Category Archives: Man World

Yes, “Soft” Bad Boys Exist in the US

Jose: Here this kind of androgyne or quasi androgyne “bad boys” maybe exist in some little circles, like between goths or something like these. Because there is no place for them being seen as “bad boys” if are quite feminine. Real “bad boys” will kick their asses. A punk, skater, hip hopper, etc., can be accepted as bad boys (according to their behavior obviously). But not effeminate men. They will be mocked, and common “quiet” men will not take them as “bad”.

If a quite effeminate men have wild behavior, at some point, they moment will have to change their feminine side or hide it because he will have problems every day if he deals with “bad boys”. He will be mocked and attacked.

For being a thug you have to act like if you were in jail or something like this. Dress is not so important, as long as you don’t dress effeminate (this can carry many problems).

In other Latin American countries probably this goes much deeper. Something dressed like Marylin Manson or David Bowie pretending being bad (even if is bad) can’t walk quiet in the street with that attitude. It have to “accept” the mocking and be taken as a “faggot”. I think in Paraguay or even little cities of my region of Argentina if someone is like this, people will not be quiet even in a normal neighborhood. Normal people will mock someone like this, not only “bad boys”. Not to mention in working-class places or some towns that are quasi-rural and people that live there are entirely from working-class and lower-class.

In big cities it’s different because people are accustomed to see “rare” persons like that.

Effeminate and feminine are not the same thing. Effeminate means acting like a woman. Here in the US, mostly only homosexual men act truly effeminate. This is the sort of “faggoty” behavior seen in ~75% of gay men. But effeminate straight men are quite rare. I would be surprised in 1% of straight men are effeminate.

These guys were not really feminine at all, but they do have a soft side. The guys I knew were pretty bad. They were juvenile delinquents, drug dealers, surfers and they stole things like ten speeds and marijuana plants. They were almost like gang or street kids. But they were masculine enough that no one would ever want to fight them. It’s just that you could see a feminine side going in a lot of them. In the US we have quite a few men who have a very strong masculine side and then they have a pretty strong feminine side going too. As long as they have that good strong masculine side going, no will fight them or even mess with them. I knew some guys like this who were criminals! One guy was a huge drug dealer in San Fransisco. He kept his cocaine in one house, lived in another house, and I forget what the 3rd house was for.

You are confusing effeminate and feminine. Effeminate means acting like a woman. Feminine is just a soft sort of guy. But a lot of White men have hard and soft going at the same time because you can do that in our culture. As long as people can see that masculine side, no one cares about the soft stuff. It sort of becomes invisible. Plus if you have a strong enough masculine side going, most men just leave you alone, don’t challenge you, don’t mock you or make fun of you, and don’t start fights with you.

I live in what is almost a ghetto. It’s a barrio. But no one ever starts one single thing with me here. No one bugs me, starts fights with me, or even insults me. But I have a strong masculine side, and I get into it in this hood, and a lot of people have told me I look scary. One advantage to looking scary is that most people pretty much leave you alone and don’t fuck with you.

This why I doubt Trash’s comments that a White man will get his ass kicked or robbed for sure in this type of neighborhood.

But in US White society, you do not have to be macho or hypermasculine like in Latin American society. Here in the US a soft man can be a bad boy or even a criminal. For instance, I get called bad boy quite a bit. People see me in a store or something, and they start laughing and say, “Hey there, bad boy!” Or I will be talking to a woman and I give her one of my million dollar smiles and she starts laughing and says, “Ohhhh, you’re a bad boy!” And I am a pretty damn soft guy. But somehow I give off a bad boy vibe somehow.

Here in US White society, a bad boy is any sort of rebel who looks like he doesn’t play by the rules and has a sort of devilish air about him. Macho or hypermasculine behavior is not necessary anymore.

I used to wear men’s kimonos! I wore these things called short kimonos. It is actually Japanese men’s wear. You wear it over a shirt and pants. A lot of guys did hate it when I wore that. I would see guys who looked like they wanted to beat me up when they saw me wear that. But nothing ever happened. Plus women loved it when I wore that kimono. They went nuts over that thing, while the guys acted like I was wearing a dress and they wanted to beat me up.

But at that time, I was also a punk rocker with a permanent scowl who wore lots of leather and spikes. A lot of people acted like they were afraid of me, and usually nobody started anything.

20 Comments

Filed under Argentina, Culture, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Latin America, Man World, North America, Paraguay, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Sex, South America, USA, Whites

PUA/Game: A Lot of Women Go Nuts for “Pure Androgynes”

Jason Y: A suspected queer in the family. Great, another way for the narcissist to feel superior.

He is not a suspected queer. Only the NPD called him gay. No one else in the family ever did. In fact, if you called my friend gay to the rest of the family, they would start laughing so hard they would almost fall on the floor. It’s because he’s the opposite of gay. It’s like laughing at a very skinny man trying to insult him by calling him fat. It’s preposterous.

That’s because my friend is so hyper-heterosexual that he is almost like the most wildly heterosexual man that ever lived. Even though he is rather “feminine” (quiet, soft, likes to read and write, and I think he even sews and knits lol) in some ways, he is not effeminate (acting like  a woman) at all.

All these PUA guys go on and on about acting masculine, but you would not believe how many of these “feminine” men I have met who were such crazed womanizers that it would blow you away.

But most of them had a masculine side going too. A lot of them were involved in illegal activity like selling drugs. They were almost all “bad boys.” Like bad to the bone. That’s the thing, everyone thinks that it’s only hypermasculine guys who are bad boys, but that’s not really true. You would be amazed at how many “feminine” (not effeminate) bad boys there are out there. Some of them are pretty bad too. Like, real bad.

