The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Bawling Beanlets
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
(Republished from The Audacious Epigone by permission of author or representative)
Hide 21 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Sid says:

    One reason why showing crying babies is bad persuasion is that the only people who care when a baby cries are its parents or close relatives.

    Otherwise, people just want the babies to be taken away ASAP. Being on a plane with a crying baby is torture.

    "Hey, look at these crying babies! We want them all over your neighborhood, how does that sound?"

    Nah, they have to go back. They can cry somewhere else.

  2. > One reason why showing crying babies is bad persuasion is that the only people who care when a baby cries are its parents or close relatives.

    Unfortunately I've seen some childless young women having misplaced mothering instincts and weeping over these invader babies. Otherwise you are 100% spot on. The reason why the left thinks its a good agitprop weapon is that so many of their women are catladies so they think if it works for them and their soiboi boyfriends, it must work for the rest of the country. Not true, as polls are telling us, fortunately.

  3. Random Dude,

    I agree that the catladies and the soibois have gone hysterical seeing the crying brown babies, but they've long since been programmed to respond emotionally to such imagery. You are right in saying that the rest of the country isn't responding to them.

    I think that pictures of dead children (most notably of the drowned Syrian boy) do have a very strong persuasive impact on normies. People don't want to see children die, even if they are somebody else's kids. But crying babies and children? Sorry but they're clearly healthy enough to scream with all their lungs. The natural reaction is to resent the parents for doing a bad job. The Derb has a new editorial where he points out how arch-neocons are vocally uncomfortable with likening the crying babies to Holocaust victims.

  4. Sid,

    For men that is especially true, doubly so for those who don't have children of their own (but true enough for those who do!).

    Anyone who has spent any time around toddlers know they cry all the time for the silliest of reasons or for no reason at all–and that the crying often ceases just as quickly as it began. Only barren cat ladies are dumb enough to fall for it, since the crying baby does ping women in a way men probably can't fully appreciate (for obvious biological reasons).

    Random Dude,

    Relatedly, the three women and the soiboi on the supreme court ruled in favor of open borders yet again.


    "Even as Ocasio-Cortez ran defiantly to his left — with universal health care, a federal jobs guarantee and the abolition of ICE headlining her demands — Crowley touted a formidable liberal record of his own."

    Democrats are the non-white, anti-America party: confirmed.

    Civil war status: on schedule.

  6. Feryl says: • Website

    "Relatedly, the three women and the soiboi on the supreme court ruled in favor of open borders yet again. "

    Is there a correlation between female power and decadence?

    Women are programmed to gravitate towards male power; that's not a bad thing when men are in charge of the castle, and project power by keeping invaders out. We always need to beware of power hungry women, who often are cold, sociopathic, and vindictive towards normies.

    When men no longer are effective at banding together for a wholesome cause, such as immigration reduction (see Turchin or Agnostic's theories of elite competition), women lose respect for the men of their tribe and don't feel any qualms about invaders gaining new turf. And of course the toxic levels of competition between male elites in a tribe allow women to gain more power than they ought to get, with self-evidently disastrous consequences.

    Interestingly, the Missionairy generation who came of age in the mid-late 19th century were know for their feminism and narcissism, and eventually granted women the right to vote in 1916 if memory serves. Status striving began to fall in the 1920's and 30's, which blunted the negative impact of the late 19th century movement to advance feminism and reduce gender distinctions, as competent (or at least well meaning) male leaders asserted control via measures like the 1925 immigration act.

    Hearteningly, Millennial females (most of 'em, not the ugly SJWs) appear to be disgusted by the brash and nasty demeanor of many Boomer and Gen X women (who came of age at a time of rapidly declining respect for men and authority, which fully set in by the late 70's). Neil Howe said that Boomer women in the 70's idealized Alan Alda and the like, which complemented the growing fashion for women to be self-reliant and status conscious. Men were supposed to be more reflective, emotional, and conflicted than the GI Generation norm, while women were supposed to get tougher and more demanding of the world around them.

    I'm struck by just how many Boomer men turned out to be such pansies and pushovers. Their not being decisive, stoic, and confident opened the door to women getting too uppity (under the aegis of Boomers, The Violence Against Women Act was passed in the mid-90's, leave it to the Boomers to do more than any other generation to pedestalize women, as if our legal system in the 90's was crying out for even more latitude granted to women. I remember a Boomer teacher in the late 90's who talked about how porn "was degrading to women". It's funny how even when they may have had decent moral cause, it still became inflected with priority given to women (as if a John Holmes retained their dignity after "starring" in 400 movies).

    Oh, and the three "women" on the Supreme Court are all indicative of just how terribly off-course we've driven.

