Category Archives: Left

Masculinity and Gay Men: My, What a Tangled Web We Weave

Matt: I am not sure your assessment of homosexuals on the whole is accurate. Most gay guys are not insane ultra left cultural radicals, and most of them like to partner with guys they perceive of as masculine and to view themselves as masculine. To be fair, every gay guy I’ve ever met deviates from conventional masculinity in some way, even if only subtly. But they believe in it.

Blatantly effeminate gay guys complain constantly about being discriminated against by the “straight acting” gay guys whom they too desire. I wonder if the culturally leftist/radical gay guys are not similar to the stereotypical feminist, in that most of those they would desire as partners find them off-putting and unattractive, and they’re angry and frustrated about it.

Most gay men* are effeminate. I would estimate 70-75% of them are at least a little bit effeminate in a way that almost no straight men are. Most want a masc guy though. They hate masculinity, but they want to get fucked by a big mean Daddy bear.

Go on Queera, I mean Quora. They’re all Cultural Left types on there. Plus Gay Politics itself is Cultural Left to the extreme, and how many gays are not into gay politics? I know there are some, but how many? The ones on Quora hate masculinity and extoll effeminacy all the while denying that gay men are effeminate – the typical crazy talk of Gay Politics, almost nothing of which makes any sense at all.

Do most gay men see themselves as masculine? Very good question.

  • You realize that 75% of sissy boys in childhood grow up gay, right?
  • You realize that 7% of gay men identify as trans now, right?
  • You realize that a lot of gay men now identify as nonbinary, right?
  • You realize that 100% of genderqueer types and the 132 genders are homosexuals, right? There are no straight nonbinary people. No such thing.
  • You realize that gays have declared war on gender and have wanted to get rid of that concept from day one, right? I wonder why?
  • You realize they call themselves two-spirit people and the Third Sex, right? Gee I wonder what that means?

Yes, effeminate men do complain about discrimination and I have met gay men who told me, “I don’t like sissies,” and things like that.

However, you make a good point.

  • If they hate masculinity so much, why do they desire masculine partners (tops, basically)?
  • Why are there hordes of submissive sub gay men looking for a mean Daddy dom to put them in their place?
  • Why do so many gay men take pride in being straight-acting?. I have told a couple of gay guys recently, “Hey you’re pretty straight acting, you know that?” And they all thanked me when I said that.

*I don’t mind men who are biologically gay. However, any guy who is choosing to engage in that behavior as a lifestyle (and there are a lot), well, I just don’t approve. I can’t hate them because the Hate Databases in my head are full of more worthy opponents, but they sure are making a stupid decision. My attitude about men engaging in homosexuality by choice is, “What if everyone did that?” I had one friend who started doing that, and I kept associating with him for a bit, and then I got rid of him once and for all. If you want I can write a post on why a continuing friendship with that guy after he went full bisexual would have been a complete nightmare.

I don’t care that biologically gay men are effeminate. Maybe whatever caused the homosexuality is causing the effeminacy. Anyway, they enjoy acting this way. It seems to all be part of the Gay Syndrome.

However, other than that, I despise effeminate or even wimpy behavior in men. Of course I have been guilty of this a few times in my life, but those were mistakes I hope to have stopped doing. The very idea of me acting effeminate is awful and of me acting wimpy is disgusting, and anyone accusing me of effeminacy or even wimpiness just insulted me in a huge way. I live in the hood. Around here, you accuse a man of being gay or even acting gay and you might just get hit. People feel pretty strongly about that stuff around here.



Filed under Cultural Marxists, Homosexuality, Left, Politics, Psychology, Sex

Why Doesn’t He Hurry Up And Die Already?

His name is Henry the K., but we leftwing children of the revolutions of the 1960’s always just referred to him as “Satan.”

People who truly know me know that I came out of the Vietnam War protest era, although I actually worked for Richard Nixon’s aptly named CREEP at age 15 in 1972, at my mother’s behest, for which I will always forgive her.

However, in 1968, I went door to door with my Cold War Liberal father campaigning for “Clean Gene” Eugene McCarthy, a forgotten Democratic politician who ran on a strict antiwar banner in the fateful Democratic primaries of 1968. I was only ten years old.

