The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The 2017 Warlock Hunt
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Commenter Anonymous writes:

The thing is, “unrepentant feminist bigots” are not capable of running anything. Maybe they don’t realize that. But I suspect they are going to eliminate every leftist man who has any vestige of manliness. I suspect that most of the actually somewhat manly guys who have prospered in leftist environments have had, as one of their chief incentives, the idea that the left is the realm of sexual freedom, and that if a man can claw his way to the top, he can have his way with women. They don’t actually say that, of course, but I suspect they believe that. I think this is to some extent true in many of the traditional bastions of leftism: entertainment, publishing, academia and politics (broadly speaking). Once they eliminate the Bill Clintons and Harvey Weinsteins, it is the war of all against all. Clinton and Weinstein more or less got the job done. They are going to be left with no one in charge.

 
Hide 75 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. You don’t think the manly women can get the job done? How about the trannies like your friend from business school?

    Read More
    • LOL: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Neoconned
    The other day I was reading about how Harvey had put together....cobbled would be a better term.....a "random consortium" of 13 banks who had offered his firm half a billion in credit. Say what you like that ain't fuckin easy to do....

    And what about all these film jobs for average people like make up artists and set builders and security guards and shit like that?

    Slinging mud is easy. Getting it off is a bitch isn't it?

    Anyway they're destroying Hillary and w her their only viable chance to unseat Trump. Bernie's too old now .....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/the-2017-warlock-hunt/#comment-2081692
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. eD says:

    This is a nice try, but Yves Smith over at Naked Capitalism had a much better term for what is going on, apparently picked up by her from her time working in Japan, the “Pink Purge”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Perv Purge.
    , @Neoconned
    I called it the Femquisition because it reminded me of the Salem Witch trials or the Inquisition.....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Feminists have actually been incredibly successful over the last 100+ years. Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time which ends up lulling conservative men into complacency. But the reality is that message is an inversion of reality: men have a lower standard of living by any reasonable definition, and in increasingly large numbers struggle to find any productive healthy role in at all.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you’re forced to say well, black men don’t count, Hispanic men don’t count, poor men don’t count, non college educated men don’t count. Conservative men are so desperate to cling to their narrative about male supremacy that they end up defining men in more and more restrictive and absurd ways.

    The reality is that the male obsolescence and sidelining that Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified in the black underclass has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn’t going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon. And cucking out by voting for a republican party that is completely incapable of advancing their interests isn’t helping.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Their message feeds into a male vanity
     
    There's nothing a wimp likes better than to be accused of being a brute.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you’re forced to say well, black men don’t count, Hispanic men don’t count, poor men don’t count, non college educated men don’t count.
     
    Well, there has been a lot of tearing up about black boys and men of late. Occasionally feminism does get trumped.

    I heard a speaker from a small Catholic university faculty tell us that when the female-to-male ratio at colleges gets too high, many of them quietly implement affirmative action for men. Because if they don't, women will not want to enroll there either, and the school enters, in the speaker's words, a "death spiral".

    As Dr Johnson would say, it concentrates the mind.

    But note, the policy is very, very quiet.
    , @Wally
    That directly ties in to the lie that 'women do not get the same pay as men for the same jobs'.
    Of course, if that was true no one would hire men when they could hire women for less.
    , @Ivy
    Women are scared shitless with the lack of boundaries now confronting them. After millennia of being one way, they are now faced with very unfamiliar territory. Some women will try to exploit their perceived opportunities, and others will freeze or stay in more familiar roles. Collectively, they need to go through their own type of Reformation, somewhat analogous to how Protestants and other groups have when pushing for big changes. They have to take the time to examine in great detail their beliefs and how they expect to interact with the world. That will help push them to figure out that the other half of humanity can help, or resist, depending on their attitude.
    , @DiogenesTheDogPhilosopher
    Guy, you hit the nail square on the head. Daniel Patrick Moynihan did call it right about the black underclass. But may I read your "has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn’t going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon" as a gentlemanly understatement?

    Not reversing itself I take as a given. But I have the sense that whites' degradation is moving along at a galloping trot and (scarier) is accelerating, getting worse faster. Take the relatively recent evidence of what's being called the "white death." Grim statistics.

    More gloomily, while America has survived re-engineering of the black underclass, how will we ride out this storm as our very much larger white population approaches black levels of degradation (faster and faster)? My imagination fails.

    , @Arthur Space
    Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time...

    Steve Sailer:

    I have been looking in vain for 20 years for an article about polygamy that mentioned that for one man to take a second wife means, in the normal course of things, that another man will get no wife at all.

    I have come to believe that this blind spot stems from it being virtually impossible for a man to imagine himself as one of the 149 losers, rather than the one big winner. He might prefer one wife to 150, but his male ego can't allow him to identify with all the men who end up rejected and alone.

     

    H.L. Mencken:

    The truth is that the picture of male carnality that such women conjure up belongs almost wholly to fable, as I have already observed in dealing with the sophistries of Dr. Eliza Burt Gamble, a paralogist on a somewhat higher plane. As they depict him in their fevered treatises on illegitimacy, white-slave trading and ophthalmia neonatorum, the average male adult of the Christian and cultured countries leads a life of gaudy lubricity, rolling magnificently from one liaison to another, and with an almost endless queue of ruined milliners, dancers, charwomen, parlour-maids and waitresses behind him, all dying of poison and despair. The life of man, as these furiously envious ones see it, is the life of a leading actor in a boulevard revue. He is a polygamous, multigamous, myriadigamous; an insatiable and unconscionable debauche, a monster of promiscuity; prodigiously unfaithful to his wife, and even to his friends' wives; fathomlessly libidinous and superbly happy.

    Needless to say, this picture bears no more relation to the facts than a dissertation on major strategy by a military "expert" promoted from dramatic critic. If the chief suffragette scare mongers (I speak without any embarrassing naming of names) were attractive enough to men to get near enough to enough men to know enough about them for their purpose they would paralyze the Dorcas societies with no such cajoling libels. As a matter of sober fact, the average man of our time and race is quite incapable of all these incandescent and intriguing divertisements. He is far more virtuous than they make him out, far less schooled in sin, far less enterprising and ruthless. I do not say, of course, that he is pure in heart, for the chances are that he isn't; what I do say is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, he is pure in act, even in the face of temptation. And why? For several main reasons, not to go into minor ones. One is that he lacks the courage. Another is that he lacks the money. Another is that he is fundamentally moral, and has a conscience. It takes more sinful initiative than he has in him to plunge into any affair save the most casual and sordid; it takes more ingenuity and intrepidity than he has in him to carry it off; it takes more money than he can conceal from his consort to finance it. A man may force his actual wife to share the direst poverty, but even the least vampirish woman of the third part demands to be courted in what, considering his station in life, is the grand manner, and the expenses of that grand manner scare off all save a small minority of specialists in deception. So long, indeed, as a wife knows her husband's income accurately, she has a sure means of holding him to his oaths.

    Even more effective than the fiscal barrier is the barrier of poltroonery. The one character that distinguishes man from the other higher vertebrate, indeed, is his excessive timorousness, his easy yielding to alarms, his incapacity for adventure without a crowd behind him. In his normal incarnation he is no more capable of initiating an extra-legal affair—at all events, above the mawkish harmlessness of a flirting match with a cigar girl in a cafe-than he is of scaling the battlements of hell. He likes to think of himself doing it, just as he likes to think of himself leading a cavalry charge or climbing the Matterhorn. Often, indeed, his vanity leads him to imagine the thing done, and he admits by winks and blushes that he is a bad one. But at the bottom of all that tawdry pretence there is usually nothing more material than an oafish smirk at some disgusted shop-girl, or a scraping of shins under the table. Let any woman who is disquieted by reports of her husband's derelictions figure to herself how long it would have taken him to propose to her if left to his own enterprise, and then let her ask herself if so pusillanimous a creature could be imaged in the role of Don Giovanni.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @eD
    This is a nice try, but Yves Smith over at Naked Capitalism had a much better term for what is going on, apparently picked up by her from her time working in Japan, the "Pink Purge".

    The Perv Purge.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Hagots than bigots

    Pussy Putsch

    Bitchforks
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. …the idea that the left is the realm of sexual freedom, and that if a man can claw his way to the top, he can have his way with women.

    “The position of women in the movement is prone.”– Stokely Carmichael

    How true.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CCZ
    “The position of women in the movement is prone.” Think that will keep him from getting his statue?

    Stokley Carmichael was a former leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and was a very powerful civil rights organizer. He would later help with the Black Power movement, becoming “Honorary Prime Minister” and later would become an icon to the Pan Africanist movement, moving to Ghana and changing his name to Kwame Ture.

    As an icon to generations of Black activism, Carmichael needs a statue of his own.

    [NewsOne.com, for and about Blacks in America]

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. CCZ says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    ...the idea that the left is the realm of sexual freedom, and that if a man can claw his way to the top, he can have his way with women.
     
    "The position of women in the movement is prone."-- Stokely Carmichael

    How true.

    “The position of women in the movement is prone.” Think that will keep him from getting his statue?

    Stokley Carmichael was a former leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and was a very powerful civil rights organizer. He would later help with the Black Power movement, becoming “Honorary Prime Minister” and later would become an icon to the Pan Africanist movement, moving to Ghana and changing his name to Kwame Ture.

    As an icon to generations of Black activism, Carmichael needs a statue of his own.

    [NewsOne.com, for and about Blacks in America]

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    “The position of women in the movement is prone.” Think that will keep him from getting his statue?
     
    Nah. Everybody knew he was joking.

    My point is that this, like many jokes, is also true.
    , @Thomas

    Think that will keep him from getting his statue?
     
    No. Bros before hoes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Sorry for the language, but p***y is pretty much the only reason for any cis het white man to get involved in Democrat politics. I know that’s why I did.

    The thing is, con candidates are almost always more masculine, so liberal men cling to their belief (hope) that conservative men are more ‘uptight’ about sex for some reason. You better be getting some, because you are going to spend the rest of your time talking about how shitty people like yourself are.

    This is a recurrent liberal bed time story, that conservatives don’t enjoy or understand or even engage in sex. Bill C was a liberal wet dream, a virile Bubba w/ left wing politics. It’s why they are so besotted with ‘Ironstache,’ because he’s a steelworker w/ lib politics ( never mind the obvious gayness of the persona, like a Village People extra).

    I spent a summer going around NYC w/ Bill de Blasio for a campaign. We were walking through Marcy projects one day when an old black guy came up to Bill and said, ‘Ay, Bill de Blasio. I like you, you know why? ‘Cause you like black p***y.’ Bill didn’t miss a beat. ‘I like all p***y.’

    It’s my fondest memory of him, actually.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Neoconned
    I became a liberal because I'm a proud union type and social democrat....

    And I vehemently opposed both the wars and the Bush administration.

    Then he left and the various identity politics racketeers took over...m
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe

    It’s why they are so besotted with ‘Ironstache,’ because he’s a steelworker w/ lib politics ( never mind the obvious gayness of the persona, like a Village People extra).
     
    I'm sorry, but who is this "Ironstache" person?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Maybe Islam is the answer to Western man’s women trouble.

    Isn’t that the punch line of the novel Submission?

    Read More
    • Agree: NickG, Kevin C.
    • Replies: @MJMD
    Yes. And yes.
    , @Kevin C.
    I hear a lot of that. Even that living as dhimmis under Muslim overlords would be preferable to feminist rule. OTOH, see Jim Donald on why Islam is "the solution we do not want".

    So, you ask, what is not to like?

    What is not to like is that when Islam conquers a civilization, that civilization dies. When people talk about the great achievements of Islamic civilization, they are actually talking about the achievements of peoples enslaved by Muslims, and what remained of their libraries after the Muslims finished looting them for toilet paper and kindling.
     

    You will notice that these features of Christianity support a world where truth is spoken, promises are kept, and science is actually scientific. Which is a big part of why it was Christians that made the scientific and Industrial Revolutions, not Jews and not Muslims, why it will be Christians that settle space and conquer the universe. (Maybe atheists are better at building rocket ships, but they will not have the children to fly those rocket ships to new worlds and settle them.)
     
