Daily Archives: February 9, 2018

American Hypersexed Culture An Illusion Propagated by Gay Hollywood

This comment was from a post I wrote noting that the median straight man has sex with six women in his lifetime, and the average straight woman has sex with only three men in her lifetime. Of course, this goes against the literally insane culture that all single straight men can just go out and get sex anytime they want.

Curiously (or perhaps not so curiously) this idiocy is promoted by feminists, especially male feminists, more than anyone else. I am not sure why, but feminism is simply Feminine Thinking Politicized (and Weaponized) or better yet the Feminine Character Politicized (and Weaponized).

Females, at least here in the modern West, are convinced that any single man can go out and get sex anytime they want to. I ask women about this, and they answer, “Well they could just go to a bar and they’re guaranteed to get a woman to have sex with them that night.” I try to tell them that this is not the case at all, and if were that easy to get laid in bars and clubs, men would spent all their time there, and society would come a halt, but it’s like talking to a wall. I don’t get through to them. They simply cannot comprehend it.

Let me tell you something. As noted above, if it were literally that easy to get laid in a bar or even a club, bars and clubs would be swarming with men every night and probably all day long too. In fact, I would probably be  writing this piece at a table at a bar myself, at 11 AM yet.

They think this way because of solipsism. Quite simply, females are solipsistic. Because of this solipsism, women are unable to put themselves in males minds and try to think like men or see the world as men do. This is why women see the world as a fantasy creation of the dream world of Feminine Character instead of how it actually is – a cold, cruel, unfair world where you barely stand a chance.

In this case, most women can  get laid anytime they want to. “By lowering your standards!” They retort. Of course that is true, but the average attractive woman could easily have her pick of 10-15 attractive men every day if she chose, at a minimum. Female humans, like other female animals, are notoriously fickle about their sexual partners and test them for fitness, choosing the best one who will pass on the best genes just like any other mammal, or even a bird or a fish for that matter. Females have been picky for a long way back in our heritage, all the way back to when we were frogs, if any of you can remember that far back.

Hence, due to female solipsism, if a woman can get laid anytime she wants, obviously a man can get laid any time he wants to because whatever is true for women is true for men and woman can only see the world as it is for women and not how it is for men.

Anyway this is a very interesting take only the Big Lie of the Reality of the Hypersexed Culture. What I mean is that the hypersexed culture exists, but not really in reality. Instead it exists as a fantasy world of the media and entertainment, and includes porn.

I believe the hypersexed culture is largely a media creation. The product of a media composed disproportionately of gay men writing about their own hyper promiscuous sex lives under the guise of heterosexual characters. TV has normal males in this culture confused under the delusion that all the other heterosexual men around them are getting random hookups with women in the exact same way the gays get it in the gay bars.

In The Myth of Heterosexual Aids by Fumento, besides his analysis of the particularly filthy, infectious nature of anal sex with gays both giving and receiving it up the ass. He also talks about the general nature of the heterosexual vs. gay lives and shows a statistic that the average straight man has 0.85 sex partners per year vs. 60 for the gays. That’s between 1 and 0 meaning most men are either monogamous in some sort of relationship, or blue balled. Any player types can’t be very common, or the number would be over one rather that under. Only in the faked-out media are there all these girls looking for random sex with strangers. The only ones that do are getting paid for it, or it’s a man in women’s clothes trying to trick men into a Crying Game moment.

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


Filed under Culture, Feminism, Gender Studies, Health, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Illness, Man World, Pop Culture, Pornography, Psychology, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Sex, USA, Women

Solipsism Is a Core Aspect of Female Nature

One uncomfortable fact of life that any halfway wise and honest man who can hear and see figures out at some point in life (I didn’t figure this out until I was in my 50’s) is that females are naturally solipsistic. It’s their basic nature. The more you hang around with women and especially if you get into close and intimate relationships with them (and  the more the better) the more this becomes so starkly apparent that it is almost impossible to deny it. The only way you can deny it is by lying to yourself.

In other words, women, like most of us flawed humans, are all wrapped up in themselves most of the time. But then men, like most of us flawed humans, are all wrapped up in themselves too. Mother Theresas are like four leaf clovers.

The youngest ones of course are the worst of all. This starts around age 16 and certainly by 17 when a female finally recognizes herself as a sexual object for men (which she literally is no matter how much feminists complain). Hence the endless poses, standing in front of the mirror and now endless photos of themselves and even videos of themselves, often with all sorts of posing, the makeup, the outfits, etc.

All of this feeds the histrionic and solipsistic nature of the female to make herself up as a sex object for men who plays all sorts of roles. Hence the constant changes in hair color, style, makeup, clothing, etc.  – these can all be seen as constantly changing roles that women play in their sexual persona – which is frankly directed more at other women (presumably competitors?) than at men. Women have told me that women dress up, wear makeup, and change their outfits and hair all the time to impress other women, not impress men.