The well known riots at the Democratic Convention came later that year. I remember those also. Mayor Daley turned his police loose on protesters and many relatively peaceful protesters were badly beaten by police. A nearby park in Chicago was taken over by protesters and named “People’s Park.” Inside the convention, an equal amount of chaos ensued, with the party coalescing around establishment candidate Hubert Humphrey, who did not run on an antiwar ticket. I remember Humphrey well too. He seemed a decent enough man at the time.

The Chicago Seven were later placed on trial for conspiracy after the demonstrations. They included Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, and a number of others, mostly Jewish. They were represented famously by Jewish radical attorney William Kunstler, who has always been one of my favorite people. Although my father was against the Vietnam War, he really hated those hippies. He used to inveigh against “Ay-bie Hoffman.”

By 1974, I’d added long hair, rock music, LSD and marijuana to my high school studies. I hung out with hippies, potheads and acidheads. I remember once David A H, a bisexual hippie senior who nevertheless always left me alone. He used to take windowpane LSD by putting it right on his eyeball.

Nixon was one of our villains. You have to understand that in that era, if you identified with the hippie movement, still going gangbusters in 1975, Nixon was probably automatically your enemy. Hating him was almost a cultural requirement. He represented, all in one man, of everything we were against. The perfect human voodoo doll.

One day David said matter of factly, “Nixon always looks like he hasn’t shit in a month.” A good one-liner!

I always felt that that was one of the best summaries of Tricky Dicky I’d ever heard.

K. was Nixon’s right-hand man. Although he was not an attractive man, ponderous, overweight, nerdy, homely and bespectacled, he had an odd reputation as a playboy, often seen escorting various actresses in public. I remember one morning at the breakfast table my father was looking at the latest pic of him with some comely model draped on his arm.

“Boy,” my father remarked. “This administration’s really got problems if Kissinger’s their playboy.” A good zinger!

The more I read about this man, the more convinced I am that he is something approaching pure evil. He has to be a psychopath of some sort. He’s one cold-blooded bastard at least. He look in his face and you see a man with heart of ice. There are probably few people as hated among my anti-Vietnam War cohort as this man. I’m getting very impatient waiting for him to kick off so I can dance on his grave. He’s stuck around far too long already.

Just hurry up and die already, Henry!



Filed under Cannabis, Cold War, Culture, Democrats, Hallucinogens, History, Intoxicants, Jews, Left, LSD, Politics, Pop Culture, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, Vietnam War, War

I Guess All World War Two Generation Males Must Be Toxic

My father wasn’t really an alpha but he thought he was like so many other men. He also wasn’t that extroverted but he thought he was once again like so many other introverts. He had problems speaking on the phone for Chrissake, often collapsing into pathetically amusing stutters. I’m not sure I ever saw him speak to a group. I doubt if he would do well.

He was a teacher though, and I once saw him teach a class. A very good female friend of mine was a student in one of his classes at the college I attended in the day and he taught at night. One night I attended one of his classes. There he was, swimming freely in his own element, quite at home and very pleasant and even stunning to behold. As is so often the case, he was a completely different person roaming about at the head of his class than he was away from the blackboard. He was actually charming up there. He was nothing like that at home. You would have thought they had switched him out.

He was a beta introvert, an intellectual who even at the end of his life was inhaling a book a day. He wore glasses. He taught school. He was a prig with Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder. You get the picture.

Yet my father very much valued masculinity as a concept. I once asked my mother why she didn’t call him on some particular aspect of his behavior.

“Oh…” she whispered. “I’m afraid he would see it as an attack on his masculinity and I would never do that to him.”

She would never attack his masculinity. Incredible. Can you imagine a woman of my generation (Baby boomers) ever saying she would not dare attacking her man’s masculinity? What ever happened to later generations of women? Didn’t they get the memo? Actually, I am afraid that what happened was a brain toxin called feminism.

My father despised gay men and mostly saw them as incomprehensible freaks if not mentally ill unfortunates to be pitied at best.

He hated his long hair more than anything else. My father felt that long hair on men was effeminate. As a boy, his mother had grown his hair long and even dressed him up in dresses around the house. At some point as a young boy, he rebelled against this nonsense and demanded to be treated like a man.