  7. Feryl says: • Website

    Feminist steadily rises in the 70's and 80's and then peaks in the mid-1990's, and heavily declines in the 2000's. Essentially, The Sixties Generation attained their peak of cultural power in the 1980's and 1990's. The subsequent decades have seen gender ID politics become a niche Leftist movement, whereas average Boomer women in the 70's, 80's, and 90's were shrieking on a regular basis about women's rights and sexism.

    One has to consider just how out of touch and alienating elderly women like Hilary Clinton, Liz Warren etc. are. Millennials grew up around hot head and entitled women. To the extent that women were disrespected back then, perhaps they deserved it, to some degree? Bill Burr (B. 1968) has a classic rant about how you shouldn't "ever" hit a woman. Like he says, um, really? Never, ever, is there a reason to do so? Us X-ers and Milennials are well aware of the diminishing returns of The Sixties. By the 70's, a bunch of assholes were taking a dump on society, and getting more and more uppity and greedy. To the older generation, being a bitch may have felt liberating, but ya know who really grew to resent it? Not your grandparents, not patriarchal society, but your own damn kids, who are tired of your drama and bullshit.

    Jordan Peterson has tapped into this by saying that we need to re emphasize physical behavior among boys, and he also (gasp) said that men can find women frustrating, because they can get away with acting out and verbal aggression that men don't know how to respond to. Because men favor violence to settle disputes. If men can't use violence to solve a dispute with a women, then what is he supposed to do when he's got a problem? Whether Peterson realizes it or not, Millennial women don't create drama like their parents did, and as such, they won't provoke violence from their frustrated male partners (Domestic violence peaked in the 80's and 90's, because….Wait for it…..Boomers were in the prime age bracket for domestic violence back then, although part of the problem was caused admittedly by early Gen X-ers).

  8. Feryl,

    We always need to beware of power hungry women, who often are cold, sociopathic, and vindictive towards normies.

    Putting together a quick physiognomy post where this observation is highly relevant, thanks.

  9. As for what men should do when women verbally lash out–read Heartiste!

  10. Off topic:

    Question 24 is unnerving. We are one mass killing away from the annihilation of the 2nd Amendment. "White college" has hit a K selection psychological trigger.

    Virginia is Alsace-Lorraine, except worse, as the Kaiser never resettled that area with loyal Prussians.

  11. 216 –

    Not that it isn't unnerving, but that's a fairly typical response to gun control questions, pre-Obama. So far just regression to the mean.

    More unnerving are the white women crosstabs. We may laugh at the bawling beanlets, but women are utterly taken in, particularly when they're menopausal (Boomers…) and/or have no or few children of their own (a very nasty feedback loop). Women's suffrage was a grave error.

  12. 216,

    The sex divide is pretty staggering, almost implausibly so.

  13. AE,

    VA voters appear to think that heroic Antifa mobs defeated the Charlottesville Beer Hall Putsch.

    It is hard to minimize the impact of CVille, we had the Joint Chiefs of Staff sending trial balloon tweets for a coup d'état.

    In spite of attempts to brand firearms ownership as almost feminist in nature, women will always trust the "Alpha Male Police State" over the CCW handgun (not even beta male, more like D____). An "Alpha Male Alt-Right Vigliante Group" is a true competitor, but illegal.

  14. Snorlax…

    "Women's suffrage was a grave error."

    Actually, it was a resounding success. Listen, I get it. You can't control your old lady so you make comments like this one. Regardless, one is dreaming if the right for women to vote is ever going away, nor should it.

  15. Feryl says: • Website

    "216 –

    Not that it isn't unnerving, but that's a fairly typical response to gun control questions, pre-Obama. So far just regression to the mean.

    More unnerving are the white women crosstabs. We may laugh at the bawling beanlets, but women are utterly taken in, particularly when they're menopausal (Boomers…) and/or have no or few children of their own (a very nasty feedback loop). Women's suffrage was a grave error."

    'Nasty', uh-huh. As in, the 'nasty' women who made up the anti-Trump sisterhood. Reality check: The most bitter and (emotionally) ugly women came of age during the golden age of the Power Woman (the 1970's and 80's). Millennials are struggling and conflicted about how much they should listen to and emulate all the Boomer trendsetters of ye olden times. Several aging Dem women lectured young girls about how they were betraying the sisterhood back in 2016. Remember that? While older women still proudly wield the feminist flag, associating it with greater freedom and financial independence, broke and forlorn Millennials have seen the damage wrought by the cultural revolution that their parents and/or grandparents led…..And they wish it would end. Part of that cultural revolution was a deliberate effort to sow discord and instability, in the name of not suppressing desires and urges. Do what you feel, say what's in your heart.Well, that attitude gave us a massive spike in brawls, arguments, divorce, and abuse. The more that older generations insist that youngsters need to "loosen up", and "live a little", the more that today's younger generations are going to feel let down.

