The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Edmund Connelly Archive
The Rocky Horror Picture Show as Reactionary Morality Tale
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show 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

How many of you have ever flown into Auckland Airport (as in New Zealand), assembled your mountain bike, then headed due south, ending up that evening at a nowhere stop that at least had a large pub featuring karaoke night (which had surprisingly good singers)? Further, how many of you, after food and beer, then pitched your little tent across the river from the pub on the other bank in the dark, listening as remaining patrons jeered the police waiting in the dark for drunk drivers? (New Zealand at the time was in the first stages of actually addressing that country’s notorious culture of drunk driving.)

How many of you then heard a car with a robust V8 elude police and rapidly accelerate away from the pub, only to horribly but invisibly crash into something made of steel, with the awful shrieks of fast-moving metal on asphalt? Instantly, but in slow motion, a mass of wreckage then crashed through the brush on the pub side of the river, showers of orange sparks leaping into the river, followed by dead silence. Ten minutes later, the village siren began to wail in earnest and eventually a helicopter with a floodlight arrived right over the river and my tent. I’ll bet none of you readers have ever experienced that. It was a night out I was going to remember for a long time.

The next morning, detectives arrived to interview me, a sort of eyewitness in the dark. Imagine my surprise upon learning that it was in fact a tractor-trailer that had plunged into the river before me, the “orange sparks” actually the running lights of the entire semi. Thus was the stage set for my short ride into the modest town of Hamilton, New Zealand.

“What the dickens is so important about Hamilton, New Zealand?” you might ask. Well, that is where Richard O’Brien spent part of his life working as a hairdresser.

Okay, where exactly is this story going?

Richard O’Brien, you see, is the creative genius behind The Rocky Horror Picture Show, a 1975 musical that has become so famous that Counter-Currents readers likely need no description of it. Thus, all know that O’Brien wrote the original musical stage show called The Rocky Horror Show in 1973, then starred as the creepy butler Riff Raff in the 1975 film version, The Rocky Horror Picture Show. And in 2004, members of the Hamilton City Council in New Zealand honored O’Brien’s contribution to the arts with a statue of Riff Raff, which is the statue I was stunned to see in a sunny and parched open lot when I arrived in Hamilton after my memorable night along the river.

Wikipedia suitably conveys conventional wisdom about the show when it writes, “Beyond its cult status, The Rocky Horror Show is also widely said to have been an influence on countercultural and sexual liberation movements that followed on from the 1960s. It was one of the first popular musicals to depict fluid sexuality during a time of division between generations and a lack of sexual difference acceptance.”

Fair enough, and that’s precisely the impression I got upon first seeing it at a standard midnight showing while a college student, and for some years after as I enjoyed repeat viewings.

Only years later, when I was a professor teaching modern American culture, did I realize that such an impression was entirely wrong, because at the climax of the musical there is an obvious turn of events indicting exactly this kind of behavior. In other words, The Rocky Horror Picture Show is one of the greatest reactionary science fiction musicals ever made!

For those who have never taught film, one thing to know is that a teacher ends up viewing a 20, 30, even 100 times — or at least select scenes from that film. Such an exposure leads to observations about a film that more casual viewers could almost never make, especially tiny things inserted into the set or passing actions made by minor characters.

In my case, I was teaching a group of foreign college students who had surprisingly little knowledge of post-war American history and, quite frankly, almost no interest in learning about it, so I turned to entertainment as a ploy. In addition, I used film versions that had subtitles in the students’ language because otherwise it would have been a total failure trying to teach the content of these films to this group.

I figured it would be good enough to start with the Great Depression and simplify each decade down to literally one word, with The Grapes of Wrath imparting the sense that Americans were “poor” during that period, followed by “war” in the next decade and “happy” during the 1950s. American Graffiti was the leading film I used for those lessons.

Then by the 1960s, I was able to spend more time offering a deeper examination of American culture, beginning with the end of the ‘50s in 1963 with Kennedy’s death, then the emergence of more individual freedom with the “sex, drugs, and rock-‘n’-roll” that followed. Having turned into an old fuddy-duddy by then, I’d try to show students that such behavior inevitably led to some very negative consequences by the early 1970s, including divorce, death from drug overdoses, and a general decline of morals. What better way to teach that progression than a truncated viewing of The Rocky Horror Picture Show!

