Category Archives: Sane Pro-Woman

Intuition, Logic’s Unacknowledged Twin

“The more time I spend around this guy the creepier vibes I get from him.”

This is that thing called intuition. It’s actually sort of the opposite of logic. It’s all about the feels. It is also what we call “vibes” which is literally short for vibrations. The implication is that we can feel actual vibrations in the air when we are around something or usually someone that makes us feel a certain way.

It also works on something called Gestalt, which is “I know it when I see it.” You can’t put your finger on exactly why you feel that way, but you just feel that way and can’t even figure out how you got to that conclusion. Sometimes the hair on the back of your head will stand up. Sometimes a shiver runs through your body. Gestalt is “the sum is greater than the whole of its parts.” It’s the “smell” of something, without even using your nose. Like “this smells fishy” about a bad deal.

I am into birdwatching, and one of things we use is Gestalt. Sure, we have all sorts of guides and photos and drawings and whatnot that show us how to tell one bird from another by looks, terrain, behavior, song and all sorts of things, but oftentimes, it just boils down to Gestalt. You see a bird, sometimes just for an instant, and you just know it was a “so and so bird.” Someone asks you how or why you reached that conclusion, and you can’t even say. You shrug your shoulders and say, “I don’t know. I just knew it.” Something about it all added up.

Men decry this because it’s not logical thinking, but logical thinking only gets you so far, and a lot of things cannot be figured out with pure logic. You will dead end and stall or need to back out.

I think holistic thinking or “seeing the whole picture” or “putting it all together” may be intuitive also. You don’t exactly see the whole picture by some logical inductive or deductive method. You sort of “put it all together.” You form a picture in your mind, and there it is. The Gestalt. The “whole picture.”

The finest detectives have excellent logic and intuitive skills. Women are much better at intuition than men. We beat them at the opposite, so it all sort of evens out. That’s why men are stereotyped as such social retards, and women often say we just don’t get it. We men go at social interactions via brute force logic like a dictionary attack to break a password, and the result is a bull in a china shop.

So much of social communication works off subtle signals, vibes, small changes in conversational subject or tone, and the whole panoply of nonverbal communication where you can communicate with people merely by looking at their faces and body language. The pure social actor has mastered this whole pantomime. The social retard just doesn’t get it. Asperger’s people simply cannot read nonverbal communication at all. They often don’t get jokes or irony. They do not understand social conventions, and social rules are lost on them. This shows how important intuition is in social communication or what we call “social skills,” a term I despise.

I would like to see more women get into detective work. Looking at this websleuth group, and some of our best sleuths are women who seem to be operating off sheer intuition. We have a few female detectives and they can be quite good, but almost all detectives are men.

4 Comments

Filed under Asperger's Syndrome, Autism, Birdwatching, Crime, Gender Studies, Hobbies, Law enforcement, Man World, Psychology, Sane Pro-Woman, Women

Game/PUA: Maternal Instinct in Females, or The Wife as Mother

Beauregard: Weren’t “1950’s Wives” almost maternal towards their husbands? I mean, an extremely insecure teenage girl cannot provide that. I suppose strong men (Alphas) might not need that, but 85% of men, including myself, are not that.

Well I would say that a lot of those 1950’s wives were teenage girls, aged 18-19.

Females want to take care of males. Women want to take care of men. I assume teenage girls want to take care of their boyfriends.

Several years ago, I had an 18 year old girlfriend, and she told me that she wanted to take care of me. Every night before she went to sleep she prayed to God to not let anything bad happen to me. She worried all the time that something bad was going to happen to me. I was pretty shocked that such a young woman would want to take care of me. I guess the maternal instinct in females starts awful young. Females don’t just want to take care of babies. They also want to take care of their men.

Most of my most recent girlfriends tried to take care of me. They were concerned about my health, and they worried a lot about me. They pretty much mothered me in some ways. It’s normal for your woman to mother you.

Also it means she loves you. If she loves you, she is going to mother you. If she doesn’t love you, she may well not mother you. The maternal instinct to care for her man seems to be tied into love. If she cares enough about you to love you, then she wants to protect you.

Also women seem to know that we men are like babies or children. Face it, we don’t take care of ourselves, and we do a lot of stupid, self destructive, or out and out dangerous stuff.

 

Sure, Alphas are not looking for women to take care of them, maybe. The dirty little secret is how much most men love their mothers. You go to a prison, and most of the men in there will tell you that they want to kill their fathers, but they all also have Mom tattooed on their shoulders, and you better not diss their momma, or you might get hit or worse.

Men are pretty much babies, as tough as we act. Our mothers take care of us until we leave the home, whenever that is, and after that, we take up with a girlfriend or wife, which is actually a surrogate mother. No man wants to admit this because it sounds so pussy, but it’s actually true. Men know instinctively that they cannot take care of themselves very well, so we live most of our lives relying on women to take care of us in one way or another.

As men age, this mothering of husbands becomes quite profound, and many older and elderly men are dependent on their wives, often to an embarrassing degree. Many men’s health collapses after they divorce because there is no woman to take care of them anymore.

Lifelong bachelors like yours truly do a lot better because we have been on our own forever, and bachelor life is sink or swim. You either learn to cook, or you eat like a dog. You either take care of yourself, or your health collapses.

It’s downright Darwinian, and an early grave awaits the bachelor who never learned to be self-sufficient and in effect mother himself. Because newly divorced men have been relying on their wives for food, shelter, comfort, medical care and even the laundry, a newly divorced man is quite often a fish out of water. This is where you see the statistics about single men living less long than married men go astray. Those statistics are distorted by the poor health of divorced men. Lifelong bachelors often do much better, as they have learned to survive on their own.

1 Comment

Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Women

Destroying Many Myths about Teenage Girl-Adult Man Relationships

Women always want the best.

– Oscar Wilde

I would add teenage girls to that. Women and teenage girls always want the best.

First of all, I would like to point out that one of the main drivers of Teenage Girl Mass Hysteria has been feminist therapists exactly like this woman posting below.

A teenage girl is with an older man. People end the relationship, and everyone starts screaming about how she got abused and molested and damaged and ruined and how now she has to go a therapist now get over her being a victim of “child molestation.” The girl is typically utterly baffled and doesn’t feel 1% harmed by the relationship, which she probably started herself anyway.

They ship her off to the feminist therapist who drills it into her head endlessly about how she was a victim of “child molestation,” about how she is a “child,” presumably the same thing as what are known as little girls, and how if she doesn’t “recover from the damage,” she will be scarred and crippled for the rest of her life.

