Monthly Archives: March 2018

“Mother Water”

This is a bit more of my creative writing. And yes, I have been published in literary journals, in case you were asking. I published a short story in a single literary journal. There were a lot of  unknown names in there, but there were also a couple of big names – Gary Snyder and Allen Ginsberg. I remember at the bar afterwards Gary Snyder said he liked Journey Through the Zone. That was my story.

Anyway, is this better as prose or as a poem?

The sea. Once again the sea. Again and again the sea. Always again the sea. The sea from which we came. The sea to which we will return. Our mother. Mother water.

Or:

Mother  Water

The sea
Once again the sea
Again and again the sea
Always again the sea
The sea from which we came
The sea to which we will return
Our mother
Mother water

It does make a neat little very short poem. As prose it would have to be part of a larger work or possibly a microfiction or flash fiction story.

And if you are looking for influences, check out Samuel Beckett. Maybe James Joyce too, who knows? Beckett for sure though.

3 Comments

Filed under Literary Excursions, Literature, Poetry, Writing

“Sad Song”

This a bit of my creative writing here.

Is this better as prose or as a poem?

The years. The long years. The sadness of the years.

Or:

The years
The long years
The sadness of the years

If you make it poetry, it’s almost a perfect little encapsulated haiku. If fiction, it would have to be part of a larger work or it could be a three-line microfiction flash fiction story.

Leave a comment

Filed under Literary Excursions, Literature, Poetry, Writing

The Story of Mr. Hands

Betiality porn is apparently legal in the US. There are bestiality photos and videos all over the Net. You can go look at them if you wish, but it’s pretty messed up stuff.

Yes, the video is called Mr. Hands, and in that video, you can indeed see this idiot getting fucked in the ass by a horse. The same act that you see on that video ended up killing him hours later. Perforated rectum I think.

I don’t like to rejoice after deaths too much, and I won’t rejoice over his, but I don’t really care that this idiot died. I don’t care when fools do stupid things and die. I don’t care when idiots jump out of airplanes and die. I don’t care when morons climb 20,000+ foot mountains in Alaska or Tibet.

A movie called Zoo was made about his story. It’s excellent, I cannot recommend it highly enough.

10 Comments

Filed under Bestiality, Death, Pornography, Sex

Corpse Landmarks on Mount Everest

I don’t care about all the fools who died climbing Mt. Everest or K2. Actually K2 has killed quite a few more people than Everest. The people who got killed climbing Everest are still sitting there on that mountain, frozen human hot dogs on an icebox mountain. I’m not sure what it means that they are still there. Maybe there is no way to go get the body. Those bodies are actually marked on maps and are used as landmarks by people climbing the mountain!

Can you believe it? You are looking at a map climbing Everest and your friend points in the distance at this darker colored object on the mountain. That’s Climber #74 over there. We call him Human Frozen Burrito for short. It’s on the map. Find Human Burrito on the map, and you can figure out where we are on this infernal mountain.

7 Comments

Filed under Asia, China, Death, Humor, Regional, South Asia, Tibet

Apparently I am a Shit Disturber or a Shit Stirrer

A woman who I was talking to recently called me a shit disturber based on looking at my site.

I didn’t know what it meant so I looked it up.

The term is Canadian. In Canada a few  years back, an antisocial habit developed among some folks, probably teenage boys and  young men, of disturbing people who were on the toilets in public defecating behind closed doors. When you are sitting there doing that, you are vulnerable, as you cannot get up and do much of anything. Your pants are down, you are behind that wall, and you may be in the midst of a big shit. You’re pretty much stuck on that toilet, let’s face it.

Well, these antisocial youngsters started doing things like throwing objects over the wall into the toilet where the people were defecating. They might toss some wet paper towels rolled into a ball, let’s say. They would throw it over the wall to try to hit the person sitting on the can. The guy on the toilet would often cry out, but the offenders would be long gone, and the guy on the toilet could hardly get up and confront or chase them. As the person on the toilet was taking a shit (in slang) at the time they were assaulted by this prankster, these hooligans soon became known as “shit disturbers” because they were disturbing people who are in the midst of taking a shit.

Bet you never knew that! Aren’t you glad you learned this odd fact?