Really, a lot of the craziest womanizers I have known had a strong feminine side along with a heavy masculine side. They were basically “pure androgynes.” I am thinking that the feminine side enabled them to get along with women well and maybe even understand how they think, to the extent that can be understood at all.

These PUA guys selling hypermasculinity like a drug are fools. My observation in life is that a lot of women and girls go absolutely nuts for these pure androgyne types. By no means all women are like this, and a lot of women say these guys are not their type because they prefer a more traditionally masculine man. White and Asian women especially go nuts for these guys. Black and Hispanic women, not so much. I think those women want or even demand hypermasculine guys. I am sure they are socialized that way, but still.

Iggy Pop said David Bowie got more women than any man he had ever known. “From waitresses to heiresses, they all wanted him,” he said. Go to a Bowie video on Youtube and it will be full of women and even girls gushing about how much they want to fuck him. And what’s a bit funny is there are quite a few guys, gay or bi I guess, who are saying the same thing. It’s like everyone wanted him. All the guys and all the girls, they all wanted David. Must have been nice.

For pure androgynes,  I am think maybe Jagger or James Dean. Or even Marilyn Manson maybe. Or Russell Brand for sure.

You don’t have to be a he-man to get women. That’s one of the biggest lies out there.

20 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Celebrities, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Hispanics, Man World, Music, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Rock, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Whites, Women

How to Engage in Hypermasculine Behavior if It Does Not Come Naturally

Johnny Caustic: Can you tell us what “absurdly exaggerated masculine” behavior you did? It would make this post very useful. Clearly you got good results, but I have no idea what you did to get those good results.

Sort of hard to describe. Just think of the most hypermasculine guy you can think of and imitate him. It might feel like a preposterous caricature so absurd that anyone who saw you would burst out laughing. Go ahead and engage in that behavior even though it feels like an idiotic caricature. Keep the idea in your head that you need to act as masculine as possible all the time, without any letup.

Don’t worry about being a caricature or anything like that. It helps if you are sort of resentful and pissed off the whole time too. For some reason that adds to the effect. Be as friendly as possible to any guys you run into. You might find men of all ages nodding their heads when you do this. They are signaling you that they appreciate the hypermasculine thing you are doing because they do it too. Go ahead and nod back to them. Other than that, just act normal.

I hate to be advocating this sort of thing, but my experience is that this behavior actually works. If it works, why not do it? Those complaining that it is sick or whatever for US society to reward what you see as toxic or pathological behavior, well, it’s up to you to change society to where it does not reward this sort of thing. As long as society gives you benefits for this behavior, I would say feel free to do it all you want and see if you can reap any rewards.

I’ve been engaging in this behavior in a sense my whole life because my masculine side is extremely strong. But then there’s that pesky feminine side that’s always getting in the way and freaking people. “You’re too sexy to be straight!” Hear it over and over. Actually it’s not a bad way to walk through life. Be a sexy man. See if the ladies respond. They have been responding to me, maybe they will to you too.

In the last 10 years or so, I upped the hypermasculine stuff in an attempt to be more “Alpha” for lack of a better word. All I have to say is it worked wonders. If you do it right, acting more Alpha should definitely improve your relationships with women. Women eat Alpha behavior like chocolate. Don’t get all wrapped up in silly arguments about whether or not you are really Alpha or what is Alpha or bla bla.

There are statistical Alphas and behavioral Alphas. Statistical Alphas are never more than 15-20% of the population. They’re the guys that most of the females want most of the time. The hot guys. Then there are the behavioral Alphas are just guys who have decided to engage in  Alpha behavior. Theoretically, you can have whole societies where most if not all of the men engage in Alpha behavior. We can debate on and on about the Alpha/Beta/Omega thing, but trust me, it’s all straight up true. Getting down to brass tacks, the take-home point is that most men would benefit from acting more “Alpha.” There’s a huge upside and little downside if you do it right.

I have not seen any of the predicted downsides from this hypermasculine behavior I have been engaging in off and on most of my life. At this point, it’s second nature. I have a few arrests. Spent 6 hours in jail my whole life. My only conviction on my record at this point is a trespassing charge for which I paid a whopping $10 fine. As you can see, I am obviously a master criminal. What is funny about this is I have been breaking the  law, mostly via what I call victimless stuff, most of my life. I’m a very cautious guy, almost passive. I am conservative and careful. There’s little drama in my life. I hardly ever have serious conflicts with other humans. As far as I can see, doing  the hypermasculine  thing has no little to no downside in my life. Plus it’s fun. Go ahead guys! Play the he-man game! Little to lose and lots to gain!

80 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships

The AltLeft “Tea Party,” by Rabbit

The AltLeft “Tea Party”

Very nice new article about the Alt Left from Rabbit. I actually still like Rabbit. He is apparently not happy at with Trump. He described most of Trump’s Cabinet picks as “cringey” which is at the very least how I feel about them. Actually to me they are more like “”homicidal rage-inducing” but at this point, that’s a bit of a quibble. Rabbit is on the same page with all the rest of the Left on Trumpism except on the broad race, immigration and possibly trade policy stuff. But he already seems to be selling out the trade stuff horrendously. He’s selling out the immigration stuff too. Too bad the Mexicans aren’t going to pay for the wall. You and me are! Out of our pockets into the mitts of one of one of Trump’s billionaire pals via a rigged no-bid contract. Reverse Robin Hood again, but Reverse Robin Hood is all Trumpism is about anyway. Think about it. Real hard now.

and I don’t see how he could be given Rabbit’s base political beliefs. A lot of the rest of the left wing of the Alt Right has gone over to Trumpism, and to me, that’s all I need to sever ties with them once and for all.