At first the girl thinks this is insane and stupid and probably wants to slap the therapist. But after a while, the therapist brainwashes her very well. Now the girl is going on and on about how she got molested, abused, raped, damaged and potentially ruined. What was formerly probably the peak experience of her young life is now regarded as a horrorshow of nightmarish abuse. She starts to develop a number of mental symptoms due to all the “abuse” she got. She was quite sane before. She was sane before, and now she’s crazy! Iatrogenic therapist-induced mental disorder. Way to go feminists! Instead of making crazy people sane, you’re doing the opposite. You’re making sane people nuts. Good job! You want a medal for that?

Rebecca Patrick-Howard:

“On another note, how can you possibly “groom” a teenage girl? You can only groom children, and teenage girls are not children.”

Children, teenage girls, and grown women can ALL be “groomed.” Grooming occurs when a power figure (teacher, parent, dominant partner in the relationship) deliberately establishes an emotional connection and relationship with another person in order to exhibit control and to lower their inhibitions, usually for the purpose of exploitation or abuse.

Little by little, a seemingly healthy relationship becomes darker as the person is isolated from their family and friends, suffers mental and physical abuse-and sometimes sexual, becomes mentally and physically dependent upon the other person, and begins suffering from self-esteem issues and other behavioral and mental health problems.

Battered women are “groomed” every day. Just ask the formerly confident, attractive, independent woman who, after years of mental and physical abuse, finds herself kowtowing to their partner’s every wish and demand, losing her autonomy, and finding herself mentally unable to leave the relationship.

Women and teenagers are groomed in a different way. They’re taught to sit quietly without asking questions, to immediately respond to any text or phone call, to put their own needs and desires aside to focus on what their partner wants, to dress and behave in public the way the other person wants, to give in to sexual desires that make make them uncomfortable, to respond to things in a manner in which they are uncomfortable. They’re groomed to do these things in the beginning by being rewarded, just like a dog is rewarded for treats. And later, when they’re not complacent, they’re punished.

Certain women are targeted. Perhaps they appear vulnerable or weak. Or maybe they’re just young. They learn to gain the other person’s trust. They find their needs being met. Then the relationship becomes sexualized. From there, control is maintained. At that point, they’re often so entangled within the relationship that it’s difficult to get out.

If you’d like, I can provide data, research, case studies, and message boards where you can read many experiences from women and teenagers who have been “groomed.” From women and teenagers who have escaped abusive relationships and even sex trafficking situations.

“She probably seduced him. That’s how this stuff usually goes.”

I would like to see citations for peer-reviewed studies that show that the “most men having sex with teenage girls are doing it because the girls seduced them” and that “Also in almost all cases it is consensual”. Because I can tell you, as a woman and former teenage girl, that’s not been MY experience. As a family therapist, that certainly goes against the studies I’ve seen and read – not to mention the experience I’ve had with dozens of my young clients.

Regardless, a 13-year-old is a child. No matter how “mature” they appear, no matter if they’ve started menses or not, no matter if they have the body and vocabulary of a 20-year-old-they’re are NOT a woman. Either legally or emotionally.

Do you have a daughter?

I don’t have one, but if your daughter is a teenage girl, I bet she is pretty angry about the way you are trying to “protect” her from a harmless thing she doesn’t even want to be protected from in the first place! From her point of view, you’re annoying and in the way, big time.

In every case I heard about personally, the girl seduced the man. In all the cases I have read about on the Net, the girl went after the man. Teenage girls like men, you know. They mostly like boys, but there’s definitely a fair number of them who like men too, usually the better looking ones.

And teenage girls did this too me more times than I can count when I was having sex with them from ages 18-21 and then later when all relationships were platonic. I never sought out underage girls even as a young man when I was dating them. I didn’t have to. I just sat back and waited for them to come to me. They approached me or mutual friends said the girl wanted to go out with me. “Hey Bob, do you want to go out with Clarissa (14 year old girl)? She wants to go out with you.”

And I certainly never sought them out as “easy lays,” mostly because they aren’t. Teenage girls are not easy targets. It is actually quite difficult to date them if you are an adult. If we lowered the age of consent right now, it would be murderously difficult for me to date a jailbait. I’m too old for them, and they’re too hard to get anyway.

I have never in my life heard of men seeking out teenage girls as “easy targets.” Why would anyone do that? Girls like men enough that if you are into teenage girls and you are goodlooking and have good Game, all you have to do is sit back and wait for them to come to you, or at least make the first signals.

I have never in my life heard of a man who “could not get a woman his own age,” so he went after teenage girls. It boggles my mind that women and feminists actually believe this ludicrous notion. It doesn’t work that way! If you can’t get a woman your own age, of course you cannot get a teenage girl because they are far harder to date than grown women your own age.

I am 59 years old and although somehow I do date attractive young women in their legal teens through 20’s (against all odds and to my own astonishment), I must say that it is horribly difficult. And when I have to deal with young women in my regular doings around town, most of them look at me like, “Get the Hell away from me, creep!” It was never like that before. It was the opposite. Obviously I am too old for them. This is 100% due to age and 0% due to anything else. Even if it were legal, dating teenage girls would be even harder for me than young women because honestly they harder to get if you are older. The younger the female, the harder it is to get her if you are an older man.

For one thing, teenage girls are much pickier than women. In every case I have known personally, the girls seduced the men, and the men were basically studs, players, playboys, womanizers, or whatever you want to call them. These were good-looking men with great Game who did great with women. Even in the cases I read about in the paper, the girls seem to be targeting the “Alphas.”

I have talked to teenage girls about this, and they told me, “We are not really into older men that much. But if we are at all, we only want the best, the cream of the crop.” Teenage girls are boy-crazy, and they will date all sorts of teenage boys. You don’t have to be an Alpha at that age. Many teenage girls have Beta or even Omega boyfriends. They are not so selective about boys their age. But once you start getting above the boys into the men, teenage girls get far pickier.

Bottom line is as far as I can tell, Beta and especially Omega men cannot even hope to get a teenage girl. Those girls only want the ~20% best men in your age group.

Look at cases in the paper. How many times have you heard of teenage girls pursuing movie directors (Roman Polanski repeatedly), rock stars (Bowie, Steve Tyler, Jimmy Page and surely many others), rich men (Trump, Jeffrey Epstein), teachers (strong authority figure with a good job and better than average smarts), writers (JD Salinger). See? They make a beeline for the best men.

Which has exactly been my experience. There are men out there who are attractive to most of the women. Call them the Alphas. Typically there are a number of women who would gladly date these men. These are the men that “all the women want.” Well, guess what sort of men teenage girls like? Exactly that type. Girls want the same cream of the crop men that the women want. Girls and women are not all that different when it comes to sex. They all want the same thing.

