Category Archives: Gender Studies

On Roosh

Juliette writes:

Yeah, I mean there’s no doubt that the guy is highly educated; he has a degree in microbiology, probably even has a high IQ. He’s just one of those people whom I look at and think, whatever happened to you? Were you raised by wolves, or molested as a kid, etc? Nope, he hails from the richest suburb in the country, just outside DC (Montgomery County) – I gotta say, these southern MD types honestly get on my nerves so much, and he’s also a Gemini, which certainly explains a lot about his personality.

Having (foolishly) ventured onto his site in the past, as well as his Youtube channel, I encountered the most gleefully misanthropic and conniving individual I’ve come across in a long time. He visits poor Eastern European countries where no one’s ever heard of him or his reputation, and purposefully singles out women there because he knows these women are more susceptible to his “charms.” He has that typical, boorish American tourist view of other cultures other than his own, generalizing whole groups of women based on nationality/ethnic origin. Not to mention, generalizing women, period. I spent like 2 hours once poring over his site, fact-checking, and making sure I wasn’t being biased. I don’t think this guy’s putting on an act for shock value or to boost his book sales/website traffic. He really seems to have a genuine disdain and borderline hatred for women. He’s evidently got legendary status amongst these PUA online communities, and every time the guy’s name or face pops up on the interwebs, I hear Guns ‘n Roses – “You’re Crazy” start playing in my head…

I agree with everything Juliette says here. It’s all true. Roosh is indeed pretty misogynistic. You can tell just by reading the stuff he writes.

A while back, he wrote that he had no respect for the women he screws as he sees them all as whores. So he “hatefucks” them. There is actually a whole new form of porn called “hatefucking.” Personally I think it is crap if you are actually serious about it. I mean, I love my girlfriends, or at the very least I like them. Usually I love them, and I am in love with them. And they are in love with me! We are both mad in love with each other. Now given that I love my girlfriend at the time, why in God’s name would I hatefuck her?  You hatefuck a woman you hate, not one you love. If you truly love your girlfriend, you don’t hatefuck her, ever, not even once.

There is some sort of idea out there that you should treat your girlfriend like crap, fuck her like you hate her, etc. If you ask me if you should do that, I would say, “Not if you love her.” And if you treat your girlfriend like crap or dirt and you hatefuck her when you have sex, guess what? You don’t love your girlfriend! In fact, you don’t even like her! You feel about her the same way as you treat her: you hate her.

All I have to say is that this sure is a sociopathic way to form partnerships and have sex. The words and phrases lover, love affair, and making love exist for a reason, you know. You are supposed to love your girlfriend, not hate her. If you are not married, you should be having a love affair with her, not a hate affair. And you are supposed to make love to her, not make hate to her.

I have a lot less respect for Roosh now that I know he goes to certain countries where he thinks women are naive so he can scam them and take advantage of them.

Now look, seduction is a scam, period. It’s a game, a scam, a con, a conspiracy. It’s about manipulation. All womanizers have a system. I have never met a womanizer who did not have a system. I told my mother this and she was surprised. I guess she thought some men were so irresistible that they just have to sit there and wait for women to fall into their laps. Forget it. No man is that irresistible.

If you can’t scam, game, con, manipulate or hatch conspiracies on females, you’ll probably never get laid. Females don’t just give it away, you know. If getting laid was easy as pie for men, why is there is a whore market? The whore market exists because women don’t give it away and for no other reason.

Back to Roosh. This is just sleazy. Not only is it sleazy, but it’s cheating. If Roosh really is a great PUA, he should deliberately pick out countries where the women are the most man-wise and try his luck there. A sport is nothing without a challenge.

Bottom line: Roosh is disgusting. And if you like Roosh, you are a bit disgusting yourself, sorry. I don’t care how many women he’s fucked. Sociopaths are usually drowning in women. They get more women than all the rest of us combined. Which maybe explains the Roosh phenomenon. Perhaps he is a bit sociopathic after all.