The thing about Rabbit is the same thing that everyone gets wrong about the Alt Left. Rabbit is a Leftist, dammit. He really is a leftwinger. He’s a man of the Left. So many people just cannot wrap their heads around that. If you look at his views across the board, Rabbit is leftwing on just about everything but race and the Cultural Left, and even on the Cultural Left, he is with them on a lot more things than I am. Rabbit holds traditional leftwing notions on sexual orientation, gender identity, feminism, etc. He’s not a social conservative at all. In fact, he is to the left of me on a lot of that stuff. On the other hand, he seems personally red-pilled and he spent a lot of time in the Manosphere and the MGTOW movement before he drifted into the Alt Left.

If he’s leftwing on about everything but race and PC Culture, how the hell is he a rightwinger? I don’t see how missing one check box on the leftwing list of beliefs throws you out of the Left. Suppose we say Rabbit cannot be on the Left due to his views on race (a common notion). In fact, we say, his racial views make him a rightwinger no matter what else gets thrown into the mix. Ok, fine, cast him out.

He’s back over on the Right now. Rabbit gets handed the rightwing checklist. Whereas with the Left he failed to check one box, with the Right he fails to check 95% of the boxes. And somehow he’s rightwing? Forget it. Getting beyond left and right is said to be a well known trope of fascism, but so what? Maybe we do need to get beyond left and right and maybe we don’t have to be fascists to do that. In fact, the Alt Left is precisely all about getting beyond Left and Right to some extent, although we are still mostly on the Left. There’s nothing inherently wrong with heterogeneous politics, and this represents your average person’s views anyway. Homogeneous politics is synonymous with ideologues, and who needs them. Give me a sui generis heterogeneous political mix versus any sort of ideologue any day of the week.

Whatever you think of his stand on race, I believe that Rabbit is a very important thinker in our movement, and besides, let’s get real, race is only part of the package Rabbit is selling. You can still buy a custom package minus the race part. Furthermore, he is a superior chronicler and opinion-maker in our movement as a whole, and Rabbit doesn’t care if you don’t agree

It’s not often discussed, but I also like his media criticism, most of which centers around movie reviews. He has a quirky sense there too, focusing on films from the 1970’s. His architectural musings are also quite good, though I don’t know much about the subject. And there’s something about a guy who unironically lionizes Charles Manson

I also very much like his prose and also a lot of his quirky worldview. I am trained as an editor and Rabbit’s prose is what we call “clean copy.” You needn’t mark it up at all, and he’s saying it better than you the editor could anyway. The rules of English punctuation are quite arcane, and 95% of Americans screw them up. Rabbit’s pretty much got them down. You would think he was a J-major.

But as far as a writer goes, he is one of the finest writers in our movement. He’s a great writer! He should be published, and in fact, I believe he is just now as he deserves to be. As a writer, most of what I read is not really great writing. Only maybe 10% of the time do you read prose on the Net that truly sings right off the page. I don’t know if he’s better than I am, but it’s awful close. It’s at least a tossup, and that’s a compliment, as I dislike most other writers.

As long as he keeps away from racial slurs, his prose is worth it for the political theory and just for the pure aesthetic pleasure of it.

A lot of people want to throw Rabbit out of the movement. Funny because he just about co-founded it. Thing is, Rabbit ain’t going anywhere, nor should he. He’s staying right where he is whether we like it or not. Rabbit is stuck with the Alt Left, and we are stuck with him. We are stuck onto each other like damned remoras. And perhaps after all that is just as it should be.
teapartyalice

I know what you’re thinking, but no, I don’t mean “Tea Party” in the sense of the happy meal conservative movement that emerged in the early part of the Obama administration. Nor am I referring to anything relating to the Boston Tea Party or the American revolution.

I’m talking about the AltLeft and how for me it has come to resemble the tea party in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1972 version of course!) This film was always on HBO in the mid 1980s, even though it came out in the early 70s. I believe the reason they began to re-air it in the 80s was because the star, Fiona Fullerton, had grown up and re-emerged as a Bond girl in “A View to a Kill,” which came out in 1985.

Anyway, when I first got involved with the AltLeft about a year and a half ago, in my mind it was always meant to augment the AltRight, not outright oppose it. It was a way to view and examine the affects of multiculturalism and political correctness from a cultural and economically left lens as well as from a secular and futurist perspective rather than the radical traditionalist, socially conservative one that dominates rightwing circles. In other words, recognizing the implicit Whiteness that underpins the identities of progressive cities like Seattle or Portland, and asserting that it must become explicit to some degree in order for those places to maintain their culture, aesthetic and quality of life.

It was to put forth the idea that someone can be pro-White without the albatross of traditionally conservative culture, pre-modern aesthetics, capitalist economics, or widely accepted Republican historical dogma (“the 60s were bad,” “Vietnam draft dodgers were traitors,” “McCarthy was right,” “I hate modern architecture,” etc.)

If you hang around rightwing groups for any period of time, you’ll find they have an assumed historical narrative that informs many of their beliefs. I say “assumed,” because they just take it for granted that everyone who agrees with them one issue such as race also accepts their historical framing of a wide range of other issues such as economic systems, religious beliefs, or aesthetic preferences (just as someone on the “Left” might assume that anyone who supports trans rights and raising the minimum wage automatically accepts the idea that racial diversity is always a good thing.) Not everyone buys the package deal.

manson

Unfortunately, the AltLeft has instead attracted a wide range of bizarre characters, each with their own zany ideas about what the AltLeft should represent. Many of them never read any of the original manifestos that I or Robert Lindsay or anyone else wrote or bothered to do any research. They just started using the term like they’d started a new band without checking to see if some other band was already using the name. That would be understandable if this were the pre-Internet days, but it seriously only takes like two seconds to Google. Others actually did thoroughly read this site and somehow managed to come to the conclusion their peculiar ideology was compatible with mine, despite it being a complete mystery to me what exactly was the point of agreement.