Why on Earth would you get involved with a man if it wasn’t consensual? If it’s not consensual then it’s rape. If it was rape, why didn’t you report it to the police? Color me baffled. You say in your practice you have met many teenage girls who were in nonconsensual relationships with men. Leaving the family aside (where coerced sex with minors is very common) how many girls get into nonconsensual relationships with men? Why would anyone do that? Are you saying that all these girls were raped? That every time they had sex, it was a rape? That’s what nonconsensual means. Rape. If all these girls got raped, why didn’t they report it to the police?

If most of these cases are really rapes and not consensual, why doesn’t LE file rape charges against the men? Instead it’s usually some statutory type charge that merely says his only crime was having sex with a female in some restricted, off-limits age range.

I’ve never heard a typical older man-teenage girl relationship that was not 100% consensual. If it’s not consensual, why would she be there in the first place. Teenage girls are pretty damn smart. You can say that kids don’t have the ability to consent because they are unclear on the concept in the first place. But to conflate the lack of agency of little girls with the wariness, worldliness and sophistication of teenage girls and argue that somehow teenage girls can’t figure out what consent means is nuts. Of course they know what it means. Only kids don’t know, and teenage girls aren’t kids. They’re neither children nor adults. We might as call them girl-women. I know them very well. They are far smarter, wiser and sensible about this stuff than most people think.

Every case I read about in the paper appears to be consensual, especially long-term relationships. How many times have you read that the girl refuses to testify against the man because she loves him, thinks he did nothing wrong or regards the relationship as consensual? I have read that so many times that I can’t count it. She often pleads with the court to release him, saying she hasn’t been harmed in the slightest.

The court disregards the fact that this was a crime involving two people where there somehow was no victim and heaves the guy into prison and throws away the key. In fact, so many teenage girls refuse to testify in these cases that it is almost expected behavior. The only reason the men ever go down is because someone else reported the case. The girl almost never reports the case. Why would she? She’s doing what she wants to do.

This non-testimony is such an epidemic that many states had to dig out their laws and make new laws and rules so that the testimony of the victim was not even required for a conviction. They had to throw out proof of harm because most of these teenage girl fake-victims will swear on a stack of Bibles that they were not harmed at all.

I would say that the one group that is probably most angry at all about this Teenage Girl Mass Hysteria is the girls themselves. Quite a few of them want to get with hot men, but every time they nab one of their dream men, people like you grab her beloved boyfriend and throw him in prison. Hell, the “victims” themselves probably hate this mass hysteria more than anyone else. Most of the “victims” probably hate the law that is supposedly “protecting them.” Isn’t that rather idiotic?

I still don’t believe a woman can be groomed. The author says grooming occurs whenever there is a power discrepancy. Does she realize how often there is a power discrepancy between adult men and adult female sexual partners? Does the author think it should be illegal to “groom” women? Would she propose an anti-grooming law for women victims of grooming?

40 Comments

Filed under Crime, Feminism, Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Law enforcement, Man World, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Psychology, Psychotherapy, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Women

A Girl in Every Woman, a Woman in Every Girl, and a Chicken in Every Pot

I have been meaning to write this post for some time now but I have been terrified to do it. But it is an excellent subject of discussion. The stages of biological life that all humans go through is an interesting subject and it is perfectly sensible and normal for any human to be interested in such a topic. If we put this topic anywhere, we should put it under Medicine, which is the study of the human body after all. Problem is anyone who broaches the subject is going to get bombarded with accusations of pedophilia and perhaps ever reported to the police. In that case, let the bombarding and reporting commence.

The vast majority of people flipping out about a post like this are going to be persons of the hysterical gender, that is females. This makes no sense because the stages of biological life development ought to be very interesting for any curious woman. After all, every woman was once a girl, though no doubt most would probably deny it.

I would actually go further and say that there’s a girl in every woman.

Based on what? Based on years of experiences with relationships with many females, some of them even long-term. After a while, a student of women starts to learn quite a bit about them. Who knows more about women? A man who has been married to one woman his entire life or a man who never married and dated 200 women? I put this question to the smartest woman on Earth, which is of course my mother. She instantly said it would be the guy who had had experiences with all sorts of women. I don’t think having sex with prostitutes 200 times is going to cut it, though I guarantee you will learn a bit.

Sure the other guy gets to look at one woman down through the years, but one woman does not say much about Womanhood as a whole. He has a blinkered perspective. Whereas a man with many experiences (especially deep, prolonged and long-term ones) is going to sample the a good cross-section of Womanhood. As they say in statistics, sample size is everything. The larger the sample, the more accurate the results. The married man above has a sample size of one. The other guy has a sample size of 200. Whose study is going to be more accurate?

Women are mysterious and confusing and often make no sense at all. My female friends tell me that women are weird and impossible to figure out. But get a nice sample size, get to know some of them long-term and deeply, and after a while, you are going to see some real patterns.

As I said, there’s a  Girl in every Woman. And if you can get that Girl to come out and play, you can have a lot of fun with women. Some women have apparently killed their Girl. They are too serious and no fun, stuck in the dull and drab monotony that we drearily call Maturity. Yawn. But only some women have killed their Girl. Most have a Girl in there romping around somewhere. The trick is luring it out. And here’s where your Game skills will come in extremely handy.

And another thing I noticed, though not from dating, is there’s a Woman in every Girl.

If you watch little girls long enough, you can actually the Woman coming out in a lot of vague ways. Watch little girls playing house and tell me those are not tiny Women. I think Girlhood is a trial run at Womanhood. Girls seem to be in the process of learning how to be a Woman.

Of course as girls get older, you see the Woman more and more. But even in teenage years, girls are trading Woman and Girl back and forth and mixing them up.

  • Teenage girls are not children.
  • Neither are they adults.
  • They are girl-women, something in between that is neither a child nor an adult. A transitional phase.

It would be nice if rational people would believe this obvious fact, but alas, common sense has run away from our fair land and has not been heard of in some time.

A 16 year old girl has a complete woman’s body and a full-blown sex drive to boot, I assure you. But observing one lately, I was stunned at how much of a girl a 16 year old girl still is. Sure, she’s partly a woman. But she’s still so much  of a girl.

My latest revelation came from observing one seriously hot 16 year old girl at a function I attended in the Fall. Why was I looking at her? Well for one  thing, the feminists haven’t made looking illegal. They’re working on it, but that’s still a ways into the future. For another thing, she was staring at me, checking me out, and giving me bedroom eyes and zombie stares all night long, so what was I to do?