    Some people point here to the "Islamic golden age", but, as many folks, including Razib Khan, have pointed out, the scientific and mathematic accomplishments of that time and place were mostly performed by the non-Muslims under Muslim rule (and the rest by folks from groups or families only recently converted to Islam).

    This was also — as at least one book has been written about — before Al-Ghazali's occasionalist school of thought triumphed over more Neoplatonic rival philosophies. Which contributes to the modern "IBM syndrome": inshallah (if God is willing), bokra (tomorrow), and malesh (never mind), something I've seen referenced, along with the rampant clannishness/tribalism, as to why Arab armies suck so badly.

    And as to clannishness, that leads to the issue of cousin marriage, which is high throughout the Muslim world. Even the Hui, the more "well-behaved" Chinese Muslims, who are pretty much ethnically Han, have much higher cousin-marriage rates than their fellow Chinese.

    In short, wherever Islam has spread, and large-scale conversion to Islam occurred, people tend to end up adopting certain dysfunctional Arab norms and practices, not really conducive to science, invention, or a prosperous, functional society. I know some have suggested that a major factor in this is the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. That many Hajji who return home from Mecca end up bringing bits of Meccan norms and practices back with them.

    There are basically two responses put forth to this problem. One is basically "fork Islam" — "fork" in the software project sense (not as a replacement for a similar sounding expletive). That is, right-wing whites convert en masse to Islam — but an Islam that, while quite orthodox about women, sex, marriage, the gays, etc., is also, say, not very strict about enforcing that alcohol prohibition (as was the case for the Ottomans a lot of the time), and whose thought leaders tend to read more Averroes than Al-Ghazali, and who retain Western norms about marrying cousins. In short, creating what would effectively be a new branch of Islam.

    I question how well this would work. First, because, as I pointed out above, nobody's managed to pull it off before. Second, there's the issue that existing Muslims will see you as "fake". The worst violence in the Middle East is between the different Muslim branches. Because while being an infidel may be bad, being a heretic or apostate is worse. Expect terrorism to greatly increase in such a scenario.

    Second is that it probably wouldn't "disarm" the Left like some think it will. In fact, that applies to conversion to Islam in general. Sure, a Mohammad Bilal Sulemani whose parents were from Pakistan can treat his wife (or wives), his daughters, and women in general however he likes, and nobody's likely to call the cops (c.f Rotherham). But if some middle American white guy, even if he's now calling himself Yousuf Mohammed and praying facing Mecca five times a day, 'puts a toe out of line', or keeps his daughter from dressing like a skank, you can bet the "domestic violence" and "child abuse" reports will come rolling in from his neighbors, and any playing of the "Islamophobia" card is going to be laughed out of the room. Because for the left, in practice, "Muslim" and "Islamophobia" is more about ethnicity than religion. And because, to the Progressive faith as well, an infidel is not nearly as bad as an apostate. Some brown Pakistani bricklayer hates gays? Well, the poor thing just doesn't know any better, as he hasn't been exposed to proper Modern thinking yet (and once he — or more accurately, his descendants — have been, they'll eventually be won over and become proper "moderate" liberals just the same as the Christian "mainstream" has been similarly assimilated into Modernity, the assumption seems to go). But a white guy? Who has been exposed to what all right-thinking people believe, but who actively rejects it? He should know better.

    The second option is not to convert to Islam, but to basically borrow and adopt the parts we like, the norms about women, sex, marriage, etc., while otherwise retaining Christian/Western philosophies, practices in other domains. This is pretty much what the whole "White Shariah" meme seems to be about, and it's what Jim Donald recommends in the link I gave above.

    However, I find this even less plausible. While it generally avoids the threat of Arabization that comes with conversion to or rule by Islam, the drawbacks more offset. First, you lose whatever limited "protection from the Left via their Islamophilia/ability to play the 'Islamophobia' card" you might have from converting.

    Secondly, though, is that this sort of mass syncretism seems immensely more challenging, and more rare historically (I can't think of any examples offhand), than mass conversion to an existing faith (even if one ends up "forking" that faith in the process).

    In short, it looks like Islam is a very uncertain solution, possibly a cure as bad as the disease, and probably — whether it comes via mass conversion, takeover by foreign Muslims, or some mix thereof — not likely to have outcomes be all that good for the average white guy anyway (he and his likely end up ethnically replaced no matter what).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    every leftist man who has any vestige of manliness.

    Key phrase is “any vestige”. The left is not a bastion of machoism, testosterone levels being rather low. That’s why those guys are there to begin with: very little competition. It’s all snark and smarminess , curled lips and micro-aggressions, that’s the upper limit lest the macho-men faint. Good place for the beta-orbiters to hang out and pretend they’re defenders of women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. PapayaSF says:

    That comment connects in some ways with this interesting post on the political mechanisms empowering today’s identity-politics left: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Luke Lea

    That comment connects in some ways with this interesting post on the political mechanisms empowering today’s identity-politics left: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/
     
    A fascinating if cynical worldview. Personally I'm more optimistic: https://goo.gl/q4kodC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @Guy de Champlagne
    Feminists have actually been incredibly successful over the last 100+ years. Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time which ends up lulling conservative men into complacency. But the reality is that message is an inversion of reality: men have a lower standard of living by any reasonable definition, and in increasingly large numbers struggle to find any productive healthy role in at all.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you're forced to say well, black men don't count, Hispanic men don't count, poor men don't count, non college educated men don't count. Conservative men are so desperate to cling to their narrative about male supremacy that they end up defining men in more and more restrictive and absurd ways.

    The reality is that the male obsolescence and sidelining that Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified in the black underclass has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn't going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon. And cucking out by voting for a republican party that is completely incapable of advancing their interests isn't helping.

    Their message feeds into a male vanity

    There’s nothing a wimp likes better than to be accused of being a brute.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you’re forced to say well, black men don’t count, Hispanic men don’t count, poor men don’t count, non college educated men don’t count.

    Well, there has been a lot of tearing up about black boys and men of late. Occasionally feminism does get trumped.

    I heard a speaker from a small Catholic university faculty tell us that when the female-to-male ratio at colleges gets too high, many of them quietly implement affirmative action for men. Because if they don’t, women will not want to enroll there either, and the school enters, in the speaker’s words, a “death spiral”.

    As Dr Johnson would say, it concentrates the mind.

    But note, the policy is very, very quiet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Epochehusserl
    Umm, the policy of quietly implementing affirmative action for men is not so quiet because Jon Birger wrote about it in his book DATE ONOMICS
    http://jonbirger.com/date-onomics/

    He thought it was unfair but he didnt realize that the institutions primarily institute this policy because they would otherwise face the prospect of downsizing because of male disinterest. He also doesn't realize that desirable positions are still rationed according to race/sex/identity affiliation or the perception is there so it doesnt matter what universities do anyways.

    , @Big Bill
    A female staffer at HLS interviewed at Smith College for a marketing/admissions position ca. 1989.

    After the obligatory questions about her resume, they went to lunch and talked in a more social environment.

    The truth trickled out: they were looking for someone who could help change Smith's image from being relentlessly butch to something more heterosexual.

    The HLS staffer lost interest. Some things just can't be done.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @CCZ
    “The position of women in the movement is prone.” Think that will keep him from getting his statue?

    Stokley Carmichael was a former leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and was a very powerful civil rights organizer. He would later help with the Black Power movement, becoming “Honorary Prime Minister” and later would become an icon to the Pan Africanist movement, moving to Ghana and changing his name to Kwame Ture.

    As an icon to generations of Black activism, Carmichael needs a statue of his own.

    [NewsOne.com, for and about Blacks in America]

     

    “The position of women in the movement is prone.” Think that will keep him from getting his statue?

    Nah. Everybody knew he was joking.

    My point is that this, like many jokes, is also true.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. guest says:

    There’s a big difference between Clinton and Weinstein. If feminists ever conquer the world, they’ll let the Clintons stick around, because of feelz.

    They won’t let Weinsteins do anything, because eww .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    But that is to believe that women/feminists are of one mind.

    Aside from Hillary the wife, there are no women "stars" in Clinton's world. In Harvey's world, he made women "stars." The aspiring starlets voted their preference.

    The "eww" factor is strictly in hindsight. And in the mind of Michelle Goldberg at the NYT, the feelz for Clinton is on the way out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Reg Cæsar

    Their message feeds into a male vanity
     
    There's nothing a wimp likes better than to be accused of being a brute.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you’re forced to say well, black men don’t count, Hispanic men don’t count, poor men don’t count, non college educated men don’t count.
     
    Well, there has been a lot of tearing up about black boys and men of late. Occasionally feminism does get trumped.

    I heard a speaker from a small Catholic university faculty tell us that when the female-to-male ratio at colleges gets too high, many of them quietly implement affirmative action for men. Because if they don't, women will not want to enroll there either, and the school enters, in the speaker's words, a "death spiral".

    As Dr Johnson would say, it concentrates the mind.

    But note, the policy is very, very quiet.

    Umm, the policy of quietly implementing affirmative action for men is not so quiet because Jon Birger wrote about it in his book DATE ONOMICS

    http://jonbirger.com/date-onomics/

    He thought it was unfair but he didnt realize that the institutions primarily institute this policy because they would otherwise face the prospect of downsizing because of male disinterest. He also doesn’t realize that desirable positions are still rationed according to race/sex/identity affiliation or the perception is there so it doesnt matter what universities do anyways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Burger says male disinterest, Deavel says female disinterest (due to male absence.) Who's right?

    I cringe at titles like "Date•onomics", so I wouldn't've come within an aisle or two of it. But I'll look for it in the library.

    I remember reading lots of Workman's books in the '70s and '80s, but never could keep them straight from Ten Speed. Chronicle Books appears to be the contemporary counterpart.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Big Bill says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Their message feeds into a male vanity
     
    There's nothing a wimp likes better than to be accused of being a brute.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you’re forced to say well, black men don’t count, Hispanic men don’t count, poor men don’t count, non college educated men don’t count.
     
    Well, there has been a lot of tearing up about black boys and men of late. Occasionally feminism does get trumped.

    I heard a speaker from a small Catholic university faculty tell us that when the female-to-male ratio at colleges gets too high, many of them quietly implement affirmative action for men. Because if they don't, women will not want to enroll there either, and the school enters, in the speaker's words, a "death spiral".

    As Dr Johnson would say, it concentrates the mind.

    But note, the policy is very, very quiet.

    A female staffer at HLS interviewed at Smith College for a marketing/admissions position ca. 1989.

    After the obligatory questions about her resume, they went to lunch and talked in a more social environment.

    The truth trickled out: they were looking for someone who could help change Smith’s image from being relentlessly butch to something more heterosexual.

    The HLS staffer lost interest. Some things just can’t be done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    Or undone.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Wally says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    Feminists have actually been incredibly successful over the last 100+ years. Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time which ends up lulling conservative men into complacency. But the reality is that message is an inversion of reality: men have a lower standard of living by any reasonable definition, and in increasingly large numbers struggle to find any productive healthy role in at all.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you're forced to say well, black men don't count, Hispanic men don't count, poor men don't count, non college educated men don't count. Conservative men are so desperate to cling to their narrative about male supremacy that they end up defining men in more and more restrictive and absurd ways.

    The reality is that the male obsolescence and sidelining that Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified in the black underclass has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn't going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon. And cucking out by voting for a republican party that is completely incapable of advancing their interests isn't helping.

    That directly ties in to the lie that ‘women do not get the same pay as men for the same jobs’.
    Of course, if that was true no one would hire men when they could hire women for less.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Ivy says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    Feminists have actually been incredibly successful over the last 100+ years. Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time which ends up lulling conservative men into complacency. But the reality is that message is an inversion of reality: men have a lower standard of living by any reasonable definition, and in increasingly large numbers struggle to find any productive healthy role in at all.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you're forced to say well, black men don't count, Hispanic men don't count, poor men don't count, non college educated men don't count. Conservative men are so desperate to cling to their narrative about male supremacy that they end up defining men in more and more restrictive and absurd ways.