In short, I’d start the lesson with a review of the 1950s, with its conventional morality and innocent teenagers. Life was pretty swell then, I’d teach. Then I’d let the film roll. Admittedly, the opening song and credits are pretty bizarre, but we next meet Brad and Janet at the country church wedding of two friends.

The experience of watching friend Betty Monroe morph into “Mrs. Ralph Hapschatt” kindles ideas of eternal bliss in Brad and Janet, and we suspect they are soon about to take the plunge into marital bliss themselves.

Of course, the whole post-wedding scene is campy, as Rocky generally is in its entirety, and we viewers, upon even the first viewing, take notice of things like the graveyard next to the church, or Brad dropping the engagement ring he tries to put it on Janet’s finger. We also notice the odd “caretakers” in front of the church, especially as they wheel a black casket inside as Brad and Janet imagine through song and dance what a wonderful married life they will soon have. (Susan Sarandon, playing Janet Weiss, was so hot as she sashayed up the aisle.)

Then, however, we have the weird entrance of the “The Narrator,” who is trying to explain what is taking place. In a few short minutes, the viewer has seen the opening of the film with a pair of bright red lips and shining teeth singing a song with enough references to famous science fiction movies of the past that we get an inkling of what is to come, but the cut to the wedding scene has no connection whatsoever (well, to the uninitiated at least) to the opening song. Then there is the abrupt cut to the stodgy narrator to add further confusion. This musical could have fallen on its face very, very easily.

Fortunately, as we all now know, it became a run-away success that has enjoyed many decades of uninterrupted fame, with the same kind of audience participation by college students and others that I had experienced so many moons ago. (I hate to think what has happened during this awful Covid era, however.)

I’ve never seen Rocky performed on the stage (and frankly wouldn’t want to). Instead, to me Rocky is and will always be the 1975 film version with its unparalleled cast and brilliant music. Rocky remains my favorite film by far, and I have never tired of showing the same scenes in class again and again and again. For me, it is as fixed in the cultural landscape as Dorothy, Toto, the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, and the Cowardly Lion are in The Wizard of Oz. It would be sacrilege to change a thing.

At this point in the essay, I would like to switch from the position of first-time viewer to that of the teacher, offering a much more thought-out consideration of the film’s meaning. What we are going to see after the Narrator’s veiled warning is the explosion of sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll that creator Richard O’Brien no doubt still strongly remembered from the second half of the 1960s and into the first years of the 1970s. And that is precisely what Brad and Janet also experience as they exit the confines of the stable safety of the 1950s and step foot into the uproar that is the 1960s. Thus, their “journey” will be compacted into a few crazy days at the rural retreat of some wealthy “weirdos.” That party is, in short, an account of the 1960s from the viewpoint of the young people who experienced it. “Bliss it was in that dawn to be alive / But to be young was very heaven.”

And, for the majority of the film to follow, Brad and Janet are indeed going to enjoy some of the freedom promised by the ’60s. But throughout, this adventure will be in tension with the undercurrent of “horror” in the title of the film, in the opening song, and in The Narrator’s menacing introduction:

I would like, if I may, to take you on a strange journey.

It seemed a fairly ordinary night when Brad Majors and his fiancée Janet Weiss, two young, ordinary, healthy kids, left Denton that late November evening to visit a Dr. Everett Scott, ex-tutor and now friend to both of them. It’s true there were dark storm clouds heavy, black, and pendulous toward which they were driving. It’s true also that the spare tire they were carrying was badly in need of some air, but they being normal kids on a night out, well . . . They were not going to let a little storm spoil the events of their evening. On a night out . . . It was a night out they were going to remember for a very long time.

The Narrator, played to perfection by the neckless Charles Gray, is absolutely right for the role, as are all the characters in the film release. Formal, old school, and with a commandingly thick British accent, he assumes the role of authority, having overseen a thorough investigation of Brad and Janet’s “night out” and the events at the secluded mansion. His cautious warning of the “night out” inevitably sticks with us as the fun unravels.

