Daily Archives: January 21, 2015

Three Types of Mexican Women

There are three basic types of Mexican females in my town:

  1. Too young to get pregnant.
  2. Pregnant/Peri-pregnant (Soon to be pregnant, Recently pregnant).
  3. Too old to get pregnant.

These Mexican chicks are so fertile, I swear to God. Seriously, all you have to do is look at them and they get pregnant. I am not kidding! Srs!

24 Comments

Filed under Hispanics, Humor, Mexicans, Race/Ethnicity, Women

Snow White Makes You Happy

Go north, young man!

Snow is happiness.

Snow is happiness.

Ingredients for happiness:

Snow White:

White people
White snow

Combine with North Seas and you have an excellent recipe.

The World’s Happiest Countries Page 2 of 4 – Forbes.com

  1. Norway
  2. Denmark
  3. Finland

I don’t get it. How can anybody be happy in these countries when it’s too cold to fuck most of the time? Someone explain.

9 Comments

Filed under Denmark, Europe, Europeans, Finland, Norway, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Whites

Capitalism Causes War

All wars are bankers' wars.

All wars are bankers’ wars.

Related.

Otherwise known as conflict of interest. Now you know why “liberal Democrat” Joe Biden was shilling for war in the Ukraine.

2 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Democrats, Economics, Europe, Geopolitics, Politics, Regional, Ukraine, US Politics, War

Scary New Pot Study

Interesting study.

They are playing it up, but the headlines are lying. They are saying, Pot Users Have Smaller Brains. That is true in a sense, and the earlier the onset of use, the smaller this part of the brain, but that is not the end of the story. The part of the brain is the orbitofrontal cortex. No one knows what this part of the brain does, and it may not do a whole lot. It is very much involved in states of addiction. So maybe this is the alcoholic/pack a day smoker/heroin addict/crackhead part of your brain that mostly just sits there until you take up a habit and then it activates and does whatever, God knows what.

The pot smokers smoked pot on average of three times a day and had started using it from ages 13-30. The younger they started using, the smaller the orbitofrontal cortex was. Pot users had IQ’s on average 5 points lower than controls. That may seem alarming, but for some like me, that leaves me with an IQ of 142, hardly a stupid burnout fried pothead. That should still be enough to kick ass and take names. Towards the lower end up the IQ spectrum, the loss of 5 points may be more significant. Going from 90 to 85 is a much bigger deal than going from 147 to 142, which is barely even meaningful.

Nevertheless, there was no relationship between the size of the orbitofrontal cortex and IQ, so the loss of grey matter in that part of the brain, whatever it was doing, was not making the users more stupid.

In addition, the reduction in size of the orbitofrontal cortex was correlated with increases in connectivity and structure. The younger the person was when they started using, the greater the increases in connectivity and structure were. So the brain was attempting to compensate for the loss of matter in the orbitofrontal cortex by building new highways and storehouses, so to speak. It is known that the brain is plastic in this way, but past a certain point, a person has sustained too much brain damage and plasticity can no longer compensate for it and then you start getting symptoms from brain damage.

Brain damage is also much overdrawn. There are plenty of scary headlines about it, sure, but how many people do you know who have four or more drinks a day. They are all shrinking their brains. Short term heavy drinking of the type often seen in college can depress the brain for up to two years afterwards. So where are all the headlines about this?

Furthermore, it is little known, but we all get brain damage. From age 23 on, our brains are getting more damaged and losing more brain cells. So all the scary headlines say X Drug Kills Brain Cells” which is really dumb because the truth is headlines should read Life Kills Brain Cells. So we should all kill ourselves to avoid brain damage?

In addition, the additional connectivity and structure is a nice addition to your brain, though it is not known what advantages it may have. But pot users will have this increased connectivity and structure that nonusers may not have and there may be advantages to that.

The increases in connectivity and structure slow down after seven years of regular use, but they do not abate. And the more pot you use, the more increases in connectivity and structure you get. And even after quite a few years of heavy use, pot users still had greater brain connectivity than nonusers.

What would be interesting would be to see if the IQ decline corrects itself after a person stops using.

10 Comments

Filed under Cannabis, Dope, Hallucinogens, Health, Intelligence, Intoxicants, Neuroscience, Psychology, Science

Less Brains, More Happiness

Ignorance is bliss.
Ignorance is bliss.

21 Comments

Filed under Humor

Our Present Misogynistic States of America

Found on the Net (the author is a woman):

I’m a virgin, nearing thirty, and I despise straight men…

…I’m a pretty honest person. I’m a misandrist, and I despise most men…

…Then again, I don’t think it’s a big deal, because men in general really hate women. They don’t treat them well, or equally. Ugly and fat women, such as myself, are derided and despised. Beautiful women who have sex and show off their fantastic bodies are derided and despised. Mothers with stretchmarks and wrecked vaginas are made fun of, flawed girls have those flaws shoved in their face constantly, and every day, instead of being treated like actual human beings, women are subjected to comparison with some impossible feminine ideal. One out of three women is raped or sexually assaulted in her lifetime – treated like nothing more than a public toilet rather than a being who deserves respect. This is not the act of a kind and loving gender. Men are, in general, neither kind nor loving towards women.

And for some reason, it’s always the woman’s fault.

Forget the 1st, 2nd and 4th paragraphs. Focus on the third paragraph. Is she right? Do we really hate women this much? Do we really treat them so horribly? I shudder to think.