The AltLeft has come to attract all kinds of eccentric personalities, each one adhering to their own pet belief system. Worse than that, many have joined the AltLeft for the purpose of militantly opposing the AltRight, which is something I never intended to do (hence the reason I still use the tagline “the left wing of the AltRight.”) Though I disagree with him on a few ideological points…I happen to support Richard Spencer, and I have defended him numerous times when certain squeamish (and often prudish) factions as well as a few prominent figures of the AltRight unsuccessfully tried to throw him under the bus.

So when I interact with other people in the incoherent “movement” known as the AltLeft, it feels a lot like the sitting down at the tea party in Alice in Wonderland. It’s a group of outlandish castouts, contrarians, and vagabonds that have little in creatural commonality other than their politically idiosyncratic tendencies and behavioral eccentricities. Part of me finds this demoralizing, wondering why I ever bothered going down this rabbit hole and whether I can just climb out and forget the whole adventure. Yet the other part of me just embraces the gathering of this zany cast of characters for the sheer chaos that they have unleashed as we bounce off-the-wall ideas past each other and revel at the sight confounded normies that stumble into our world.

6 Comments

Filed under Cinema, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Democrats, Economics, Fascism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Republicans, Sane Pro-White, US Politics, Vanity, Writing

Fight Over “Faggot!” Remark One, Two and Three

Jason Y: Only massively hypermasculine men would kill someone accusing them of being gay. Other people possibly get hurt by it, but either ignore it or maybe try to insult them back, but in a low-key manner, maybe with some “Fuck you” remark or something.

White Dawg: I agree with you, Jason. If you are remotely masculine and not mentally ill, you would counter with a put down of some sort. One might choose to ignore but usually, one does say “Fuck you, blow me” in one way or the other. Sometimes, during the fighting ages – teens, late adolescence or early twenties, calling someone something similar to this would be the last words used to start the actual fistfight.

But, murder, no. Maybe accidental manslaughter.

Keywords are “not mentally ill”.

I live in the hood. It’s full of Mexicans, who are massively hypermasculine, and Blacks, and you know what they are like. We also have a fair number of Arabs. Do you think Arabs are hypermasculine? The few Whites around here are essentially the dregs. The very few good-looking White girls around here are all hooked with really lousy, ghetto, thuggish Black guys. The guys look like total scum, but the White girls eat em up like chocolate.

A good way to get punched or even killed in Latin America is to challenge a man’s masculinity in any way. In fact in a number of those countries, you can just about get away with such a crime, as it is considered an honor crime, and a man has a right to defend his honor down there, with his fist or maybe even with a gun or a knife.

Down there, some guy calls another guy a faggot pussy, and the other guy pulls out a knife and stabs him. Most men down there will have no sympathy for the guy who got killed. They will say that he was asking for it, and what did he expect was going to happen? No sympathy for idiots. He would be treated like a guy who jumps into the polar bear exhibit as the zoo and gets killed. So what! Darwin Award!

About the guy who did it, a lot of guys will just shrug their shoulders and say, “Yeah, well, a man has to defend his honor…I might do the same.”

They would agree that it is a tragic situation for both parties, and it is a rather sad and not joyous occasion, but they will tend to have a “What do you expect?” attitude towards the killer. They might be inclined to let him go. They won’t cheer for him, and they will think it is all a tragic mistake, but they will not want to persecute him either.

Fight Over “Faggot!” Remark One

When I was 19, I went out with a couple of my friends. My friends were quite good-looking Alpha type guys (surfer/stoner/drug dealer types), and actually that description in the parenthesis would be a good description of me too. I don’t know if I was good-looking or not, but people were always raving about how handsome I was, so perhaps I looked good.

One of the guys knew these two single chicks who lived alone. Problem was they were fat, but they were very nice and sort of pretty too. They were about 19. We went in the apartment and the vibes were  crazy. These two fat chicks were giving off vibes like, “Whoa! We won the lottery! When do we get a chance to get guys like this? How do we get these guys to fuck us? Goddamn, we want to fuck you hot guys so bad! We are going to tie you guys up and rape you here!” and we were giving off vibes like, “Um, don’t think so, you chicks are really nice, but you’re fat, sorry lol.” The sexual tension was so thick you could cut it with a knife. Nobody said much along those lines, but you could feel the sexual cold front like a heavy fog.

So nothing really happened.

We went to this party across the way. I think we went with those girls. There was booze, hard liquor and I think a lot of pot. By 11 PM I was seriously wasted, and the room was rotating on its axis. All three of us guys were in the kitchen, and all of us were straight. The two other guys were seriously macho, almost scary. Some guy tried to one-up or AMOG us. He pointed to all three of us, noted that we were all together, had been together all night and had not gotten any women, therefore, we must be faggots. He was not very nice about it either.

My friend suddenly turned around and hit him hard. They guy flew back against the wall, and there was a serious fight for awhile. We left later and were talking in restaurant and decided that a comment like that could only have been answered with a punch. I said I was not sure if I would hit someone who called me that, and the guy who threw the punch said, “I sure hope you would,” and looked at me disdainfully and dubiously. The other guy agreed. Their attitude was, if you do not answer that comment with a punch, you are seriously pussy or probably a fag yourself. You are disgusting and disreputable, you are not any sort of man at all, and we will not associate with you anymore. You are a worm. Oh and you’re probably a fag yourself.v

Fight Over “Faggot!” Remark Two

This guy named RG was one of meanest and evilest bullies around. Basically your worst nightmare of an antisocial juvenile delinquent. He called me a fag in the 8th grade one day after school. I am not sure what else he did. I think he started something physical or challenged me to fight.