    The reality is that the male obsolescence and sidelining that Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified in the black underclass has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn't going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon. And cucking out by voting for a republican party that is completely incapable of advancing their interests isn't helping.

    Women are scared shitless with the lack of boundaries now confronting them. After millennia of being one way, they are now faced with very unfamiliar territory. Some women will try to exploit their perceived opportunities, and others will freeze or stay in more familiar roles. Collectively, they need to go through their own type of Reformation, somewhat analogous to how Protestants and other groups have when pushing for big changes. They have to take the time to examine in great detail their beliefs and how they expect to interact with the world. That will help push them to figure out that the other half of humanity can help, or resist, depending on their attitude.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Whiskey says: • Website

    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an “person of color” because the police were “unsafe” or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men … is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they’ve set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can’t handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don’t like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won’t be any left — it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    Read More
    • Replies: @It's All Ball Bearings
    This is Tiny Duck's wet dream. Hmmm...
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    There will always be a place for white men - Jew and Goy - because practically no NAMs and a fleetingly small number of women are capable of organizing and seeing through a complicated project with many conflicting interests and personalities.

    The question is whether these white men - especially Jews - will stand for being the unrecognized grunts who get all the work done and none of the glory. In Hollywood, I don't see that being an issue since producers have always been the behind of the scene guys. They make a ton of money and have the real power, even if very few people outside of Hollywood know their name.

    No, where this question will be much more interesting is in Democratic politics. Will the next generation of young Chuck Schumers be happy with their role as a very much behind-the-scenes consiliares to dim, impetuous black and brown politicians? Will these young Chuck Schumers enjoy their day-to-day environment surrounded by said black and brown politicians' gaggle of black and brown "advisors" who add nothing but make the politician feel at home? Will these young Chuck Schumers stick around knowing that they will never be the one in the spotlight?

    Also, what about the big donors, who are mostly Jewish. How happy will they be with this new crop of Dem politicians? Sure, the big donors will be able to mostly control them. I mean, look at what happened to Cynthia McKinney. But the donors will know that these politicians secretly dispise them and could care less about Israel. Even Obama, who definitely knew how to play the game, had a hard time concealing his dislike of Israel. Imagine what less-refined black and brown politicians will be like.

    For these donors, there will be a difference between giving your money to white Jewish and goy politicians who share their genetics and political views and giving money purely to control. The latter is simply more unstable.
    , @Seth Largo
    It is suspicious that the entertainment industry rather than the sports industry was the coordination point for this "sea change" moment in American culture. (Of course, it might "peeter out" in the coming weeks, pun intended.)

    Every year there emerge dozens and dozens of sports-related sexual harassment and outright rape accusations, Kobe Bryant being the most famous in recent memory. The racial angle, however, obviously kept these accusations from launching a cultural conversation.
    , @Old Left

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they’ve set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.
     
    Amen.

    It's weak white men that have turned women into shrews.

    Women only respect men capable of dominating them. Female rebellion and demands for equality (a meaningless concept since only the same can be equal) are prods to get men to act like men and put women in their place. But weak men cave in when women complain and just make themselves weaker, driving women to more hysterical extremes.

    So now comes the reckoning. And the nauseating spectacle of neutered males profusely apologizing for any hint of offense they may have ever given to a woman.
    , @MBlanc46
    For most of our past, humans were polygynous. It’s only been for the last few thousand years that most women have had to mate with low status men. Clearly they haven’t liked it, and have now succeeded in overthrowing permanent monogamy. Low status men are out of luck. And if women perceive status and high testosterone as associated, West African men may cash in.
    , @unpc downunder
    No. It was orchestrated by the Daily Mail, which I believe is still run by white men.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    The Perv Purge.

    Hagots than bigots

    Pussy Putsch

    Bitchforks

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Thomas says:
    @CCZ
    “The position of women in the movement is prone.” Think that will keep him from getting his statue?

    Stokley Carmichael was a former leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and was a very powerful civil rights organizer. He would later help with the Black Power movement, becoming “Honorary Prime Minister” and later would become an icon to the Pan Africanist movement, moving to Ghana and changing his name to Kwame Ture.

    As an icon to generations of Black activism, Carmichael needs a statue of his own.

    [NewsOne.com, for and about Blacks in America]

     

    Think that will keep him from getting his statue?

    No. Bros before hoes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Mr. Blank says:

    I’ve been wondering about this for some time, too. What effect is the Social Justice Jihad having on recruitment of future leaders?

    I mean, imagine you’re a young, talented and ambitious heterosexual white guy who is still trying to form his political ideas. You look at the modern Left, and it must seem like there’s just no place for someone like you. Won’t that probably have a profound effect on the development of your political ideas, and the subsequent course of your career? What’s the likelihood that some budding Bill Clinton-wannabe who’s about 12 right now is going to be attracted to left-wing politics?

    I wonder if this isn’t going to create a feedback effect that will lead to even greater polarization along the “fringe vs. core” axis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Luke Lea

    I’ve been wondering about this for some time, too. What effect is the Social Justice Jihad having on recruitment of future leaders?
     
    Careers open to talent: https://goo.gl/q4kodC (Chapter 4)
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe

    wonder if this isn’t going to create a feedback effect that will lead to even greater polarization along the “fringe vs. core” axis.
     
    I don't think there's really much doubt this will occur. I guess some on the left imaine this will benefit them. It's not clear how they're arrived at that conclusion, however.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Neoconned says:
    @anony-mouse
    You don't think the manly women can get the job done? How about the trannies like your friend from business school?

    The other day I was reading about how Harvey had put together….cobbled would be a better term…..a “random consortium” of 13 banks who had offered his firm half a billion in credit. Say what you like that ain’t fuckin easy to do….

    And what about all these film jobs for average people like make up artists and set builders and security guards and shit like that?

    Slinging mud is easy. Getting it off is a bitch isn’t it?

    Anyway they’re destroying Hillary and w her their only viable chance to unseat Trump. Bernie’s too old now …..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Neoconned says:
    @eD
    This is a nice try, but Yves Smith over at Naked Capitalism had a much better term for what is going on, apparently picked up by her from her time working in Japan, the "Pink Purge".

    I called it the Femquisition because it reminded me of the Salem Witch trials or the Inquisition…..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Neoconned says:
    @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Sorry for the language, but p***y is pretty much the only reason for any cis het white man to get involved in Democrat politics. I know that's why I did.

    The thing is, con candidates are almost always more masculine, so liberal men cling to their belief (hope) that conservative men are more 'uptight' about sex for some reason. You better be getting some, because you are going to spend the rest of your time talking about how shitty people like yourself are.

    This is a recurrent liberal bed time story, that conservatives don't enjoy or understand or even engage in sex. Bill C was a liberal wet dream, a virile Bubba w/ left wing politics. It's why they are so besotted with 'Ironstache,' because he's a steelworker w/ lib politics ( never mind the obvious gayness of the persona, like a Village People extra).

    I spent a summer going around NYC w/ Bill de Blasio for a campaign. We were walking through Marcy projects one day when an old black guy came up to Bill and said, 'Ay, Bill de Blasio. I like you, you know why? 'Cause you like black p***y.' Bill didn't miss a beat. 'I like all p***y.'

    It's my fondest memory of him, actually.

    I became a liberal because I’m a proud union type and social democrat….

    And I vehemently opposed both the wars and the Bush administration.

    Then he left and the various identity politics racketeers took over…m

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Sabril says:

    I would guess that there are plenty of Leftist elite men who are pretty safe due to a combination of (1) being decent looking; (2) avoiding women who are obviously crazy; and (3) limiting themselves to women who are unmistakably interested.

    Safe for now anyway.

    Anyway, I think Mr. Blank raises an interesting point. How are things now on college campuses for white men involved in Left Wing causes?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Blank
    It just seems to me that if you drive out every single man who might have a single hint of sexual impropriety in his past, you'll end up with two types of candidates:

    1. Angry women, or

    2. Weirdly ambiguous Alien Pod People like Barack Obama, though odds are none of them will have anything like Obama's charisma.

    That's going to make it incredibly hard to appeal to average folks, which portends a future with very stark political polarization. Come to think of it, a movement headed by angry women and sexless men would probably alienate a significant number of gay men, too. Milo Yiannopoulos might be a harbinger in that regard. (The left will always have room for more conventionally masculine men if they have a suitably exotic background — angry black men from the slums, Muslims with five wives, etc. But those options would be even harder to sell to mainstream voters, so I doubt they'd ever be put forth as the face of the party.)

    If "no sexual shenanigans whatsoever" are the new standard for the Left, but they still want candidates who can appeal to normals, I guess they could make a play for the more cucked evangelicals and Mormons. I'm pretty sure no woman will ever accuse Mitt Romney of anything even slightly untoward in the sexual department. I'm not sure the Left could bend enough on culture-war issues to accept them, though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. MJMD says:
    @David Davenport
    Maybe Islam is the answer to Western man's women trouble.

    Isn't that the punch line of the novel Submission?

    Yes. And yes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Whiskey
    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an "person of color" because the police were "unsafe" or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men ... is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they've set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can't handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don't like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won't be any left -- it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    This is Tiny Duck’s wet dream. Hmmm…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Mr. Blank says:
    @Sabril
    I would guess that there are plenty of Leftist elite men who are pretty safe due to a combination of (1) being decent looking; (2) avoiding women who are obviously crazy; and (3) limiting themselves to women who are unmistakably interested.

    Safe for now anyway.

    Anyway, I think Mr. Blank raises an interesting point. How are things now on college campuses for white men involved in Left Wing causes?

    It just seems to me that if you drive out every single man who might have a single hint of sexual impropriety in his past, you’ll end up with two types of candidates:

    1. Angry women, or

    2. Weirdly ambiguous Alien Pod People like Barack Obama, though odds are none of them will have anything like Obama’s charisma.

    That’s going to make it incredibly hard to appeal to average folks, which portends a future with very stark political polarization. Come to think of it, a movement headed by angry women and sexless men would probably alienate a significant number of gay men, too. Milo Yiannopoulos might be a harbinger in that regard. (The left will always have room for more conventionally masculine men if they have a suitably exotic background — angry black men from the slums, Muslims with five wives, etc. But those options would be even harder to sell to mainstream voters, so I doubt they’d ever be put forth as the face of the party.)

    If “no sexual shenanigans whatsoever” are the new standard for the Left, but they still want candidates who can appeal to normals, I guess they could make a play for the more cucked evangelicals and Mormons. I’m pretty sure no woman will ever accuse Mitt Romney of anything even slightly untoward in the sexual department. I’m not sure the Left could bend enough on culture-war issues to accept them, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon7
    I was thinking along these lines also. Women don't seem to understand it, but the actual Perfect Gentleman is most often some poor guy with a severe personality disorder, probably as a result of sexual abuse in childhood. Emotionally healthy men (if there are any of those these days) simply don't measure up.

    I was watching The Orville, a sci-fi show, the other day, and once again I was presented with the story that the most admirable "male" character is an artificially intelligent machine with no sexual characteristics of any kind.

    Cultural madness.
    , @stillCARealist
    Is it really impossible for a man to be a good leader and have no filthy behavior in his CV? I don't buy it. Yes, a leader will likely have higher T, but that doesn't mean he uses it to assault women. Mike Pence seems pretty masculine to me, and yet has no accusations that I'm aware of. That's just one example, but in my personal life I see all sorts of men in positions of leadership who have impeccable reputations.

    I suppose you meant that the Democrats can't find male leadership without shenanigans, which is a unique question of chicken and egg. which comes first, liberal politics or louche behavior?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. helena says:

    This gender stuff is getting far too confusing. Usually I can scan read and understand what a post is about but I really couldn’t this time.