On the other hand, it also has an extended meaning. I looked it up, and here is what I came up with:

Shit disturber: One who enjoys creating trouble for others by provoking controversy, for example by revealing facts that others would prefer to keep secret. A person who takes pleasure in causing trouble or discord. One who adds fire to oil during peacetime to create trouble. Someone who tries to cause or increase unfriendly feelings or arguments between people. A person who voices or encourages a viewpoint opposed to the status quo; an iconoclast. To deliberately cause trouble. To cause unrest or dissent…

…A person who enjoys causing controversy or upsetting people. A person who causes needless difficulties or distress for others; a troublemaker. A person who enjoys creating fights or causing trouble. Someone who aggressively and actively agitates or escalates a situation, dialog, or event. A person who because of their very nature, insults random people, picks fights, and likes to stir up trouble. Someone who stirs up drama, usually for no valid reason whatsoever. Somebody who just can’t mind their own damn business and stirs up trouble. Anytime there’s a tenuous peace existing and it looks like a conflict is about to blow over or has come and gone, expect some shit disturber to go and re-stoke the fires. A person who will at any cost go out of their to annoy and irritate people.

I am not sure if I should take pride in this or not. So is this me?

2 Comments

Filed under Canada, North America, Psychology, Regional

“Child Pornography” on the Darknet

You may have heard that the FBI has people dedicated to infiltrating the Dark Web. They won’t get very far.

The FBI got into one of the invite only child pornography (CP) sites by accident somehow and, they busted the guy who ran it and his clientele. But that’s it. They have not cracked anything else.

It’s hardly crackable anyway. No one knows who anyone is down there, and there’s no way to find out who anyone is. If a cop or anyone for that matter is wandering around down there, mostly what you are going to see is a lot of weird closed doors to sketchy websites. Everything requires an invite or a password. It’s like walking through a huge hotel where all the doors are locked and there are cryptic, possibly sleazy but hard to figure out labels on the doors.

There are all sorts of weird, creepy, and sleazy sites down there, but the hard cold illegal stuff like child pornography is typically invite-only. And I guess the cops are not going to get an invite. One of the largest child porn sites down there is run by a woman who got molested as a girl and apparently liked it and turned into a child molester or child porn fan herself. She runs it with her husband. No one seems to know who she is, and there doesn’t seem to be any way to find out.

I believe 60% of the Dark Net is CP. Ugly place.

I have never been to the Darknet, and I don’t go looking for real CP on the web. I have friends who have seen it on the chans where it gets posted sometimes, and they told me it is awful stuff, so bad that once you see it, you never want to see it again.

CP barely exists on the real web, and your chances of stumbling across it accidentally are vanishingly small, but that depends very much on how you define your “CP.” There are nine different levels of “CP,” and the top 3-4 levels are more or less legal and are actually not even considered CP.

I am talking about photos of nudist camps where people of all ages, including kids, are walking about naked. There are nudist and nudist camp sites all over the Internet, and you can see naked human beings of all ages on those sites walking about in the woods, sitting on the beach, etc. Remember, nudity is not necessarily child pornography. There has to be some sort of focus on the genitalia or lascivious display of the genitalia.

The stuff with little girls (under 13) is basically impossible to get to on the normal web if it even exists at all anymore (it’s probably all gone Darknet). The stuff with puberty aged girls with adult-like bodies posing lasciviously is accessible on the normal Net but extremely hard to find, and you really have to know where to go looking for it and know what you are doing to find it on more or less “hidden” websites. It’s also dead illegal, and I would not go looking for that stuff if I were you.

I have been told that there are are photos of naked teenage girls posed and even having hardcore sex all over the Net. Teenage girls have quite a bit of their own posed nude stuff out there. They post their nudes or porn pics to their personal social media pages like Twitter. There are definitely Russian sites where that post a lot of underage  teenage girls. They’re mostly standing in front of a mirror, standing in their bedroom or by the pool, and playing at the beach. Those sites are quite hard to find and are quite hidden and not marked well. Nevertheless, I am pretty sure that all of the photos described above are legal anyway. But most people are so afraid that it might be illegal that no one in the US wants to post it.

If it looks like she could be 18, there’s no way to find out if she is or not.

I am also told that there is a lot of hardcore porn with underage teenage girls all over the Internet, but I’ve hardly seen any myself other than one famous one by the Bang Brothers that has millions of views by now. She’s 15, but you watch that video, and she doesn’t look 1% different from the legal 18 year olds out there. Nothing’s going to happen if you watch it because LE would have to put millions of men in jail or prison by now.

Hardcore porn with underage teenage girls, although reportedly common, is very hard to find for real though because you are never sure if she’s really underage unless someone tells you. Almost no hardcore porn on the Net actually says it’s an underage girl, and the rare stuff that is might just be marked “16 years old” just try to draw in viewers looking for taboo stuff, and it might not even be illegal. Might be an 18 year old girl with a “16 years old” tag on it to draw in viewers.