Rocky’s plot involves a layering of motifs, beginning with an homage to science fiction B-movies of the past. It also centrally incorporates the Mary Shelley Frankenstein tale, updating it to a more imaginative, hipper Dr. Frankenstein. And finally, this is a thorough-going morality tale, one that Richard O’Brien could in no way have foreseen would be hugely relevant in the 1990s and into the new millennium. This is all wrapped in camp and parody (though, as I will later argue, it actually contains a poignant tragedy revolving around some very serious topics).

Still, on the surface, there is no doubt about Rocky’s lightheartedness, as this description explains:

The Rocky Horror Picture Show is not a film that takes itself too seriously. Because of this, it has in-jokes, fourth-wall breaking and a host of nods, winks, and tongue-in-cheek dialogue. It takes great delight in parodying films from previous eras at certain points. Dr. Frank ‘N Furter even looks directly at the camera in some instances, acknowledging the fact that there is an audience watching.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves. Let us return to Brad and Janet’s plans after the wedding of Betty and Ralph Hapschatt. Brad and Janet are in a suitably boring old station wagon, driving along a dark road under rainy skies. While listening to Richard Nixon’s resignation speech, Brad takes a wrong turn and backs up to get back to the correct road, whereupon he hits something and blows out a rear tire, setting up the occasion for these immortal lines:

Brad: Dammit! I knew I should have gotten that spare tire fixed! Well you just stay here and keep warm, and I’ll go for help.

Janet: Where will you go? We’re in the middle of nowhere.

Brad: Didn’t we pass a castle back down the road a few miles? Maybe they have a telephone I could use.

Brad’s sheer insouciance — no, stupidity — in not noticing anything out of place with a castle plopped out in the wilderness of the American Midwest succinctly captures his naïveté and unreadiness to enter into the confines of that castle — or into the mind-expanding activities of the 1960s.

Before viewing a further demonstration of Brad’s lack of preparation for the ’60s, we observe the rain-soaked couple approach the castle, a line of motorcycles glistening in the flash of lightning. The camera then pans to a turret up in the castle, where the butler Riff Raff sings a beautifully plaintive song, really one lacking in irony or parody, but rather a cry from the heart, dealing with his existential condition:

Darkness must flow down the river of night’s dreaming
Flow Morphia, slow
Let the sun and light come streaming into my life, into my life

Informed now about the state of the butler’s tortured soul, we see him as he answers the door of the castle, the rings of the large doorbell still reverberating off the stone walls. At this point, Janet, at least, understands that they are in more than a little danger. Brad, meanwhile, remains oblivious, hardly the man to protect his fiancée.

Upon entering, Brad and Janet slowly gaze at their new surroundings, eerie and threatening. Riff Raff tries to explain the weird circumstances by understatedly informing the young couple, “You’ve arrived on a rather special night. It’s one of the master’s affairs.” Suddenly, Magenta, the maid and sister to Riff Raff, slides down the railing and screeches, followed by Riff Raff breaking into the popular “Time Warp” tune.

Thrust into the ballroom, Brad and Janet are presented with a wide range of decidedly odd guests thoroughly enjoying dancing “The Time Warp.”

To no one’s surprise at this point, the nerd (okay, asshole) Brad utters the inanity, “Say, do any of you guys know how to Madison?” Now Janet really knows she’s in trouble.

Immediately, we hear an ominous cadence and soon see an old cage elevator descending, occupied by someone wearing ostentatious white high heels. Panning upward from the heels, the camera reveals a showman in a cape, and the showman turns around. The Rocky Horror Picture Show has now truly begun.

Glossed lips glistening, our next main character makes a glorious entrance as he throws open the door of the elevator and struts into the ballroom, launching into the song “Sweet Transvestite” where we (assuming it is prior to, say, 1990) are shocked to see that this character is a man in a woman’s garter belt and bodice ensemble.

Jaded and outrageous, he introduces himself through song:

How do you do?
I see you’ve met my, faithful . . . handyman
He’s a little brought down, because when you knocked
He thought you were the candyman
Don’t get strung out by the way I look
Don’t judge a book by its cover
I’m not much of a man by the light of day
But by night I’m one hell of a lover

He throws off his cloak, revealing his transvestite attire: “I’m just a sweet transvestite, from Transsexual Transylvania.”