At any rate, he did something provocative, and there was a huge fight between him and me. I held my own somehow. It wasn’t fun at all, but a huge crowd of guys gathered around, and they were all cheering and yelling like it was a football game. Good times! The fight ended with no one winning. Everyone agreed that I had to hit him in those circumstances. My net worth at the school increased exponentially after that fight. Before I was a wimp, but now there was this new respect. I was still sort of geek, but now I was a dangerous and honorable geek and plus I was probably not a fag either, and that at least earns a nod.

Fight Over “Faggot!” Remark Three

A couple of years after incident one at age 21, I was at this party my friends threw. We were all drinking beer, and it was about 10-11 PM. RG came up to me.

Well, RG could never get laid ever for some reason even though he was a psychopathic bully. He was almost too mean and ugly to get laid if that’s even possible. He was a doper all through high school, and I think even the booze set in which was unusual for high school, as alcs were rare. After high school, he turned full-blown alcoholic, dressed poorly, never combed his hair, smelled bad, was as ugly as ever and stumbled around drunk most of the time. Of course he was just as mean as ever, but now he was regarded as a pity case, being a drunk.

He staggered up to me at the party outside and said, “Lindsay LOL. You faggot LOL.” Well that’s one thing, and who knows how to respond? But while he is doing this, he took his beer and poured it down the front of my open  shirt. Now where I grew up, if someone does that, you have to hit them. You must. No two ways about. If you don’t, you are a pathetic, sissy fag and no one will talk to you anymore. Well, I hit him about as soon as he did that, and a wild fistfight broke out.

Somehow the fight migrated into the kitchen, and the women as usual were yelling, “Both of you guys are going to jail!” the way they always do.

Some people were asking what to do, but one guy said, “Don’t worry. Just leave them alone. Bob will kick his ass.”

The kitchen cleared out fast, and the fight got seriously nuts and even dangerous. I was so mad I picked up a kitchen table, lifted it over my head and smashed the table right down on his head! Yep. I hit a man over the head with a table! With a table. I can’t believe I did that. I did it with such force that the wooden table broke into many pieces, and RG crashed to the ground, nearly out cold and badly hurt but not dead or even close. Eventually, RG picked himself up, staggered over to me and shook my hand. I guess he wasn’t going to call me a faggot anymore that night.

There was some frenzied discussion about what I did.

“Geez man. Bob broke the damn table! Is that ok? Should we let him get away with that? He should pay for it.”

The attitude of most including the owners of the house was, “So what, who cares if he smashed the  table to bits? It was worth it for RG to get his ass kicked. Bob should not be made to pay for the table. Just forget it.”

I would be careful calling people that. Those are fighting words where I was brought  up.

53 Comments

Filed under Arabs, Blacks, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Hispanics, Homosexuality, Man World, Mexicans, Race/Ethnicity, Sex, Whites

Jack Nicholson Has Still Got Game

Jennifer Lawrence after winning Best Actress at the Oscar (former Academy) Awards. Look at her. She’s blushing like a schoolgirl. Old Jack was 76 years old when this video was taken, and the old dog’s still got Game. Incredible. She must be half his age. I so want to be like this if I ever make it this far.

1 Comment

Filed under Celebrities, Cinema, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Sex, Women

Can Gay Men Still Be Attracted to Women in Some Sort of Way?

I smash one more insane Cultural Left lie below.

The Cultural Left regularly states as one of its theorems that most if not all gay men get turned on by females on a regular basis. Why the Cultural Left wants to insist on this nonsense, I have no idea.

In general, the Cultural Left hates “generalizations.” They don’t want any laws or rules about anything. Or corollaries or theorems. Or well-supported conclusions. It’s scientific nihilism all the way.

We cannot “generalize” (which means form a conclusion by testing a hypothesis against the collected data) about anything on Earth. Nothing means anything. Or everything means nothing. Or nothing means everything. Or everything means everything. Or everything means anything. Or something. Or something. Or whatever. Or mumbo jumbo. Or bullshit.

Oh, and no labels! The Cultural Left hates labels because labels imply definitions and in the wild and woolly bonkers world of the insipid Cultural Left, definitions are generalizations, and generalized conclusions are bigotry. All generalizations are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, looksist, speciesist or just some generalized form of oppression by the dominant paradigm of whatever the beaten down subaltern of the day is.

If you notice, the asinine scientific nihilism of the Cultural Left is straight out of the social sciences, where notoriously nothing can ever be proven except whatever silly PC theory the social scientist wants to prove, typically with no evidence, while the obvious common sense wisdom of ages is all “scientifically disproven” by a bunch of fake social science studies and is at any rate waved away as racism, sexism, fat-shaming, slut-shaming, homophobia, transphobia or whatever whatever bla bla. Oppression Olympics.

My answer to this question on Quora:

Newsflash: Gay men don’t get turned on by women! Isn’t that shocking?
Most of the gay men posting below are simply lying. Endless studies in the lab have shown that the typical gay men reacts in the following way:

maximal attraction to males

minimal attraction to females

In fact, this is one of the most robust findings in social science! They’ve tested it so many times that no one wants to test it anymore because everyone knows how it comes out.

To put it another way, how many straight men are turned on by men? Most of them are not, and even those that are have quite low levels of attraction to men.
Hard bisexual men are not common. Most men lean hard one way or the other. Most bisexual men lean straight and usually hard straight. A much smaller percentage of bisexual men lean gay ,and many of those lean hard gay. Fully 87% of men with a bisexual orientation in the lab lean straight. The other 13% lean gay and those vary 2/3 leaning hard gay and 1/3 being significantly bisexual.

I have not the faintest idea why all these gay men below are falling all over themselves to lie that they get hard for women on any regular basis.

Is there some sort of shame in not being turned on by women? So you’re not turned on by women? So what? Or as I would say, lucky you, now you don’t have to be driven insane by them like we are!