What did she want? No idea. But obviously I was making her horny. I’ve been around enough females to know what a horny female looks like. I can almost spot one half a mile away, blindfolded, at night, by now.

Not that she necessarily wanted to act on that feeling. What females feel and what they actually want to do about that feeling is a major part of female psychology that is poorly understood by almost everyone, including most women. See that woman staring at you all night long? Well, obviously you’re making her horny. Duh. So that means she wants to have sex with you then, right? Ay, there’s the rub. That’s not necessarily true. Maybe she just likes to look. Females probably encounter 10,000 males who make them horny in a lifetime. They don’t exactly jump on all of them you know. Thoughts and actions are two different things, although every day tens of millions of idiots can never seem to figure that out.

That 16 year old girl? Yes, it’s a woman. But in so many ways,it’s still such a girl. You don’t notice this until you get older because only then can you see immaturity for what it is. A young man gets too caught up in thinking these are little women because he’s not old enough to see how immature they are. Plus he’s thinking with his dick, and your dick doesn’t have a lot of brain cells last time I checked.

But you get to be my age, and you can see that girl as clear as air.

A 17 year old girl, ok, now we are getting somewhere. Especially right before they turn 18, a lot of them are after older men aged 29-59. This like graduation from Girlhood and on to Womanhood on a fast track. A 17 year old girl can be surprisingly mature. Nearly a little Woman. She’s way beyond a 16 year old girl, half a world away and past the International Dateline. How do I know? Guess. I told you I understand women pretty well. And that includes those little women called girls too.

But if you are around 17 year old girls enough, you are going to see that the girl is still quite prominent. She’s just having a dueling match with the Woman is all.

A few years back, I dated an 18 year old girl at age 56. How I pulled off this impossible task, I have no idea, but somehow I did it. She was interesting. Maybe I can only see it with age, but while there was a little Woman in there for sure romping about, I was stunned at how much of a girl this young woman still was. Even at adulthood, legally adult with all that comes with that, she was still quite a bit of a girl.

Although it was hard to obtain this information and the only way I got it was from men confessing to crimes, as soon as that sex drive hits, the Real Sexual Woman is out and about. There is a lot more to female sexuality than just sex. It’s a whole huge area of study that they could probably offer PhD’s in. The fun house mirror maze of Female Sexuality is what those Game/PUA blogs are trying to figure out. And they are doing a good job of it.

I read on the Net about a couple of men who had had sex with 13 year old girls. The girls seduced the men. Happens more often than you think. And they really did. Grabbing a man’s penis out of nowhere is pretty much open seduction, no? Because that is what these girls did. 

One was the mother’s boyfriend, and the other was the stepdad. These men described the sex that followed, and I almost fell out of my chair.

Because some of the things those girls did, I thought, “You know, that’s exactly what a woman would have done.” Precisely. Something happens in the female brain with the onset of the sex drive. They somehow get attracted to other humans (How does that work?), and the whole weird ball of wax called Female Sexuality comes out in full-blown form. A lot of this is cognitive stuff. I assume that the rush of hormones causes changes not just in the female body via a sex drive but also in the female brain to create a whole new cognitive way of looking at the world. I’m not going to go into it too much because you guys should know:

  • Confusion of love and sex, mixing them together, and mistaking one for the other.
  • Suddenly feeling very vulnerable and even frightened.
  • A desire to be not just protected but dominated.
  • A desire for a strong masculine man for this purpose.
  • The allure of the mysterious bad boy.
  • A bit of masochism or often more than a bit.
  • A desire for pain of different kinds and an association of sexual arousal with this feeling.

This is all cognitive stuff, and apparently somehow the estrogen creates all these cognitive effects in the brain. Amazing or what?

A girl after the full-blown onset of the sex drive is indeed a Woman in some very important ways. Now at that age, the girl predominates obviously, but I am stunned at how mature 13 year old girls are. The difference between a 12 and 13 year old girl is like a light year. A 12 year old girl is still not just a girl but a little girl. A 13 year old girl is no longer a girl. She’s a girl-woman beginning her maturational curve. And a girl that age is way smarter than you think.

So you see, the roles of Girl and Woman trade back and forth throughout the lifespan of a female. Girls are Little Women. Just ask Luisa Alcott. And women are big Girls. It’s a nice part of a woman, and it’s pleasure to see because usually woman are usually so happy when they let the Girl out. Happy, silly, joking, role-playing, nonsensical, absurd and even childish. But that’s a great thing to see in a woman, unless you’re all hard-faced and mature and all that. Plus she might be in love with you because women really let that Girl out when they fall in love. And she’s probably horny as Hell too, because you and I that know by a certain age, most girls are boy-crazy.

 

 

27 Comments

Filed under Biology, Feminism, Gender Studies, Girls, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Women

The Old “Treat Woman Like Crap” Advice

GondwanaMan: Pumpkin Person told to me to try some sociopathy/narcissism, but it’s hard! I started reading Chateau Heartiste/Roosh V, then went outside of my apartment to try it out. First girl I tried it on, walked away. Same with the second. Then I went to a third one. Same thing.

Finally I found an elderly woman and talked down to her like she was stupid. She liked me, but I think only because she was hard of hearing and lonely. So I’ll try again tomorrow on someone else.

Personally, the last men on Earth I would read for advice on how to get women are ultra-misogynists and narcissist/sociopaths Chateau Heartiste and Roosh V. I suppose that technique could work if you are a real scumbag. Roosh’s advice seems to be mostly a How to Date Rape Women and Get Away with It manual. And Roosh is indeed a date rapist. That’s for sure. And boy does he hate women.

You hear a lot of players and womanizers give precisely this advice on how to get women and deal with them. They claim it works fantastic. Some of the worse ones even say that they beat and hit women, and this works wonders. None of this has ever made the tiniest bit of sense to me, and I’m pretty experienced with women.

As a man who has done quite well with women in his life, I would say that acting like a sociopath/narcissist in the sense you are talking about is just not going to work. I’ve never gotten women by talking down to them like they are idiots. Lots of players say the secret to women is to treat them like shit, but I’ve had many girlfriends, and that’s never worked for me. I don’t get it. How to guys treat women like shit and get away with it?

As it is, women in my life are always accusing me of insulting them or not caring about them or being mean or hurting their feelings. That is, being an asshole. However, I am generally not even trying to do that! I actually try very hard not to insult women or put them down too much, but it seems like women are paranoid and always reading insults into places where they are not intended. To the extent that I have treated women poorly in this way, albeit usually unintentionally, it’s never been anything but a disaster. I don’t get it. How do misogynists get women? How does insulting a woman get you laid? How does talking down to a woman make her want to go out with you?

Color me mystified.

17 Comments

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

Berkeley Riots Escalate Dramatically Overnight

Amazing footage shot sometime in the past few hours in the early morning of Thursday, February 2.

Above, footage of the riots occurring while Milo was speaking. A huge crowd is gathered outside the venue. Antifa throw Bricks, rocks and fireworks at the first and second floors of the building, attack police are attacked with bricks and rocks, and dismantle police barricades. Later in the video, on Telegraph Avenue, an antifa assaults a Trump supporter and wrestles him to the ground. Several come to the young man’s aid and pull the two of them apart. The man who was attacked gets up and walks away.

Above, rioters attack pro-Trump people with flying objects and a flagpole. The girl early in the video is hit by a flying object. At :14, an antifa beats a Trump supporter with a flagpole! The Trump supporter somehow gets up and fights back. Later in the video, a bleeding Trump supporter is interviewed.

Incredible video. A journalist interviews a Milo fan wearing a Trump hat. At the end of the short interview, he thanks her and they part. Almost immediately, an Antifa attacks the young woman with pepper spray!

This video appears to be taken on Telegraph Avenue after the campus riot ended. A large group of demonstrators and antifa seem to be attacking and assaulting Trump supporters. The Trump supporters run away but the Antifa chase after them and attack them with poles and iron rods. One Trump supporter lies in the street, possibly knocked out cold. Others are run down and beaten to the ground.

After the riots at UC Berkeley were dispersed, demonstrators made their way to Telegraph Avenue. At some point, more rioting occurred. Ready tellers were smashed at several banks and some banks had most of their windows smashed. Mechanics, Chase, Wells Fargo and Bank of America branches were all vandalized. There were reports that at least four banks had been vandalized.

Above, rioters smash ATM’s in Berkeley.

Several fires were set in Telegraph Avenue. At least two banks were on fire near Center Street and Shattuck Avenue.

Graffiti was painted around. Slogans included “Antifa” and “Liberals get the bullet too.” So you can see these are radical Leftists who do not like your average Democratic Party peaceful Women’s March protesters at all.

A Starbucks was attacked by having its windows smashed out with iron bars. Rioters then went inside and looted the Starbucks. They distributed the looted property to people in the crowd. Robin Hood, I guess.

Most of the crowd appears to be just looking and cheering them on. There were a surprising number of young women in the crowd. Call me old-fashioned, but I would say, “That’s no place for a woman to be.”

The scene in that video has an air of menace. That looks like a very dangerous place to be right now. I would not want to be in that crowd. Perhaps they might turn on you. There is an undertone of anger and menace there that I would not want to be around.

When people get like that, they are like sharks who smell blood. You are in the middle of a dangerous, violent riot with some seriously unhinghed people around and there’s no guarantee that they won’t come after you too. These dangerous scenes are unpredictable. The rioters are getting amped up by destroying things, looting business and perhaps assaulting other people earlier. There’s no guarantee that you will be safe if only you appear to be on their side. It’s sort of like being trapped amidst a gang of criminals, but it’s not nearly that bad. But still, the vibe is the same.

63 Comments

Filed under California, Conservatism, Crime, Democrats, Gender Studies, Higher Education, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Sane Pro-Woman, US Politics, USA, West

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

Trump’s Sexist Remarks about Women

All of these remarks by Trump about women have been called sexist by feminists, the Cultural Left, and the popular culture at large, which is really just the Cultural Left as we are getting to the point now where the Cultural Left is actually our mainstream culture, which is pretty sorry. The remarks were rated on whether they were really sexist or not, and reasons were given for my opinions. Sexism really does exist. Misogyny is real and an awful lot of men are guilty of it. In fact, you might say that misogyny is the norm in male culture. It’s simply normal when among men to be a sexist pig and have a low view of women. That’s just the way men talk when they get together.

To some extent it’s understandable as women tend to make us insane, but it’s still not ok. You guys don’t like females who hate men, right? Well then,  don’t be a woman -hater. Anyway, I feel that most of the serious complaints against women are due to things women cannot help. Their brains just work in a certain way and most male complaints about women seem to be due to women’s brains working in exactly the way they are programmed to work. In other words, I don’t think there is a whole lot women can do about this stuff and I doubt if they are deliberately going out of their way to act horrible when they act bad. They  probably do not have a lot of control over it, and to some extent, women, like men, are probably prisoners of our biology.

Comments welcome.

“I would never buy Ivana any decent jewels or pictures. Why give her negotiable assets?” Sexist – lousy attitude to have towards your wife.

That women are essentially aesthetically-pleasing objects: In his 2006 book Trump 101: The Way to Success, Trump wrote: “Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.” Not sexist – true.

That sexual assault in the military is totally expected. 26,000 unreported sexual assaults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?  Not sexist – true.

That women on The Apprentice need to rely on sex appeal. “It’s certainly not groundbreaking news that the early victories by the women on The Apprentice were to a very large extent dependent on their sex appeal.”  Sexist – was the show supposed to be about how sexy the women were?

That bad press doesn’t matter as long as you have a sexy girlfriend. “You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.” Sexist – poor taste and a lousy way to talk about your woman.

That a woman MUST be hot in order to be a journalist. “I mean, we could say politically correct that look doesn’t matter, but the look obviously matters,” Trump said to a female reporter in a clip featured on Last Week Tonight. “Like you wouldn’t have your job if you weren’t beautiful.” Sexist – sex appeal should not be a factor in whether a woman is a good journalist or not.

That pumping breast milk is “disgusting.” When a lawyer facing Trump in 2011 asked for a break to pump breast milk for her infant daughter, The Donald reacted very poorly. “He got up, his face got red, he shook his finger at me, and he screamed, ‘You’re disgusting, you’re disgusting,’ and he ran out of there,” attorney Elizabeth Beck told CNN. Trump’s attorney does not dispute that his client called Beck “disgusting.” Sexist – lousy attitude towards breastfeeding.

That all women hate prenups because they are gold diggers. “The most difficult aspect of the prenuptial agreement is informing your future wife (or husband): I love you very much, but just in case things don’t work out, this is what you will get in the divorce. There are basically three types of women and reactions. One is the good woman who very much loves her future husband solely for himself but refuses to sign the agreement on principle. I fully understand this, but the man should take a pass anyway and find someone else. The other is the calculating woman who refuses to sign the prenuptial agreement because she is expecting to take advantage of the poor, unsuspecting sucker she’s got in her grasp. There is also the woman who will openly and quickly sign a prenuptial agreement in order to make a quick hit and take the money given to her.” Sexist – probably not all women are this avaricious.

That women have a “great act” going on to trick men. “Women have one of the great acts of all time. The smart ones act very feminine and needy, but inside they are real killers. The person who came up with the expression ‘the weaker sex’ was either very naive or had to be kidding. I have seen women manipulate men with just a twitch of their eye — or perhaps another body part.”  Not sexist – true.

That Hillary would be a bad president because of her husband’s actions. “If Hillary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband, how can she satisfy America?” Sexist – the behavior of her husband has nothing to do with how good of a President she would be. Poor taste to imply that she is lousy in bed.

That Angelina Jolie has dated too many guys to be attractive. “[Angelina Jolie’s] been with so many guys she makes me look like a baby… And, I just don’t even find her attractive.” Sexist – slut shaming.

That Bette Midler’s “ugly face and body” are offensive. While @BetteMidler is an extremely unattractive woman, I refuse to say that because I always insist on being politically correct. Sexist – that is not a good reason to dislike a person.

That Rosie O’Donnell is “crude, rude, obnoxious and dumb. My favorite part [of ‘Pulp Fiction’] is when Sam has his gun out in the diner, and he tells the guy to tell his girlfriend to shut up. Tell that bitch to be cool. Say: ‘Bitch be cool.’ I love those lines.” Sexist – Lousy way to talk to women on a habitual basis.

That a journalist who offended him had an ugly face. New York Times columnist Gail Collins recalled: “During one down period, I referred to him in print as a ‘financially embattled thousandaire’ and he sent me a copy of the column with my picture circled and ‘The Face of a Dog!’ written over it.” Sexist – her looks are not of any importance.

That Cher is ‘lonely’ and ‘a loser’ because she doesn’t support him. @cher should spend more time focusing on her family and dying career! “Cher is an average talent who’s out of touch with reality,” he said in a 2012 Fox News interview. “Cher is somewhat of a loser. She’s lonely. She’s unhappy. She’s very miserable.”  Not sexist – he does not like this person. Has nothing to do with the fact that she is a woman.

That women fawn all over him because he is rich and powerful. “Love him or hate him, Donald Trump is a man who is certain about what he wants and sets out to get it, no holds barred,” Trump said about himself one time. “Women find his power almost as much of a turn-on as his money.”  Not sexist – probably true.

That the ladies on “The Apprentice” are all super into him. “All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me — consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected.”  Not sexist – possibly true.

57 Comments

Filed under Culture, Democrats, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Law, Left, Politics, Psychology, Republicans, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, US Politics, Women

More Marxists Against the Alt Left

Well, against my Alt Left anyway.

This is from Lost Generation, a reddit purportedly about the economic troubles of the Millennial Generation, but which seems to be populated mostly by Marxists for some odd reason.

All of the usual charges that get leveled against me by the Hard Left types are here: I’m a racist, sexist, fascist, crypto-Nazi Alt Right guy masquerading as being on the Left. What’s ridiculous is that I hate all of these people and have never felt at home at any of their websites. I am usually appalled by their racism, sexism, fascism, Nazism, etc. and I really cannot stand most Alt Right sites for similar reasons.

There is just about no one I hate as much as fascists, and I’ve never found a racist website where I felt at home and was not bothered by their hard racism. I also hate Nazis. And one of the main reasons that I hate the Manosphere so much is  because it is so misogynistic and sexist. In other words, I cannot stand sexist Manosphere sites. They’re awful and it’s their misogyny that I hate so much. I love women, I don’t hate them.

All of the attacks on me and my ideology are italicized.

Here’s the critique:

digdog303: Why isn’t there any alt-left?

Get_Erkt: I saw some dudes using that, but they seem keen to ignore everything we’ve learned in the past 100 years about how patriarchy and white supremacy/ imperialism are more effective impediments to revolution than police repression. Like they’re mad they might have to stop macking on comrades or share the spot light with others, and they think socialism means having a PS4 pro and $4K TV.

SayingStuffOnReddit: Ugh, exactly this.

I found this guy’s WordPress blog the other day, first one I’ve seen that was an “Alt Left” blog. He regularly bans people for very petty things, and it’s always race-related. He’s always hurling racially or religiously charged insults at people who say the slightest thing that makes HIM uncomfortable, and he always points out how someone is “ARAB” or a “JEW” even if there is zero evidence of them being that, it’s like “Hey, I think you look like you’re from X, so I’m going to call you a name associated with that area of the world.”

It was fucking ridiculous. Very little discussion of actual socialist theory and a whole lot of whining about “SJWs” and “feminism” while not really putting forth anything that really distances his views from a typical Alt-Righter.

For a self proclaimed Leftist (he had pictured of Stalin and Lenin, for example) it is pretty disgusting to see this kind of crap being spread as “valid” forms of agitprop for “socialism.”

Dude identified as a “race realist” and basically spews Nazi propaganda 50% less of the time than an actual fascist would.

I mean, I hate being called a brocialist, because I’m not one, but I’ve had people irresponsibly throw this at me when I’ve tried to critique Identity Politics and such in good faith. This guy, however, totally fits the bill and totally showed me why the term exists and is used as an insult to begin with.
They want “liberation,” but just none of that icky stuff that has to do with race, gender, or anything outside of class.

It is truly strange and something I cannot remotely relate to. I can only imagine that his “activist” group (if he even has that) is just a bunch of angry White dudes, which, in spite of me being a White male, I simply can’t get down with.

I live in a predominantly Black area, and this kind of shit would never fly in public, it is the product of upper-middle class White folks playing the role of revolutionary from their gated-in communities in the ‘burbs.

I hate sounding so condescending too, because I know it isn’t helping, but sometimes people really do need to meet you half way, and this guy is one of them; he’d do better to just shut up and read a book than spew more of this incoherent “Alt Left” bullshit.

pikapizza: The double-edged sword of the Internet is that it gives any idiot or socially-marginalized weirdo a voice. Embracing the ‘brocialist’ smear (anyone to the left of Hillary = hates women and likes the KKK) because you found one such idiot or socially- marginalized weirdo is not the way to go.

SayingStuffOnReddit: I don’t embrace it as a smear, I was just saying that I now understand why people might so easily sling it around when people like that guy are basically fascists appropriating left-wing aesthetics and terminology.

pikapizza: People using that epithet aren’t thinking of this guy. The whole ‘class politics = racist and sexist’ meme only got traction because millions of young Americans weren’t doing what they were told and started voting for the evil brocialist Bernie instead of the devout feminist and anti-racist progressive Hillary.

They have in mind the 22 year-old college student who has the disgusting, privileged audacity to think economic justice might be more important than smashing the patriarchy, and insults like this are their way of telling him to fuck off, that left-wing politics are not for him, and to go vote for Trump.

SayingStuffOnReddit: I know what you’re talking about, but I’ve seen it used in many other forms than the one you just mention. I was citing one instance.

And tbf “smashing the patriarchy” and “economic justice” have to go hand in hand. I don’t see them as at odds with one another, that’s all I was saying. Hillary supporters obviously can’t make the connection there, and doubly so for the right wing. People like Robert Lindsay see them as “polar opposites” which really just shows his lack of understanding of what actual feminists (the socialist ones, at least) believe. Instead, he lambastes caricatures of what feminism actually is or just takes pot shots at random individual actors without grappling with any real ideas.

He and his ilk spend more time talking about what a woman decided to wear to a “Slut Walk” than what her views are on “patriarchy,” how she might define it, and why she came to such an event in the first place. In a way, he doesn’t “dismantle” feminist critiques of society; he inevitably proves their legitimacy.

pikapizza: But they clearly don’t go hand in hand. We’ve just witnessed an election where the self-described feminist and standard bearer for progressive Identity Politics in the US was also a multimillionaire, staunch neoliberal and hardline imperialist who openly spoke for the interests of business and the very wealthy. Her campaign overtly used gender politics to dismiss economic justice as a sideshow issue (if not a sneaky cover for the Left’s closet racism and sexism) and smear any criticism from her left as veiled misogyny.

This is the new political reality. Thinking you can ignore it and keep on pandering to identitarianism with ‘oh, that’s not MY kind of feminism!’ or whatever is quite stupid.

SayingStuffOnReddit: Dude whatever i’m not gonna argue with you about the importance of gender and race and its relationship to class.

There’re books that talk about the significance of these, even when people try to insist class is some kind of “be-all” “end-all.”

If your idea of progressivism is “don’t talk about gender or race,” and you essentially equate any discussion of gender or race as “Identitarianism” then you’re just driving away people.

I feel like we’re talking about two different things, and you seem to be insisting that I’m promoting some kind of neoliberal Identity Politics. That’s not the same as taking an intersectional approach where we acknowledge that class is the key unifier of all oppressed identities.

Furthermore, Hillary isn’t nor has she ever been the “standard bearer” for progressive anything.

That is catering to and propagating neoliberal media narratives and ultimately capital interests.

There’s many different angles one can discuss gender and race, which I’m completely fine with so long as they’re rooted in anti-capitalist critiques.

Get_Erkt: Brosocialism existed before Sanders but referred to men who didn’t care about women’s issues, like whether we ought to discipline or expel men who preyed on women from socialist organizations. There were several high profile cases of rape cover-ups in Leftist organizations recently, but marginalizing women and relegating them to “women’s work” was something even the Panthers and Soviets were guilty of.

Patriarchy was the first form of economic class and exploitation, but brosocialists don’t want to hear it. Our organizations aren’t dating services, and comrades are held to a professional, disciplined standard of behavior in our personal interaction, but brosocialists don’t want to hear it.

The people who used Clinton’s gender as a lasso or whip against opponents were cynical opportunists. Clinton is no friend of women or anyone. But the Left has to struggle against internal sexism and racism nonetheless because we are products of a racist, sexist society and understanding the struggle revolving around class is only the first step to liberation. Patriarchy and White supremacy/settlerism/imperialism are manifestations of class across physical human characteristics.

pikapizza: Brocialism has been around for awhile, sure, but it’s never had that sort of narrow definition. It’s always been an ideological pejorative for any left-wing politics critical of or hostile to Identity Politics (you can be a woman and be a brocialist). So it was very much consistent and predictable that it was picked up by the Hillary campaign. The ruling class’ embrace of ‘Leftist’ Identitarian ideology and politics in support of imperialist policy, state repression, curtailing civil freedoms, divide-and-conquer political strategies et al. has been ongoing for many years.

And Clinton’s Identity Politics were only cynical opportunism if you’re still clinging to shitty and delusional assessment of Identity Politics that hasn’t moved past the 1960’s where racial and gender politics are still radical and revolutionary and haven’t been thoroughly integrated into modern bourgeois ideology and the daily functioning of big business and liberal bourgeois democracies.

It’s based on this completely unfounded premise that there is some secret and intrinsic connection between Identity Politics and the Left when the plain reality is that these are basically right-wing, anti-Marxist conceptions that dovetail perfectly with neoliberal politics and ideology. A right-wing multimillionaire shill for Wall Street like Hillary becoming the standard bearer for Identity Politics isn’t an aberration or a ploy, it’s a perfectly logical outcome.

SayingStuffOnReddit: There is an Alt Left, but it’s basically a bunch of “left” wingers in denial of their White Nationalism. They claim to be separate from the Alt Right, but it’s all propaganda that any well read socialist can point out.

An easy one is they have a distaste for “Cultural Marxism” in common with Alt-Righters.

Yet nobody seems to want to admit that “Cultural Marxism” is just a nice dog whistle for actual Nazi propaganda that was used during WWII.

It’s just that back then, it was called “Cultural Bolshevism“.

It’s funny how much this phenomenon has in common with the modern Alt-Right as well. Any symbols representing the authorities of the current prevailing order, if disrespected through art or expression bring shame and derision from the Alt-Right types, yet these are the people who are supposed to be the “revolutionaries” and “rebels” of the current time.

You’d think a bunch of revolutionaries would be more interested in disrespecting and subverting authority than supporting (let alone protecting) it.

60 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Fascism, Gender Studies, Left, Marxism, Nazism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Revolution, Sane Pro-Woman, Socialism, US Politics, Useless Western Left, White Nationalism, Whites

Official Renunciation of Two Alt Left Groups and Two Alt Left Factions

According to Ryan England’s seminal work on the Alt Subtypes these are the main subtypes:

“The Left Wing of the Alt Right” – Rabbit uses this phrase quite explicitly. They are most open to race realism and most opposed to mass immigration and Islamism but are also inclined towards some kind of economic socialism or social democracy and are otherwise put off the Alt-Right somehow or other. Strasserites might be a more explicitly national socialist variant of this, and National Bolshevism would be even more out there still.  Left wing nationalism would be a softer variant of this.

