on or possibly even hate women, don’t treat them well, and women reward these semi-sociopathic misogynists by drowning them in pussy.

There’s also the player or womanizer who loves women or ladies’ man. He simply can’t get enough of them and even prefers to spend his time with women instead of men. He even thinks like a woman, somewhat. He’s often very goodlooking and he’s a bit softer than the other kind. He doesn’t treat women very well either, but he does love them.

Bukowski was a serious misogynist. A drunken raging creep. I remember one interview in his home where he drunkenly picked up a chair and hurled it at whichever Young Woman Writer Groupie Du Jour was staying with him, and he added in a ton of abuse. And she hadn’t done much to deserve it. In addition, he was a proud alcoholic and he was also probably the ugliest man that ever lived, yet he got lots of women his whole life. Go figure.

Game/PUA: How Much Do Good Looks Help You in This World?

Ray: Can good looks get you far?

Do people take sides of good looking people over uglies?

Do they have more chances of being hired in jobs?

Sure, of course!

Of course!

Of course!

But you can still get fucked over. And still have lots of people hating you. I did. I got fired from jobs. Lots of people hated me. Even though I was goodlooking. It only goes so far in the world of work. In the world of other things like friendships maybe and getting women, yes. It’s great for getting women but good Game is necessary. If you don’t have good Game, well.

You won’t be an incel. Sometime in your early 20’s some women will grab you and basically rape you. And they will try pretty often before that if you have decent Game. You really need that good Game though. But all the good Looks and good Game does is get you laid.

Women often fall in love with a pretty face, it’s that simple. But you can still wear out your welcome. Girlfriends will turn bitchy or even evil. They will dump you, scream at you, laugh in your face, humiliate you. But you do get laid.

I think it also gets some women to fall in love with you, especially if you have other redeeming qualities, intelligence (the more the better), wisdom (later in life), friendliness and warmth, charisma, infectiousness, sex appeal, some sort of achievement, egotism, a bit of aggression, bad boy influence or even criminality, sense of humor, good lovemaking skills, and believe it or not kindness and compassion, and of course power, status, fame, and money (though these four tend to come later in life).

Nevertheless, power and status can come early in life via just being The Cool Guy on the Block that all the Girls Want. This can also get you a bit of local fame, as in the locally famous cool guy in the neighborhood who everyone knows and likes. Popularity alone gets you women right there, though and the opposite is also true.

But all of those things are simply “add-ons” to the good Looks. The good Looks are practically a requirement. I could be wrong. This has simply been the experience in my life.

If you are unattractive or average, can you still get women? Of course, but you will have more difficulties, and you may have to settle for women who are lower quality.

Let me give you examples:

The Nerd

Beta nerd:

Woman 1: Ew, he’s such a nerd! He almost stinks! He’s always got that slide rule in his pocket.

Woman 2: Yeah but he’s the smartest boy in the department!

Woman 1: So what? He’s a creepy geek!

 

Chad nerd:

Woman 1: Chad is so brilliant! He can do quadratic equations in his head?

Woman 2: Really?

Woman 1: Yeah.

Woman 2: Damn! I’m getting horny just thinking about it!

The Man of Wisdom

Beta wise man:

Woman 1: Yeah, see that older man there? He’s always trying to talk to us. Always doling out this “old age wisdom.” It’s so insulting. He thinks we’re stupid girls who don’t know anything.

Woman 2: I know, it’s so creepy. I bet he’s just trying to fuck us!

 

Chad wise man:

Woman 1: So Chad’s old, so what? He’s so wise. I’m learning so many things from him. He’s like my father, except I never had one!

Woman 2: Oh, I know, hun, I think you have Daddy issues.

Woman 1: If Daddy issues means I can get that hot old man, I’ll take em!

Woman 2: Teehee. Me too, even though I love my Dad. I could always pretend I have Daddy issues. Wisdom? I’m just a dumb girl. I bet he could teach me a thing or two too, teehee!

The Nice Guy

Beta nice guy:

Woman 1: Yeah, he’s just too much of a nice guy. I want a tough guy, not a little bitch!

Woman 2: I know what you mean. Nice guys are so boring and sissy. I think they all need a testosterone shot!

 

Chad nice guy:

Woman 1: Can you believe what a nice guy Chad is? He’s the nicest guy in the whole world!

Woman 2: Oh, that’s so wonderful! I wish I had a nice guy. All I get are jerks (because I choose them)!

The infectious/engaging Man

Infectious/engaging Beta:

Woman 1: Ew! That creepy guy! He’s so intrusive. Always coming around, thinks he’s so hot. Thinks he’s so charming.