“Women dress up for other women. It’s to impress other women,” a particularly perceptive 43 year old blonde divorcee told me several years ago while openly flirting with me over a coffee at a Starbucks. “Men will fuck anything,” she told me, “There’s no need to pretty yourself up for men.”

That solipsism is an essential trait of the Female Character should not be taken as an insult. As in most things, the Female Character has a masculine corollary in the Masculine Character. Hence on the metric of selfishness (and all humans are selfish no matter what  you think, and necessarily so) the layout looks like this:

Character                  Masculine     Feminine


Self-centeredness    narcissism    solipsism

Men are naturally narcissistic, and woman are naturally solipsistic. Pick your poison. We are dealing with basically selfish humans here, and humans are flawed by nature from birth itself.

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


Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Narcissism, Psychology, Sex, Women

Hinduism As Social Segregation Sanctified

From the comments. I agree that this is the basic nature of the religion. The base of the religion itself is the religiously sanctified social segregation or, I would argue, stratification. The Dharma and reincarnation stuff may well be tossed in as pie in the sky. the way the Catholic churches sold pie in the sky to the working classes for centuries.

Lin: Hinduism is social segregation sanctified, with ‘spirituality’ like ‘dharma’,’ reincarnation’ thrown in as opioid to instill fatalism/defeatism to the downtrodden or vanquished races. Go ask Mr. Singh, your ex-prime minister:


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


Filed under Asia, Catholicism, Christianity, Hinduism, India, Regional, Religion, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asia

Sunnis As Protestants, Shia As Catholics

Despite being banned by Islam, many local forms of Islam developed that were outside of the original laws laid down by Mohammad. For instance, it was very common to have graveyards with gravestones in the Muslim World, especially in Central Asia. Worship of God via intercessionary saints and their temples was also quite common, especially in Northern Mesopotamia and over into Central Asia.

Both of these were associated with Sufism, the innovated Islamic form which has frankly always been the official Islam of the Sunnis of Iraq, including Saddam’s regime. Some of the later rebel groups in the Iraqi resistance were Sufis, even though Sufism is fairly quietist as far as Islam goes. Sufism is also very big in the Kurdish area, in Iran among the Shia as a Shia Sufism sanctioned all the way up to the mullah level, and of course into Afghanistan, which is really Ground Zero for this sort of shirk, innovation, etc. That some of the most fundamentalist Islam of all came out of such a central area of Islamic deviation is odd, or perhaps the fundamentalists were rebelling against all of the shirk and innovation.

It is well known outrage against all sorts of forms of shirk and heretical innovation in the Arab World that has led to the development of political Islam, the Salafists and onto Al Qaeda and ISIS. Make no mistake, the Salafists, Sunni fundamentalists, Salafists, Al Qaeda and ISIS are all products of the Arab World originally. Al Qaeda itself came out of Saudi Arabia and Egypt and then on to Sudan. The spread to Central Asia, where Al Qaeda relocated to Afghanistan, was a later development in context with the Islamic revolt against the Marxist regime there beginning in 1978-79.

These Salafists are back to basics purists similar to what a lot of fundamentalist Protestants nowadays claim to be. It was also similar to the Protestant Revolt, which was actually a back to basics revolt against the Catholic Church, mostly due to corruption due to selling of indulgences, writing the books in Latin, and the Church’s great wealth. Corrupt priests are hardly Christians at all. Writing the books in Latin a language few could read led to the religion being distorted into whatever the priests wanted it to be instead of the Word itself.

Jesus’ message was go forth and bring the good news to the common man, hence the missions of the Mormons and other missionaries, the Bible translation of SIL, etc. A real Christianity would write the books in whatever language the people could read. Writing in a language that the layfolk can’t even read is anti-Christian. And indeed, the most back to basic folks in Christianity nowadays are still the Protestants, analogous to Sunnis who believe that the Koran was divine word and must not be deviated from.

In contrast, the Shia are like the Catholics. The Catholics actually believe that the Christianity must constantly be reinterpreted to go along with the times, sort of like liberal living Constitution types in Constitutional law. This itself is actually quite progressive and it is the lack of a central authority banning back to basics and mandating living Christianity that leads to almost all true literary Biblicalist fundamentalists nowadays being Protestants.

The Vatican learned its lessons early on via Galileo in being anti-science. They have changed quite a bit. For God’s sake, the Vatican even has its own astronomer!

The resistance to the theory of evolution was mostly coming from the Protestants in the years after Darwin. The Catholic Church simply went agnostic on the subject, which I believe is still doctrinal to believers who can choose to believe or not even if the Church itself says that evolution is true.

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

Leave a comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Asia, Catholicism, Christianity, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Kurdistan, Left, Marxism, Middle East, North Africa, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Saudi Arabia, Science, Shiism, South Asia, Sudan, Sufism, Sunnism

The King As God and Pie in the Sky When You Die

The Catholic churches sold pie in the sky to the working classes for centuries, urging them to accept their downtrodden role in life as religiously sanctified. Yes, this life is terrible, they said, but this is your lot in life, essentially ordained by God and religion (notice the connection with Hindu caste here) to live this life, there is glory, beauty and valor in suffering, after all suffering being at the heart of Christianity since He died on the cross.