If you asked a group of straight men on here if we ever get turned on by men, would they be falling all over each other to deliriously confess how they regularly get hard for Brad Pitt? These gay men trying to desperately to prove that they get hard for women strike me as self-haters. The implication being that a man who cannot get turned on by women is defective somehow. Sad.

I work as a psychological counselor. In the course of my counseling, I have many people who come in with problems that involve sexuality in some way. In these cases, I do a sexual orientation assessment of my male clients. Contrary to the nonsense you are reading below about “don’t believe in labels,” the truth is that labels are completely appropriate for men when it comes to sexual orientation.

That is because by no later than age 15, it has been proven in the lab that male sexual orientation is completely fixed. Not only can gay men not be turned straight (as proven endlessly in the lab), but, even more pessimistically than that, gay men cannot even be moved anywhere towards straight on the orientation scale. A 0-100 gay man cannot even become 10-90. A 20-80 gay man cannot become even a 30-70.

There is no data on whether straight men can turn gay, but if it works one way, it must work the other. In fact, there is one intriguing case in the literature of a miserable and hopelessly heterosexual male college student who hated women and desperately wanted to be gay. He spent most of his time hanging around gay men trying to turn gay. He told the clinician that he had tried everything he could think of to turn gay, and nothing had worked.

We men are simply up the creek as far as our orientation goes. We are whatever we got wired up to be, and that’s that.

The sexual orientation assessment simply assesses what the man was turned on by as a child and then up until age 15, as I don’t care what happened after that, as nothing could have happened anyway. All gay men told me that they were strongly attracted to males from puberty on, and some told me that they were into males even as early as childhood. Most of them reported no attraction to females during childhood, puberty and adolescence.

So far, all of my gay male clients have told me that in general:

  • They rarely look at women and check them out sexually, in most cases never do so. They’re checking out the guys, all guys, all the time.
  • Even more importantly, they never fantasize about sex with women. Like never, ever. All men, all the time.
  • Perhaps most importantly of all, they never think about women when they masturbate. Not even once, ever. It’s all men, all the time.

I have not yet had one gay man in my practice who had any significant attraction to women. Now that’s anecdotal, not scientific, but it ought to tell you something.

Some of the men above who showed no significant reaction to women had identified as 25-75 bisexuals to me on my scale, which is reasonably bisexual. A 25-75 man is maximally attracted to males and attracted to females at only half that rate. However, my 25-75’s practically speaking had no real attraction to women at all. So you see gay men often identify themselves as much more bisexual than they are.

Furthermore, in interviews with women married to closeted gay men, the wives say that their husbands displayed no interest at all in their bodies, even when they were naked. The husbands were often fascinated with male bodies, some claiming to be sports fans and collecting bodybuilder or other magazines that showcase jacked handsome men. They report that their husbands showed a particular aversion to cunnilingus.

The husbands often preferred sex from the rear position, and some liked anal sex a bit too much, if you catch my drift. Others reported that the husband showed little or no interest in sex. Reports of longterm impotence among closeted gay husbands are common. Girlfriends have told me that they have disrobed partially or fully in front of gay or suspected gay men, and the gay men did not look at them for one second and even acted like nothing in the room had changed!

This has actually been born out in the lab, as until recently all studies of so called “bisexual” men found that they tested in the lab exactly the same way as gay men:

  • maximally to men
  • minimally to women

The researchers concluded that “bisexual” men were simply gay men who cannot accept being gay due to stigma or prejudice, so they identify as bisexual because that is more acceptable to society.

This scenario continues to this day, as males in their late teens on through their 20’s identify at fairly high rates as “bisexual.” A common scenario is young men in their 20’s identifying as “bisexual” while they have wives or girlfriends. Yet these men spend most of their free time in gay bars and clubs. If you follow these men to age 30, you will find out that nearly of them have come fully out as gay by then. It simply took them all through their 20’s to accept that they were gay. Sad.

However a study was recently reported where researchers found a group of “bisexual” men who were actually bisexual in that they reacted significantly to both men and women in the lab. So it appears that they do exist. However, pure bisexual men or 50-50’s seem to be quite rare. Surveys show that only 1% of men can be classified this way.

Men are leaners. We either lean straight or we lean gay, often pretty hard one way or the other. This is even true of bisexual men. I do not know why this is, but that is what the research shows us.

6 Comments

Filed under Cultural Marxists, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Left, Man World, Psychology, Psychotherapy, Science, Scum, Sex

George Michael Was Not Really Gay: He Was Actually a Strong Bisexual

Trash: GEORGE MICHAEL

A husky hairy-faced man high on crack and lurking in public toilets trying to get you to suck his penis.

I think effeminate gays are more palatable.

The police officer who arrested George Michael later tried to sue for “emotional damage” as a result of George high off his head on crack cocaine shoving his head into his crotch in a public toilet.

That is scary.

George Michael was not really gay. He was a very strong bisexual. He was very turned on by women his entire life. He was also very turned on by men. He was more gay-romantic than anything else. As a prepubertal boy, he was girl-crazy. Around the time of puberty, somehow he got very turned on by boys also. The high attraction to females never went away. But soon after puberty, he realized that he could only fall in love with a man.

He slept with quite a few beautiful women for a while there in early adulthood and he loved it. He told the women that he was into guys too, but after a while, it all just felt too dishonest and he felt like he was screwing the women over psychologically somehow, so he quit having sex with them. But he retained a high attraction to women his entire life. I would have liked to have interviewed the guy as I have a big interest in sexual orientation stuff. The commenter above seems to imply that Michael was rather masculine for a gay men, which makes sense to me. The more into a women a gay man is, the more masculine he acts. The more exclusively gay he is, the more effeminate he acts.