Woman 2: Charming? Yeah, charming as a cobra!

Woman 1: Ew, gross, I know. He even looks like a snake lol.

Woman 2: It’s gross the way he tries to come across as Joe Cool to everyone. It’s creepy as Hell!

 

Infectious/engaging Chad:

Woman 1: Oh no, he’s not creepy or obtrusive at all. I mean, Chad is in your face and imposing, but oh I so love that in man!

Woman 2: Oh me too! He’s so engaging! I bet he has electric energy! Just sucks you right into him teehee.

The Friendly and Warm Man

Friendly and warm Beta:

Woman 1: That creepy guy tries to be so nice!

Woman 2: Ew I know! He walks up and talks to everyone, whether they want to talk to him or not.

Woman 1: I don’t trust him. Sure, he puts on that really nice cover, but he’s so damn creepy! I bet he wants to wear my skin!

 

Friendly and warm Chad:

Woman 1: Chad loves everyone! He talks to everyone, no matter who they are!

Woman 2: Wow, really? I bet everyone loves him too.

Woman 1: Of course they do. Even total strangers. Everyone opens up to Chad!

The Charismatic Man

Charismatic Beta:

Woman 1: Oh, gross! That gross, creepy guy thinks he’s so cool!

Woman 2: Ew, I know. What’s he got to be cool about?

Woman 1: He’s so delusional. Everyone hates him, he’s a creep and

weirdo, and he thinks he’s Mr. Charming!

 

Charismatic Chad:

Woman 1: Yeah, Chad thinks he’s hot shit. Chad is so vain.

Woman 2: Tee hee, that’s ok, all hot guys are vain. They have a right to be. They’re hot.

Woman 1: Yeah, I don’t care anyway. I’m insecure and I need some of that confidence around me.

The Sexy Man

“Sexy” Beta:

Woman 1: Ew, that gross creepy guy thinks he’s so sexy! Look at how he walks, talks, sits, stands, moves…everything. He’s so gross and ugly though.

Woman 2: Oh I know, right? When a gross guy tries to act sexy, it doesn’t work. It just seems creepy. I’m about ready to metoo the creep.

 

Sexy Chad:

Woman 1: LOL you see Chad? I swear, everything about him is sexy. They way he walks, talks, moves, sits, stands, holds a coffee cup, his little mannerisms, his charming emotions. Everything! He sounds seductive towards everyone too. I bet it’s just gone native by now. He doesn’t even have to think about it.

Woman 2: Wow! I bet he could turn on my grand-ma, and she’s 90!

The Man of Achievement

Beta with some sort of achievement:

Woman 1: So? So he’s a achieved a few things? He’s still gross! And he’s still a creep!

Woman 2: Oh I know! He could have 10 PhD’s, and it wouldn’t make my clit tingle. I know. He dries me right up just looking at him.

Woman 1: I think I’m going to be sick!

 

Chad with some sort of achievement:

Woman 1: Chad has a degree! And an advanced degree! And he’s working on his PhD! He ran the XXX Department! He won the XXX Award for XXX.

Woman 2: Hot! I love a successful man!

The Egotistical Man

Egotistical Beta:

Woman 1: Not only is he ugly, gross, and creepy, but he’s also arrogant.

Woman 2: I know! He’s an arrogant dick! He thinks he’s so hot. What a condescending bastard.

Woman 1: I know, he looks down on everyone and for no good reason.

Woman 2: Well, obviously he seems to be in love with himself.

Woman 1: In love with what? His ugly, gross face.

Woman 2: Ew shut up, I’m going to have dinner soon.

 

Egotistical Chad:

Woman 1: Teehee, Chad is so full of himself. But I love it though.

Woman 2: Yeah, me too. I see him and he’s so arrogant that I want to walk up to him and slap his face, but then I think, “Hey, I like that.”

Woman 1: I know what you mean! He really thinks he’s hot shit. But it’s kind of cute, actually. Anyway, he should love himself! He’s Chad! Chad has a right to some vanity!

The Somewhat Dangerous and Aggressive Man

Beta with a bit of aggression:

Woman 1: Ew, gross. He gives me serial killer vibes! He looks sort of menacing, doesn’t he?

Woman 2: Ew, yeah. He gives me the creeps every time I see him. I can’t put a finger on it. He’s not just ugly and creepy, but he also sets off my spidey sense.