Well, we certainly have had an unexpected development here. Imagine how audiences must have reacted in 1973 (stage) and 1975 (movie theater) upon seeing this outrageous cabaret. Quite likely, the response was to view it as hilarious fiction, an over-the-top portrayal of an unrealistic and impossible world.

Surprise! Viewers of that era had no idea this very thing was coming to their world in 30 short years, and in 40 years anyone with the temerity to find anything offensive in this behavior would be viciously hounded and condemned. Oh, Rocky was so prescient, indeed.

In any case, I’ve devoted so much time to this introduction because it is so deserving of praise for its brilliance in so many ways. The seemingly disjointed collection of scenes prior now coalesce to give us the framework of the story. Further, it now situates the three main characters: Brad, Janet, and Dr. Frank-N-Furter (and yes, later there is a stale joke that Frank is a real “hot dog”). Perhaps because she has lost faith in Brad’s ability to protect her, but maybe more because she is attracted to drama and power, Janet begins to show tentative interest in Frank as a sex object, a feeling that will grow throughout the movie. Frank, for his part, merely sees Brad and Janet as another sideshow that can provide him with yet more fleeting pleasure — including the pleasure of utterly corrupting them.

Next, we move on to the Frankenstein portion of musical, where Frank-N-Furter indeed attempts to create a man out of inanimate material. Of course this is no monster. Instead, Frank describes his creation as he tells Brad and Janet about his lustful desires:

Why don’t you stay for the night — or maybe a bite
I could show you my favorite obsession
I’ve been making a man
With blonde hair and a tan
And he’s good for relieving my tension
I’m just a sweet transvestite . . .
From Transsexual Transylvania

Sure enough, after some colorful chemical processes, Frank gets his man — Rocky:

Next, to jump ahead a bit, we enter into an unexpected moral dilemma as a scene of irrepressible power and creativity overtakes us. From a large freezer emerges an ice-covered biker carrying a saxophone. The biker is none other than the iconic Meat Loaf, scarred and oozing primal male power, which is apparently what drew Columbia, an old girlfriend, to him.

Meat Loaf as Eddie belts out a powerful rock-‘n’-roll song, completely upstaging the fuming Frank-N-Furter, a vain and spoiled individual. After finishing his sax solo, Eddie rides around the large room on his large Harley, continuing to dominate the scene. Furious, Frank grabs a pick and threatens the much larger Eddie, who fearfully backs into the foggy freezer, from which we hear the horrible sounds of pick ripping flesh, with screams from Columbia. Soon, the bloodied Frank-N-Furter exits, stumbling after such exertion. Rushing over to his love creation, he consoles an agitated Rocky, “Don’t be upset. It was a mercy killing. He had a certain naïve charm — but no muscle.”

To Frank, this is just more typical behavior, as thus far no one has been able to tame his unruly passions. But, in fact, this murder becomes the moral fulcrum of the show by asking us: What exactly are the limits of behavior? Wild parties with plentiful drugs? Unbounded sex? Challenging God’s prerogative of creating humans? Cold-blooded murder?

Frank, being a “sweet transvestite,” shows that he is also playfully bisexual, first slipping into Janet’s solitary bedroom disguised as Brad. Deceived, Janet submits to the bodily temptation and for the first time engages in sex, only to find that it is with the despicable Dr. Frank-N-Furter, who continues his seduction. Still, Janet sobs, “You tricked me — I wouldn’t have — I’ve never — never . . .” Frank purrs back to her, “Yes, yes I know. But it isn’t all bad, is it? I think you really found it quite pleasurable.” Finally, Janet succumbs to this erotic stimulation and asks, “Promise you won’t tell Brad?” “Cross my heart and hope to die,” Frank replies. They then resume intercourse.

The following scene is nearly identical, except now “Janet” enters Brad’s chambers and they begin to have sex. Sure enough, Frank is now impersonating Janet, and Brad is of course outraged, repeating almost line for line what Janet had just said. Exposed but undeterred, Frank continues his seduction, in turn using the same words with Brad that he had with Janet. Like Janet, Brad completes his initiation into the world of sex, even if his first encounter was with a man. Frank’s corruption of the young couple continues apace.