I do not know the answers to those questions, but I remember thinking around my high school and college years that most males didn’t really like females all that much. The proof in the pudding was in the fact that whenever males had any free time, they spent it with their male buddies, not with their girlfriend or other females. Now sure perhaps they loved having sex with their girlfriends, and perhaps they were even in love with them (or said they were), but other than that, I always got the feeling that most guys in general would prefer to spend most of their free time around guys rather chicks.

And if it’s really true that this is the way most males treat females (including presumably their wives and girlfriends whom they profess to love), then we must ask the question if most men really and truly do love their female lovers at all? Because the behavior described in paragraph 3 is not loving treatment. That’s not the way you treat someone you love. Sorry.

21 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Sane Pro-Woman

Neoliberal Nonsense

Found on the Net:

The Nobel laureate economist Ronald Coase is famous for showing that, among other things, government regulation isn’t necessary to solve problems like pollution of drinking water. The people who drink the water can negotiate with the polluters, and if the costs of these transactions are low, they’ll settle their differences on their own. For example, the people might simply pay the polluters not to pollute if their harm was greater than the polluters’ benefit. (Alternatively, the polluters might pay the people to put up with the filth if the pollution benefited the polluters more than it harmed the people.)

This guy won a Nobel Laureate in a nonexistent science called Economics? Well I suppose it figures.

Breathtaking, just breathtaking. What a stupid idea. So when does this ever happen in the real world anyway? If it’s such a great idea, how come it never happens?

The polluter has all the power. The resident victims have no power. And that’s all you need to know about that power exchange, or really total power exchange. Which is the key concept of course. Total power exchange. The polluter is the master, The residents are slaves. The residents have no leverage over the polluter, contrary to the fantasies of the purveyor of dismal science above.

But until you figure out that it is unworkable utopian fantasy that never happens outside of ivory towers, it sure sounds convincing.

Still, it’s amazing how many of our elites actually believe this sort of airhead academics. Or do they even believe it in the first place? Whenever anyone believes any self-serving nonsense, you always have to wonder whether they really believe it or whether they are just pretending to and they know it’s nonsense.

4 Comments

Filed under Economics, Neoliberalism

What Language Is This?

No clues, sorry.

Já það er bara held ég mjög góð hugmynd hjá þér, nema ég bara veit ekkert hvað ég á að segja! Ég spyr bara hvaðan ert þú? Og ég geri ráð fyrir að þú notir google þýðingarvélina til að skilja þetta.

11 Comments

Filed under Linguistics, Spot the Language

Disliking a Culture Versus Disliking a Race

Is disliking a culture acceptable if you dislike its behavior? Sure!

Is disliking a race acceptable if you dislike that race’s behavior? The problem here is that there often is no behavior typical to any race the same way that there is behavior typical to cultures. Culture drives behaviors much more than race per se does. So the answer is no because races generally don’t have typical behaviors in the first place.

What is ok is to have a general dislike for a culture and everyone in it who practices that culture and is immersed in it. For instance, one could say, “I don’t like ghetto Blacks. I do not like the way they act.” Everyone knows what that group of people is and unfortunately, they do have some pretty typical ways of acting. You could even dislike that whole group of people called ghetto Blacks.

But there are probably large numbers of Blacks who are not ghetto at all, so you would not be able to dislike the entire Black race under this rule. This rule isn’t going to allow anyone to dislike the Black race because the Black race doesn’t really have a common culture in the US, surely not an reprehensible one.

The Indians are way worse because Indian culture is all-pervasive and it seems to suck up everyone in India into it and warp and distort them. So you could say I hate Indian culture and I don’t really like the people who practice that culture. But many Indians have pretty much dropped out of Indian culture. This is especially true for NRI Indian emigrants and expats.

I have a physician who could not stand Indian culture so he left India to come here for a culture he thought was a lot better. Though most Indian immigrants are pretty wrapped up in their weird, unpleasant culture, most Indians born here in the US are emancipated from Indian culture. The US-born Punjabis I meet are as American as I am. A lot of them act like the surfer-stoner cool guys I grew up with. I have no idea whether they retain any Indian culture, but they definitely seem to have chucked all the backwards and barbaric aspects of it. Maybe they retained some of the good parts, I have no idea.

US born Indians, at least the Punjabis, seem to assimilate rapidly and very well. Why this is is not uncertain.

It is going to be tempting for racists to us the notion that you can dislike a culture for its general behavior and anyone in it who follows the precepts of that culture as an excuse for the racism and hatred for entire races on generally dubious grounds. After all, the racist typically says that all of the hated group act alike. But that is typically not so. Blacks don’t share a common ghetto culture. Hispanics do not share a common barrio gang culture. Muslims do not share an ISIS extremist Islam culture. The ones I meet here in the US are quite pleasant and behave very well.

So while racists may try to use this rule to justify their racism, it usually will not work because culture is not monolithic, many cultures are heterogeneous, and many people abandon the more backwards and obnoxious aspects of their culture.

Sure it’s ok to dislike a group of people for their specific behaviors that you view as obnoxious, poisonous or nasty. But you have to dislike only those persons in that culture that are wrapped up in their barbaric system. You have to pardon all of those who have freed themselves from it.

6 Comments

Filed under Culture, Ethics, Philosophy, Race/Ethnicity