He later demanded that his formal first name be reduced to the more macho sounding nickname. He was quite proud of this form of rebellion against the strictures of imposed familial culture.

He took macho jobs in the summer working at Yosemite National Park, where he met my mother, or even working in supermarkets. I remember once visiting a supermarket and there was my bespectacled schoolteacher father, tossing and catching watermelons like they were tennis balls.

When my mother first went to work in 1980, my father objected. He was raised that a good man should not allow his wife to work. If your wife worked, that meant you were a failure as a man because you were failing to earn enough money to support your family. Your wife taking a job was a form of emasculation.

As you can see, my father took great importance in masculinity, as did many men of his generation. However, the Cultural Left seems to deny that things like masculinity and femininity even exist, God forbid that they may be essentialized by Nature.


Filed under Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Left, Man World, Scum

Masculinity Studies, Yet another Abomination of the Cultural Left

The Cultural Left can’t even agree if masculinity exists or not. On the one hand, it is another one of these “constructed categories” that exist only in minds and not in realis. On the other hand, it exists, but it is evil, referred to as always “toxic” and in need of eradication along with those wicked other constructed qualities like race and gender, which also exist only mentally and ephemerally and not materially.

And even if it does exist, masculinity is apparently evil. All masculinity is “toxic masculinity.” There’s no other kind.

The war on masculinity is led of course by the feminists, who have always hated the masculinity and sexuality of normal heterosexual men. That masculinity exists at all indicates that it is oppressive. In fact, these things cannot exist at all without being oppressive.

It’s little remarked that the gays also wage war on masculinity, a concept along with gender that they despise. Of course gay men hate gender – most of them are men who act like women! And of course they hate masculinity – because so many of them are men who are very unmasculine. The very concept of masculinity at all would seen to be homophobic, and gays online routinely refer to masculinity as toxic.

The fact that masculinity or its caricature at least exists in spades on gay culture would seem to be lost on them. Who are these tops anyway? What’s a bear? What’s with these hard-looking stern-faced leathermen with other men on leashes. More cognitive dissonance or in this case cognitive blindness.

You would think that lesbians who typically act masculine like men would take up the banner of masculinity, but they just don’t. In fact, to suggest that lesbians are masculine is heresy – it is considered to be de facto homophobic and hate speech.

In this case as in so many others with the Cultural Left, truth becomes vicious insult on account of its revelations being unpalatable. The Cultural Left believes that if truths are ugly, then this means that they are not true! An interesting form of philosophy to say the least.

Our universities now have entire fields of studies devoted to “Masculinities.” There are even journals about these manly things, which are always bizarrely pluralized. At first I thought they were onto something as I have a bit of a hard-on for masculinity myself, at least in my own mind and self-image. I’d love to see some real scholarship on the concept of masculinity and how it manifests in the individual and society across classes, races and cultures.

I dipped into it and was quite disappointed. Everyone writing in “Masculinity Studies” is either an insane feminist or a gay man. The entire field is devoted to waging war on the very concept of masculinity and sees its very existence as permanently pathological.


Filed under Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Higher Education, Homosexuality, Left, Man World, Radical Feminists, Scum, Sex

There’s No Red Baiting in California

Beauregard: Again, is social control always good?

Most people think a commie like yourself is something society shouldn’t tolerate, and you should hence get the shit beat out of you until you change.

No one is going to hit me for being practically a Commie. Some of the locals know about it and they don’t care, or they even like it, being Hispanics from Mexico and El Salvador. No one really knows I feel this way. If you walk around wearing a Communist t-shirt or  passing out Communist flyers, you might get some shit,  but unless you do that, no one is going to know.

Around here, no one cares if you are a Commie or nearly a Commie. Most people will shrug their shoulders or act like, “Well, that’s weird,” or “I don’t accept that at all, but I am going to overlook that about you,” or “Well, that’s ridiculous.” In all cases, they act like, “Well I am going to ignore this weird fact about you and still be your friend.”