1 Comment

Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Personality, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex

Pedo Parade Japan 2008

Actually it should be Hebe Parade Japan 2008, but no one will understand that. If you like these girls, that is a hebephilic interest, but all men are hebephiles to a significant degree anyway, so that’s not such an important distinction. The main thing is that interest in these girls is not “pedophilia.”

Notice how the bodies of the girls have very nice curves in them already? That can’t happen until after age 12, and even by age 13-14, it is not much in evidence. Once a girl’s body is curving like that very nicely, she looks great to any male who isn’t gay or dead. They do have small to nonexistent tits, but there are plenty of adult women who have the same thing. If you don’t believe me, just go have sex with a bunch of adult women, and then get back to me. A lot of adult females are quite small, often so small it is almost sad.

I have no idea how old these girls are, but when I first saw them, I kept thinking they were adults. I could not figure that out, but then I decided that it was because of the way they were acting. Their movements were so choreographed and perfect, and they just seemed so mature. It was hard to pinpoint, but their minds, expressions and behavior seemed to scream “woman” a lot more than “girl.” If you look at the minds of these girls, they seem to have a woman’s sort of emotional adeptness, poise, certainty and gravitas that you don’t see a lot in girls. Or maybe these are just girls who are very mature and have women’s brains in their skulls already. I have no idea.

But that is one more reason that these girls are going to be interesting to most men. Sure, it looks like a girl, but it’s as mature as a woman! Whoa! Sex Offender List, here I come! Now that is going to be very interesting to most men. The more womanly a girl acts, the more normal men will be interested in her and the more she turns off the pedos. The more girly she acts, the more the pedo likes her, and the normal guy feels turned off.

These two are not really my type. They look too much like little girls, they have no tits, and their bodies look like sticks. Most teenage girls don’t even really interest me anymore, and a lot of 16 and 17 year old girls look like little girls to me now, and I’m just not interested.

If you were aroused by these girls though, that’s not abnormal, though why any man would prefer these Lolis to a real woman I have no idea. All normal males are aroused by girls like this in the lab, albeit at a lower rate than for matures. The chart below shows male attraction in the lab. So normal males are aroused by 12 year old girls at 60% of the rate of matures. A pedophile or hebephile might have maximal attraction to 12 year old girls but might have minimal to no attraction to mature females.

Age 16+ = maximal attraction
Age 15 = 90% of max
Age 14 = 80% of max
Age 13 = 70% of max
Age 12 = 60% of max
Age 11 = 50% of max
Age 10 = 40% of max
Age 9 = 30% of max
Age 8 = 20% of max
Age 7 = 10% of max
6-below = 0 attraction

A pedophile by contrast might have a map that would look like this:

Age 9 = maximal attraction
Age 8 = 90% of max
Age 10 = 80% of max
Age 7 = 70% of max
Age 11 = 60% of max
Age 6 = 50% of max
Age 12 = 40% of max
Age 5 = 30% of max
Age 13 = 20% of max
Age 14 = 10% of max
16+ = 0 attraction

It is actually quite common for true-blue pedophiles to have some interest in younger teenagers. This is because younger teenagers, though maturing, still retain many

Anyway, it sure is cool the way swarms of red-blooded Japanese males are swarming around these Lolis. Gotta love those Japs.

Update: A commenter has just written in saying that they are Candydolls Yulia and Sasha Dynovska and that they are both 12 years old. If these are little girls, they act very mature (like women) and that right there will make them interesting to normal men.


Filed under Asia, Culture, Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Japan, Man World, Mass Hysterias, NE Asia, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Regional, Sex

From Hirsutism to Depillation and Back Again and Vice Versa

1464702_10153043959397744_5468152146841937747_nNever seen those 70’s things too much, but I came of age in the 1970’s and 1980’s and the 1980 beaver was what I was weaned on and it looks great to me. I saw lots of them, both in porno documentaries and in the wild. That what got me hard as I cam of age and of course it still does. I could care less about this shaving epidemic. I don’t hate it, but it seems a bit weird to me. On the other hand, it also seems exotic.

Now the different hairstyles think about each other.

How the different hairstyles think about each other.