    All this culturally Marxist identity/gender drivel is starting in America and coming to UK so you are advanced in that sense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. @Guy de Champlagne
    Feminists have actually been incredibly successful over the last 100+ years. Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time which ends up lulling conservative men into complacency. But the reality is that message is an inversion of reality: men have a lower standard of living by any reasonable definition, and in increasingly large numbers struggle to find any productive healthy role in at all.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you're forced to say well, black men don't count, Hispanic men don't count, poor men don't count, non college educated men don't count. Conservative men are so desperate to cling to their narrative about male supremacy that they end up defining men in more and more restrictive and absurd ways.

    The reality is that the male obsolescence and sidelining that Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified in the black underclass has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn't going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon. And cucking out by voting for a republican party that is completely incapable of advancing their interests isn't helping.

    Guy, you hit the nail square on the head. Daniel Patrick Moynihan did call it right about the black underclass. But may I read your “has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn’t going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon” as a gentlemanly understatement?

    Not reversing itself I take as a given. But I have the sense that whites’ degradation is moving along at a galloping trot and (scarier) is accelerating, getting worse faster. Take the relatively recent evidence of what’s being called the “white death.” Grim statistics.

    More gloomily, while America has survived re-engineering of the black underclass, how will we ride out this storm as our very much larger white population approaches black levels of degradation (faster and faster)? My imagination fails.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    If you don’t like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won’t be any left — it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    If the Indians could make a movie anyone besides Indians could stand to watch they would have put the Jews out of business two decades ago. Many more films have been made by Bollywood than Hollywood since 1965 or thereabouts. (Before TV Hollywood cranked out huge sheer numbers, often Westerns, to feed their vertically integrated theater systems.) They tend to suck.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    Whiskey's point was that women will accept lower quality movies in their quest to hate hate hate the beta male.
    , @Anon
    Outside the Americosphere they sell pretty well.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Y5XJfj15eM
    , @Anonymous
    I wonder what happened to Japanese cinema? The quality of their work used to be high, but its pretty much rock-bottom now.
    , @stillCARealist
    I tried to watch a Bollywood movie once. I tried, I really did. It was incomprehensibly absurd. what goes on in the heads of Indians that they find that stuff entertaining? Please, any Indians reading here help me out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. bomag says:
    @Anonymous

    If you don’t like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won’t be any left — it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.
     
    If the Indians could make a movie anyone besides Indians could stand to watch they would have put the Jews out of business two decades ago. Many more films have been made by Bollywood than Hollywood since 1965 or thereabouts. (Before TV Hollywood cranked out huge sheer numbers, often Westerns, to feed their vertically integrated theater systems.) They tend to suck.

    Whiskey’s point was that women will accept lower quality movies in their quest to hate hate hate the beta male.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Thermidor had a piece on this not too long ago.

    http://thermidormag.com/revolution-and-pussy-the-sam-kriss-story/amp/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous

    If you don’t like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won’t be any left — it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.
     
    If the Indians could make a movie anyone besides Indians could stand to watch they would have put the Jews out of business two decades ago. Many more films have been made by Bollywood than Hollywood since 1965 or thereabouts. (Before TV Hollywood cranked out huge sheer numbers, often Westerns, to feed their vertically integrated theater systems.) They tend to suck.

    Outside the Americosphere they sell pretty well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. eah says:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. @Guy de Champlagne
    Feminists have actually been incredibly successful over the last 100+ years. Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time which ends up lulling conservative men into complacency. But the reality is that message is an inversion of reality: men have a lower standard of living by any reasonable definition, and in increasingly large numbers struggle to find any productive healthy role in at all.

    Seriously in trying to argue that men have it good in society you're forced to say well, black men don't count, Hispanic men don't count, poor men don't count, non college educated men don't count. Conservative men are so desperate to cling to their narrative about male supremacy that they end up defining men in more and more restrictive and absurd ways.

    The reality is that the male obsolescence and sidelining that Daniel Patrick Moynihan identified in the black underclass has spread to wider and wider swaths of society in a trend that isn't going to stop let alone reverse itself any time soon. And cucking out by voting for a republican party that is completely incapable of advancing their interests isn't helping.

    Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time…

    Steve Sailer:

    I have been looking in vain for 20 years for an article about polygamy that mentioned that for one man to take a second wife means, in the normal course of things, that another man will get no wife at all.

    I have come to believe that this blind spot stems from it being virtually impossible for a man to imagine himself as one of the 149 losers, rather than the one big winner. He might prefer one wife to 150, but his male ego can’t allow him to identify with all the men who end up rejected and alone.

    H.L. Mencken:

    The truth is that the picture of male carnality that such women conjure up belongs almost wholly to fable, as I have already observed in dealing with the sophistries of Dr. Eliza Burt Gamble, a paralogist on a somewhat higher plane. As they depict him in their fevered treatises on illegitimacy, white-slave trading and ophthalmia neonatorum, the average male adult of the Christian and cultured countries leads a life of gaudy lubricity, rolling magnificently from one liaison to another, and with an almost endless queue of ruined milliners, dancers, charwomen, parlour-maids and waitresses behind him, all dying of poison and despair. The life of man, as these furiously envious ones see it, is the life of a leading actor in a boulevard revue. He is a polygamous, multigamous, myriadigamous; an insatiable and unconscionable debauche, a monster of promiscuity; prodigiously unfaithful to his wife, and even to his friends’ wives; fathomlessly libidinous and superbly happy.

    Needless to say, this picture bears no more relation to the facts than a dissertation on major strategy by a military “expert” promoted from dramatic critic. If the chief suffragette scare mongers (I speak without any embarrassing naming of names) were attractive enough to men to get near enough to enough men to know enough about them for their purpose they would paralyze the Dorcas societies with no such cajoling libels. As a matter of sober fact, the average man of our time and race is quite incapable of all these incandescent and intriguing divertisements. He is far more virtuous than they make him out, far less schooled in sin, far less enterprising and ruthless. I do not say, of course, that he is pure in heart, for the chances are that he isn’t; what I do say is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, he is pure in act, even in the face of temptation. And why? For several main reasons, not to go into minor ones. One is that he lacks the courage. Another is that he lacks the money. Another is that he is fundamentally moral, and has a conscience. It takes more sinful initiative than he has in him to plunge into any affair save the most casual and sordid; it takes more ingenuity and intrepidity than he has in him to carry it off; it takes more money than he can conceal from his consort to finance it. A man may force his actual wife to share the direst poverty, but even the least vampirish woman of the third part demands to be courted in what, considering his station in life, is the grand manner, and the expenses of that grand manner scare off all save a small minority of specialists in deception. So long, indeed, as a wife knows her husband’s income accurately, she has a sure means of holding him to his oaths.

    Even more effective than the fiscal barrier is the barrier of poltroonery. The one character that distinguishes man from the other higher vertebrate, indeed, is his excessive timorousness, his easy yielding to alarms, his incapacity for adventure without a crowd behind him. In his normal incarnation he is no more capable of initiating an extra-legal affair—at all events, above the mawkish harmlessness of a flirting match with a cigar girl in a cafe-than he is of scaling the battlements of hell. He likes to think of himself doing it, just as he likes to think of himself leading a cavalry charge or climbing the Matterhorn. Often, indeed, his vanity leads him to imagine the thing done, and he admits by winks and blushes that he is a bad one. But at the bottom of all that tawdry pretence there is usually nothing more material than an oafish smirk at some disgusted shop-girl, or a scraping of shins under the table. Let any woman who is disquieted by reports of her husband’s derelictions figure to herself how long it would have taken him to propose to her if left to his own enterprise, and then let her ask herself if so pusillanimous a creature could be imaged in the role of Don Giovanni.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paul Jolliffe
    That's an amazing passage from Mencken!
    (I see myself in his words . . .)

    Thanks for sharing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Whiskey
    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an "person of color" because the police were "unsafe" or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men ... is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they've set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can't handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don't like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won't be any left -- it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    There will always be a place for white men – Jew and Goy – because practically no NAMs and a fleetingly small number of women are capable of organizing and seeing through a complicated project with many conflicting interests and personalities.

    The question is whether these white men – especially Jews – will stand for being the unrecognized grunts who get all the work done and none of the glory. In Hollywood, I don’t see that being an issue since producers have always been the behind of the scene guys. They make a ton of money and have the real power, even if very few people outside of Hollywood know their name.

    No, where this question will be much more interesting is in Democratic politics. Will the next generation of young Chuck Schumers be happy with their role as a very much behind-the-scenes consiliares to dim, impetuous black and brown politicians? Will these young Chuck Schumers enjoy their day-to-day environment surrounded by said black and brown politicians’ gaggle of black and brown “advisors” who add nothing but make the politician feel at home? Will these young Chuck Schumers stick around knowing that they will never be the one in the spotlight?

    Also, what about the big donors, who are mostly Jewish. How happy will they be with this new crop of Dem politicians? Sure, the big donors will be able to mostly control them. I mean, look at what happened to Cynthia McKinney. But the donors will know that these politicians secretly dispise them and could care less about Israel. Even Obama, who definitely knew how to play the game, had a hard time concealing his dislike of Israel. Imagine what less-refined black and brown politicians will be like.

    For these donors, there will be a difference between giving your money to white Jewish and goy politicians who share their genetics and political views and giving money purely to control. The latter is simply more unstable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Whiskey
    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an "person of color" because the police were "unsafe" or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men ... is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they've set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can't handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don't like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won't be any left -- it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    It is suspicious that the entertainment industry rather than the sports industry was the coordination point for this “sea change” moment in American culture. (Of course, it might “peeter out” in the coming weeks, pun intended.)

    Every year there emerge dozens and dozens of sports-related sexual harassment and outright rape accusations, Kobe Bryant being the most famous in recent memory. The racial angle, however, obviously kept these accusations from launching a cultural conversation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous

    If you don’t like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won’t be any left — it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.
     
    If the Indians could make a movie anyone besides Indians could stand to watch they would have put the Jews out of business two decades ago. Many more films have been made by Bollywood than Hollywood since 1965 or thereabouts. (Before TV Hollywood cranked out huge sheer numbers, often Westerns, to feed their vertically integrated theater systems.) They tend to suck.

    I wonder what happened to Japanese cinema? The quality of their work used to be high, but its pretty much rock-bottom now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Spike Gomes
    It got killed by Hollywood. One of the most depressing aspects for me when I was living in Japan was finding out that every theater in town was playing dubbed Hollywood films. The only exception was the latest Hayao Miyazaki realease. I'd have to go all the way to Nagoya proper to watch an actual non-animated Japanese film, and the chances were it'd be some pretentious art-house flick, or worse, some sort of stupid Tarantino gonzo grindhouse homage.

    Japan didn't really try to protect it's native cinema like France and other nations did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. AndrewR says:

    I imagine there are many competent, confident, sexually non-degenerate men out there, even on the left. Just because a dude is alpha doesn’t mean he tries to bang every other female he meets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
    You’re right. Most decent-looking, competent men are not degenerates. It’s neurotic people, people with poor impulse control and people who were dealt a bad hand in the appearance department who end up degenerate. Idolizing womanizers is immature. Wouldn’t have all the promiscuous, divorce-happy women that the commenters in these parts often complain about were it not for a 50 year long celebrated cultural tradition of womanizing. Women just copied men at some point. A lot of second wave feminism probably stemmed from anger towards philandering, neglectful husbands.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Anon7 says:
    @Mr. Blank
    It just seems to me that if you drive out every single man who might have a single hint of sexual impropriety in his past, you'll end up with two types of candidates:

    1. Angry women, or

    2. Weirdly ambiguous Alien Pod People like Barack Obama, though odds are none of them will have anything like Obama's charisma.

    That's going to make it incredibly hard to appeal to average folks, which portends a future with very stark political polarization. Come to think of it, a movement headed by angry women and sexless men would probably alienate a significant number of gay men, too. Milo Yiannopoulos might be a harbinger in that regard. (The left will always have room for more conventionally masculine men if they have a suitably exotic background — angry black men from the slums, Muslims with five wives, etc. But those options would be even harder to sell to mainstream voters, so I doubt they'd ever be put forth as the face of the party.)

