Category Archives: Gender Studies

Massive Riots at UC Berkeley Over Milo Yiannapoulis Visit

Here.

Milo Yiannapoulis was scheduled to speak at UC Berkeley as part of his Dangerous Faggot tour.

Many of his tour stops on campuses around the country have been disrupted by rowdy demonstrations and even riots. His appearances are being canceled in many cases due to fear of riots. After the election of Trump, the demonstrators have gotten much more violent and rowdy.

At the University of Washington recently, there was a huge riot at a Milo appearance. People coming to see Milo were assaulted by demonstrators, who attacked them with fists, object and paint bombs. Some Milo fans were injured in the meelee. I am not sure if the speech got canceled or not. Antifa and Black Bloc elements present were probably causing most of the violence. At one point, fights broke out between antifa and Trump supporters. In the midst of one of these fights, a Trump supporter drew a weapon and shot an antifa. The antifa was badly wounded in the hospital but may have survived.

Just tonight, Milo was scheduled to speak in the Student Union at UC Berkeley in Berkeley, California. A huge crowd of over 2,000 protesters assembled. At first the demo was peaceful, but later, a smaller group of antifa Black Bloc types broke away and began engaging in violence.

There were shouting matches and fistfights between antifa and Trump supporters. In one case, an antifa threw an object at a young woman Trump supporter, hitting her in the face. She charged the man with fists and returned blows at her attacker. I don’t like the idea of beating up women, even if they are Trumpsters. I couldn’t do it myself. If a woman wants to take her on, fine, but men assaulting women even in political demos leaves me cold. Men should fight men and women should fight women, sorry. I guess that’s that horrible, evil Alt Left conservatism of mine that makes me such an vile scum according to the Cultural Left. Isn’t it horrible that I want to protect women from violent men? Disgusting! I believe in chivalry. Is that scummy or what?

Large amounts of fireworks and smoke bombs were set off, most of them being thrown at the building where Milo was speaking. People charged police barricades and tore them down. They then used the barricades to smash the windows of the venue where Milo was speaking. People set fires here and there, including a large bonfire. At one point, the mob charged the building, smashed open windows using police barricades and managed to breach the first floor of the venue where Milo was speaking! Wow! I wonder what they would have done with Milo if they got their hands on him. They might have lynched him. Security at the speech panicked and the speech was canceled. For a while it seemed that Milo was trapped inside, but officers managed to escort him to safety.

Police had to resort to tear gas, pepper spray and even rubber bullets to disperse the crowd. Police gave orders to disperse, warning that anyone who did not leave would be arrested.

This was probably the most serious riot at UC Berkeley in quite some time, but of course, in the 1960’s and 70’s, huge demonstrations and even riots rocked the campus on a regular basis. Governor Ronald Reagan even called out the California National Guard to restore order on California campuses.

3 Comments

Filed under California, Conservatism, Gender Studies, Higher Education, Law enforcement, Left, Man World, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Sane Pro-Woman, US Politics, USA, Washington, West

Alt Left Positions on Gays, Transsexuals, Non-Whites and the Disabled

Jason Y: The part about dumping gays and trannies might gain some sympathy, but action against non-Whites and the disabled makes the Alt-Left seem too hateful.

We are not dumping gays and trannies, we are just with to lessen the celebratory rhetoric about these people that ends up treating the abnormal as normal and the normal people as freaks. Face it, it’s not normal to be a transsexual and fully homosexual. It’s abnormal. So is being left-handed or having green eyes, but if everyone was left-handed or had green eyes, we could deal pretty well. If even 20% of society was gay or tranny, the consequences to society would be catastrophic. Since gays are only 3% and trannies are maybe .15% of the population, it’s no great shakes to deal with them, but even with those low numbers, transsexuals and homosexuals still cause a lot of societal problems, so these are not exactly positive things society-wise.

On the other hand, I think the Alt Left in general wants full rights for gays. That is, we support most if not all of the political causes that the gay community is pushing right now. I personally participate in gay political campaigns, which is why it’s a bit rich that I keep getting called homophobic.

We support basic minimal rights for transsexuals. I am not sure about the transsexual bathroom issue. I doubt if it will be much of a problem if we implement this, but it’s not a very important issue either. Perhaps the Alt Left will go neutral on the transsexual bathroom issue.

I believe an employer ought to be able to discriminate against gays or transsexuals if the person looks noticeably odd like a lot of transsexuals do or if their homosexual behavior is blatant and flaunted. For jobs involving meeting the public, an employer ought to be able to say, “Hey, this person’s going to scare customers away.” In that case, the flagrant gay or transsexual still ought to be able to get a job say in the back room somewhere where they are not serving as a front to the business with the public.

I think transsexuals are generally mentally ill, but mentally ill people generally deserve full rights, and their mental disorder is not dangerous to others.

What sort of action does the Alt Left advocate with regard to non-Whites other than reducing legal immigration, stopping illegal immigration, ending birthright citizenship and restricting the abuse of work visas such as H-1B’s?

The Alt Left opposes all discrimination based on race, ethnicity, etc.

Furthermore, we believe that the Voting Rights Act needs to be put back in, strong efforts to curb Republican efforts to keep Blacks from voting (similar to Jim Crow).

We would like to see the Housing Rights Act much better enforced. As it is, there is still a lot of housing discrimination against Blacks because there is little enforcement of this act. Black people need to be protected against all forms of discrimination, not just employment but also in voting and housing.

On the other hand, the Alt Left opposes Black Lives Matter. Rather than evil, I simply see BLM as idiotic, absurd, unnecessary and counterproductive.

And how is it that the Alt Left is advocating any harm for the disabled at all? In fact, we very much support the state’s disability programs and would even like to see them expanded and liberalized, believe it or not. For instance, in the UK, people on the equivalent of SSI can make as much money as they want. They usually do not make much due to their problems, but still.

And SSDI will let you work quite a bit. I knew a guy who worked 28 hours a week on SSDI. He said they just deducted his check. And if you are making good enough money on Disability, just cut the check to zero dollars and let them keep the medical care. If they become ill again and have to cut back or stop work, bring back the check in some form, but don’t throw them off the program. If they are disabled, they are going to have some serious health care needs for as long as they are disabled, so it is important for them to keep health coverage.

What’s so bad about that?

Jason Y: Anyhow, note, if there are certain bozos drifting off toward Trump from the left, then good riddance !!! Who needs them anyhow? I mean, they know who Trump is and what he represents. It’s not like they were lied to.

I disagree. We should take any people leaving Trump or heading his way that we can. If they renounce support for Trump and the Republicans, they can join our movement. Better to have them with us on the Left than over there on the Right causing chaos.

8 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Blacks, Conservatism, Discrimination, Employment, Fake Guest Workers, Gender Studies, Government, Health, Homosexuality, Housing, Illegal, Illness, Immigration, Law, Left, Legal, Mental Illness, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Republicans, Sex, US Politics, White Racism

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.

5 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.

50 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