Some of these hairstyles would like to go out with the other hairstyles. Other are repelled from each other.

The future: Bigfoot for men. 11 year old girls for women. Vive la differance!

The future: Bigfoot for men. 11 year old girls for women. Vive la differance!

I must say the future is looking pretty bleak body hair wise. At the very least it is looking like weirdness, maybe bad weirdness.

The future, if the gender-bending Cultural Left freakshow catches on.

The future, if the gender-bending Cultural Left freakshow catches on.


Filed under Cultural Marxists, Culture, Gender Studies, Humor, Left, Ridiculousness

Africa, 12,000 YBP: The Dawn of the Negroid Race

An anonymous emailer asks:

I’m a little confused. I have many questions, you seem to be good resource..

I see that you said that the Khoisan is the oldest race, but how can that be the oldest race when the oldest skull they found only goes back 15,000 years?

Caucasoids inhabited Sub Sahara before Khoisan and Bantu types:

Hofmeyr: 36,000 (Grine 2007)

Khoisan: 15,000 (Grine 2007)

Bantu/Iwo Eleru: 10,000 (Grine 2007, Mauny 1978, Allsworth-Jones 2002, Phillipson, 2005)

Also how did Negroids come into existence? Any peer reviewed articles?

Not true, we have human skulls going all the way back to 90,000 YBP in Southern Africa and probably even before that. We have skulls of Homo Rhodesiensis dating back 185,000+ years.

What is Hofmeyr? There were no Caucasoids anywhere until 42,000 YBP.

Negroids evolved probably from archaic Pygmy and Khoisan types from 6,000 to 12,000 YBP. The process started at 12,000 YBP, which coincides with the first proto-agriculture in Africa and in the world. Yes it is true, Black Africans were some of the first agriculturalists on Earth!

Over this 6,000 year period, proto-Negroids slowly evolve from archaic Africans into the more modern and progressive Negroid type. This happened in the context of primitive agriculture, tribes with chiefs and hangers-on and monopolization of women in harems by a few elite men while leaving few women for the rest of the tribe. The most aggressive, brutal and sociopathic proto-Negroids out-competed all of the nicer men and rose to become chiefs of the tribe.

In addition, females in primitive agricultural no longer needed men to survive, so they were able to choose mates. Women when left to their devices will choose hypermasculine, robust, aggressive and even cruel, sociopathic, powerful and wealthy men over all others. They will even happily join a harem of such men instead of hooking up with a weaker male. In other words, given a choice, females will mass-choose the “Alphas” and leave most of the “Betas” twisting in the wind.

In contrast, primitive hunter-gatherers often have low testosterone. In Africa, the Negroid agriculturalists tend to have high testosterone while the Pygmy and Khoisan hunter-gatherers tend to have lower testosterone. Khoisans are described as friendlier, more engaging and less aggressive than Negroids. Pygmy’s are extremely non-aggressive nearly to the point of extreme passivity. Negroids are dramatically more aggressive than Pygmies.

Primitive hunter-gatherer females do not have the luxury of lives without men. They need to hook up with a man early in order to survive. Hence by age 18-22 if not earlier, most tribal women are married to a hunter-gatherer male. The marriages may not last long, but they do exist.

The important thing is that nearly every hunter-gatherer male gets a female and females exert almost no selection pressure on males for much of anything. All males tend to contribute their genes fairly equally. Under such a situation, testosterone levels in males will not rise.

The hangers-on of the chiefs were similarly robust and aggressive males. The process was completed by 6,000 YBP with the appearance due to the strong selection pressure above of the hypermasculine Negroid race, a robust, extremely athletic, physically skilled, aggressive, possibly more Machiavellian and sociopathic race with high testosterone levels driving the hypermasculinization.


Filed under Race/Ethnicity, Anthropology, Africa, Regional, Sex, Sociology, Blacks, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Agricutlure, Pygmies, Khoisan, Physical

Was Humbert Humbert a Pedophile?