And so Frank’s indulgence of disordered passions proceeds, but we in the audience are increasingly convinced that this “freedom” is justified, as we escape the previous shackles of parents, religion, and general morality. The ’60s are a new age and there is no punishment for realizing desire, nor even for more serious transgressions. So, for instance, we return to the topic of Eddie’s murder when Frank hosts a birthday dinner party. It never crosses Frank’s mind that he has exceeded the limits by what he has done to Eddie. In fact, he celebrates it by throwing the murder in the faces of his dinner guests when, reenacting Alfred Hitchcock’s 1948 film Rope, he entertains while the mutilated body of Eddie lies beneath their very dinner table.

Compared to Hitchcock’s Rope, the dinner scene in Rocky is no sophisticated affair, as for instance Janet is nearly naked and Frank is wearing a child’s birthday party hat. Frank then cuts the dinner meat with an electric knife and passes out slices to his guests, but the conversation turns suspect when the character known as Dr. Scott says, “We came here to discuss Eddie,” to which Frank replies, “That’s a rather tender subject,” implying something entirely unsavory. Frank is indeed a depraved man.

As the gnawing suspicion grows that Frank is feeding them the flesh of the deceased Eddie, Frank rips off the tablecloth to reveal a Cubist vision of the vivisected Eddie. All are appalled except for Frank, who blithely continues to assume that power trumps any old-fashioned concepts of morality.

The Narrator, however, reminds of us of the pull of morality:

Fate it seems had decided that Brad and Janet should keep their appointment with their friend Dr. Everett Scott. But it was to be in a situation which none of them could have possibly foreseen. And just a few hours after announcing their engagement, Brad and Janet had both tasted forbidden fruit. This in itself was proof that their host was a man of little morals — and some persuasion. What further indignities were they to be subjected to? And what of the floorshow that had been spoken of? In an empty house in the middle of the night, what diabolical plan had seized Frank’s crazed imagination? What indeed? From what had gone before, it was clear that this was to be no picnic.

Reference to “forbidden fruit” is indeed apt here, for the Garden of Eden story is a parable about God imposing morality on mankind. Transgression is worthy of punishment, so Frank too must be punished, but that will come later. First, we are treated to the floorshow alluded to by Dr. Scott. Here, the musical begins its crescendo to the climax and denouement.

Dr. Frank has turned his guests into stone statues as he prepares his floorshow. He then pulls down a large lever to return Columbia to a living human, and she begins her song, “It was great when it all began, I was a regular Frankie fan.” In turn, the others are unfrozen and sing about their transition to an unrestricted lifestyle. When Brad’s turn comes, he sings:

It’s beyond me
Help me Mommy
I’ll be good and you’ll see
Take this dream away
What’s this, let’s see . . . I feel sexy
What’s come over me
Whoa — here it comes again!

Next is Janet, who is empowered now, welcoming her own initiation into sins of the flesh:

Oh, I . . . I feel released
Bad times deceased
My confidence has increased, reality is here
The game has been disbanded
My mind has been expanded
It’s a gas that Frankie’s landed
His lust is so sincere

Even the wheelchair-bound Dr. Scott is enticed by this cultural shift toward freedom and promiscuity, revealing that under his quilt he is wearing black high heels and fishnet stockings. This shift everyone makes to acceptance of the permissive society’s mores is validated when Frank begins his own performance, dressed like a woman as he stands beneath a model of the RKO Tower. Kicking a lever to reveal a stage diving board, Frank slowly ascends it, singing invitingly:

Give yourself over to absolute pleasure
Swim the warm waters of sins of the flesh
Erotic madness beyond any measure
And sensual daydreams to treasure forever
Can’t you just see it — oh, oh, oh . . .

This is the credo of liberated Western man and woman, as sex has been chemically separated from procreation and guilt while pursuing sexual gratification has been conquered by unbridled imagination. Unrestricted sex leads to physical and emotional nirvana, from the lifestyles of the single liberated woman to Michel Foucault in the bathhouses of San Francisco. No cost is attached to any of this.

This message is then amplified as the feminized Frank leaps into the mist above the pool beneath him, at which point, the mist clearing, he softly launches into repetitively singing lyrics representing the entire message of the movie up to this point:

Don’t dream it, be it
Don’t dream it, be it

It’s a beautiful sequence, to be sure. Frank is 100% sincere in his embrace of this motto, seemingly cleansed of the memory of the many horrible deeds he’s committed. At this point, the sheer beauty of the scene of him standing beneath the RKO Tower, then jumping into the lavish indoor pool, mesmerizes us, pulling us into Frank’s fantasy, just as it has pulled in the other characters. For all intents and purposes, it looks like this is leading to a happy ending.