My scale:

100-0: Maximum heterosexual, minimum homosexual
90-10: Maximum heterosexual, incidental homosexual
80-20: Maximum heterosexual, significant homosexual
70-30: Maximum heterosexual, strong homosexual
60-40: Maximum heterosexual, very strong strong homosexual
50-50: Maximum heterosexual, maximal homosexual
40-60: Maximum homosexual, very strong heterosexual
30-70: Maximum homosexual, strong heterosexual
20-80: Maximum homosexual, significant heterosexual
10-90: Maximum homosexual, incidental heterosexual
0-100: Maximum homosexual, minimal heterosexual

I haven’t the faintest idea where he would be on this chart. I doubt if he was more turned on by women than he was by men. I would say anywhere from a 30-70 to a 50-50. Gay leaning strong bisexuals (30-70 to 40-60’s make up fully 1/3 of all men who lean gay, so it appears there are quite a few men like that. I think maybe 2% of the male population is a gay leaning strong bisexual. It’s an interesting group of men and I would like to see more work done on them. Pure bisexual men are quite rare – only 1% of the male population is this way. Almost all men with a bisexual orientation at all lean one way or the other, typically strongly in that direction. Men either lean heavily gay or lean heavily gay; they do not seem to do the middle ground  stuff very well. Why this is is unknown.

 

12 Comments

Filed under Celebrities, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Sex

Romantic Orientation: An Unknown Factor in Sexual Orientation

100-0: Maximum heterosexual, minimum homosexual
90-10: Maximum heterosexual, incidental homosexual
80-20: Maximum heterosexual, significant homosexual
70-30: Maximum heterosexual, strong homosexual
60-40: Maximum heterosexual, very strong strong homosexual
50-50: Maximum heterosexual, maximal homosexual
40-60: Maximum homosexual, very strong heterosexual
30-70: Maximum homosexual, strong heterosexual
20-80: Maximum homosexual, significant heterosexual
10-90: Maximum homosexual, incidental heterosexual
0-100: Maximum homosexual, minimal heterosexual

That is my very own sexual orientation scale. I use it a lot in my counseling practice. What is odd is that everyone seems to like it a lot, and almost everyone gives me an almost immediate answer to where they are on the chart. This implies that most people know their sexual orientation at least deep down inside and few people are legitimately going round and round about their sexual orientation.

In my practice the only people I met who were going round and round about their sexual orientation were mentally ill. It doesn’t seem to be something normal people do. I think most adults know their orientation very well, but quite a few simply cannot admit it to themselves. Hence you see formerly married men “discovering they are gay” at age 45. They are not discovering a damn thing. They’ve known all along. The only  thing that changed was they stopped lying to themselves.

I like this better than the Kinsey Scale.

We really need another scale for romantic orientation.

I have known some lesbians who identified as 25-75 but identified as lesbian because they said that while men might be fun for sex, they could only fall in love with a woman. So it looks like self-labeling for sexual orientation can be based as much on romantic attraction as sexual attraction.

I have known women who had sex with both men and women but identified as straight as they only had relationships with men. They told me that relationships with women were straight up insanity time.

In fact, a number of bisexual women have confided in me that they did not like relationships with women because they were too nutty, which is something we men have been saying forever now. They told me that relationships with men were much more stable.

Woman = chaos + drama is how the equation works. All men have woman troubles. If you have a woman, you have woman troubles, period. Maybe you don’t if she’s mute, but even then she probably is capable of murderously dirty looks. Mute women have the advantage of knowing when to shut up and plus they can never give you the silent treatment. I think more men should look into relationships with mute women. It sounds like a neglected demographic. Generally the man is a stabilizing influence to the drama + chaos and women from partriarchal cultures are encultured or even terrorized into acting sane and decent most of the time.

Now you have two humans. One is drama + chaos and the other is drama + chaos. Ok, what do you think the result of that is? A Type 3 emotional hurricane I would say.

3 Comments

Filed under Culture, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Women

Resolved: Young Boys are Straight-Up Evil

RL: Another question answered in Quora. The Cultural Left BS is that gay men are no more likely to be effeminate than straight men…

…Think about that. The boy on the hoppityhop was the “queer.” You know what queer means. The job of all of the other boys was to basically destroy the queer riding the ball and throw him of the ball. Whoever was the queer got smeared. Everyone tried to destroy you and throw you off the ball. What’s the message here? Queers get smeared. Queers get attacked and destroyed. If you are a Queer, all of the other boys will attack you with violence. It’s pretty obvious the message that gets internalized with such games.

Jason Y: Only assholes play that game. They don’t represent most boys. They’re just the alpha jocks of the group, who by the way, are big pussies when they have to encounter real men who can easily beat them up. After that, of course, they cry like little girls, and child abuse charges are brought up. 😆

Note these fuckers don’t change as they go into upper-grade school and college either. They make life hell for decent people who treat others fairly and certainly they are an enemy to the socialism that you speak of.

RL: It was deliriously fun to beat up this boy who cried all of the time. In case you think I am a sociopath, many other boys joined in, and most were quite normal, not the bad bullies at all. Just regular, violent boys. Of course, the more we beat him up, the more he cried, so it was sort of dumb to hit him, but 10 year old boys don’t think like that.

Jason Y: Only assholes beat up crying boys, but yes, most boys don’t approve of crying though they may not admit it. I don’t really think it’s good behavior, not even for girls. It’s just really weak.

RL: There are indeed some effeminate straight men, but mostly they only act effeminate some of the time and not all the time. I would estimate that no more than 1% of straight men are obviously effeminate. The number of very wimpy straight men must also be small. Perhaps 1–2%.

Jason Y: Well, what about skinny guys or midgets? Note they’re being attacked for being weak and queer, just cause they look the part. Well, not everyone is doing that, but asshole 7-12 year old boys and other alphas are.