    If "no sexual shenanigans whatsoever" are the new standard for the Left, but they still want candidates who can appeal to normals, I guess they could make a play for the more cucked evangelicals and Mormons. I'm pretty sure no woman will ever accuse Mitt Romney of anything even slightly untoward in the sexual department. I'm not sure the Left could bend enough on culture-war issues to accept them, though.

    I was thinking along these lines also. Women don’t seem to understand it, but the actual Perfect Gentleman is most often some poor guy with a severe personality disorder, probably as a result of sexual abuse in childhood. Emotionally healthy men (if there are any of those these days) simply don’t measure up.

    I was watching The Orville, a sci-fi show, the other day, and once again I was presented with the story that the most admirable “male” character is an artificially intelligent machine with no sexual characteristics of any kind.

    Cultural madness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    A "perfect gentleman" is being polite while signalling that he doesn't want to sleep with you. That's not an unhealthy state but it is for obvious reasons never a state in which a girl's partner will be, so if she expects it she will always be disappointed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Anonymous

    If you don’t like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won’t be any left — it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.
     
    If the Indians could make a movie anyone besides Indians could stand to watch they would have put the Jews out of business two decades ago. Many more films have been made by Bollywood than Hollywood since 1965 or thereabouts. (Before TV Hollywood cranked out huge sheer numbers, often Westerns, to feed their vertically integrated theater systems.) They tend to suck.

    I tried to watch a Bollywood movie once. I tried, I really did. It was incomprehensibly absurd. what goes on in the heads of Indians that they find that stuff entertaining? Please, any Indians reading here help me out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Bride and Prejudice was pretty good.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_and_Prejudice
    , @Anon
    I have repeatedly tried to watch Hollywood movies over the past twenty years. I thought anyone who found them entertaining should be either caged or shot.

    Indians like bright colors, pretty women, and melodrama. It really is that simple.
    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    Try 3 Idiots or Dangal, both starring the talented actor Aamir Khan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Luke Lea says:
    @PapayaSF
    That comment connects in some ways with this interesting post on the political mechanisms empowering today's identity-politics left: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/

    That comment connects in some ways with this interesting post on the political mechanisms empowering today’s identity-politics left: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/

    A fascinating if cynical worldview. Personally I’m more optimistic: https://goo.gl/q4kodC

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    And on what, if anything, do you base that optimism?

    (I don't own a Kindle, or any ebook reader (or even a smartphone), so I can't exactly purchase the book, unless there's a paper-and-ink version, if in fact you provide evidence there.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Mr. Blank
    It just seems to me that if you drive out every single man who might have a single hint of sexual impropriety in his past, you'll end up with two types of candidates:

    1. Angry women, or

    2. Weirdly ambiguous Alien Pod People like Barack Obama, though odds are none of them will have anything like Obama's charisma.

    That's going to make it incredibly hard to appeal to average folks, which portends a future with very stark political polarization. Come to think of it, a movement headed by angry women and sexless men would probably alienate a significant number of gay men, too. Milo Yiannopoulos might be a harbinger in that regard. (The left will always have room for more conventionally masculine men if they have a suitably exotic background — angry black men from the slums, Muslims with five wives, etc. But those options would be even harder to sell to mainstream voters, so I doubt they'd ever be put forth as the face of the party.)

    If "no sexual shenanigans whatsoever" are the new standard for the Left, but they still want candidates who can appeal to normals, I guess they could make a play for the more cucked evangelicals and Mormons. I'm pretty sure no woman will ever accuse Mitt Romney of anything even slightly untoward in the sexual department. I'm not sure the Left could bend enough on culture-war issues to accept them, though.

    Is it really impossible for a man to be a good leader and have no filthy behavior in his CV? I don’t buy it. Yes, a leader will likely have higher T, but that doesn’t mean he uses it to assault women. Mike Pence seems pretty masculine to me, and yet has no accusations that I’m aware of. That’s just one example, but in my personal life I see all sorts of men in positions of leadership who have impeccable reputations.

    I suppose you meant that the Democrats can’t find male leadership without shenanigans, which is a unique question of chicken and egg. which comes first, liberal politics or louche behavior?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Blank

    Is it really impossible for a man to be a good leader and have no filthy behavior in his CV?
     
    Not at all. But as I pointed out, the sort of men likely to fit that description — i.e., Mitt Romney or Mike Pence — aren't likely to be attracted to left-wing politics.
    , @bartok
    Ethnic groups that are very low in crime are likely to be low in sexual offences as well, at least among the hetero portions.

    As these groups have exited the political stage (e.g. WASPs), those who have replaced them have been both more criminal and more likely to put tongues and hands where they are likely unwanted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Luke Lea says:
    @Mr. Blank
    I've been wondering about this for some time, too. What effect is the Social Justice Jihad having on recruitment of future leaders?

    I mean, imagine you're a young, talented and ambitious heterosexual white guy who is still trying to form his political ideas. You look at the modern Left, and it must seem like there's just no place for someone like you. Won't that probably have a profound effect on the development of your political ideas, and the subsequent course of your career? What's the likelihood that some budding Bill Clinton-wannabe who's about 12 right now is going to be attracted to left-wing politics?

    I wonder if this isn't going to create a feedback effect that will lead to even greater polarization along the "fringe vs. core" axis.

    I’ve been wondering about this for some time, too. What effect is the Social Justice Jihad having on recruitment of future leaders?

    Careers open to talent: https://goo.gl/q4kodC (Chapter 4)

    Read More
    • Troll: Kevin C.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. DJ says:

    As John Derbyshire noted in 2001:

    The main thing that caught my febrile adolescent attention was the very striking difference in the female population of these two political tribes. The conservative women were much prettier, but the socialist girls were much looser. The star of the latter set was actually a girl named … well, never mind her name. Her nickname was “Nookie,” and for very excellent reasons. Though far from being a beauty queen, and even further from being obsessive-compulsive about personal hygiene (regarded in this set as a contemptible bourgeois affectation), this young lady, not to obscure the matter behind any veil of false delicacy, banged like an outhouse door in a force nine gale. Well, youth has its own priorities. I became a socialist, and remained one well into my twenties.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. Forbes says:
    @Big Bill
    A female staffer at HLS interviewed at Smith College for a marketing/admissions position ca. 1989.

    After the obligatory questions about her resume, they went to lunch and talked in a more social environment.

    The truth trickled out: they were looking for someone who could help change Smith's image from being relentlessly butch to something more heterosexual.

    The HLS staffer lost interest. Some things just can't be done.

    Or undone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Forbes says:
    @guest
    There's a big difference between Clinton and Weinstein. If feminists ever conquer the world, they'll let the Clintons stick around, because of feelz.

    They won't let Weinsteins do anything, because eww .

    But that is to believe that women/feminists are of one mind.

    Aside from Hillary the wife, there are no women “stars” in Clinton’s world. In Harvey’s world, he made women “stars.” The aspiring starlets voted their preference.

    The “eww” factor is strictly in hindsight. And in the mind of Michelle Goldberg at the NYT, the feelz for Clinton is on the way out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Harvey wouldn't be a star-maker in a world run by feminists. That's part of the point.

    Bill Clinton now isn't really Bill Clinton of '92. I was talking about the latter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Sorry for the language, but p***y is pretty much the only reason for any cis het white man to get involved in Democrat politics. I know that's why I did.

    The thing is, con candidates are almost always more masculine, so liberal men cling to their belief (hope) that conservative men are more 'uptight' about sex for some reason. You better be getting some, because you are going to spend the rest of your time talking about how shitty people like yourself are.

    This is a recurrent liberal bed time story, that conservatives don't enjoy or understand or even engage in sex. Bill C was a liberal wet dream, a virile Bubba w/ left wing politics. It's why they are so besotted with 'Ironstache,' because he's a steelworker w/ lib politics ( never mind the obvious gayness of the persona, like a Village People extra).

    I spent a summer going around NYC w/ Bill de Blasio for a campaign. We were walking through Marcy projects one day when an old black guy came up to Bill and said, 'Ay, Bill de Blasio. I like you, you know why? 'Cause you like black p***y.' Bill didn't miss a beat. 'I like all p***y.'

    It's my fondest memory of him, actually.

    It’s why they are so besotted with ‘Ironstache,’ because he’s a steelworker w/ lib politics ( never mind the obvious gayness of the persona, like a Village People extra).

    I’m sorry, but who is this “Ironstache” person?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    I believe they're referring to Randy Bryce, a Dem running against Paul Ryan in the 2018 midterm elections:

    Randy Bryce, who announced on Sunday that he would challenge the house speaker in the 2018 midterm election, is a blue-collar Democrat, union ironworker, Army veteran and mustachioed single dad from Wisconsin. Adding to his intrigue are his Twitter handle, @IronStache, and what some have described as his strong “Ron Swanson vibes.”
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Mr. Blank
    I've been wondering about this for some time, too. What effect is the Social Justice Jihad having on recruitment of future leaders?

    I mean, imagine you're a young, talented and ambitious heterosexual white guy who is still trying to form his political ideas. You look at the modern Left, and it must seem like there's just no place for someone like you. Won't that probably have a profound effect on the development of your political ideas, and the subsequent course of your career? What's the likelihood that some budding Bill Clinton-wannabe who's about 12 right now is going to be attracted to left-wing politics?

    I wonder if this isn't going to create a feedback effect that will lead to even greater polarization along the "fringe vs. core" axis.

    wonder if this isn’t going to create a feedback effect that will lead to even greater polarization along the “fringe vs. core” axis.

    I don’t think there’s really much doubt this will occur. I guess some on the left imaine this will benefit them. It’s not clear how they’re arrived at that conclusion, however.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Melendwyr
    Isn't it obvious? The Left has nothing to keep its various interest groups together as a movement except perceived predator pressure. Without something they can point to and blame everything on, something that everyone must join their side to oppose because it's too big for any of the subgroups to handle, they'd fly apart into a million pieces.

    It's why America has a two-party political system: people have to sacrifice most of their interests to band together in very inclusive teams, because if the don't, the other huge team will gain influence.

    It's why so much politicking in this country is negative. All the choices are awful, so the only way to get people to support you is to make it look like there's a single alternative which would be even worse. No one tries to campaign on their own merits, because they don't have any - at least, not enough to appeal to more than narrow demographics, and most not at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Melendwyr says: • Website
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    wonder if this isn’t going to create a feedback effect that will lead to even greater polarization along the “fringe vs. core” axis.
     
    I don't think there's really much doubt this will occur. I guess some on the left imaine this will benefit them. It's not clear how they're arrived at that conclusion, however.

    Isn’t it obvious? The Left has nothing to keep its various interest groups together as a movement except perceived predator pressure. Without something they can point to and blame everything on, something that everyone must join their side to oppose because it’s too big for any of the subgroups to handle, they’d fly apart into a million pieces.

    It’s why America has a two-party political system: people have to sacrifice most of their interests to band together in very inclusive teams, because if the don’t, the other huge team will gain influence.

    It’s why so much politicking in this country is negative. All the choices are awful, so the only way to get people to support you is to make it look like there’s a single alternative which would be even worse. No one tries to campaign on their own merits, because they don’t have any – at least, not enough to appeal to more than narrow demographics, and most not at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @stillCARealist
    I tried to watch a Bollywood movie once. I tried, I really did. It was incomprehensibly absurd. what goes on in the heads of Indians that they find that stuff entertaining? Please, any Indians reading here help me out.

    Bride and Prejudice was pretty good.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_and_Prejudice

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Not really Bollywood, though. A good classic Bollywood film (vaguely Seven-Samurai-esque) is Sholay. As with American films older is usually better, so Awaara or Shree 420 are recommended (and free on youtube).

    Bollywood proper is mostly pop cinema. For artsy or intellectual stuff one should see Bengali or Sinhala films. Particularly those directed by Satyajit Ray and Lester James Peiris.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon7
    I was thinking along these lines also. Women don't seem to understand it, but the actual Perfect Gentleman is most often some poor guy with a severe personality disorder, probably as a result of sexual abuse in childhood. Emotionally healthy men (if there are any of those these days) simply don't measure up.

    I was watching The Orville, a sci-fi show, the other day, and once again I was presented with the story that the most admirable "male" character is an artificially intelligent machine with no sexual characteristics of any kind.

    Cultural madness.

    A “perfect gentleman” is being polite while signalling that he doesn’t want to sleep with you. That’s not an unhealthy state but it is for obvious reasons never a state in which a girl’s partner will be, so if she expects it she will always be disappointed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @stillCARealist
    I tried to watch a Bollywood movie once. I tried, I really did. It was incomprehensibly absurd. what goes on in the heads of Indians that they find that stuff entertaining? Please, any Indians reading here help me out.

    I have repeatedly tried to watch Hollywood movies over the past twenty years. I thought anyone who found them entertaining should be either caged or shot.

    Indians like bright colors, pretty women, and melodrama. It really is that simple.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Anonymous
    I wonder what happened to Japanese cinema? The quality of their work used to be high, but its pretty much rock-bottom now.

    It got killed by Hollywood. One of the most depressing aspects for me when I was living in Japan was finding out that every theater in town was playing dubbed Hollywood films. The only exception was the latest Hayao Miyazaki realease. I’d have to go all the way to Nagoya proper to watch an actual non-animated Japanese film, and the chances were it’d be some pretentious art-house flick, or worse, some sort of stupid Tarantino gonzo grindhouse homage.

    Japan didn’t really try to protect it’s native cinema like France and other nations did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jim Don Bob
    Bride and Prejudice was pretty good.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_and_Prejudice

    Not really Bollywood, though. A good classic Bollywood film (vaguely Seven-Samurai-esque) is Sholay. As with American films older is usually better, so Awaara or Shree 420 are recommended (and free on youtube).

    Bollywood proper is mostly pop cinema. For artsy or intellectual stuff one should see Bengali or Sinhala films. Particularly those directed by Satyajit Ray and Lester James Peiris.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Old Left says:
    @Whiskey
    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an "person of color" because the police were "unsafe" or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men ... is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they've set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can't handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don't like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won't be any left -- it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they’ve set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    Amen.

    It’s weak white men that have turned women into shrews.

    Women only respect men capable of dominating them. Female rebellion and demands for equality (a meaningless concept since only the same can be equal) are prods to get men to act like men and put women in their place. But weak men cave in when women complain and just make themselves weaker, driving women to more hysterical extremes.

    So now comes the reckoning. And the nauseating spectacle of neutered males profusely apologizing for any hint of offense they may have ever given to a woman.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bartok
    Interestingly, White women are the most racist in their mating choices. I.e. they are the least likely to mate out of their race.

    Each White woman heartily approves of multiculturalism and race-mixing, just not in her own unique case.

    White men are ideologically racist but will marry anything thin and/or cute (e.g. Asian or Amerindian). White women are ideologically anti-racist but empirically are loath to marry anything other than White.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Epochehusserl
    Umm, the policy of quietly implementing affirmative action for men is not so quiet because Jon Birger wrote about it in his book DATE ONOMICS
    http://jonbirger.com/date-onomics/

    He thought it was unfair but he didnt realize that the institutions primarily institute this policy because they would otherwise face the prospect of downsizing because of male disinterest. He also doesn't realize that desirable positions are still rationed according to race/sex/identity affiliation or the perception is there so it doesnt matter what universities do anyways.

    Burger says male disinterest, Deavel says female disinterest (due to male absence.) Who’s right?

    I cringe at titles like “Date•onomics”, so I wouldn’t’ve come within an aisle or two of it. But I’ll look for it in the library.

    I remember reading lots of Workman’s books in the ’70s and ’80s, but never could keep them straight from Ten Speed. Chronicle Books appears to be the contemporary counterpart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @AndrewR
    I imagine there are many competent, confident, sexually non-degenerate men out there, even on the left. Just because a dude is alpha doesn't mean he tries to bang every other female he meets.

    You’re right. Most decent-looking, competent men are not degenerates. It’s neurotic people, people with poor impulse control and people who were dealt a bad hand in the appearance department who end up degenerate. Idolizing womanizers is immature. Wouldn’t have all the promiscuous, divorce-happy women that the commenters in these parts often complain about were it not for a 50 year long celebrated cultural tradition of womanizing. Women just copied men at some point. A lot of second wave feminism probably stemmed from anger towards philandering, neglectful husbands.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. MBlanc46 says:

    An old buddy of mine from southern Illinois used to describe his attitude toward women as, “Yes, I love you. Now take off your pants.” Perhaps with Lefty men it’s, “Yes, I admire you as a strong, independent woman who doesn’t need a man. Now take off your pants.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. MBlanc46 says:
    @Whiskey
    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an "person of color" because the police were "unsafe" or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men ... is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they've set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can't handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don't like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won't be any left -- it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    For most of our past, humans were polygynous. It’s only been for the last few thousand years that most women have had to mate with low status men. Clearly they haven’t liked it, and have now succeeded in overthrowing permanent monogamy. Low status men are out of luck. And if women perceive status and high testosterone as associated, West African men may cash in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Mr. Blank says:
    @stillCARealist
    Is it really impossible for a man to be a good leader and have no filthy behavior in his CV? I don't buy it. Yes, a leader will likely have higher T, but that doesn't mean he uses it to assault women. Mike Pence seems pretty masculine to me, and yet has no accusations that I'm aware of. That's just one example, but in my personal life I see all sorts of men in positions of leadership who have impeccable reputations.

    I suppose you meant that the Democrats can't find male leadership without shenanigans, which is a unique question of chicken and egg. which comes first, liberal politics or louche behavior?

    Is it really impossible for a man to be a good leader and have no filthy behavior in his CV?

    Not at all. But as I pointed out, the sort of men likely to fit that description — i.e., Mitt Romney or Mike Pence — aren’t likely to be attracted to left-wing politics.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. bartok says:
    @Old Left

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they’ve set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.
     
    Amen.

    It's weak white men that have turned women into shrews.

    Women only respect men capable of dominating them. Female rebellion and demands for equality (a meaningless concept since only the same can be equal) are prods to get men to act like men and put women in their place. But weak men cave in when women complain and just make themselves weaker, driving women to more hysterical extremes.

    So now comes the reckoning. And the nauseating spectacle of neutered males profusely apologizing for any hint of offense they may have ever given to a woman.

    Interestingly, White women are the most racist in their mating choices. I.e. they are the least likely to mate out of their race.

    Each White woman heartily approves of multiculturalism and race-mixing, just not in her own unique case.

    White men are ideologically racist but will marry anything thin and/or cute (e.g. Asian or Amerindian). White women are ideologically anti-racist but empirically are loath to marry anything other than White.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CCZ
    "White women...are the least likely to mate out of their race."

    Here comes Mighty (oops, I mean) "Tiny Duck," one, two, three....

    Or maybe not, he always says "white girls" (quite a fetish he has with adolescents).
    , @Sabril
    I think you are corrrect, at least on the surface.

    But consider that in the West these days, it's difficult to both (publicly) ideologically racist and have high status. Given the woman shortage and obesity epidemic, a low status man who wants a thin attractive woman is likely to find himself dating a lot of Asians and such.

    Women, on the other hand, can be a lot more picky when it comes to dating. One can ask why white women prefer white men. For that matter, why do so many women if other races prefer white men?

    Perhaps I am obsessed with status, but this seems to be a status issue too.

    In short, it would seem that your observation can be explained by the underlying principle that almost everyone is obsessed with status.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. bartok says:
    @stillCARealist
    Is it really impossible for a man to be a good leader and have no filthy behavior in his CV? I don't buy it. Yes, a leader will likely have higher T, but that doesn't mean he uses it to assault women. Mike Pence seems pretty masculine to me, and yet has no accusations that I'm aware of. That's just one example, but in my personal life I see all sorts of men in positions of leadership who have impeccable reputations.

    I suppose you meant that the Democrats can't find male leadership without shenanigans, which is a unique question of chicken and egg. which comes first, liberal politics or louche behavior?

    Ethnic groups that are very low in crime are likely to be low in sexual offences as well, at least among the hetero portions.

    As these groups have exited the political stage (e.g. WASPs), those who have replaced them have been both more criminal and more likely to put tongues and hands where they are likely unwanted.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Whiskey
    No, I think nearly everyone is missing the obvious. This is a purge, of White men, BUT ONLY OF WHITE MEN. Orchestrated mostly by White women and in no doubt coordination with Valerie Jarrett and Baracky! himself.

    There was IIRC a meeting with various White women at some function and White women there were urged by other White women, feminists all, to NOT REPORT RAPE by an "person of color" because the police were "unsafe" or some such.

    What this boils down to is most White women have had it up to here with the lack of sexy violent dominance in White men, and find distasteful or obnoxious beta male provisioning as they no longer want or need even that. What women want, and here there are no end of ways in which Women are the eternal enemy of (most) White men ... is a society of neutered, gelded, castrated beta males and a very few Alphas. For most White professional women who are the ones who decide these things, those Alpha males will be Black, Muslim, or at the least Hispanic.

    [There has been zero, zilch, NADA about Antonio Villaraigosa's fondness for teen girls as he runs for Governor, and even less about Martin Luther King's fondness for underage White girls.]

    This is utterly predictable, women will make excuse after excuse for the most violent bad boy on the cover of Rolling Stone (homosexuals do the same) and have fits of rage over dongle jokes or invitations to coffee dates by White beta male nerds.

    The end result is also predictable: GONE: Al Franken, Joe Biden, Hillary (because of Bill), all the Boomer White dudes as the Black men and White feminist millenials take over. The Democratic Party, Hollywood, Publishing, media-tainment, will be run by the Kim Kardashians and Kanye Wests of the world. This is also now including the military.

    White women **WILL** be ruled and dominated by someone. Having made themselves the equal of White men and finding that nauseating as all women do (when made equal to their men) they've set about replacing us with non-White men to lead and control and dominate them.

    What is the ratio of forcible rape by say, Black NFL players to say, rapidly aging Boomer dudes copping a grope? Heck even George H W Bush, a senile old man in a wheelchair, has been accused. If a woman under the age 75 can't handle that, she ought to permanently retire to the fainting couch. Yet there has been not a word in the media (which embargoed anything negative about the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, and Bill Clinton) about Black NFL players. Something about Peyton Manning, but not oh say Ray Lewis. Who would you pick as more likely of something awful towards women?

    If you don't like Jews in Hollywood, wait five years. There won't be any left -- it will be all Black, Muslim, and Indian. Hope you like the new Star Wars movie directed by Tyler Perry, starring Kevin Hart and John Boyega, and that new romantic comedy starring Mindy Kaling and Kanye West. With music by Young Thug.

    There is no place for White men, not even Liberal Jews, in multicultural America. Black men always make room for White women, us White men are considered just things to be disposed of when convenient.

    No. It was orchestrated by the Daily Mail, which I believe is still run by white men.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. CCZ says:
    @bartok
    Interestingly, White women are the most racist in their mating choices. I.e. they are the least likely to mate out of their race.

    Each White woman heartily approves of multiculturalism and race-mixing, just not in her own unique case.

    White men are ideologically racist but will marry anything thin and/or cute (e.g. Asian or Amerindian). White women are ideologically anti-racist but empirically are loath to marry anything other than White.

    “White women…are the least likely to mate out of their race.”

    Here comes Mighty (oops, I mean) “Tiny Duck,” one, two, three….

    Or maybe not, he always says “white girls” (quite a fetish he has with adolescents).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Sabril says:
    @bartok
    Interestingly, White women are the most racist in their mating choices. I.e. they are the least likely to mate out of their race.

    Each White woman heartily approves of multiculturalism and race-mixing, just not in her own unique case.

    White men are ideologically racist but will marry anything thin and/or cute (e.g. Asian or Amerindian). White women are ideologically anti-racist but empirically are loath to marry anything other than White.

    I think you are corrrect, at least on the surface.

    But consider that in the West these days, it’s difficult to both (publicly) ideologically racist and have high status. Given the woman shortage and obesity epidemic, a low status man who wants a thin attractive woman is likely to find himself dating a lot of Asians and such.

    Women, on the other hand, can be a lot more picky when it comes to dating. One can ask why white women prefer white men. For that matter, why do so many women if other races prefer white men?

    Perhaps I am obsessed with status, but this seems to be a status issue too.

    In short, it would seem that your observation can be explained by the underlying principle that almost everyone is obsessed with status.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. guest says:
    @Forbes
    But that is to believe that women/feminists are of one mind.

    Aside from Hillary the wife, there are no women "stars" in Clinton's world. In Harvey's world, he made women "stars." The aspiring starlets voted their preference.

    The "eww" factor is strictly in hindsight. And in the mind of Michelle Goldberg at the NYT, the feelz for Clinton is on the way out.

    Harvey wouldn’t be a star-maker in a world run by feminists. That’s part of the point.

    Bill Clinton now isn’t really Bill Clinton of ’92. I was talking about the latter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Arthur Space
    Their message feeds into a male vanity by talking about how great men have it all the time...

    Steve Sailer:

    I have been looking in vain for 20 years for an article about polygamy that mentioned that for one man to take a second wife means, in the normal course of things, that another man will get no wife at all.

    I have come to believe that this blind spot stems from it being virtually impossible for a man to imagine himself as one of the 149 losers, rather than the one big winner. He might prefer one wife to 150, but his male ego can't allow him to identify with all the men who end up rejected and alone.

     

    H.L. Mencken:

    The truth is that the picture of male carnality that such women conjure up belongs almost wholly to fable, as I have already observed in dealing with the sophistries of Dr. Eliza Burt Gamble, a paralogist on a somewhat higher plane. As they depict him in their fevered treatises on illegitimacy, white-slave trading and ophthalmia neonatorum, the average male adult of the Christian and cultured countries leads a life of gaudy lubricity, rolling magnificently from one liaison to another, and with an almost endless queue of ruined milliners, dancers, charwomen, parlour-maids and waitresses behind him, all dying of poison and despair. The life of man, as these furiously envious ones see it, is the life of a leading actor in a boulevard revue. He is a polygamous, multigamous, myriadigamous; an insatiable and unconscionable debauche, a monster of promiscuity; prodigiously unfaithful to his wife, and even to his friends' wives; fathomlessly libidinous and superbly happy.

    Needless to say, this picture bears no more relation to the facts than a dissertation on major strategy by a military "expert" promoted from dramatic critic. If the chief suffragette scare mongers (I speak without any embarrassing naming of names) were attractive enough to men to get near enough to enough men to know enough about them for their purpose they would paralyze the Dorcas societies with no such cajoling libels. As a matter of sober fact, the average man of our time and race is quite incapable of all these incandescent and intriguing divertisements. He is far more virtuous than they make him out, far less schooled in sin, far less enterprising and ruthless. I do not say, of course, that he is pure in heart, for the chances are that he isn't; what I do say is that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, he is pure in act, even in the face of temptation. And why? For several main reasons, not to go into minor ones. One is that he lacks the courage. Another is that he lacks the money. Another is that he is fundamentally moral, and has a conscience. It takes more sinful initiative than he has in him to plunge into any affair save the most casual and sordid; it takes more ingenuity and intrepidity than he has in him to carry it off; it takes more money than he can conceal from his consort to finance it. A man may force his actual wife to share the direst poverty, but even the least vampirish woman of the third part demands to be courted in what, considering his station in life, is the grand manner, and the expenses of that grand manner scare off all save a small minority of specialists in deception. So long, indeed, as a wife knows her husband's income accurately, she has a sure means of holding him to his oaths.

    Even more effective than the fiscal barrier is the barrier of poltroonery. The one character that distinguishes man from the other higher vertebrate, indeed, is his excessive timorousness, his easy yielding to alarms, his incapacity for adventure without a crowd behind him. In his normal incarnation he is no more capable of initiating an extra-legal affair—at all events, above the mawkish harmlessness of a flirting match with a cigar girl in a cafe-than he is of scaling the battlements of hell. He likes to think of himself doing it, just as he likes to think of himself leading a cavalry charge or climbing the Matterhorn. Often, indeed, his vanity leads him to imagine the thing done, and he admits by winks and blushes that he is a bad one. But at the bottom of all that tawdry pretence there is usually nothing more material than an oafish smirk at some disgusted shop-girl, or a scraping of shins under the table. Let any woman who is disquieted by reports of her husband's derelictions figure to herself how long it would have taken him to propose to her if left to his own enterprise, and then let her ask herself if so pusillanimous a creature could be imaged in the role of Don Giovanni.

     

    That’s an amazing passage from Mencken!
    (I see myself in his words . . .)

    Thanks for sharing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Kevin C. says:
    @David Davenport
    Maybe Islam is the answer to Western man's women trouble.

    Isn't that the punch line of the novel Submission?

    I hear a lot of that. Even that living as dhimmis under Muslim overlords would be preferable to feminist rule. OTOH, see Jim Donald on why Islam is “the solution we do not want”.

    So, you ask, what is not to like?

    What is not to like is that when Islam conquers a civilization, that civilization dies. When people talk about the great achievements of Islamic civilization, they are actually talking about the achievements of peoples enslaved by Muslims, and what remained of their libraries after the Muslims finished looting them for toilet paper and kindling.

    You will notice that these features of Christianity support a world where truth is spoken, promises are kept, and science is actually scientific. Which is a big part of why it was Christians that made the scientific and Industrial Revolutions, not Jews and not Muslims, why it will be Christians that settle space and conquer the universe. (Maybe atheists are better at building rocket ships, but they will not have the children to fly those rocket ships to new worlds and settle them.)

    Some people point here to the “Islamic golden age”, but, as many folks, including Razib Khan, have pointed out, the scientific and mathematic accomplishments of that time and place were mostly performed by the non-Muslims under Muslim rule (and the rest by folks from groups or families only recently converted to Islam).

    This was also — as at least one book has been written about — before Al-Ghazali’s occasionalist school of thought triumphed over more Neoplatonic rival philosophies. Which contributes to the modern “IBM syndrome”: inshallah (if God is willing), bokra (tomorrow), and malesh (never mind), something I’ve seen referenced, along with the rampant clannishness/tribalism, as to why Arab armies suck so badly.

    And as to clannishness, that leads to the issue of cousin marriage, which is high throughout the Muslim world. Even the Hui, the more “well-behaved” Chinese Muslims, who are pretty much ethnically Han, have much higher cousin-marriage rates than their fellow Chinese.

    In short, wherever Islam has spread, and large-scale conversion to Islam occurred, people tend to end up adopting certain dysfunctional Arab norms and practices, not really conducive to science, invention, or a prosperous, functional society. I know some have suggested that a major factor in this is the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. That many Hajji who return home from Mecca end up bringing bits of Meccan norms and practices back with them.

    There are basically two responses put forth to this problem. One is basically “fork Islam” — “fork” in the software project sense (not as a replacement for a similar sounding expletive). That is, right-wing whites convert en masse to Islam — but an Islam that, while quite orthodox about women, sex, marriage, the gays, etc., is also, say, not very strict about enforcing that alcohol prohibition (as was the case for the Ottomans a lot of the time), and whose thought leaders tend to read more Averroes than Al-Ghazali, and who retain Western norms about marrying cousins. In short, creating what would effectively be a new branch of Islam.

    I question how well this would work. First, because, as I pointed out above, nobody’s managed to pull it off before. Second, there’s the issue that existing Muslims will see you as “fake”. The worst violence in the Middle East is between the different Muslim branches. Because while being an infidel may be bad, being a heretic or apostate is worse. Expect terrorism to greatly increase in such a scenario.

    Second is that it probably wouldn’t “disarm” the Left like some think it will. In fact, that applies to conversion to Islam in general. Sure, a Mohammad Bilal Sulemani whose parents were from Pakistan can treat his wife (or wives), his daughters, and women in general however he likes, and nobody’s likely to call the cops (c.f Rotherham). But if some middle American white guy, even if he’s now calling himself Yousuf Mohammed and praying facing Mecca five times a day, ‘puts a toe out of line’, or keeps his daughter from dressing like a skank, you can bet the “domestic violence” and “child abuse” reports will come rolling in from his neighbors, and any playing of the “Islamophobia” card is going to be laughed out of the room. Because for the left, in practice, “Muslim” and “Islamophobia” is more about ethnicity than religion. And because, to the Progressive faith as well, an infidel is not nearly as bad as an apostate. Some brown Pakistani bricklayer hates gays? Well, the poor thing just doesn’t know any better, as he hasn’t been exposed to proper Modern thinking yet (and once he — or more accurately, his descendants — have been, they’ll eventually be won over and become proper “moderate” liberals just the same as the Christian “mainstream” has been similarly assimilated into Modernity, the assumption seems to go). But a white guy? Who has been exposed to what all right-thinking people believe, but who actively rejects it? He should know better.

    The second option is not to convert to Islam, but to basically borrow and adopt the parts we like, the norms about women, sex, marriage, etc., while otherwise retaining Christian/Western philosophies, practices in other domains. This is pretty much what the whole “White Shariah” meme seems to be about, and it’s what Jim Donald recommends in the link I gave above.

    However, I find this even less plausible. While it generally avoids the threat of Arabization that comes with conversion to or rule by Islam, the drawbacks more offset. First, you lose whatever limited “protection from the Left via their Islamophilia/ability to play the ‘Islamophobia’ card” you might have from converting.

    Secondly, though, is that this sort of mass syncretism seems immensely more challenging, and more rare historically (I can’t think of any examples offhand), than mass conversion to an existing faith (even if one ends up “forking” that faith in the process).

    In short, it looks like Islam is a very uncertain solution, possibly a cure as bad as the disease, and probably — whether it comes via mass conversion, takeover by foreign Muslims, or some mix thereof — not likely to have outcomes be all that good for the average white guy anyway (he and his likely end up ethnically replaced no matter what).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin C.
    Messed up the link. Correct link is at https://blog.jim.com/war/the-solution-we-do-not-want/.
    , @Anonymous
    This is interesting. I'll throw out a few thoughts:

    It seems to me that a white guy who converts to Islam is widely regarded as a Muslim. At least he is so regarded in the dominant narrative. Contrast this with a Muslim who embraces atheism or Christianity, who is likely to be regarded as a purveyor of "hate speech". I think this is clearly true in general. But as for a white Muslim "revert" who does some spousal battery or child abuse: I guess my suspicion would be that the MSM hides the Muslim angle and just portrays him as a white guy. I suppose they might find some court Muslims to go on record and denounce him for failing to fully understand that Islam is really an egalitarian religion.

    As for Neo-Platonism, if Islam went downhill after rejecting it, why not say the same about Christianity? I'm inclined to say just that.

    My sense is that Christianity is inherently syncretistic (and this is my major objection to many strains of "dissident right" thinking, since I think that Western civilization is ultimately inseparable from some engagement with Christianity). By contrast, my sense is that Islam is to some degree inseparable from its tribal origins. (That said, I regard it as a Christian offshoot, and I have personally gained genuine insight from a few authors that regard themselves as Muslims in some way, mostly Sufis.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Kevin C. says:
    @Luke Lea

    That comment connects in some ways with this interesting post on the political mechanisms empowering today’s identity-politics left: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2017/11/14/biological-leninism/
     
    A fascinating if cynical worldview. Personally I'm more optimistic: https://goo.gl/q4kodC

    And on what, if anything, do you base that optimism?

    (I don’t own a Kindle, or any ebook reader (or even a smartphone), so I can’t exactly purchase the book, unless there’s a paper-and-ink version, if in fact you provide evidence there.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Kevin C. says:
    @Kevin O'Keeffe

    It’s why they are so besotted with ‘Ironstache,’ because he’s a steelworker w/ lib politics ( never mind the obvious gayness of the persona, like a Village People extra).
     
    I'm sorry, but who is this "Ironstache" person?