The careful viewer, however, will see signs of smoke on the horizon, so to speak. For when Frank jumps into the pool, he ends up sitting atop a standard ocean lifesaver as he dreamily paddles about the ornate pool, a large rendering of Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel Divine Spark image beneath him.

But if one checks the letters on the lifesaver, one will read “SS Titanic.” Perfectly appropriate at this point. Full speed ahead.

Intoxicated with his unrivaled power and the success he’s attained in the pursuit of a hedonistic lifestyle, Frank erupts into a boisterous chorus, leading a line dance of characters upon the stage with a triumphant victory song:

I’m a wild and an untamed thing
I’m a bee with a deadly sting
You gotta hit and your mind goes ping
Your heart’ll thump and your blood will sing
So let the party and the sounds rock on
We’re gonna shake it till the life has gone

Amidst this, however, Dr. Scott struggles against this message, pulled both in the direction of his traditional moral past and in the new direction of eroticism and freedom:

Ach, we’ve got to get out of this trap
Before this decadence saps our wills
I’ve got to be strong and try to hang on
Or else my mind may well . . . SNAP
And my life will be lived
For the thrill

Then, out of nowhere, we get the sudden entrance of the actual alien commander from the planet Transylvania — none other than the self-effacing butler Riff Raff. Having stoically endured his subordinate Frank-N-Furter’s humiliation and abuse, he forcefully turns the tables and issues this edict:

Frank-N-Furter, it’s all over
Your mission is a failure
Your life is too extreme
I’m your new Commander
You now are my prisoner
We return to Transylvania
Prepare the transit beam

Sadly, Frank misinterprets this to mean he will also accompany the commander and Magenta back to Transylvania, but in fact Frank has been condemned to death, which Riff Raff duly effects with his laser beam. It’s a touching scene.

We’ve now reached the end of the film. To be honest, for years I never noticed that Frank’s debauched lifestyle was ultimately condemned in the film and his execution a stark statement about a “life too extreme.” After the execution, Dr. Scott even congratulates Riff Raff for the action by nothing, “Society must be protected.” I think these points are very clear, and they were always there for us to see and hear. Curious, then, that the film has always been celebrated as a paean to sexual and other liberations.

When Riff Raff and Magenta beam the rocket-cum-castle back toward Transsexual Transylvania, Brad, Janet, and Dr. Scott are left sullied and bruised by the rocket’s blast — and by their brush with freedom, for they have learned that there are no great adventures without risk. And sure enough, as mentioned, the 1970s saw a rise in divorce and out-of-wedlock births, a rise in venereal disease, drug addiction, nihilism, and so on.

The Narrator captures this sense of chastisement as he prepares to turn out the lights to his office:

And crawling . . . on the planet’s face
Some insects . . . called the human race
Lost in time . . . and lost in space
And meaning

For me at the time, that was an exquisitely profound pronouncement, commenting as it did on the fallout from the loss of religious faith in the West and the spread of existential angst in the twentieth century. The Rocky Horror Picture Show accomplished so much in its 100-minute run time.

Why do I think the musical is so good? In short, I have always experienced it as a near-perfect production. In addition to the superb cast, the music is just so good. Sure, it’s not Wagner, but the coin of our realm is popular music, and Richard O’Brien hit it out of the park with his compositions, and singers then captured the spirit of the songs wonderfully.

In addition the costumes and cinematography are stunning. Perfect, really. So vivid, so alive, and all done on a tiny budget. The Rocky Horror Picture Show is, to my mind, a modern film miracle, as relevant today as it was in 1975. By taking the generic Hansel and Gretel tale of two innocents released among the wilds, Richard O’Brien spun a story that captured the highs and lows of the entire second half of the twentieth century in American culture. And by the year 2000, what was seen as outrageous parody theater had now become our life. I’ll need to watch it yet again to see if some of the joy of the film is at all muted by the action in the musical now becoming the norm. And will there be a correction for this? A price to pay, as Frank-N-Furter paid with his own life for the extreme nature of his visit to Earth? We’ll soon find, out one way or another.