    What's inspiring is that deliberate efforts to stir the pot are most associated with "prophet" generations (such as Missionaires and Boomers), so as younger generations gain more clout we can expect to have less hectoring, haranguing, pointless quarrels and arguments, etc. in the culture. And since prophet generations hate male authority and idealize women, the most toxic effects of women's lib occur when the prophet generation is setting the tone (that would've been in the 1970's and especially the 1980's and 1990's for Boomers). Gen X women have far more humility than Boomer women, and are not as pathologically addicted to the idea of gaining money, power, and status to lord over the competition. Millennial women are even better, as they came of age being pedestalized by their fathers, which actually makes them feel spoiled and appreciative of Dad. Boomer women collect and weaponize real and imagined slights against their dignity and life goals, Gen X-ers don't take things so personal and are better at getting over traumas (and indeed, X-ers were much more likely to be abused at a young age than Boomers), while Millennials have been socialized to respect male authority (fathers, police, and military leaders were to be treated with deference; Boomers experienced the opposite atmosphere in the 60's and 70's, with this sentiment lingering well into the 80's, as the GSS records most respondents as having a negative view of the military in the 80's).

  16. Feryl says: • Website

    The flag of feminism will be lowered and eventually taken down, as it comes to be associated with a particular kind of raucous and narcissistic activism that will be seen as an out-dated cultural scourge. Right now in the pop. culture there's a big wave of retarded ID politics, which I think we can all agree is the product of highly status conscious elite figures who want their daughters (and gay and tranny sons) to aspire to be big winners, super heroes. That's an elite concern, though; most people just want to make a decent living and have peace and quiet. One reason I'm skeptical of a neo-1960's is that Millennials don't resemble whatsoever the bratty little shits of the 1960's who were born into paradise (mid-century America), yet had no respect, let alone admiration, for the men (and it generally was Lost and GI men) who created it. One generation (Boomers) came of age resenting any restrictions on their wishes and behavior ("what about what IIIIIIIII wannnaannntt"), another (Millennials) came of age during a hedonistic/darwinistic free for all created Boomers……And both Gen X-ers and Millennials have found the Boomer culture to be rather…..Lacking in it's ability to justify itself, and also recognize how it became such an excess, an orgy, of reckless and selfish behavior.

    Lastly, for the skeptics out there: the elite guardians of culture are emphasizing the most ugly and poorly socialized women, while encouraging the more demure girls to act bratty and brassy. Activist-y. Problems is, Boomers ruined activism and to the extent that younger generations want to get involved, it isn't on Boomer terms that are narcissistic, bitter, ugly, and vindictive. This is the opposite of the 1960's, when older generations were often plainly confused and at time distressed by how emotional and angry youngsters were. That's a reason a fair number of GI campus heads and police chiefs Got Tough with young Boomers. It's not that they disliked the causes of Boomers, it's more that they hated the ugly way that Boomers expressed themselves (cursing, crying, shouting, name calling, and the like). Which early-period Boomers misunderstood as an attack on their goals. Nu-uh, dipshits. The GI Gen actually got fed up with how you acted like a bunch of babies. The people born in the 1940's have to be the most emotionally brittle and needy people ever. If they don't immediately get respect and get their way, they have to go on a crusade to tear apart whoever dissed 'em. Even a lot of later born Boomers get tired of their generational neighbors, and I can understand why.

  17. 216,

    Yeah, though I knew it would happen, it has still really been something to see the retconning that has taken place over the course of just one year.


    I've been looking at the Reuters-Ipsos cross tabs on a lot of these things and the marriage/child divide among younger women is staggering. Young single women are SJW-left on everything, often by margins that are wider than (entire) groups of non-whites.

  18. Feryl says: • Website

    Women are conformists, so there ya go. The cultural rot that Silent and Boomer men set in motion in the 60's and 70's (which helped unleash the worst tendencies of women) has destroyed the ability of men and traditional values to get respect. and yet…….Millennials have way more respect for rules, authority, and their fathers than Boomers and Gen X-er did and often still do.

    Men can better whip everything back into shape with women (most of all Millennials and Gen Z) ready to embrace traditional roles….Provided that our culture and politics are re-shaped to bring back order and stability. Remember, women don't rock the boat….USUALLY, with the primary exception being Boomer type generations who stir the pot against the wishes of the authorities and elders.

    It can't be emphasized enough that SJWism is not bold, brash, and brave. It's been inculcated by decadent Boomers and Gen X-ers who wouldn't know true progressivism (the Robin Hood class stuff) if it bit them in the ass. Neil Howe has repeatedly said that most behavioral and psychological indicators reveal that Millennials are doing better than young Boomers and X-ers were. Boomers and X-ers when asked about their relationships with their parents often said that they felt alienation and at times hostility toward their parents. Teens becoming delinquents, runaways, etc. were a much bigger problem in the 1970's-early 90's then they are these days.