This is California. No one cares about leftwing politics here, and there have always been a lot of Commies and Leftists of all sorts around this state. Look at the Bay Area. LA is full of all sorts of left-wingers. It’s been that way forever. Even if people are not Commies, liberalism is huge here. Most liberals don’t hate Commies. They’re not Commies and they don’t like the philosophy but they are not hardcore anti-Communists. Many people here call themselves progressives, and even out and open Leftists and self-proclaimed socialists are not rare. Most people regard Hard Left politics as interesting, amusing, or odd. Mostly people act like it is your personal business. California is not a state where Commies get beat up.

I’m not really a total Commie anyway. I am sort of an undifferentiated liberal to Commie leftwinger. I support most all of the Left.


Filed under California, Economics, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Socialism, Sociology, US Politics, USA, West

Etiologies and Possibilities of Change in Male and Female Sexual Orientation

Huho: I’m surprised that the myth that you can turn gay exists post 1945.

Maybe it’s not a myth? Depends how you define being gay. There are heterosexual men by orientation who have chosen a gay lifestyle because they were terribly rejected by women or straight society. Apparently men don’t turn them on at all, but they go gay because women reject them and they want to have a sex life. Are these men gay? Are they straight? What are they? What determines orientation, attraction or behavior.

We only know that male sexual orientation is fixed at age 15. I report this a lot, but no one else does, and sites linking in to my articles about this often express disbelief and shock.

A large percentage of the  Cultural Right continues to insist that all gay people have chosen a gay lifestyle. The therapists around Saccarides and NARTH have always promoted a line that males apparently turn gay somehow or other in boyhood due to poor father identification.

They also insist that gay men can change their sexual orientation with their fraudulent therapy, yet science has now abundantly proven that all studies attempting to turn gay men straight or even bi for that matter, have failed. I remember one article I read that listed ~80 publications documenting the inability to change gay men.

If gay men can’t move at all, straight and bi men may not move either. And indeed the latest science that by age 15, males cannot even be moved around in their orientation – you can’t change a 10-90 gay man to a 20-80 gay man.

Heterosexual orientation cannot be increased in the lab and homosexual orientation cannot be increased. This goes for even the sexual orientation continuum, where they can’t even move a bit on the continuum.

They have not yet documented that straight men cannot be turned gay. We don’t know if heterosexual orientation can be decreased or if homosexual orientation can be increased because no straight man ever shows up in the lab wanting to turn gay.

There is however one tantalizing case in the literature of a straight college man who wanted desperately to turn gay who had tried for several years with no success. He hated women and  spent most of his time with gay men, but he couldn’t move his orientation. He had been trying and failing for several years when he showed up for therapy.

Straight men who go gay in prison nearly always revert right back to heterosexuality when they walk out that gate.

As I said though, if it works one way it has to work the other, otherwise you have to postulate heterosexual orientation as some weird weak force that can always be decreased and and never increased and homosexual orientation as some strange virulent virus that can always be increased but never decreased. That hypothesis fails even before testing, as it doesn’t make sense.

There wasn’t much evidence until recently that male sexual orientation is immutable past age 15 and that sexual orientation may even be fixed or rooted before then. This whole “born gay” business has not been going on very long. How long? 20 years? 30 years?

Homosexuals still insist that “sexuality is fluid,” while insanely saying that “gays are born gay.” They want it so all of them are born gay and can’t change, and all straight people can turn bi or something anytime they want. Clever, right? Gay sites still react with rage and fury when I say that male sexual orientation is fixed at age 15. Then start jumping up and down and yelling that straight men can turn bisexual at any age. Obviously the ideal situation for them is them all being stuck gay forever and us all being able to go halfway anytime we want. It’s so obviously self-serving that it is disgusting.

Gay politics is so insane that you could nearly diagnosis a Delusional Disorder for the whole movement in the DSM. Almost every single notion that they promote is a flat out lie.

A lot of women absolutely turn bisexual. Female sexual orientation is not immutable as men’s is.

I still get a lot of flak from SJW’s  who insist that male and female sexuality is fluid and people can move all over the place all through life on whatever whim of the moment they have, and this is wonderful because “no one cares” who’s gay and who’s not, so I guess if 50% of society turns gay, this is the greatest thing since Kleenex? Many pro-gay people continue to write “sexuality is fluid” at the same time they write “nobody chooses their sexual orientation” and “all gays are born gay.” In fact, these three contradictory notions are part of any Cultural Left discourses on sexual orientation.