“Gamergate Leftists” – Named from an article I read a while back claiming that most Gamergaters were left-leaning, these are another type. These types need not be big on Gamergate per-se (the more I studied Gamergate personally, the more lost and confused I got) but being anti-feminist (at least against the kind of PC feminist theory you’d find in a women’s studies class or on any left-leaning blog) and anti-SJW is huge with them as is civil and cultural libertarianism.

I found a number of these posting on anti-SJW pages. They come to the Alt-Left usually because of a belief in Leftist economics, though they are usually not that far Left.  Guys who believe in some regulation and a social safety net. Some too get put off by the tendency of anti-SJWs to drift into genuinely misogynistic and racist territory.  Remember kids that SJW and social liberalism are not the same things.  Think YouTubers like Sargon of Akkad or the Amazing Atheist, though they don’t use the term Alt-Left to describe themselves. Not yet, anyway. These kinds are defecting less from Richard Spencer and more from Milo Yiannopoluous. I used Gamergate’s colors in the design of my page’s logo and banner in an attempt to attract these types.

“Red Enlightenment” – These are most passionate about rationalism, skepticism, empiricism and in some cases, transhumanism and futurism. Generally scientifically minded and technocratic sorts of socialists or social democrats.

“True Liberals” – Antiracist and feminist supporters who think the whole thing has gotten out of hand and are concerned for the SJW’s lifestyle puritanism and opposition to free speech. They are more pro-feminist and pro-social liberal than the Gamergaters though. “The Democratic Party of the 1990s,” someone once remarked to me when I described the alt-left to them, to which I replied, “There were no liberals or Leftists in the 1990’s except myself.”

“Brocialists” – Socialists or social democrats with a penchant for men’s rights and anti-misandry. I seem to have drawn a number of these to my page, and a few of my moderators fall into this category. Hillary Clinton supporters have accused Bernie Sanders of using these as his base of support.  Used as a pejorative by the “Lorettas” of the present day left, I’m a firm proponent that we reclaim the term.

“Red Templars” – Especially and specifically anti-Islamic. We get a lot of these from Sam Harris and Bill Maher’s followings. Unlike the Left Wing of the Alt Right types, these sorts are more standard liberals otherwise.

“The New Old Left” – Would dispense with race, culture and identity all together if they could and make Leftism mostly about economic Leftism. The Realist Left page and the blog Social Democracy for the 21st Century are like this. Farther left you’d find /leftypol/ on 8chan and some Marxist/Anarchist groups that reject IdPol.  A whole separate entry could be made of the economic subtypes one might find on the alt left.  I’ve also found a lot of labor nationalists and assorted 3rd positionists: mutualists, distributists, market socialists, state capitalists, syndicalism and so on.

A few types that I have not seen many of and would have expected more are:

Christian Leftists (Catholic Social Teaching, the social gospel and even liberation theology seem especially well suited to alt-leftism),

and

Dissident Feminists  Surely, some feminists must be frustrated with what’s happened to their movement.  It’s been a long, long time since anything this dogmatic, intolerant, and puritanical has arisen in the western world.  Those well meaning devotees to feminism and social justice time and again are the ones who come under the sternest censure for the most minor of transgressions.  How many women out there, after getting called out one time too many for some sleight micro-aggression or another think “screw this” and drift away from the movement, while still holding to its essential ideals?  Many, I would think.  I would hope.  They can’t be that hive-minded, could they?  In any event, if there are, the alt-left must be the port-of-call for women of liberal sentiment overall who reject this 21st century rehash of 16th century puritan culture.

We have already discussed most of these types here, and we can do so again if you wish. But I would like to highlight one group in particular and say that I am renouncing them and want no part of them in our movement. I am tossing them out, in other words. Well out of my Alt Left faction anyway. And as the person who created the Alt Left, I think I might want to have some say on who’s in and who’s out.

The faction I am renouncing is here:

“Red Templars” – Especially and specifically anti-Islamic. We get a lot of these from Sam Harris and Bill Maher’s followings. Unlike the Left Wing of the Alt Right types, these sorts are more standard liberals otherwise.

I just came from an Alt Left Facebook group that threw me, the founder of the movement, out of the group. And this is apparently the shitposting site for the Sam Harris group on Facebook. So these are the Sam Harris people and this is what Sam Harris people are like. Well, guess what? You’re out. As far as I can tell, you want no part our movement and we want no part of yours. Most of you are not Alt Left anyway – and many of you are actively hostile to us. Well guess what? If you are hostile to us, ou are out. Bye bye. They’re not a part of the Alt Left at all. They can go off and form their own movement and call it Sam Harris’ Jerkoff Boys Movement or whatever.

I am also renouncing two Alt Left Facebook groups who have nothing to do with our movement.

Alt-Left: Those would be the “less crazy but still crazy SJW’s and sexual deviants centered around the Alt-Left site. Renounced. You’re not us. Bye.

Alt-Leftists: The other would be the Alt-Leftists group on Facebook, which is run by Sam Harris execrable crowd. It’s not that we on on the Alt Left do not have concerns with Islam and radical Islam. It’s not that we have no concerns with Muslim integration into the US or even Europe. We just feel that it is not a core issue and it brings in far too many people who are opposed to the core principles of the movement. You’re out. Bye. It was not pleasant having you over.

Also a new faction has emerged in the True Liberals Faction. Suffice to say that these are the crazy SJW’s who are fighting the crazier SJW’s. The movement is mostly made up of sexual deviants to boot, which makes even less palatable to us. Of course true biological gay men and lesbians are welcome in any faction of our movement, but it is beyond me why would need an Alt Left gay faction? I mean I am open to the idea, but what would it look like?

Anyway, here is the new faction:

True Liberals: Anti-racist, pro-feminist (pro equity feminism, in any event) but put off by SJW extremism.  I’ve noticed a subcategory of these who are, say, cisgendered gay males or transgender people who’ve quarreled with trans exclusionary radical feminists (TERF’s.)  I’ll call these kinds Equal Rights Advocates.  Perhaps you recognize yourself among them, dear reader?

These people are not us either. They were hostile to the founder of the movement and in the short time I was in their group, they were violating quite a few of our principles, including some of core principles. They’re not one of us, or they are not part of my group anyway. They need to leave. There is no room for these showboating SJW freaks and weirdos in our Alt Left. We are trying to get away from the 24-7 Gay Pride Parade in the Streets that the Cultural Left seems intent to shove down our throats.

2 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Catholicism, Christianity, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Economics, Feminism, Gender Studies, Government, Homosexuality, Immigration, Islam, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Nationalism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Religion, Sane Pro-Woman, Science, Sex, Socialism, US Politics, Weirdos