    Seeing as how indicators of rebellious behavior are at their lowest level since the mid-1950's, we ought to really question the meme that Millennials are somehow upending a (culturally) conservative order. Culturally we've grown more and more liberal since the late 60's; regurgitating Cult-Marx crap is nothing new (and on free speech, for example, 1960's births are the first cohort to support moderate to heavy restrictions).I do think that on economic issues, we are heading in the Robin Hood direction due to Millennials, as Boomers and X-ers are far more Darwinist in their thinking (with great economic freedom comes big winners and big losers).

    The dominant and often aged elites are intent on pushing hardcore ID politics, because after all they're invested in the past, the 60's and 70's cultural revolution where Leftist ID politics began to outstrip other concerns. These elites are disinterested in advancing beyond Reaganite and Clintonite economic mores where winners are celebrated and losers are forgotten. While Millennials might respect the ID politics angle that they've been socialized with, on the other hand it's plainly retarded for most Millennials to buy into the neo-liberal paradigm of the last 40+ years. It's been of no benefit to younger people; why defend something that has no value to you?

  19. Feryl says: • Website

    Another thing to consider is that Boomers and Gen X-ers, more so than perhaps any other generations in human history, bought into the "free agent" mentality. They don't like teams, don't like institutions, don't like elaborate customs of conduct and etiquette; hell they don't even have that many friends (Neil Howe said that Boomers and X-ers came of age in small bands of close friends who went on adventures; research shows that Millennials tend to have less invested in a small circle of close friends than older generations did). The greatest change Millennials will bring about is insisting that people be respected, rules be followed, fair play observed, and so on. What Silents and Boomers wrought, and Gen X-ers rarely opposed, was the notion that immigrants, racial minorities, homosexuals, etc. ought to have the same opportunity to make it big and live life on their own terms as cishetero white Western males. In other words, individual opportunity always superceded the importance of downplaying individual ego for the sake of the greater good. A great sign of this is the rise in "open" floor plans in offices; Boomers and Gen X-ers wanted to be seperated each in their own little world, while Millennials don't think privacy is that important (and given that Boomers and X-ers have a much spottier track record than Millennials, it stands to reason that older generations feel as if they've got a lot to hide).

  20. Feryl says: • Website

    You're oft noted tendency to remind people that young Republicans are much more immigration restrictionist is also a good sign.

    Older generations of conservatives didn't think much of restriction because they saw it as a State imposition on individual freedom and opportunity. When the likes of George Will wail about not feeling like they're in Kansas anymore, it's not without good reason to suspect that things are changing. Again, Boomers and Gen X-ers' conception of fairness in say, the 1990's, was giving everyone maximum freedom to live life as they wished. But lately the values have changed to be about protecting people from the excesses of individualism. Since Millennials have not benefited at all from the free for all that's reigned in the Western world for 50 years, why does anyone expect them to fight for that system? There's a big danger in older generations of elites stubbornly clinging to that which no longer works or sells. Anecdotally, I've noticed over the last 5-10 years that more and more people (including "conservatives") have begun to question the economic changes of the last 40-50 years. We're light years beyond the 80's or 90's, when conservatives gleefully attacked the notion that workers and consumers deserve more protection. Even during the Bush era, a decent number of conservatives rejected the idea that we ought to blame consumers for accepting bogus loans; perhaps the real problem is a legal and social order that enables elites and companies to be abusive.

    To the extent that the GOP has had recent success, a lot of it can be attributed to 60's births being strongly Republican (and often of the cuck flavor), as well as Trump. But if they can't get off their Saint Ronnie Raygun high horse, and the economy craters, than the GOP is royally screwed. They can't count on later Boomers and early Gen X-ers reveling in social Darwinism forever. And Jesus, Trump made hay by attacking normal GOP policy towards trade and foreign policy, while Trump didn't run on attacking social spending or big government. So already the GOP is on thin ice, which cracks more everytime the Dems run a moderate white guy or woke woman/non-white, depending on the nature of the district or state.

    Lawd almighty, please stop with the Reagan hagiography. He to a large extent oversaw our government during a period in which many negative trends started or worsened, particularly WRT defense spending and irresponsible economic bubbles (every economic boom since the mid-80's has been less and less beneficial to working class people). I get it, everyone felt like shit in the 70's and whamo in comes Reagan and "everyone" feels better. Older people weren't as impressionable, but youngsters born in the 60's and early 70's basically thought that Reagan was this demigod who saved us from the dreadful 70's.

  21. Feryl,

    The dominant and often aged elites are intent on pushing hardcore ID politics, because after all they're invested in the past, the 60's and 70's cultural revolution where Leftist ID politics began to outstrip other concerns.

    There's an observation that can be quantified in the GSS. Thanks for the post idea!

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS