Category Archives: Psychology

PUA/Game: Women Love Writers

Yes, women (and girls) love to fuck writers. Bukowski said that, but he was not the first. We are romantics, you know. Artist types are romantic and romantic artist types set off the romantic drive that underlies the love instinct in females. Thing is you have to be good. Yes, women love writers, but my observation is that the only writers I have known who got women from their writing were damn good.

And they were usually writing some sort of literary type writing, either novels, short stories, poetry or literary nonfiction. Even a good journalist can get women if your prose really sings, say a music reviewer. If you are a writer but you don’t write well, I don’t think you will get women from your writing. It’s probably like that with any art. Yes, musicians, artists, writers, etc. can all get women, but only if they are damn good. If you are creative but you are not damn good, I don’t think it works to get women.

PS, when a woman tells a writer, “Oh! I love the way you write!” Um, that usually means she wants you. She’s in love with you or she wants to fuck you. Pretty much always. It doesn’t matter which because those two things are all jumbled up in females anyway.

1 Comment

Filed under Art, Gender Studies, Literature, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Writing

Is the Internet Fostering a Culture of Hatred, Abuse, Insults, Attacks and Sociopathy?

There are all sorts of maniacs running around the Web who seem to be there only to cause havoc and destruction. And a lot of ordinary people are much more insulting and vicious on the Net than they would be in Meatspace. Many seem to think it is normal to savagely abuse someone, and if you take offense, there is something wrong with you. It’s as if vicious insults are the New Normal.

It seems like the destroyers do not have jobs. They just post on troll sites all day and dedicate themselves to trolling and destroying people and sites. Apparently they have nothing better to do. I find all the hate and haters on the Internet to be very unnerving. There is something about the Web that fosters oceans of hate and legions of haters. I believe it is the anonymity and the fact that you can be as mean and destructive as you wish with no consequences.

Apparently when you get rid of consequences for behavior, a large percentage of the population turns mean, vicious, destructive, and some degree of sociopathic.

My opinion of the human race is taking another huge plunge.

41 Comments

Filed under Psychology, Social Problems, Sociology

“Child Porn” (Whatever the Hell That Means), Teen Sexting and Pic/Video Trading and Other Moral Panics, Mass Hysterias, Emotional Derangements and General Idiocies

Contrary to what my enemies say about me, I will take a pretty hard line below. The real deal (adults and kids 12-below child porn) needs to be kept the Hell off the Net. People making that crap, putting it up on the Net, or collecting it on their drives can go down hard for all I care. Throw the book at ’em. On the other hand, the issue is somewhat more nuanced than that, and it brings up some extremely difficult questions in legal theory and moral philosophy and general common sense.

The laws against child pornography are correct in that it ought to be illegal put that stuff up on the Net.

I have a hard time seeing how it is illegal to look at the stuff. I mean, you are cruising around the Net and BAM there’s some child porn on your screen. Or you are pic trading porn in a chatroom, and all of a sudden the guy you are trading with sends you child porn BAM! Even if you had no idea the guy was going to send you that crap, and you deleted it within seconds of it hitting your screen, you still committed a felony. Isn’t that crap?

Suppose you are cruising along the Chans and BAM there’s some child porn up on the Chan. OK what exactly are you supposed to do? Leave the page? Stay on the page? It doesn’t matter! Because BAM as soon as that crap hit your screen, you committed a felony! Any way to go back and uncommit the felony? Nope! You’re going down forever more unless you can clean your drive real well. See what crap that is?

I also have a problem with eyeball crimes. This is the only crime on Earth where you can to go prison for many years for “illegal looking.” What do you mean illegal looking? What the Hell kind of crime is that? You can look at anything else on Earth, videos of men being slowly tortured to death by serial killers, Islamists sawing people’s heads off and torturing them to death in every way imaginable, the worst crime scenes  imaginable… everything on God’s Green Earth is legal for your eyeballs.

Except for this CP crap. The argument goes that this kid was injured or harmed in the making of that porn. Indeed that’s probably the case. But then the argument goes that by the fact that your eyeballs grazed that photo of that kid being harmed, you horribly harmed that poor child again by looking at them with your eyeballs! Really?! Your eyes hurt that kid? Every time someone looks at that pic, that kid gets horribly injured? How? Where’s the injury? Is it invisible? Can we measure it?

For this to be true, you would have to prove that that kid was aware every time someone looked at the CP photo of them. So if the photo gets looked at 100 times that day, somehow through some psychic process that kid gets a devastatingly injurious brain zap every time? The whole argument behind this theory is sheer idiocy, and it defies all logic and sense. It’s not a rational argument in any possible universe.

You see where they say Mr. X was arrested for “downloading” child porn. For a long time, I thought these guys deserved it. I mean “downloading” means saving it to your drive in a folder, right? Once you do that, you’re possessing it, right? I have no problem with the possession of CP being illegal. You shouldn’t be collecting that crap on your drive. And yes, all you perverts collecting that crap is of course what drives the market for it in the first place. It’s illegal to possess all sorts of things. There are many such laws saying we may not possess this or that. That’s grounded in sanity, logic and legal precedent.

But recently I realized that downloading CP doesn’t mean downloading at all necessarily. It’s often a reference to the horrific crime of “illegal looking with illegal eyeballs.” I guess your eyeballs have to go to prison for the illegal looking charges? Just by the fact that you happened upon that child porn, perhaps out of complete ignorance and innocence, you are guilty of “downloading child porn.” Isn’t that stupid? It’s “downloading” because your browser downloads a copy of everything you see on the Net to the browser cache. Now I suppose if you clean your drive thoroughly, you can get rid of everything in your browser cache, but still, what the Hell kind of retarded crime is that? Illegal looking? WTF!

Child pornography is photos and videos of adults having sex with children age 12-under. I don’t think pornographic photos and videos of teenagers having sex with anyone is child porn. It’s just not. I don’t know what the Hell it is, but it sure as Hell ain’t “kiddie porn.”

Teenagers of both sexes, boys and girls, are constantly taking nudes and pornographic photos and maybe even videos of themselves and trading them around with other teens. I can tell you for certain that there is a vast amount of this going on, at least on Twitter. How do I know? Because I know about this stuff. They form private pic and video trading groups, (usually all underage teenage girls mostly 15-17) and they trade pics of each other, sext each other, etc.

Usually the groups are girls under 18 only, no boys allowed. Often bisexual girls are especially encouraged to join. So underage teenage girls are taking a vast amount of pornographic photos and maybe videos of themselves and maybe others and trading them all around to fellow underage teens. It’s literally an epidemic. And according to the law, it’s all child porn. Every one of those girls taking those photos and videos is “producing/manufacturing child pornography.” If she trades the stuff with her girlfriend? Now she’s “distributing child pornography.” Huge numbers of teenagers of both sexes are being arrested for manufacture, distribution and possession of child pornography. This insanity is absolutely outrageous. It shows just how insane the Pig State really is. It’s not even a Police State – it’s actually a Pig State.

So what is to be done? I have no idea. We should leave these kids alone with their pics, though. If they put them up on the Net, that’s not OK, but from what I can tell, girls are hardly putting any porn pics of themselves up on the Net. It’s all going back and forth with messaging and emails. Almost nothing is going up on any webpage. I think we should make it illegal for these teenagers to put this teen porn up on the Net. We have to ban that. And we need to keep the under 18 for porn law in. You know why?

This is why:

Now suppose we said that in Kentucky the age of consent is 16, so you can have sex with any legal person you want to at that age, 13-93? There are laws like this all over the land. It’s perfectly legal for any adult man to have sex with a 16 year old girl in half the states in the US, which is fine. But if it’s legal for her to have sex, why isn’t it legal for her to take a nude pic of herself? So now you have a tidal wave of cases of the Pig State allowing a 20 year old and a 16 year old to have sex with each other, but as soon as one takes a nude of themselves or the other and gives it to the other one, they’ve manufactured and distributed child porn, and they have to go to prison for 10 years! Idiocy!

So this 20 year old man can have sex with this 16 year old girl 10 times a day for years if he wants to, but as soon as these star crossed lovers who are screwing each other’s brains out every day take a nude of one or the other, they’re child pornographers and they are going to prison for 10 years! What kind of stupid crap is that!?

I do not know what to do about this. I suppose if they are over the age of consent, they can take pics of each other all they want and pass them around at least to one another in privacy and to other minors. I’m leery about this stuff being passed around willy nilly to adults though. They can’t put them up on the Net because it’s illegal material, and we don’t want that junk on the Net.

But why not? Indeed, let us look at a fascinating argument:

A very good argument is that if a girl can consent to sex at 16, why can’t she consent to taking porn photos and videos of herself and put them up on the Web? Or allow other people to film her? Actually it sounds logical. If you’re old enough to screw, of course you’re old enough to do porn. At the very least, you ought to be able to take pictures of your own self and put them up on the Net. I have no problem with this in theory.

But here is the problem. Pornographers are some of the most low down, sleaziest, slimiest men (and almost all are men) on the planet. They’re just about criminals, except what they are doing is legal. Most are what I would call legal criminals. The rates of Axis 2 Cluster B disorders is very high among pornographers. Narcissistic Personality Disorder and especially sociopathy and psychopathy are everywhere in that industry. It’s Ground Zero for male controlled psychopaths. Most pornographers are simply awful people.

Now here’s the problem. Say in these states where the AOC is 16 or 17, we allow girls that age to consent to doing porn. I agree it’s rational and reasonable. But here’s what is going to happen. Very soon after you legalize legally sexually mature girls age 16 and 17 to do porn, the porn studios are going to be flooded with teenage girls wanting to do porn. It’s just going to happen. I assure you it will. If they can’t find them here in the US, they will readily find them in Russia, Romania, Ukraine, Bulgaria, and places like that.

Because the porn industry is constantly pushing the envelope and promoting weirder, kinkier and sicker stuff in a race to the bottom, the 16 and 17 year old girls doing porn will soon be flooded all across the net. There’s already a massive market for the “Barely 18” market, in which 18-20 year old girls do porn for the “young girls” market. You can call men who would look at those 16 and 17 year old girls doing porn sick fucks all you want, but I assure you that in the US alone, you will have millions of men looking at that 16 and 17 year old girl porn.

Do we want this? No, we do not want this! We cannot allow girls under 18 to make porn because of the scenario above. I don’t want to open up my browser and see 10 ads for 16  year old girls doing hardcore porn. Just forget it.

As far as CP – the real deal – adults and kids 12 and under – goes:

  • Of course it needs to be illegal to put that crap up on the Net.
  • It has to be illegal to make it.
  • It has to be illegal to trade it back and forth by messaging or emails.
  • People who collect that crap in folders on their drives can go down hard for all I care.

But illegal looking? Illegal eyeballs? That’s just weird. How do you justify putting some poor schmuck in prison for 10 years because of some image that he innocently stumbled on and flashed before his eyes? The whole idea of “illegal looking” at anything on Earth being a crime, much less a serious felony, sounds completely bizarre. Like I said, name one other thing on God’s Green Earth that it is illegal to look at?

Let the teenagers take their porn pics and whatnot of themselves and each other and trade them around in strict private out of the view of everyone else. If it’s perfectly legal for two humans to engage in any sex act they wish with each other, for God’s sake, of course they can take photos of each other doing it or just posing with nothing on. But I don’t want to see that crap being passed all around town. If you are a grown adult, you should not be looking at nudes and porns of underage girls. The exception would be if you are in a legal sexual relationship with her. But passing them all around town? We need to discourage that somehow.

There is zero sense, logic, sanity or rational thinking operating on any argument about this stuff. 100% of the people talking about this stuff are emotionally deranged. They are trying to think about this, but they are emotionally crazed so they can’t think about it logically. If you are in an emotionally deranged state of mind, you can’t make any rational decision about anything. Reasonable thinking only occurs when people calm down and stop thinking emotionally.

Emotional thinking never does any good. All it ever does is give you the wrong answer.

5 Comments

Filed under Child Porn, Computers, Crime, Girls, Government, Jailbait, Law, Losers, Mass Hysterias, Moralfags, Narcissistic, Personality Disorders, Pornography, Psychology, Psychopathology, Ridiculousness, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Sociopathy

In Support of Prejudice

I just found out that prejudice means “dislike for a group of people.” This typically means a racial, ethnic, religious, gender, sexual orientation or sexual identity. Prejudice usually means bigotry of some sort, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, sectarianism, and various forms of ethnic hatred.

For the life of me, I cannot see what on Earth is wrong with not liking some group of people. However, I would argue that this should be limited to dislike, it should not be obsessive and it should not be the sort of hot or cold hatred that hurts a lot of people.

This boils down to a basic limitation of freedom. Saying that prejudice is illegal or immoral or bad in some way is automatically an abrogation of human freedom. Obviously, we don’t have to like anyone. Isn’t that clear? Obviously, we can dislike anyone we want to, for a good reason, a bad reason or no reason at all. That is our right as a free citizen.

We have a right to our preferences. We have a right to have a preference for one particular group or a preference to not associate with some other particular group, although I would hope it would be phrased as,

“You know, I just don’t care to associate with [X group]. I wish them all the best and will work for equal rights for them because as humans they deserve it, but as far as I am concerned, it’s them over there and me over here. I simply prefer not to be around them too much and I do not wish to befriend them. If I have to deal with them, I will be as polite and friendly as possible, but I do not wish to take things any further than that.”

What in God’s name is wrong with such a mindset? Now obviously you cannot incorporate it into law. You cannot use your preferences to discriminate against certain groups in housing, employment, voting rights, etc. (even though such discrimination is rampant even now and is even officially sanctioned by a political party called the Republican Party). Sure, you can’t discriminate. But you don’t have to be friends with anyone. You don’t have to make the acquaintance of anyone. You don’t have to hang around with or associate with anyone.

I happen to have a certain dislike for some groups of people.

I am not wild about gay men, though I have a few online gay friends who I am very fond of. Friendships between gay and straight men are impossible in my book and fail every single time. How do I know this? Personal experience. I have also had a lifetime of bad experiences with gay men, and I just do not wish to deal with them anymore. I’ve had enough of gay men for one lifetime.

On their other hand, I support full rights for them, and I even work on their political campaigns! I support most of their political causes and in general think it should not be legal to discriminate against them.

But it’s still them over there, me over here, and never the twain shall meet. In my life, almost all straight men I have known have had little or nothing to do with gay men. I cannot think of anything more bizarre than straight men have gay friends, and the men I have known who befriended gay men almost always reported a catastrophic experience, bearing out my concerns. But then, I am Old School.

I don’t like Gypsies very much. In fact, I do not like them at all. I don’t hate them because they are not worth wasting my energy hating. I have met five Gypsies in my life. Four of them stole from me, and one just got out or jail. All were female. Based on that, I do not wish to meet anymore Gypsies in  this lifetime.

I’ve met plenty enough Gypsies for one life. As far as racism against Gypsies, it’s not something we deal with in the US, so it’s not an issue. It’s a nonexistent problem, so I have no opinion about it.

I don’t like Nigerians or Africans period very much, especially West Africans. I am done with them. Almost every African I met on the Net behaved horribly, and almost all of them tried to steal from either me or my friends.

We had a Yahoo group once and we let a lot of Africans, mostly Nigerians, into the group.

All except for one or two tried to steal from us.

A few others were trying to scam a White wife so they could get into the US. We called them wife-scammers and considered them to be about as low as the thieves.

The rest of them were always trying to chat with the women in our group. When the women would go talk to them, these men would have their cams on and would always be jerking their big Black cocks at these women, almost always White women. A number of our women got very upset by this, and some were out and out traumatized.

We threw almost all of them out of the group for stealing or trying to steal, wife scamming, and flashing and jerking off at our women without permission. We then put in a totally racist and discriminatory rule banning all Africans from joining the group.  We got accused of racism for this, and a lot of group members defected to go hang out with those wonderful Africans.

I suppose you think that because I am not fond of Africans, I dislike Black Americans. Actually, I have no particular opinion about Black Americans, and mostly I try to just not think about them, which I think is best. This is one group of Americans that I would say the less you think about them, the better.

Yes, we banned Africans from our group, but we also had a lot of Black Americans, men and women, in the group. Only one was banned, and he deserved it. The African ban did not apply to American Blacks. Why? Because they were not doing any of the things the Africans were doing! They were not stealing from us, wife scamming or jerking their dicks at our women.

In fact, the behavior of the US Blacks in our group was orders of magnitude better than the Africans! It was almost like we were dealing with two completely different races of people. This is why I think it is wrong to lump US Blacks in with Africans. Behaviorally, they are dramatically different, and US Blacks are much better behaved than Africans. I am not sure why this is, but I have some theories. As  you can see, theories of genetic race and behavior do not make much sense here, as US Black genes are not much different from African genes. What’s different? How about culture? How about 400 years of exposure to White culture here in the US?

I don’t have any particular preferences about any other groups of people, although to be completely honest, I suppose I am most comfortable with my own White people. I know that I am most comfortable with White women. I think it is just that they are most similar to me in many different ways. Also White women are far more likely to like me and want to get involved with me than are women of any other race. Why that is, I have no idea, but perhaps when it comes to dating and relationships, a lot of people simply prefer their own kind.

Which brings me to another type of preference. Why in God’s name can we not have racial or any other type of preferences when it comes to dating!? So you don’t want to date Catholics, or Arabs, or bisexuals, or transwomen, or Gypsies, or Gentiles, or atheists, or Nigerians, or, Hell, Midwesterners, or redheads, or people with blue eyes, or Republicans, or insurance salesmen, or banksters, or…anything or anyone for any reason or no reason?

I cannot think of anything more personal than dating, relationships, love, sexual behaviors, intimacy, and sex itself. The idea that we cannot have preferences or even actively discriminate in this area is absolutely insane, but we are starting to hear this now from the Cultural Left.

Apparently we men have no right to discriminate against transwomen in dating. As for me, sorry, I don’t date trannies. Real women are enough of a headache, believe me. I don’t need to deal with some chick who used to be a dude, sorry, I’m out as far as that goes.

Apparently, we White men are no longer allowed to say we prefer not to date Black women. We also cannot say that we do not find Black women attractive (a common belief among White men). I guess we have no right to have standards when it comes to attraction! The Cultural Left now says it is always racist for a White man to prefer not to date Black women, and it is always racist if a White man says he is not attracted to Black women.

I keep telling you that these Cultural Left freaks keep getting crazier every year. I think they are on some runaway Crazy Train. Apparently the nature of the Cultural Left is to get weirder and crazier every year, continually upping the ante and making more and more extreme demands. We meet a few of their nutty demands, and they don’t even bother to say thanks before they move the goalposts again and start making new even nuttier demands. It’s like a football field that stretches far off into the horizon with no end in sight.

13 Comments

Filed under Blacks, Civil Rights, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Discrimination, Homosexuality, Law, Left, Nigerians, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Roma, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites

Taking Apart the Anti-IQ Arguments Once Again

iRath: I know a lot of high IQ people that are stupid. It doesn’t mean you are all that creative or inventive. It means you have great memory recall. Kind of like an encyclopedia. In my experience, dealing with people who brag about high IQ points, they are usually narcissistic idiot savants. They are insufferable to be around because of their abrasive insecurities.

I don’t think the average person spends much time hand-wringing over their IQ score. On a day to day basis, it just not all that important. I do understand why people have an aversion towards elevating IQ scores as some sort of barometer of human value. Usually the people who are fapping on about it believe in their own divinity (narcissists), and that’s a very dangerous path we’ve been down before.

IQ measures more than recall. It’s the best measure we have for pure human intelligence.

If you don’t think IQ is important, then  you don’t think human intelligence is important. If you think human intelligence has no importance or value for human beings, I  suppose I would have to ask you why you are taking such an extreme position.

IQ measures:

  • Recall capacity (short term and long term).
  • Recall speed (short and long term).
  • Abstract thinking ability.
  • Verbal intelligence.
  • Nonverbal intelligence.
  • Pattern recognition.
  • Ability to compare and contract (analogy).
  • Actual capacity and breadth of human knowledge.
  • Pure, raw brain speed.
  • Brain efficiency.
  • Brain size (this is a statistical correlation).

Apparently the commenter does not think any of the above things are important. I suppose I would ask him why he takes such a radical position.

The commenter has known many high IQ people who were stupid?! Never met a single high IQ idiot in my entire life. Where have they been hiding? What does the poster mean by high IQ idiots? Explain.

In my experience, dealing with people who brag about high IQ points, they are usually narcissistic idiot savants. They are insufferable to be around because of their abrasive insecurities.

This is probably true, though I have never met an IQtard who goes around bragging about his IQ all the time in real life. There are a few on the Internet. IQ-haters like to go on and on about IQ braggarts, how the world is full of them, and how horrible they are, but where are they? I’ve never met one in my entire life. If they are such a problem, why I have never met one? This sounds like a solution in search of a  problem. Fighting the IQ-braggarts makes about as much sense as attacking a windmill with a spear. You are fighting against a problem that doesn’t even exist.

I do understand why people have an aversion towards elevating IQ scores as some sort of barometer of human value. Usually the people who are fapping on about it believe in their own divinity (narcissists), and that’s a very dangerous path we’ve been down before.

I’ve never met one of these people either, though there are some on the Net. Yes, they are insufferable, but best I can tell is they don’t even exist in the real world. Once again, a solution in search of a problem.

I don’t think the average person spends much time hand-wringing over their IQ score.

Of course most people don’t spend time thinking about IQ. I assure you though that everyone with a genius IQ or thereabouts knows their score and most, but not all, will tell it to you readily. In fact, most people with IQ’s over 120 know their scores and will immediately tell them to you, and some in the 110-119 range do too, and they will also quickly tell you, especially if they are 115-119. Where you run into people not knowing or even caring about their score is in the normal and below (90-100) or wide normal (84-116) ranges.

So people with scores above the wide normal range usually know their score and will readily tell you with no embarrassment or sense of shame or social violation. If they are 140+, generally speaking, you detect a sense of pride when they tell you no matter their gender. Under 140, not usually. Over 140 is the top 1% of humans. I would say if you are in the top 1% of any good thing, you ought to feel proud of it. Why not? We all need to feel good about ourselves.

I guess people in the normal range just don’t care, and they probably should not care. We are talking about most people here. I mean the vast majority of humans you meet day to day have IQ’s in the broad normal range. That’s even probably true in this slow city I live in, and this town is a graveyard of intelligence, trust me.

What’s wrong with being like everyone else? What’s wrong with being normal? Or regular? Or everyday? Or a typical person? Is it some sort of a sin?

What’s the point of knowing their score? Most people with average IQ’s are well aware they are not Einsteins anyway, and they do not lose any sleep over it. Almost everyone with an average IQ does not think it is important to be a brain (a logical point of view given their score), and they do not place much if any value on smarts. They tend to place value on other things that they think are more important than brains. Most of the people who really value brains are smart people.

3 Comments

Filed under Intelligence, Psychology

Do People with OCD Enjoy Thinking about Their Obsessions, or Is It Always an Involuntary/Unpleasant Experience?

Answered on Quora:

Do people with OCD enjoy thinking about their obsessions, or is it always an involuntary/unpleasant experience?

Actually enjoying your obsessions (or repetitive thoughts) is a rule-out for OCD. If you enjoy your repetitive thoughts, OCD is literally ruled out. I sometimes come across people who enjoy their repetitive thoughts and think they had OCD. I told them that they did not.

Most common differential diagnoses were Prodromal Psychopathy (person is developing psychopathy but does not yet have it), Pedophilia, GAD and Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder. Also things like Homosexuality which are not even illnesses. None of them are common. The only one I have seen more than once was Pedophilia.

But by and large, people who come to me suspecting they have OCD are correct almost all (98%) of the time. Clinicians despise self-diagnosis and say it has no credibility, but with OCD at least, many persons are quite certain that they have it, and they are correct in their self-diagnosis.

Usually what happens is they get symptoms and cannot figure out what is wrong with them, so they start doing research. They come across articles that describe OCD in great detail or are case histories of OCD’ers. They read that, and something instantly clicks. They say, “That’s me exactly! The person who wrote that could have been crawling around in my brain reading my thoughts.”

Pure O OCD symptoms are remarkably similar. I also like to say I can spot Pure O OCD symptoms half a mile away, blindfolded, at night. That’s not true, but you get the picture. It’s like they are all “reading off the same script.”

The symptoms are so clockwork-like that it has led me to think there is something wrong with a person’s brain who has OCD. The symptoms are classic, almost all of them display the same core symptoms and you can go down a checklist to figure out who has it, or just recognize it by sheer intuition. In that sense it is very much like how physician diagnoses a physical illness he is familiar with quite quickly via sheer intuition. In that sense, OCD resembles a typical physical illness very much.

2 Comments

Filed under Anxiety Disorders, Mental Illness, OCD, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Symptoms

Why Do Some People with High IQ’s Have So Much Confidence in Their IQ?

Shall we reword this question?

“Why do some people have so much confidence in their intelligence?”

Well, don’t you think people of high intelligence would have a lot of confidence in their intelligence? Don’t you think someone with athletic, artistic, musical, literary, mathematical, or any other talent would have confidence in that particular talent of theirs? Isn’t it logical that they would?

I suppose I should ask you why you are even asking this question in the first place. The answer is quite obvious. People with talents and gifts for superior performance for whatever their talent or gift is for. Success breeds confidence. A high IQ person will excel in many areas that require high intelligence. Hence, he will become quite confident of his intelligence. Doesn’t that just seem logical?

If you want to argue about whether it is appropriate or not to discuss your IQ score, that is another matter altogether. American society is extremely anti-intellectual and has long hated smart people. This is why we hate it when people bring up IQ and why discussing IQ is a social error much of the time. You need to be very careful how you discuss your IQ score if it is high and you know the number. It can be done in such a way that it is socially appropriate, but that’s pretty hard to figure out, and you need excellent social skills to determine that.

2 Comments

Filed under American, Culture, Intelligence, Psychology

Why Do People Speak so Highly of IQ Tests?

Because IQ tests test how intelligent you are! That is a fact, a pure, 100%, absolute fact. IQ tests are the best and most accurate way we have of determining intelligence. Basically it is a measure of raw brain speed. The faster the brain, the higher the IQ. It is also a measure of how big your brain is. The bigger the brain, the higher the IQ. People with high IQ’s have better short and long term memory. That can store more things in memory and retrieve them faster. They are better at abstract thinking.

In a word, they are simply more intelligent.

We could reword your question like this, “Why do people speak so highly of human intelligence?”

Doesn’t that sound silly? Don’t you think human intelligence is a pretty important thing? Are you prepared to argue that human intelligence has no meaning at all for human beings? What sort of an argument is that? Why would you want to argue such a thing?

5 Comments

Filed under Intelligence, Psychology

Alt Left: Does Every Androgynous Woman Have to Be Lesbian?

Answered on Quora.

I am familiar with a sex researcher who studied male college students. He found the degree of femininity in their behavior correlated well with their sexual orientation.
Men with mildly feminine behaviors reported minor levels of gay attraction (they were basically straight). As their degree of femininity increased, they reported higher and higher levels of gay attraction. At the far end, a few men (4%), were strongly gay (0–100 to 20–80 where 0–100 is pure gay) and these men were the most feminine, or actually effeminate, of them all.

The correlation is not perfect, and we have all met faggy straight men and mannish straight women, but their numbers are few. I would estimate that ~3% of straight men are effeminate, whereas I would guess ~70–75% of gay men were. That’s a strong correlation.

I am going to go out on a limb here. What do you mean by androgynous?

Because to me, androgynous for a man means a very strong masculine side and a strong feminine side. Think Mick Jagger.

An androgynous woman would have a very strong feminine side and a strong masculine side. Think of the Runaways.

However, most people use androgynous in a man to mean a man who acts completely effeminate and in a woman to mean a woman who is completely masculine.

It sounds like you are heterosexual, have an androgynous nature about which we know little, and do not wish to become a lesbian. Well, good for her. A straight man applauds you. One more for our team.

However, I would ask you if you have any residues of femininity in her that she can dredge up and maybe work with? Because a very butch or dykey straight woman is just going to seem weird. You are going to get people thinking you are lesbian all the time, and after a while, you will start getting really sick of it and get pretty mad about it. I know a straight female car mechanic in this bind right now. She’s getting sick of people thinking she’s a lesbian!

Look, I will be straight up. Straight men simply do not like excessively butch, masculine or dykey straight women. We acknowledge that they are straight, but their lack of femininity is a massive turnoff to us. They just seem weird. And if we date them, we feel gay because it feels like we are out with another man. Straight men hate to feel gay. They will go anything to avoid that feeling.

I think it’s great that you have a strong masculine side! Good for you. I’ve got a damn strong feminine side myself.

But the more feminine side you mix in with that masculine side, the more you will be accepted in the straight world, and the more men will like you.

Feminine behaviors in a woman is what turn on straight men’s sex drive. Masculine behavior in a woman generally shuts down men’s sex drives.

Here’s hoping you can work this out some way or another at some point in the future and then move on to other things because this particular line of thinking (I am straight but I act gay) and the worry associated with it is a very painful way to think.

In my counseling practice, I have met some men and women with this problem, and they were extremely miserable. One or two were suicidal.

It’s an ugly rabbit hole to be in and I would say the sooner this gets cleared up for you, the happier you will be.

Leave a comment

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

Alt Left: Do IQ Tests Have a Cultural Bias? If So, How Do They Need to Be Reformed?

Answered on Quora.

We must talk about two types of scientific thinking.

The first type are the intelligence researchers, the top names in the field, and people who actually study the issue. They write in journals like Intelligence. Charles Murray, Philippe Rushton, Arthur Jensen, Richard Lynn, and James Flynn are some of the top names in this field. I keep up with the field, and Flynn, discoverer of the Flynn Effect, is actually an acquaintance, so I know what I am talking about.

These and a few others are actually the most respected names in the field. However, outside the field, Murray, Rushton, Lynn and even Jensen are often pilloried as racists, and the popular line is that their work is pseudoscience or scientific racism. However, in the intelligence community, they are regarded as the top names of all, their work is regarded as excellent science, and their views are regarded as valid hypotheses about race and intelligence that are worth investigating.

Although the genes versus environment matter for IQ has not been sorted out (the above names are some of those fighting it out), the argument in the journals about whether the tests are culturally biased or not was settled long ago. The leaders of the Pure Environment group such as Nesbitt ran up the white flag a while back on the cultural bias issue. Nesbitt never talks about cultural bias anymore and accepts that the tests are valid. Instead, he argues about different things. He simply argues that the scores are correct, but the differences are due to environment, not genes.

The problem here is that just about nobody is monitoring the actual debate in the intelligence community and the journals, so a huge disconnect has emerged between popular scientists and journalists who write on this subject and the experts in the field.
The former continue to insist that the tests are biased despite the fact that the matter was settled in the journals for some time now. The people writing in the popular press are either not following the debate in the journals or they are and they are lying (I cynically suspect the latter). To be honest, there are a few radicals in the community who continue to insist that the tests are biased, but they were defeated as a group a while back. There are only a few holdouts left.

Almost everyone who knows about the issue follows the debate in the press, but almost none of them bother to dig into the actual debate in the books and journals, so you get this huge disconnect between how the state of the debate is portrayed in the popular press and the actual state of the debate in the field.

Long story short, the debate has been settled for quite some time now in the field (15–20 years), and the cultural bias folks mostly admitted they were defeated, acknowledged that the tests were not biased, and moved on to other arguments. But popular opinion has not caught up with the science, so flat-out lies such as that the consensus among intelligence researchers is that IQ tests are biased continue to be peddled as fact, and most readers are not educated enough to figure out that they are being lied to.

The tests are correct. There are indeed differences in average intelligence between the races. The debate’s over on that too for quite some time now. Instead the debate has shifted to whether these differences are due to genes, environment, or both.
Popular opinion is lost back 15 years ago, anyone who says there are documented intelligence differences among the races is shouted down as an evil racist, and massive attempts are made to destroy their lives and careers for stating a simple fact of science. James Watson was a recent casualty. It’s pretty depressing when people are getting fired for telling the truth, but it happens all the time in our PC Culture where the truth is often Outlawed Speech, and patent lies masquerade as fact.

2 Comments

Filed under Culture, Intelligence, Journalism, Psychology, Race Realism, Science