 

Chad with a bit of aggression:

Woman 1: Teehee, well, Chad is a bit aggressive. He even scares me a little bit sometimes. But that’s ok, that kind of turns me on, you know.

Woman 2: Ooooohhhh, a dan-gerous man! You poor girl, teehee!

Woman 1: Yeah, he can do what he wants to me. I just told him, “Please don’t kill me!”

Woman 2: Teehee. Hell, he’s so hot, I might even let him kill me! It’d be a great way to go out!

Woman 1: Yeah! Danger is sexy! I’m attracted to dangerous men. Moth to the flame I guess teehee.

The Bad Boy

Bad Boy Beta:

Woman 1: Ew, that ugly guy gives me the creeps!

Woman 2: I know. He looks like a criminal! I bet he’s been in jail.

Woman 1: Yeah, what a loser. Jailbird. And probably for bad things too.

Woman 2: He’s so damn creepy, you know he’s got to be a rapist or a child molester. No way would I let that creep anywhere near my kids.

 

Bad Boy Chad:

Woman 1: Heehee, Chad is such a bad boy. He’s always getting in trouble teehee.

Woman 2: Ohh, Chad is a verrry bad booooy! I’m going to have to spank him for being so bad!

Woman 1: Yeah, me too. But I like bad boys. Nice guys are so boring.

The Funny Man

Funny Beta:

Woman 1: You see those jokes he tries to tell?

Woman 2: Oh I know. They’re all terrible! And so many of them are just tone deaf and send the whole room into embarrassed silence. And he keeps repeating the same jokes, over and over. We didn’t laugh the first time. Why would we laugh again, idiot?

Woman 1: And his jokes are so corny. They’re not even funny!

Woman 2: Yep. My little brother tells better jokes than that, and he’s in fifth grade!

 

Funny Chad:

Woman 1: Teehee, Chad is always cracking jokes. And often in inappropriate situations where he offends everyone in the room. Even his dumb, corny jokes are funny. I even laugh when he repeats his jokes. So he repeats them? They’re still funny!

Woman 2: Face it, hun, Chad’s a card! “Ladies and gentlemen, give it up for Chad!”

Woman 1: Teeheehee.

The Man Who Is a Good Lover

Nerd as good lover:

Woman 1: My friend dated him for a while, and she said he was good in bed.

Woman 2: Big deal! Look at how creepy and ugly he is! Gross!

Woman 1: I know, I’d have to take three showers after I got done with him. Yuck!

Woman 2: I don’t care how good he is in bed. I’d have to look at his face when he’s on top of me. I’m afraid I might puke!

Woman 1: Oh I know, huh? Who cares if some ugly creep is a “good fuck.” A grizzly bear could probably fuck me pretty good, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to do it with one!

Woman 2: I know, right?

 

Chad as good lover

Woman 1: I swear to God, Chad is the best fuck I’ve ever had in my whole life.

Woman 2: Really?

Woman 1: Yeah, he doesn’t even have to do much. Hell, he could just lie there and let me get on top of him and do the work, and I’d still think he was the best fuck of all!

Woman 2: Teehee, me too!

Woman 1: Why is Chad the best fuck? Because he’s in the room, naked, and fucking you, that’s why!

Woman 2: That’s about all he has to do, girl! Teeheehee.

The Kind and Compassionate Man

Kind and compassionate Beta: Well, he is nice. And he’s very kind and compassionate. He’s very good with animals. He works at the vet and he’s very kind to the animals there.

So what? He could be Mother Theresa’s son and I wouldn’t date him! What about us human female animals? How does he treat us? He’s creepy as Hell! Ted Bundy seemed very kind and compassionate too. He worked at a rape help line and he counseled women who had been sexually assaulted. And when he was done for the day, he went out and killed women!

 

Kind and compassionate Chad:

Woman 1: You will never believe this, but you know my smart-ass, sarcastic, bad boy, always in trouble, part-time criminal, full-time asshole boyfriend, Chad?

Woman 2: Teehee, yes, I know him. He’s a very bad boy! I think you should send him to my reformatory school where I will punish him teehee in my own special way.

Woman 1: Teehee. But you know what? Chad loves animals. Even bugs! He’s a birdwatcher and he even collects butterflies. And he rescues hurt animals all the time. He almost has tears in his eyes when he does it, too. Once my cat died and Chad come over to bury him in the backyard in a cardboard box, and Chad was crying!

Woman 2: Oh, how sad! Chad is so sensitive. So hot and so sensitive. Tell you what, next time Chad’s crying because some pet died, send him to my place. I’ll make him feel better teehee!

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)