What there is instead is a ton of porn out there with young looking teenage girls saying generally saying “18” on it, and Lord knows if the girls are 18 or not. They always look like they could be 18. Unless they know who she is or she could not possibly be 18, LE has no idea if it’s even “CP,” so it stays up.

1 Comment

Filed under Child Porn, Crime, Girls, Jailbait, Law enforcement, Lolitas, Pornography, Sex

A Look at the Altaic Question, a Current Controversy in Linguistics

               Turkic    Tungusic*        Written Mongolian

1P sing.:
 
nominative      ban      bi               bi
oblique stem    man-     min-             min-

2P sing.:

nominative      san      chi    (<*ti)    si
oblique stem    san-     chiin- (<*tin)   sin-

(e.g. Evenki and Manchu)

The Altaic argument is one of the biggest controversies in current linguistics. It is said that Linguistics has decided that Altaic does not exist. Actually, the field has not decided that at all. The consensus in the field is that Altaic is still an open question. In other words, they are fighting about it.

The field is split up into Pro-Altaicists and Anti-Altaicists. It’s not true that the field has decided in favor of the Anti-Altaicists. The Antis say that there is no such thing as Altaic. The Pros said that Altaic exists, and here is the evidence. The consensus instead rejects both positions and says we don’t know if Altaic exists or not. There is a big difference between we don’t know if it exists (maybe it does and maybe it doesn’t) and it doesn’t exist. One statement is uncertainty and the other statement is negative.

According to Anti-Ataicists, every time a human can’t make up their mind about something yes or no, they actually are saying no. No they’re not! They’re not saying yes or no. They are rejecting both positions and saying instead that they are undecided. What the Anti-Altaicists are doing is akin to saying everyone who answers undecided on a political candidate poll is actually saying that want to vote against the person! The entire basis of political polling would change.

The Anti-Altaicists are typically quite vicious, while the other side is not. The safe position is Anti-Altaicism, so a lot of wimpy linguists too scared to stand up and fight have sought refuge in the negative position. Furthermore, Linguistics is like an 8th grade playground. Some positions are openly ridiculed. Pro-Altaicism is openly ridiculed, and taking that position is seen as prima facie evidence that a linguist is a crank, an idiot or a fool. I would imagine that if you told a hiring committee that you believed in Altaic, it would be harder to get hired than if you took the negative stand. And I could imagine that being pro-Altaic might keep you from getting tenure.

Not only are the Antis vicious (all of them are vicious, bar none), but many of them are complete idiots and fools, as seen above in the preposterous conflation of uncertain opinions with negative opinions above. The fools on Bad Linguistics Reddit are evidence of this. They all hate Altaic because they are wimps who are too afraid of a fight, so they take a safe position. They bashed me for saying Altaic was real, saying it was evidence of what a kook and crank I am, when in fact, Altaic exists is a completely acceptable position to take. Many famous linguists have supported Altaic in the past, and a number of top linguists currently support it.

Anti-Altaic papers are often vicious from an academic paper standpoint. In academic papers, you are supposed to be restrained and keep your strong opinions to yourself. Not so with anti-Altaicists. They are over the top insulting and ridiculing towards Altaicists.

Altaicists have accumulated quite a bit of evidence in support of their position. The pronouns above prove Altaic for me. All I have to do is look at those pronoun sets (and there are other pronouns that also line up precisely like above) and I know it’s real.

This is what Joseph Greenberg means when he says that proving whether language families exist and reconstructing proto-languages are two different things.

You figure out a language family by simple inspection. Greenberg uses the mass comparison method, and it has worked very well for him for African languages. His Amerindian languages proposals have not been well accepted, but it’s clear that there is a large family called Amerind. There is 1st person m and second person n all through the family, occurring ~450 times. Personal pronouns are rarely borrowed, and entire personal pronoun sets are almost never borrowed (Piraha did borrow all of its pronouns, but Piraha is bizarre in many ways).

Joanna Nichols, a current spokesperson for the conservative Linguistics Establishment as good as any other (and a fine linguist to boot) states that the current consensus is that there is no such thing as Amerind and that those 450 similar pronouns are all cases of borrowing. Wow! Personal pronoun sets (not just one pronoun but an entire paradigm) were borrowed 450 times in the Americas! That’s one of the most idiotic statements that one could make, but this is the current consensus of linguistic “science.” Dumb or what?

A much better position would be to say that Amerind is uncertain (maybe it exists, maybe it doesn’t), as the negative position is preposterous and idiotic right on its face. Nichols has also stated that all of the Altaic pronouns were borrowed.