There seems to be evidence that women’s attractions and even orientation can move around, and a fair amount of women move around through life. A lot of straight women turn lesbian, and quite a few lesbians turn straight. Straight women turn bi all the time. Teenage girls nowadays go through phases where they are straight, bi, lesbian, asexual, pansexual, etc. shifting between any one of these things to any of the  others all the time. A blob of mercury is easier to pin down.

Female sexual orientation is very poorly understood and a lot of lesbians seem to be lesbians of choice.

Current theories of how women arrive at a lesbian sexual orientation are irrational and even fail the smell test.

For instance, I like to go to porn movie sites. You know what they are. Pornhub, Xhamster, Xmovies. The videos are nice but I especially like to read the comments.  They’re almost better than the videos, which I often skip through and miss most of the video, only watching parts.

I have seen many cases of women cheering wildly for the dirtiest straight porn you could possibly imagine. Gangbangs, blowbangs, bukkakes, etc. with one woman and 26 guys, stuff like that. These videos show women engaging in the most perverse acts of wild heterosexuality with zero lesbianism. Face it, a woman doing that has a heterosexual orientation that is as strong as it can get. Attraction to men doesn’t get any stronger than that.

I followed a lot of these accounts back, and in many cases, these women cheering wildly for some gangbang with 10 guys are lesbians! Now this makes no sense to me. Lesbians, if the definition makes sense, are turned on by women and lesbian sex but not turned on by men and heterosexual sex. So it looks like a lot of lesbians are very much turned on by men and women engaging in wild straight sex with men, yet nevertheless insist that they are lez.

This makes no sense, and it implies that the decision to go lez is not based on what women are attracted to or turns them on. It’s probably more likely rooted in fear and hatred of men, and just coincidentally, vast numbers of “born that way” lesbians for some odd reason also have virulent hatred of phobic behavior towards men. Apparently they were born with a vicious hatred and terrifying fear of men! What sort of sense does that make?

The only thing that makes sense is that a lot of lesbians have tried men and had a lot of bad experiences with them, so they started hating and fearing men while going lez.
I’m sorry. If you are highly aroused by men and women having sex with men, how can you possibly be a lesbian? Someone lay this out for me.

Further, we have scientifically documented sexual orientation change of some lesbians in the lab. Some lesbians, predictably, are that way due to fear of men (documented by science). If they are motivated to change, these women can be changed by sex therapists who work with them to get rid of their fear of men. I have no idea what happens to the attraction to women. Gay sites go completely crazy, screaming and yelling, whenever I say that because it interferes with their “lesbians are born that way” lie.


Filed under Conservatism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Left, Political Science, Politics, Pornography, Psychology, Science, Sex, Women

“The Most Uncomfortably Honest Person On the Net”

Otherwise known as me.

What does /pol/ think of Robert Lindsay?

  ID:y5Kzqn7l No.151000405

Finally, somebody actually gets it. 95% of the stuff you hear about me is flat out wrong and the vast majority of that is simply lies and untruths. People just don’t get me at all. All they do is mischaracterize me. I know my own beliefs and values. I can obviously figure out if I am being mischaracterized or not.

This is one of the most perfect analyses of what I am doing here on the Net that I have ever read. Of course it comes from pol, the Alt Right/Nazi/White nationalist/whatever board.

I’m not a Nazi (I actually hate them) but Nazis, White nationalists, and Alt Right people are some of the few people who have managed to figure me out. Everyone else just doesn’t get it. They read the Book of Me but they didn’t understand it.

I am not sure what this means, except that maybe I really am Alt Left. It’s disturbing that only Alt Right people get me, but maybe that makes sense I am really Alt Left after all, with the original Alt Left being an Alt Right split. The original Alt Left had Alt Right roots (in fact it was an open Alt Right split), and the presence of certain aspects of the Alt Right are present in much of the true Alt Left to this day.

It’s a complicated theory, but Rabbit has written some excellent analyses along these lines. Read him if you don’t get it. Let’s put it this way. One great thing about the Alt Right was this Realism Uber Alles attitude – race realism, gender realism, sexual orientation realism, gender identity realism. It’s a scientific attitude towards the bitter  facts of life that rejects the SJW feel good mythology of Soma and happy pills. The SJW’s hearts are in the right place in a sense – they want everyone to be nice and quit picking on everyone else – but it’s anti-reality and they’ve turned into some weird Church Lady Commissars. They aren’t even fun anymore. SJW’s are as fun as a stern nun with a ruler in her hand.

Sometime I think Brandon Adamson is one the few Alt Left people who has figured me out. We are different, but in a way, Brandon is my child. The deepest roots of Brandon’s Alt Left are found in his reading of my Liberal Race Realism, my previous political project, which set Brandon slowly down the road to the Alt Left. LRR more or less turned into the Alt Left over years.

Most of the Alt Left is still far too rightwing for my and hopefully Brandon’s sensibilities.

It’s interesting though that the very earliest Alt Leftists (I will include Ryan England here also) are the ones who truly understood and stayed faithful to the complicated ethos of the early visions of the Alt Left.

In particular, the early Alt Left was very left on economics. I am some sort of weird liberal-to-Commie type and Brandon likes to call himself a “space Communist.” Ryan was originally know as Agent Commie, and his thinking has Marxist roots.

Brandon is getting some new followers that seem to be onto his Left of the Alt Right project – some sort of weird leftwing White nationalism which I do not support – but I wish him well. I’d be quite happy if more of these Alt Right guys went socialist. I don’t care if they vote of us or not. Why should I care? A sane politics grabs every vote it can.

How many people do Nazis kill, anyway? A few here and there?

And the neoliberalism of the corporate Democrats has killed tens of millions.

And the insane neoconservative wars of the Cold War Democrats has killed close to 2 million since 2003 alone.

What are we talking about here? At least 22 million deaths?

How many have these Alt Right Nazis killed in the last 30 years? It sure ain’t 22 million.

A socialist Nazi is 20 times better than a corporate Democrat, and I hate Nazis.

You pick your poison in life. Life is basically toxic, and you simply choose the poisons that harm you the least. And then you die.

Ashes, ashes, all fall down.

Momento mori!


Filed under Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Economics, Fascism, Left, Marxism, Nazism, Neoconservatism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race Realism, Racism, Socialism, US Politics, Vanity, War, White Nationalism

How America Has Achieved the Classless State of Communism (in an Odd Sense)

Granted, rich and middle class people think they are better than poor people. A lot of Whites or Asians think they are better. There is still some ethnic chauvinism around.

Nevertheless, I have had a low income for decades. I talk to people who make very good incomes sometimes, and they are very friendly to me. Some of them were even quite close to me, as in relatives. My income situation is not brought up. I am intelligent and highly educated and polite, and a lot of higher income people think people like that are interesting people regardless of their income. So those wealthier people will treat me well because I act like a White middle class college educated American. They don’t care about my income. That’s not important. What’s important is if you walk the walk and talk the talk. That actual particulars are somewhat irrelevant. A lot of culture in the US is about display more than essentials.

Sure people think like this. It is considered in very bad taste to brag about how rich you are or even to visibly look down on people of lower classes. If you do so openly, you are going to get told to knock it off in one way or another. I guarantee that you will be very disliked.

There was a guy at my junior college whose parents were rich. I went on a ski trip with him and other students to Colorado. From early on in the trip, he bragged all the time about how rich his family was. It wasn’t long before everyone on the whole trip hated him. People talked about him a lot behind his back. Others started making subtle remarks telling him to knock it the Hell off.

I roomed with the guy and three other guys. Towards the end of the week-long trip, I made some oblique comment about how his bragging about being rich was really angering a lot of people in the group. I didn’t come out and say it. Instead I said it in a sort of hidden code. He figured out what I meant, and he told me in an annoyed tone that he had gotten the message loud and clear. And he did pretty much knock it the Hell off.

We are very much a class-oriented society, but we are supposed to pretend that we are all equal. It is almost as if America has actually achieved a classless state of Communism. In that sense, we are a Communist country. We have extreme class differences, but you are not allowed to mention class in the US, so there is this sort of idea that we are all the same somehow regardless of money.

I lived in a working class White community for a while. There were a lot of well to do people there who had high paying jobs. Everyone was very nice to everyone else, even the trashmen, the clerks in the 7-11’s, and gas stations, basically all of what you would call lousy, low paying jobs. It is quite amazing to see how polite an attorney will be to a trashman or gas station clerk in a town like that. There is also this attitude in White culture that “you never put down a man for working at a job.” It goes along with “any job is a good job.” If you had a good job and treated the trashman or gas station clerk with disdain, a lot of people would see you and think very poorly of you. It is just not something you are supposed to do.

I am aware that Chinese think like that, along with Asians in general. Indians are notorious for this thinking. It may be common in some other parts of globe.

Americans consider this sort of thinking to be a sign of a backwards culture.


Filed under American, Asians, Chinese (Ethnic), Culture, East Indians, Left, Marxism, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asians, USA, Whites

Cascada, “Because the Night”

More Electropop, this time out of Germany. Check out the statuesque Tuetonic blonde Nico type fronting the band.

This is actually a new musical movement called Eurodance. This did indeed come out of House and Techno DJ dance music of an earlier era, moreso than Electropop.

The original song is by Patti Smith, and it is excellent. I cannot recommend Patti Smith highly enough. She was one of the original punk rockers and she was actually a poet. Her music is real poetry set to music. She even shacked up with playright Sam Shephard for a while. She’s a bit butch, but she was always heterosexual. This is what I liked about the genderbending of the 1970’s. You could be an androgynous man like the guys in Mott the Hoople or Queen, Bowie’s band or the Dolls and still be 100% heterosexual. Mott were actually hyper-heterosexual, but a lot of people said they dressed like faggots.

Similarly, sure, Patti Smith is a bit butch for a woman, but she is ravenously heterosexual. Once again, in 70’s thinking, even fairly masculine women can be wildly heterosexual, and no one cares.

We are really getting away with this with the insane Cultural Left modern gay culture and the much more insane Trans Culture. We are getting back into essentializing gender again. I thought feminism was the opposite of that? The 1970’s were definitely the opposite of that. Gendered behavior was uprooted from sexual orientation. Men could be feminine. Chicks could be masculine. All without being faggots or dykes. Yay!

The crazy way we are now, most fairly feminine men have either gone over to gay somehow or are quite likely to be bisexual, often by preference and not biology. Worse, feminine behavior in men is seen as proof positive that you are a bit Tranny. There are even radical Trans activists who insist that all gay people are really trans and they all need to come out and transition and get it over with. Gay Politics birthed its child, Trans Politics, and now the offspring is attacking the parents. Once again the Cultural Left keeps sprouting and watering the seeds of its own destruction. Sort of like, you know…capitalism? Cue Marx.

Masculine women who would have been straight in the 1970s are now almost all lez or bi if not out and out transmen as gender has once again been essentialized moronically by the Cultural Left. What is nuts that is that another Cultural Left wing, Feminism, has always hated the essentialization of gender. This hatred is the raison de etre or feminism itself. So the Cultural Left’s various factions promote their own contradictions (cue Marx again) and the contradictions go to war against each other, tearing the host asunder.

If a man is as feminine as Bowie or Marc Bolan or the Dolls nowadays, he’s nearly always gay or bisexual if not out and out trans. All of these men, if growing up nowadays, would have gone seriously bi if not gay and at least Bowie would probably be a damned transwoman by now.

Do you see how the modern Cultural Left has limited the options of men and women. Straight men and women are once again shoved into masculine and feminine boxes, and you step outside, that’s prima facie evidence that you’re not straight and probably not cis anymore.

Way to go Cultural Left! Thanks for bringing 1950’s gender roles back to straight people.



1 Comment

Filed under Cultural Marxists, Culture, Feminism, Gender Studies, Glam, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Left, Man World, Music, Politics, Pop Culture, Punk, Rock, Sex

Are There Any Americans Who Don’t Engage in Pure Black and White Thinking?

Alex: Robert, thanks for the warm welcome.

I’ve been reading your blog for a while and I would say that your views defy categorization, which I find refreshing. Of course, you’re free to apply any label you like to yourself. I personally have been exposed to enough narrow ideologies to find most such labels distasteful. I would rather people apply labels like ‘open-minded’, ‘numerate’, or ‘principled’ to themselves instead of an ideological designator which is as much about tribal affiliation as it is about personal philosophy. If people were really honest, they could even apply terms like ‘selfish’, or ‘biased towards short-term outcomes’ and nobody could fault them because we’re all that way to some extent.