    I believe they’re referring to Randy Bryce, a Dem running against Paul Ryan in the 2018 midterm elections:

    Randy Bryce, who announced on Sunday that he would challenge the house speaker in the 2018 midterm election, is a blue-collar Democrat, union ironworker, Army veteran and mustachioed single dad from Wisconsin. Adding to his intrigue are his Twitter handle, @IronStache, and what some have described as his strong “Ron Swanson vibes.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Kevin C. says:
    @Kevin C.
    I hear a lot of that. Even that living as dhimmis under Muslim overlords would be preferable to feminist rule. OTOH, see Jim Donald on why Islam is "the solution we do not want".

    So, you ask, what is not to like?

    What is not to like is that when Islam conquers a civilization, that civilization dies. When people talk about the great achievements of Islamic civilization, they are actually talking about the achievements of peoples enslaved by Muslims, and what remained of their libraries after the Muslims finished looting them for toilet paper and kindling.
     

    You will notice that these features of Christianity support a world where truth is spoken, promises are kept, and science is actually scientific. Which is a big part of why it was Christians that made the scientific and Industrial Revolutions, not Jews and not Muslims, why it will be Christians that settle space and conquer the universe. (Maybe atheists are better at building rocket ships, but they will not have the children to fly those rocket ships to new worlds and settle them.)
     
    Some people point here to the "Islamic golden age", but, as many folks, including Razib Khan, have pointed out, the scientific and mathematic accomplishments of that time and place were mostly performed by the non-Muslims under Muslim rule (and the rest by folks from groups or families only recently converted to Islam).

    This was also — as at least one book has been written about — before Al-Ghazali's occasionalist school of thought triumphed over more Neoplatonic rival philosophies. Which contributes to the modern "IBM syndrome": inshallah (if God is willing), bokra (tomorrow), and malesh (never mind), something I've seen referenced, along with the rampant clannishness/tribalism, as to why Arab armies suck so badly.

    And as to clannishness, that leads to the issue of cousin marriage, which is high throughout the Muslim world. Even the Hui, the more "well-behaved" Chinese Muslims, who are pretty much ethnically Han, have much higher cousin-marriage rates than their fellow Chinese.

    In short, wherever Islam has spread, and large-scale conversion to Islam occurred, people tend to end up adopting certain dysfunctional Arab norms and practices, not really conducive to science, invention, or a prosperous, functional society. I know some have suggested that a major factor in this is the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. That many Hajji who return home from Mecca end up bringing bits of Meccan norms and practices back with them.

    There are basically two responses put forth to this problem. One is basically "fork Islam" — "fork" in the software project sense (not as a replacement for a similar sounding expletive). That is, right-wing whites convert en masse to Islam — but an Islam that, while quite orthodox about women, sex, marriage, the gays, etc., is also, say, not very strict about enforcing that alcohol prohibition (as was the case for the Ottomans a lot of the time), and whose thought leaders tend to read more Averroes than Al-Ghazali, and who retain Western norms about marrying cousins. In short, creating what would effectively be a new branch of Islam.

    I question how well this would work. First, because, as I pointed out above, nobody's managed to pull it off before. Second, there's the issue that existing Muslims will see you as "fake". The worst violence in the Middle East is between the different Muslim branches. Because while being an infidel may be bad, being a heretic or apostate is worse. Expect terrorism to greatly increase in such a scenario.

    Second is that it probably wouldn't "disarm" the Left like some think it will. In fact, that applies to conversion to Islam in general. Sure, a Mohammad Bilal Sulemani whose parents were from Pakistan can treat his wife (or wives), his daughters, and women in general however he likes, and nobody's likely to call the cops (c.f Rotherham). But if some middle American white guy, even if he's now calling himself Yousuf Mohammed and praying facing Mecca five times a day, 'puts a toe out of line', or keeps his daughter from dressing like a skank, you can bet the "domestic violence" and "child abuse" reports will come rolling in from his neighbors, and any playing of the "Islamophobia" card is going to be laughed out of the room. Because for the left, in practice, "Muslim" and "Islamophobia" is more about ethnicity than religion. And because, to the Progressive faith as well, an infidel is not nearly as bad as an apostate. Some brown Pakistani bricklayer hates gays? Well, the poor thing just doesn't know any better, as he hasn't been exposed to proper Modern thinking yet (and once he — or more accurately, his descendants — have been, they'll eventually be won over and become proper "moderate" liberals just the same as the Christian "mainstream" has been similarly assimilated into Modernity, the assumption seems to go). But a white guy? Who has been exposed to what all right-thinking people believe, but who actively rejects it? He should know better.

    The second option is not to convert to Islam, but to basically borrow and adopt the parts we like, the norms about women, sex, marriage, etc., while otherwise retaining Christian/Western philosophies, practices in other domains. This is pretty much what the whole "White Shariah" meme seems to be about, and it's what Jim Donald recommends in the link I gave above.

    However, I find this even less plausible. While it generally avoids the threat of Arabization that comes with conversion to or rule by Islam, the drawbacks more offset. First, you lose whatever limited "protection from the Left via their Islamophilia/ability to play the 'Islamophobia' card" you might have from converting.

    Secondly, though, is that this sort of mass syncretism seems immensely more challenging, and more rare historically (I can't think of any examples offhand), than mass conversion to an existing faith (even if one ends up "forking" that faith in the process).

    In short, it looks like Islam is a very uncertain solution, possibly a cure as bad as the disease, and probably — whether it comes via mass conversion, takeover by foreign Muslims, or some mix thereof — not likely to have outcomes be all that good for the average white guy anyway (he and his likely end up ethnically replaced no matter what).

    Messed up the link. Correct link is at https://blog.jim.com/war/the-solution-we-do-not-want/.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Kevin C.
    I hear a lot of that. Even that living as dhimmis under Muslim overlords would be preferable to feminist rule. OTOH, see Jim Donald on why Islam is "the solution we do not want".

    So, you ask, what is not to like?

    What is not to like is that when Islam conquers a civilization, that civilization dies. When people talk about the great achievements of Islamic civilization, they are actually talking about the achievements of peoples enslaved by Muslims, and what remained of their libraries after the Muslims finished looting them for toilet paper and kindling.
     

    You will notice that these features of Christianity support a world where truth is spoken, promises are kept, and science is actually scientific. Which is a big part of why it was Christians that made the scientific and Industrial Revolutions, not Jews and not Muslims, why it will be Christians that settle space and conquer the universe. (Maybe atheists are better at building rocket ships, but they will not have the children to fly those rocket ships to new worlds and settle them.)
     
    Some people point here to the "Islamic golden age", but, as many folks, including Razib Khan, have pointed out, the scientific and mathematic accomplishments of that time and place were mostly performed by the non-Muslims under Muslim rule (and the rest by folks from groups or families only recently converted to Islam).

    This was also — as at least one book has been written about — before Al-Ghazali's occasionalist school of thought triumphed over more Neoplatonic rival philosophies. Which contributes to the modern "IBM syndrome": inshallah (if God is willing), bokra (tomorrow), and malesh (never mind), something I've seen referenced, along with the rampant clannishness/tribalism, as to why Arab armies suck so badly.

    And as to clannishness, that leads to the issue of cousin marriage, which is high throughout the Muslim world. Even the Hui, the more "well-behaved" Chinese Muslims, who are pretty much ethnically Han, have much higher cousin-marriage rates than their fellow Chinese.

    In short, wherever Islam has spread, and large-scale conversion to Islam occurred, people tend to end up adopting certain dysfunctional Arab norms and practices, not really conducive to science, invention, or a prosperous, functional society. I know some have suggested that a major factor in this is the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. That many Hajji who return home from Mecca end up bringing bits of Meccan norms and practices back with them.

    There are basically two responses put forth to this problem. One is basically "fork Islam" — "fork" in the software project sense (not as a replacement for a similar sounding expletive). That is, right-wing whites convert en masse to Islam — but an Islam that, while quite orthodox about women, sex, marriage, the gays, etc., is also, say, not very strict about enforcing that alcohol prohibition (as was the case for the Ottomans a lot of the time), and whose thought leaders tend to read more Averroes than Al-Ghazali, and who retain Western norms about marrying cousins. In short, creating what would effectively be a new branch of Islam.

    I question how well this would work. First, because, as I pointed out above, nobody's managed to pull it off before. Second, there's the issue that existing Muslims will see you as "fake". The worst violence in the Middle East is between the different Muslim branches. Because while being an infidel may be bad, being a heretic or apostate is worse. Expect terrorism to greatly increase in such a scenario.

    Second is that it probably wouldn't "disarm" the Left like some think it will. In fact, that applies to conversion to Islam in general. Sure, a Mohammad Bilal Sulemani whose parents were from Pakistan can treat his wife (or wives), his daughters, and women in general however he likes, and nobody's likely to call the cops (c.f Rotherham). But if some middle American white guy, even if he's now calling himself Yousuf Mohammed and praying facing Mecca five times a day, 'puts a toe out of line', or keeps his daughter from dressing like a skank, you can bet the "domestic violence" and "child abuse" reports will come rolling in from his neighbors, and any playing of the "Islamophobia" card is going to be laughed out of the room. Because for the left, in practice, "Muslim" and "Islamophobia" is more about ethnicity than religion. And because, to the Progressive faith as well, an infidel is not nearly as bad as an apostate. Some brown Pakistani bricklayer hates gays? Well, the poor thing just doesn't know any better, as he hasn't been exposed to proper Modern thinking yet (and once he — or more accurately, his descendants — have been, they'll eventually be won over and become proper "moderate" liberals just the same as the Christian "mainstream" has been similarly assimilated into Modernity, the assumption seems to go). But a white guy? Who has been exposed to what all right-thinking people believe, but who actively rejects it? He should know better.

    The second option is not to convert to Islam, but to basically borrow and adopt the parts we like, the norms about women, sex, marriage, etc., while otherwise retaining Christian/Western philosophies, practices in other domains. This is pretty much what the whole "White Shariah" meme seems to be about, and it's what Jim Donald recommends in the link I gave above.

    However, I find this even less plausible. While it generally avoids the threat of Arabization that comes with conversion to or rule by Islam, the drawbacks more offset. First, you lose whatever limited "protection from the Left via their Islamophilia/ability to play the 'Islamophobia' card" you might have from converting.

    Secondly, though, is that this sort of mass syncretism seems immensely more challenging, and more rare historically (I can't think of any examples offhand), than mass conversion to an existing faith (even if one ends up "forking" that faith in the process).

    In short, it looks like Islam is a very uncertain solution, possibly a cure as bad as the disease, and probably — whether it comes via mass conversion, takeover by foreign Muslims, or some mix thereof — not likely to have outcomes be all that good for the average white guy anyway (he and his likely end up ethnically replaced no matter what).

    This is interesting. I’ll throw out a few thoughts:

    It seems to me that a white guy who converts to Islam is widely regarded as a Muslim. At least he is so regarded in the dominant narrative. Contrast this with a Muslim who embraces atheism or Christianity, who is likely to be regarded as a purveyor of “hate speech”. I think this is clearly true in general. But as for a white Muslim “revert” who does some spousal battery or child abuse: I guess my suspicion would be that the MSM hides the Muslim angle and just portrays him as a white guy. I suppose they might find some court Muslims to go on record and denounce him for failing to fully understand that Islam is really an egalitarian religion.

    As for Neo-Platonism, if Islam went downhill after rejecting it, why not say the same about Christianity? I’m inclined to say just that.

    My sense is that Christianity is inherently syncretistic (and this is my major objection to many strains of “dissident right” thinking, since I think that Western civilization is ultimately inseparable from some engagement with Christianity). By contrast, my sense is that Islam is to some degree inseparable from its tribal origins. (That said, I regard it as a Christian offshoot, and I have personally gained genuine insight from a few authors that regard themselves as Muslims in some way, mostly Sufis.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @stillCARealist
    I tried to watch a Bollywood movie once. I tried, I really did. It was incomprehensibly absurd. what goes on in the heads of Indians that they find that stuff entertaining? Please, any Indians reading here help me out.

    Try 3 Idiots or Dangal, both starring the talented actor Aamir Khan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?