Before reaching my final comments, I’d like to fill in a few blanks for readers, particularly concerning the opening lyrics where we are promised a

Science Fiction double feature
Dr. X will build a creature
See Androids fighting Brad and Janet
Anne Francis stars in Forbidden Planet
Ahahahaho . . .
At the late night, double-feature Picture Show

To be sure, we easily recognized the Frankenstein horror story, but where was the science fiction beyond that? Upon multiple viewings, of course, we learn that the entire trio of Frank, Riff Raff, and Magenta are aliens literally from another planet, and when you go back to watch the opening wedding scene, it is the trio that play the custodians at the church.

This outrageous mixture of themes never should have worked — yet it did. And still does. I wonder how it will age over the next half-century.

Finally, I’ll offer the two closing songs, the first accompanying the launch of the castle and the Narrator’s profound comments on the drama we’ve just experienced. To this day I’m still impressed by the chastised remaining characters’ disorientation, represented by a nauseous spinning of their surroundings as it morphs into the globe, which the Narrator reflects upon before turning out the light. Enjoy this closing here.

Even the closing credits provide an enchanting spectacle as we enjoy a beautiful reprise of the opening song. Full of melancholy and a sense of lost opportunities, the song is slow, ethereal, elegant, with tinkly bells adding a whiff of nostalgia for the long-lost past of King Kong, Faye Ray, and so many others we once knew. Frankie and Rocky, too. Most of all, the song brings perfect closure to an uproarious era, all packed into that night in a mysterious castle. It was quite a journey.

(Republished from Counter-Currents Publishing by permission of author or representative)
Hide 157 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Franz says:

    And sure enough, as mentioned, the 1970s saw a rise in divorce and out-of-wedlock births

    The WWII guys were fetching trophy wives. Already alarmingly noted in 1967 by Divorce American Style, a mendacious movie that tried to play it for laughs.

    “Rocky Horror” (stage or screen) got attention in the 70s for starting the Midnight Movie trend. Few people saw it. The ones who did saw it more than once and were unlikely to contribute to divorce statistics. A gay bar with a nearby cheap screen showing Rocky was a cliche by 1980.

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @SBaker
  2. I missed seeing Rocky Horror when it premiered in 1975, but watched a midnight screening at a theater on Colfax street in Denver in 1979. By then the film already had a cult following. Some of the audience were dressed in character and often would charge down to the front and dance excitedly together with one of the favorite numbers; “Let’s do the time warp again” was performed by the half drunken crew of dancers and was very comical to watch. I enjoyed the enthusiastic audience more than the film. I left the film thinking, “Those people need to get a real life.” But it was fun and I suppose they outgrew it. We were all young then.

    • Replies: @Curle
  3. Jake Dee says:

    Superb analysis.
    What ever Richard O’Brien thought he was creating there are hidden depths in any powerful work of art that only reveal themselves slowly.
    I just noticed that the groupie Columbia has the same name as the female avatar of North America.
    Coincidence ?
    Depends on how you see things doesn’t it ? If O’Brien lifted the name from Columbia Pictures (like his many references to RKO pictures) then there is a direct link. Names like this are memes that burrow deep into the human psyche and can stay dormant for generations, just like the eggs of the brine shrimp in the salt flats waiting for the rains to come again.
    Colombia, once a pure goddess full of hope and promise, later a powerful movie studio, later still a whore in thrall to an alien degenerate.
    Coincidence ?

  4. Fr. John says:

    The utter LACK of spiritual insight in this ‘review/jack-off fest’ of an article is so astounding, it beggars the imagination. Or is that intentional? Does the author himself lust after the ‘things of the world’ that this film encourages? As a teacher, I would hope not. Otherwise, he is no better than the scum whose film he is reviewing.

    RHPS was not a ‘prescient look into the future;’ it was FINKELTHINK/MK Ultra/Laurel Canyon propaganda, guaranteed to MAKE that future come to pass! While O’Brien may have had the initial idea, it was the usual (and unusual- read SICK) suspects that INCARNATED this antichristian vision for mass consumption. Who were those criminals (Let’s just be honest, shall we?)?
    Faggots, Jews, and other cultural Gramscian lowlifes:

    OBrien- a disgusting, psychological mess of a man: “In a 2009 interview, O’Brien spoke about an ongoing struggle to reconcile cultural gender roles and described himself as transgender or “of a third gender”.