Cahokia writes:

Is Nabokov’s Humbert Humbert a pedophile? Obviously, he’s just a literary figure and the author was extremely resistant to political interpretations of his work. Nevertheless, in Lolita the narrator expresses a clear preference for girls just on the cusp of adolescence.

I say the protagonist is not a pedophile, despite his distaste for older teenage girls and young women. A Lolita based upon a genuine pedo would not have been palatable enough to become a hit.

Humbert clearly is a hebephile. I always wondered about Nabokov. Teenage girl heartthrobs and the older men who are obsessed with them are woven all through his work. I wonder if he was a bit of an ephebephile himself.

  • Preference for minors 12-under = pedophile
  • Preference for minors 12-14 or 13-15 = hebephile
  • Preference for teens 15-19 or 16-19 = ephebephile

Michael Jackson was clearly a hebephile. He liked boys right around puberty, 12-14. I would wager that a lot of so-called pedophiles are actually more properly called hebephiles. A preference for actual children 12-under must be rather rare I would think. There can’t be too many folks like that around.

Note that it says preference for, not attraction to. This is one of the major pitfalls in definitions of these terms. Studies show that even high attraction to girls aged 2-12 is quite common among normal men, as 26% of normal men are aroused by girls 2-12 the same or more than they are by females aged 13+. I assume the vast majority of these men are not pedophiles. They are probably aware of some attraction to girls, shrug it off as nothing and something they do not want to investigate in their sex life, and as long as they have a high attraction to mature females, they just focus on that and forget about the girls.

A true fixated pedophile is obsessed with young girls and has been since an early age, often as far back as they can remember or at least since puberty. They often have little or no interest in mature females, but some are nonexclusive and are attracted to mature females too.

Fixated pedophilia cannot come on later than age 14, as apparently it is not possible to become sexually fixated after that age. Any interest in young girls developing after age 14 would not be the fixated variety and would instead be the “sexual smorgasbord” or “trysexual” variety. These are men who are turned on by just about anything sexual. Let’s just call them perverts. However the vast majority of their interests are experimental or exploratory in nature, are not fixated and can be dropped or changed at any time. These men are developing these interests out of pure choice, which is surely not the case with the true pedophile.

The true fixated pedophile typically states something like,

I don’t know. All I know is that I have been crazy about little girls for as far back as I can remember, and I have been crazy turned on by them and masturbating all the time thinking about them ever since, and that’s all I know. That’s all I can tell you about why I feel this way.

They often use child pornography. Their fantasy life will be rich and often exclusively about young girls. They will spend a lot of time masturbating to fantasies about young girls. In other words, young girls drive them crazy.

As this is something that they love, they are often not particularly upset by it. Instead the relationship is similar to an addiction to say drugs, gambling or pornography. The addict absolutely loves his object of choice, but sometimes they feel out of control and like they can’t control their desires or urges anymore.

Although there is usually little guilt going on with true fixated pedophiles, many report that after they have an orgasm from masturbation, they feel very guilty. This is common to many other paraphilias and deviant sexual interests also. Men who fantasize about rape and murder of women often report intense arousal followed by serious guilt after orgasm. The guilt is often most intense in the early phase of the paraphilia and is particularly common with teenage boys with a paraphilia.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why any man past his mid-20’s would actually prefer a 13-14 year old girl to a grown woman. Sure, some of them are attractive, but are they more attractive than a grown woman? And talk about immature!

I can’t even understand ephebephiles, although obviously ephebephilia must be quite common. You mean you actually prefer teenyboppers to a grown woman? Once again, I cannot fathom any man past 30 feeling this way. It’s ridiculous. Sure you can legally have sex with an 18-19 year old girl.  I will probably never do it again, but I did it many times in the past. But the  main question is what are you going to talk to her about afterwards?

And why would an 18-19 year old girl be better than a grown woman in the first place? At my age, teenage girls are ridiculous, and they seem more empty-headed and silly with each passing year as a man ages. I am ashamed to say that even most college girls strike me as airheads, and it wasn’t always this way.