That’s even more idiotic because unlike in the Americas, entire large pronoun paradigms exist in Altaic where they do not exist in Amerind. Paradigms, especially pronoun paradigms, are almost never borrowed, and paradigm evidence is considered excellent evidence of genetic relationship. English good, better, best is the same paradigm as German gut, besser, besten. That’s an odd way to set up comparatives, and the fact that that comparative set lines up perfectly is what is known as a paradigm. That one paradigm right there ought to be enough to prove the relatedness of English and German, even leaving out all other massive evidence for relatedness.

Greenberg says that after you decide that languages form a family, then you set about using the comparative method of reconstructing proto-languages, finding sound correspondences and whatnot. The current conservative or reactionary position of the field is that first you reconstruct the proto-languages and then and only then can you prove a language family. That’s absurd. They’re in effect doing everything ass backwards. Incidentally, long ago Edward Sapir agreed with Greenberg that language families were proven first by inspection and only later did reconstruction take place. Sapir also came up with the Amerind hypothesis decades before Greenberg. Sapir is quoted as saying:

Getting down to brass tacks, how are you going to prove Amerind 1st person m and second person n other than genetic relatedness?

– Edward Sapir, 1917?

Who was Edward Sapir? Only one of the greatest linguists in history.

I can look right there at that pronoun paradigm set and tell you flat out that those three language families are related. It’s not possible that all of those languages borrowed all of those pronouns. It didn’t happen. It didn’t happen because it couldn’t happen. It’s beyond the realm of statistical probability. A statement that is outside the realm of statistical probability is considered to be for all intents and purposes nonfactual. Ask anyone Statistics major.

Not only has Proto-Altaic been reconstructed at least in a tentative and initial form, but there are regular sound correspondences running through all of the comparative lexicon of the three proto-languages: Proto-Turkic, Proto-Tungusic and Proto-Mongolian.

Regular sound correspondences are another thing we look for. It would mean that every time you have VlV in Language A, you have VnV in Language B (V = vowel). We then say that Language A l -> Language B n. Regular sound correspondences are considered to be excellent evidence of genetic relatedness.

In fact, an entire etymological dictionary of Altaic has been produced, reconstructing a lot of Proto-Altaic lexicon along with the cognates in the daughter languages. This dictionary runs to over 1,000 pages, and it is a true work of art in the social sciences. The entire etymological dictionary has been rejected out of hand by the Anti-Altaicists. However, they have not directly attacked or tried to prove many of the etymologies wrong. They simply looked at it, said it’s junk, laughed at it and ridiculed it, and moved on.

This conservative or even reactionary mood has been the norm in Historic Linguistics for decades now. The field has become very stick in the mud about this.

However, in much of the rest of Linguistics, especially Sociolinguistics, Language Acquisition, and Applied Linguistics, the field has reached consensus on many a silly thing that makes little to no sense at all other than that it sounds very Politically Correct. Linguistics being a social science, PC and SJW Cultural Left culture has infected the field in an awful way.

You must understand that Cultural Left views did not just appear in a few select social sciences. Instead this ideology swept through the entire social sciences, sparing not a one. In terms of a March Through the Institutions for this ideology, it was akin to a rapid hostile takeover. Cultural Left and SJW views are now mandatory in Linguistics. If you refuse to go along, you will not get hired or get tenured. If your reputation is too bad, you may not be able to publish in academic journals or books.

Alas, my field has been poisoned with this Cultural Left toxin or venom like all the rest of them!

1 Comment

Filed under Altaic, Comparitive, Cultural Marxists, English language, German, Germanic, Language Families, Left, Linguistics, Scholarship, Sociolinguistics, Tungusic, Turkic

Sticky: Support Beyond Highbrow

This is not a free website. Regular commenter have to make a $10 donation in order to keep commenting. Occasional commenter do not have to donate. Regular readers do not have to donate, but they might want to consider doing so. Membership on the Delphi Murders Forum costs $20.

Reading this site is like reading a newspaper or a newsmagazine. If you give money to the site, it is like you are buying a newspaper or magazine copy or subscription. Think of it that way. Reading for free is like going over to the newspaper rack and opening up newspapers to read without paying for them. That said, no one has to donate, and people may read for free all they like, especially if they are poor. But even if you are poor, I would suggest that regular readers might want to donate $3 or so.

This site is independent media. We consistently go against the entire mainstream corporate media, and we regularly expose the lies and machinations of the media and the government. We also discuss the  lies and machinations of foreign governments. The motto here is, Let the Truth Shine. We are not going to knowingly lie to you about anything here. According to readers, this is the most “uncomfortably honest site on the Internet.” That’s the purpose of the site.