I guess according to you all normal young boys are assholes.

I got some news for you. None of my friends were macho jock assholes. I wasn’t, and none of my friends were either. We were actually the direct opposite of macho jock assholes, about as far as you could get from that behavior. We were the most normal boys you ever met. We were not even all that popular. I mean we were sort of popular, but we were in the In Crowd. And we were not hypermasculine or macho either. Some of us were getting called pussies ourselves. I doubt if they were particularly conservative either. We were not homophobic macho jocks! Homophobia is normal for all young boys!

You say only assholes beat up crying boys. Let me tell you something. Everyone beat that guy up. Everyone. Both of my brothers beat him up. One was in second grade, and the other wasn’t even in kindergarten. Even my four year old brother helped beat that guy up. He really loved it too. He got into it big time. There really was not anyone who did not beat that guy up, I think because it was so much fun. And almost all of the guys beating him up were simply regular, normal boys, not assholes or bullies or jocks or anything. Just run of the mill boys.

Skinny guys are typically not effeminate. I can think of a Hell of a lot of skinny guys I have known in my life, and I am having a hard time thinking of one effeminate or even very wimpy skinny boy. I have never known or met any midgets. I had a good Net friend once who was a “little person” as he called it, and everyone loved him and left him alone. Being skinny or a little person is not the same thing as acting effeminate.

The guys you are talking about are hypermasculine homophobic psychos. When we were that age, we never called any skinny boys fags or beat them up. Some of us were pretty skinny ourselves. Only the crying boy got his ass beat. There were some skinny but very faggoty effeminate boys named the Hunts. We called them the Cunts, and we used to torment them and call them fags. They never rose to the bait though so we never hit them. I have to admit that that was pretty fun too. We really loved tormenting those boys because their faggoty behavior was so ridiculous. They both acted like Liberace + Paul Lind. Our attitude was that that behavior was simply outrageous and offensive and that’s why they got teased.

The way I see it is boys are simply diabolical. We all tortured insects and we even had Nazi style mass killing machine experiments for some common garden pests that were eating the crops in our garden. We experimented on all sorts of ways to kill snails and pillbugs. We had “bullfights” with tomato worms. We would put them in the “bullring” and then throw nails at them. Every time we threw a nail we yelled “Picadors!” which you gotta admit, is pretty funny. I believe we also set those things on fire. We burned ants with magnifying glasses.

We or at least I used to conduct science experiments on some bugs. The bugs were not harmed. I would pain the shell of a snail blue and then release it. A few days later I would go looking for it. I found that a damn snail could travel awful far in only a day or two. Some of them went all the way from the backyard to the front yard in only a day or two. I found this fascinating.

We stole stuff from the workmen building the new houses in back. We would go back there at night and steal whole boxes of nails, tools, you name it. It was actually pretty fun to steal stuff from them. It was quite scary and exciting. We used to go fishing at this place called “The Smelt Place.” We could catch up to 100 smelt in a day at this place.

Mostly we just threw them back but after a while, we were catching so many of them that we started murdering them. We would leave them on our lines after we caught them and then cast the line with the fish on it over onto some nearby rocks. Then we would yell, “Acapulco Cliff Divers!” which was a funny thing to say, I have to admit. Then we would reel the poor things back in over the rocks. The fish  would come back in battered but still alive. A few casts and it was threw. I think we just threw the dead fish in the estuary. One friend took a live smelt and tied it to a rope at the end of his bike and dragged it aways. He was trying to see how far he could drag it before it died. We thought this was hysterically funny.

Thank God we never killed or even harmed amphibians, reptiles, birds or God forbid mammals. Killing insects is almost normal, and killing fish is not that pathological, but as it escalates, the behavior starts getting more alarming.

We we were the best of friends, but a lot of us fought constantly. My brothers and I were best friends but we fought and beat each other up all the time. We also broke up into teams and had “Berry Wars” or “Dirt Clod Wars.” We used hard green small fruit of some tree as berries. We would arm ourselves with these small objects and then throw them at each other. It could hurt to get hit with those and those wars often turned quite violent. It was not uncommon for them to end with us screaming  that we were going to kill each other.

The next day it was all good and everything was normal. I remember once we flew up to see my relatives and just before the plane back, we got into a horrific berry war with my cousins. As we were being hauled into the car to the airport, I remember my brothers and I screaming at my cousins that we were going to murder each other. My mother found this quite alarming. Next time we went up to see them, everything was fine.

I simply think that young boys are wicked. They are often mean and they can be quite sadistic. Sadism seems to be a normal part of boyhood. They love violence, they love to tease and torment other boys to provoke a violent response in order to have an excuse to beat up the guy you teased. We were always provoking each other into violence. We all had very mean nicknames for each other. If you called the person by their mean nickname they would usually try to assault you. So of course we called each other by these mean nicknames all the time in order to provoke a violent response to we could respond by beating them up.

My girl cousins came and lived with us for a while. I learned all about females then and later when we became best friends, but while they were living with us, it was nonstop warfare. We were pre-pubertal, so it generally took the form of girls versus boys, which was a real blast of course because we thought, no wait we knew, that we were better than girls.

I think boys are just normally evil a lot of the time. Most of them just age out of it and turn into quite normal adolescent and adults, but some of them go way too far and end up being antisocial or worse adults. I have also observed that little girls can be quite evil too, but the violence is more verbal than physical. They seem to delight in being mean to other girls, forming cliques, excluding others, sadistically making other girls cry, etc. Girls seem to be pretty sadistic around that age too. Most of them seem to grow out of their childhood evil too. This antisocial or evil behavior seems to be a normal developmental stage in both genders, but I do not understand why that would be.

7 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Girls, Man World, Psychology