Revolting now would be a sin, the Church preached. I am not sure how they conjured up how it was a sin, but perhaps given the connections between religion and  the state in those days the priests said that the monarchs  were ruling via God and hence rebellion would be rebellion against God and religion itself. How can you fight a war against God, Jesus and the Bible? Talk about a heresy! And in this way, the people were calmed.

The Nepalese Hindus were told the same thing and hence they were banned from rebelling against the state. If you prayed, lived a good life as sin-free as possible or at the  very least had your sins absolved regularly, you could accept your miserable lot in this earthly life on the grounds that if you lived religiously properly, you could have “pie in the sky when you die.”

In other words, keep your head down, don’t complain too much, don’t rebel, accept your lot in life and just try to be a good Christian you will rewarded with an eternity in Heavenly bliss when you die. You wonder why the early Marxists hated religion so much and called it the opium of the people. I believe it was mostly for this reason – religion sapping the normal revolutionary will of the people in service to a powerful elite who abused the common people.

As noted above, in Europe it was common for the monarchs to claim to be ruling in God’s place acting via intercession in place of God Himself and religion.

In this sense, the monarchs in Old Europe were God. There were the people and then God and religion. In between stood the priesthood and especially the monarchs. The latter in particular made great pains to show that they had been chosen directly by God to rule and that it was actually God and religion which was ruling the people via the monarch.

In ancient times, it was supposedly not uncommon for rulers to claim to be ruling in place of God or via God. In this sense, God and religion themselves were ruling the people and the monarch was simply a pawn, a tool of the Gods, forced to implement the will of God and religion and an intercessionary conduit. The ruler was barely even a human. He was in fact something of a Human Pipeline, transmitting the will of religion and God to the people via decrees and rules. If you are being ruled by God and religion themselves, how can one revolt.

The Hindu monarchy in Nepal does the exact same thing.

I am not sure the extent to which the Muslim rulers pulled this off as intercessionary prayer is supposedly banned in Islam as being one step from idolatry while also being a prohibited innovation. However, many of the sultans and imams who ruled the Arab World were in a sense religiously sanctified often by being the genetic line of Muhammad himself. If you are being ruled by Muhammad’s descendant via the laws that Muhammad laid down himself with the imam being in a sense intercessionary to Mohammad, God, and religion (though never stated explicitly as such).

So the same thing was going on in the Arab World except that noticing it and stating it out loud were virtual heresies akin to saying that the ruler himself was a heretic.

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


Leave a comment

Filed under Arabs, Asia, Catholicism, Christianity, Europe, Hinduism, Islam, Left, Marxism, Nepal, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asia

Problems of the Arab Mind, with a Nod to Raphael Patai

Interesting comment on the site from this old post, which I really ought to run again. It sure would be nice to talk to this woman some more. I would like her to elaborate on her comments here. From the way she describes it, it is almost like Arab culture is an actual Culture of Narcissists, with most of the men being narcissistic mostly due to how they are raised. And yes the women are raised to feel inferior from the very start. This is the case in family life even from the early years. It is clear to the Arab girl growing up that the boys and men in the family are superior to the girls and women.

I totally agree with Robert. Being cunning while having no resources is natural to them. They also involuntary gaslight everyone around them 24/7, from business tactics to the closest people in their life (Yes, even family).

I am Latina and after being married to one and traveling to North Africa several times, I can assure you it takes their holidays of Ramadan to get them to actually help other people. They can walk right past a child dying of starvation and not offer and feel no remorse. They are unbelievably selfish to a point an American could never grasp. This is what allows them to get into relationships with other narcissistic Arabs. It’s sickening really because all women want is love, and a woman will never be happy married to an Arab for long.

They have an uncanny ability to manipulate and gaslight/brainwash people. It’s really fucking scary. All that charm with their good looks fucks your head up. They will break your spirit, disconnect your soul from your body, and hold it in a suspense state. I finally broke away after 13 years of loving and hoping he would change. I had to literally start recording our conversations because he would have me questioning my own sanity. When I was alone I would play those conversations back to myself because I honestly couldn’t remember at the time what was going on around me.

It’s all just so sad. I lost all those years living in CPTSD, and now I’m in total isolation. So what I’m saying is stay away from them as much as possible or you will be sucked in. Keep in mind I am a professional. I am a current member of SHRM and also a Human Resource Director.

The sad part is their women stand up for them because they were born and breed to be slaves via humiliation from the beginning. This is the way cults, the military, and other organizations manipulate their members to mind control them. These women don’t even know that they were born to gaslight themselves. Sad but true.

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

1 Comment

Filed under Arabs, Culture, Islam, Narcissism, Personality, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Religion, Romantic Relationships, Women