Although we are on the Left, and this is a socialist website, we will also expose the lies, machinations, and falsehoods being peddled by the Left. If the Right is correct and the Left is wrong on some particular issue, we may well side with the Right, as abhorrent and wicked as they are. All controversial issues must be evaluated for their truthfulness. Truths need to be reported on even if they make my side look bad and the other side look good. All lies and misinformation needs to be called out, even if calling out the lies makes my side look bad and the other side look good.

Although this is not my only source of income, I do not have a regular job for health reasons. Nevertheless, I work for myself and earn money that way via various income streams, and this happens to be one of them. So this is one of the jobs I do in order to make money.

I don’t feel like writing for this site for free. If that’s the way it is going to be, I may well just shut down the site. If you don’t see me posting for more than a day, that means that I am on strike. On strike for more wages or any wages at all. By asking for donations from this site, I am requesting to be paid for more labor. I am a worker who is asking to be compensated for his labor and hard work. I am not a beggar. I work very hard on this site, and it’s very hard work to do.

You may worry that you are making me rich. I made ~$9,000 off this site last year and $22,000 all together. That’s lower middle class, but it’s not a very good income. I figure I got paid $5/hour at most to write for this site. That’s half of the California minimum wage. If you want to know my current financial situation and whether I am feeling flush or busted broke, email me and I will let you know what is going on. I don’t expect you to donate to a rich man, but that’s not what you are doing here.

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/contribute/

25 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Economics, Government, Journalism, Labor, Left, Meta, Political Science, Socialism

Who Is the Most Intelligent Person Who Has Ever Lived?

Answered on Quora:

Goethe, Michelangelo, William Sidis and a number of others have been suggested for the honors.

Goethe seems to take the prize for “universal genius.” He may have had a 220 IQ, if that is even possible. A man as smart as Goethe comes around maybe once every 100 years or so.

10 Comments

Filed under Intelligence, Psychology

The Likable Homophobe: Are You One, and What Do You Tell People When You Choose Not to Spend Time with a Someone Because of Their Homosexuality?

Answered on Quora:

I believe that almost all straight men are homophobic on a certain level – and that level is that they hate homosexuality and especially the idea of doing it themselves. Dirty little secret – most straight men are completely straight in part because they think that engaging in homosexual acts is the worst thing on Earth, and this is why they don’t engage in them.

There is a problem when you say that engaging in homosexual acts is just fine. Now the question comes up, “Well, why don’t you do it, then?” And the ugly truth is that most straight men find that idea so horrific that they would rather die than do that. A number of straight men have told me that they would rather take a bullet than engage in a homosexual act. That’s how severe the revulsion is.

Now the question becomes if we think this type of sex is the worst thing on Earth, how can we accept it in other people? This is a bind, but many straight men solve the bind by saying that gay men cannot help being gay, so it’s therefore immoral to hate them. Others somehow say that it’s the worst thing on Earth for them to do it, but it’s ok if those gay guys want to do it.

As you can see, it is difficult for straight men to reconcile their extreme revulsion for gay sex with somehow managing to accept biological gay men for what they are.

The source of a lot of homophobia is simply this rooted in this very revulsion. This seems more common than religious objections from guys I have known.

And it is a problem once you say gay sex is fine. I assure that once a lot of straight men say there’s nothing wrong with gay sex (as we are supposed to think nowadays) that you are going to see a lot more opportunistic and recreational bisexuality among basically straight men. And my anecdotal evidence is that we are seeing just that right now.

It’s a bind. On the one hand, the revulsion causes a lot of homophobia, but on the other hand, once you say there’s nothing wrong with it, I assure you that a lot more guys will start doing it. There’s bad outcomes either way in my opinion.

The likable homophobe would be someone whose homophobia is simply limited to a desire not to associate or deal with gay men. If that’s the total extent of your homophobia, I don’t see the problem. Nobody has to associate or deal with anyone. Our associations are our personal choice and in a free society, everyone has a moral right to associate with whoever they wish.

In fact, I do not associate or even deal much with gay men myself. I don’t hate what they do if they can’t help it. On the other hand, I have had a lifetime of bad experiences with gay men, and I simply do not wish to deal with them anymore. Can someone tell me why this is wrong?

However, I have supported gay rights for decades and even endured accusations of being gay for supporting gay rights. To this day, I support a lot of gay political causes, and I am on the mailing list for gay political organizations. And I do participate in a lot of their campaigns.

In summary, if the total extent of your homophobia is not wishing to associate with gay men, I would say your homophobia is basically nothing and that level of mild homophobia indeed qualifies as a “likable homophobe.”

14 Comments

Filed under Ethics, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Philosophy, Politics, Sex