Filed under Child Porn, Ephebephilia, Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Literature, Lolitas, Man World, Novel, Pedophilia, Pornography, Psychology, Sex

Rising IQ in Western Women

Women have 5 IQ less than men in average, because their brain is smaller (Political correctness claims otherwise, they also say that overweight women are the most Beautiful). But but there are intelligent women of course. It’s only an average.

Historically, this was true, but I think the figure was 3.5 points, not 5 points. At any rate, there are many bright women and I have met many very high IQ, even genius women.

My colleague Jim Flynn has recently released evidence showing that in the US, women now match men on IQ. He thinks this is due to the increasingly complex nature of modern society and women are getting better at manipulating their way around all of this complexity and hence they are becoming more intelligent.


Filed under Gender Studies, Intelligence, Psychology, Regional, Sociology, USA, Women

Robert Stark Interviews Ogi Ogas


Ogi Ogas  received his Ph.D. in computational neuroscience from Boston University, where he designed mathematical models of learning, memory, and vision. He is co-author of A Billion Wicked Thoughts . He was a Department of Homeland Security Fellow and conducted biodefense research at MIT Lincoln Laboratory. He was also a contestant on the game show Who Wants To Be a Millionaire.


Topics include:

How Ogi analyzed web searches, web sites, erotic videos, erotic stories, personal ads, and digitized romance novels.

How his study is the most extensive since Alfred Kinsey’s in the 1950’s.

How censorship and barriers to sex research used to come primarily from social conservatives but now often comes from cultural liberals.

How men and women’s brain’s are wired differently.

How men’s desires are primarily visual while women’s are more psychological.

How physical arousal can contradict psychological arousal in women.

How women’s desire’s and what they find attractive in men are more influenced by culture than men’s.

The attraction to youth and how barely legal porn is the only subscription genre to survive the proliferation of tube porn.

The misconception that homosexual men are women in men’s bodies.

Homosexual porn.

Why heterosexual men are surprisingly interested in tranny porn and penises.

The theme of domination in porn and how it’s viewed by women and both heterosexual and homosexual men.

1 Comment

Filed under Conservatism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Liberalism, Neuroscience, Political Science, Pornography, Science, Sex, Sociology

Solipsism and Narcissism

Some PC types (gender feminists in this case) are claiming that the definition of lack of empathy is solipsism, therefore all solipsists lack empathy. This is wrong, but almost everything PC people are gender feminists say is wrong anyway. PC people lie constantly because PC itself is nothing but lies. Gender feminists lie constantly because the very concept of gender feminism is based on a series of lies. Gender feminists don’t understand men at all – they have zero understanding of males. Gender feminists don’t even understand women! Their understanding of women is very poor.

Anyway, let’s take it apart. Do solipsists lack empathy? Probably not. There is much evidence against this theory. First of all, the Manosphere has been saying for some time now that females are solipsistic. I would say instead that the feminine essence is solipsistic. Males are not so much solipsistic as narcissistic. In fact, narcissism is a defining characteristic of the masculine essence.

However, I do agree that females are basically solipsistic. The world of the female is a world of endless solipsism. However, females are not purely solipsistic because while they are wrapped up in themselves all the time, most females also have quite a bit of empathy for others. So while they spend a lot of time in their shell, they come out of quite easily, often do and very much enjoy caring about other people. If 50% of the population is notoriously solipsistic but at the same time has a great deal of empathy, this should prove the crazy PC charge wrong on the spot. Obviously observation shows that many solispsistic people are capable of tremendous caring.

But what about a worse type of solipsist. This type is often male and is all wrapped up in himself most of the time. Does he lack empathy? Probably not. This type of male solipsist does indeed care about others, but they are so wrapped up in themselves all the time that they simply have little time or energy left over for other people. They’re too busy thinking of themselves to devote much time to thinking of others. That’s not lack of empathy.

Also many of these types are distressed about the fact that they are too wrapped up in themselves to worry about others, and they often worry that they lack empathy. If you worry that you lack empathy, you don’t lack empathy.

In response, many solipsists have told me that they spend a lot of time working on their empathetic feelings, but they say that these feelings do not come naturally because they always seem to come first in their minds.

If you are trying very hard to be empathetic, you don’t lack empathy.

If you feel upset, worried, and guilty that you don’t care about others enough, then you don’t lack empathy. That right there shows you you have a conscience. Also guilt is a sign of empathy. If there’s guilt, there’s empathy. There can be no guilt without empathy. No empathy, no guilt because they are part of each other.

We need to look at people who truly lack empathy. I have known many of them in my life. If you point out that they don’t care, are abusive, manipulative or selfish, they often get angry and start projecting back at you because these types project constantly. It is their major defense.

At any rate, these types are not upset by their selfishness, manipulation, abusiveness or lack of empathy. They could care less. I am not sure if they know they are bad or if they simply do not care if they are bad or not because I can’t understand someone like that. Many of them will simply deny that they are selfish, manipulative, abusive or uncaring. Apparently they don’t think they are. They will just deny it and not think of it again because they have shut their bad behaviors out of awareness.

Anyway, unempathetic people don’t get upset if you point out how selfish and uncaring you are. They will just call you a liar, get angry, or project away and move on. Whether they are like this or not is not important to them. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t, but at the end of the day, they could pretty much care less. It is not something that keeps them up at night.

So while the solipsist does care about others but simply doesn’t have the time or energy to worry or think about them much, narcissists and others have plenty of time and energy to care but they simply do not want to. Why they do not want to, I have no idea. Why they don’t care about not caring, I have no idea. That is because I cannot fathom how any human being could possibly think this way. It makes no sense to me.



Filed under Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Narcissism, Personality, Psychology, Radical Feminists

Are Bad People Ever Right? Yes. Are Good People Ever Wrong? Yes.

The Manosphere is a horrible place full of awful men. I want to vomit whenever I go to one of their sites, especially the PUA sites as those are the worst of all. MGTOW sites are ok but the misogyny is extreme and very hard to take. My enemies say I am an MRA. If I am an MRA, why am I repulsed by most MRA sites? They also say that I am a misogynist. If I am a misogynist, why am I almost physically repelled by the misogyny of the Manosphere?

Even though the Manosphere is awful, sadly many of the things they say are true.

This is where all PC and Identity Politics goes wrong. PC types and gender feminists say that the Manosphere and those in it are awful people and therefore everything they say is a lie. But this is not true. Sadly, awful human beings are often correct in many of the often brutally honest things they say. Just because someone is awful doesn’t mean they are wrong. And good people are not necessarily telling the truth. Many good people are full of nonsense.

In Logic, this is called an ad hominem fallacy. The argument tries to say that the opponent is a bad human being somehow and therefore what he says is either wrong or cannot be trusted. But this is a fallacy for the same reason I gave above. Bad people are often correct about many things they say.

If you hang around them long enough, you will notice that PC types, gender feminists and the rest utilize logical fallacies constantly. This is because they are ideologues and ideologues not only lie all the time but they specialize in logical fallacy. Also it shows that PC in general is based on weak thinking and poor to nonexistent theory. PC has almost no valid theoretical underpinning behind it. It’s a castle of sand.


Filed under Cultural Marxists, Gender Studies, Man World, Psychology, Radical Feminists, Sane Pro-Woman

Are All Drag Queens “Born That way” Too?

See? The rates of transvestism and drag queens also varies across space. How many drag queens were “born that way?” The number of gay men who are drag queens in the US is rather low. I estimate no more than 2-3%, if that. Were they all “born that way?” In the Philippines, 100% of gay men are drag queens. Were they all “born that way” too?

Gay Identity Politics is insane. Almost all of its arguments are incoherent, idiotic, absurd, or lies.

Political homosexuality needs to answer some of these questions. Let us ask the Gay Lobby just how many drag queens were “born that way?” I do not mean how many are biological homosexuals. No doubt most if not all of them are. I want to know whether homosexual transvestism is “biological” too. Are there are men who are “born drag queens?”


Filed under Cultural Marxists, Gender Studies, Homosexuality, Politics, Sex