Of course I am a man of the Left and I always have been. I am a liberal, progressive, socialist, whatever you want to call it. Exactly.

And the problem is that in the US, you pretty much have to define yourself as liberal or conservative. I suppose it is possible to be a Centrist, but I don’t hear many folks identifying that way.

Of course I am a man of the Left and I always have been. I am a liberal, progressive, socialist, whatever you want to call it.

However, once you designate yourself on the left of the spectrum like that, you are given a checklist of 1,000 different issues, and you have to check the “liberal” position on every single damn one of them. If you fail to check even one, everyone on the Left flips out, says you are not a liberal/progressive/socialist/whatever, and instead you are a reactionary/conservative/fascist/Nazi/Republican. Well, I am not any of the latter. I have examined all of those philosophies in great detail, and I despise those people. I do not fit in with them at all. However, only conservatives have been friendly to me, even though their philosophy is crap. Everyone on the Left by and large hates my guts.

So I am a man without a country, so to speak.

Really if you gave me a list of Left positions, I might check most of them. More importantly, if you gave me a list of rightwing opinions, I would not check too many of them. But I would check a few. But you can’t even check a few, you see. You can’t even check one.

Let me give you another example. I think a $15 minimum wage is a terrible idea. But I am very much pro-worker. I just don’t think that is the way to deal with working class problems in the US. That would cause more problems then it would cure. When I say that, everyone on the Left gets outraged and says, “I thought you were for the workers!” As in, if you are  pro-worker, you have to support a $15/hr wage. Well, I am pro-worker, and I think that wage is a terrible idea.

Everything is black and white here. I like a lot of what Putin does, but I agree that he does some bad things, and I will gladly rattle them off. When I do this, Putin-haters (everyone) is outraged and yells, “I thought you were pro-Putin! See, even you admit he’s bad.”

You see in the US you have to take positions. If you hate Putin, nothing he does is good. Same with Trump, Assad, Kim Jong Il, or other bogeymen. Most everyone on the Left in the US says all of these men are pure evil. If you point out that these people are good or correct in some certain way, everyone flips out. “You support Kim Jong Il!” Well, no I don’t, but he has the right to defend his country.

People who are pro-Democrat or anti-Assad or whatever will never admit that there is one bad thing about Democrats or one good thing about Assad. You can’t.

If you say one bad thing about Democrats, they’re not “good” anymore. If you say one good thing about Assad, he’s not “bad” anymore.

Let’s say we are talking Putin. My conversation partner is a Putin-hater. Literally everything Putin does is pure evil. I am taking the opposite point and supporting Putin on a number of issues. But if I concede Putin is bad in one way, my partner starts jumping up down and yelling, “Even you say he’s bad!”

If you concede one point, if you say you’re guy is bad in even one way, in the US, you just lost the argument. Because the other guy never concedes a point. In the US, the way people think is that the person who never concedes on anything wins, and the person who concedes a point or two loses.

Literally almost everyone I meet in this country is exactly like this. Most people I have known in my life are like this. I know several people with 140+ IQ’s, and they are complete black and white thinkers, so it’s not down to intelligence.

Humans just can’t seem to handle cognitive dissonance. They can’t deal with gray areas. Gray areas make people nuts. A gray area means the good guy’s not good anymore, and the bad guy’s not bad anymore. We can’t have that.

Ever since I appeared on the Net, people have been screaming that my politics is utterly irrational and insane. That is simply because I am Left on some things and Right on others. In America, apparently that is the definition of insanity. Recently someone commented that I am “all over the place.” That’s right. If you live in a permanent gray area, you will always be all over the place.

Which brings me to my original question: Just how many Americans are not black and white thinkers? I would also like to ask if it is a human characteristic rather than an American one. Will you generally find the same black and white thinking everywhere you go in the world?


Filed under American, Asia, Conservatism, Culture, Democrats, Economics, Eurasia, Left, Liberalism, Middle East, NE Asia, North Korea, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Regional, Republicans, Russia, Socialism, Syria, US Politics, USA