    Umm, yeah. NO.

    Sharman- low-class carnie pervert, of a family of low-class hedonists and adulterers: “Later in life the director would discover that both his grandfather and father had second families, born out of liaisons formed on the carnival circuit.”-

    NO wonder history has always denigrated carnie folk. They’re the bottom of the barrel.

    Lou Adler – “Adler was born to a Jewish family, the son of Manny and Josephine (Alpert) Adler…”

    Michael White- “Michael White was born in Glasgow, Scotland, the son of Doris (née Cohen)…His mother was Eastern European Jewish …”-


    Tim Curry – “He has never been married and has no children.” And he’s 75? Privacy is one thing; paranoia about the truth, when you know he is…. is well, sick.

    Susan Sarandon – “Sarandon is known for her active support of progressive and left-wing political causes…”- Wiki

    Ah, yes. Selling one’s soul to the Hollywood beast.

    Need I go on? Sorry. But this film is an abomination. All of the people involved with it, are enemies of decency, and therefore, “traif” – to use a Jewish/Yiddish term. Every copy, every picture, every vestige of this hole of degeneracy, should be found, banned, and burned. Make the book burnings of the Nazis look like a summer parade, frankly. So many people dead of AIDS, and a lifestyle that, six years on from the release of this film, were due to the fallacy that ‘the wages of sin’ is NOT death.

    God is not mocked.

    Also, this film was THE focal point for both gays and tranny freaks’ self-legitimization (and legal attempts to legitimize perversity), from 1975 on.

    “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” – Matt 18:6


  5. Interesting article, Mr. Connelly, but face it, if you didn’t bring into the theater a bag of rice, some white bread, and water guns, you don’t even know what made this movie a phenomena. It was a big party. You can’t do any of this anymore, since our country started to suck.

    “He’s got no neck!”

    A few beers beforehand is always a good idea.

    Oh, lastly, I happened to go to this movie in Spain some years later and without the crowd knowing all this, even without my knowing the language, I could tell when the moviegoers were saying “What the fuck??”

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  6. Hello readers. I’d like to thank you for the comments some have made, but first I’d like to point out a minor (major?) discovery we made through the comments at Counter-Currents at

    It seems that after Frank-N-Furter is executed by Riff Raff and the castle (rocket) blasts off back to Transsexual Transylvania, there is an additional scene called “Superheroes,” one that was included in the version I’ve used since at least the year 2000. A reader with the name “Petronius” informed us that the scene in question is missing from the release he saw, which strikes me as a rather large omission.

    The scene explicitly repeats the “reactionary morality” tale I used as a title, and might explain why those who did not see/hear that scene downplay the theme that Frank was executed for a life too extreme (not just sexual perversion but murder). You can watch that sometimes deleted scene here:u can catch it here:

    Interestingly, an American comments under it the YouTube version: “I live in America and I’m so sad that this ending was cut out of the US version.  It’s the perfect ending, especially with the narrator’s speech. It shows how Brad and Janet will never be the same again. Ending the movie as the castle is beamed to Transylvania is an okay ending, but this song gives the film an extra pow, and gives a proper ending to Brad and Janet’s character arcs. It truly feels complete after this, after the narrator leaves.  The ending in the US version just isn’t as effective and not nearly as beautiful.”

    Still, even with all this evidence that ultimately Frank is severely condemned for his behavior, why do we continue to overlook that in favor of ACCEPTING Frank’s decadence? To review, Riff Raff turns the tables on his fellow alien (Frank) when he bursts in with his laser and sings:

    Frank-N-Furter, it’s all over

    Your mission is a failure
    Your life is too extreme
    I’m your new Commander
    You now are my prisoner
    We return to Transylvania
    Prepare the transit beam

    Next follows a long execution scene in which first Columbia, then Rocky and Frank, die. THEN if you immediately watch the Superheroes scene, it is hard to deny that the film is sending a clear message that Frank went too far — and we should not emulate him.

    But still ….

    Our commenter Petronius might ultimately understand the impact of the film best:

    “The ‘reactionary morality’ addressed in this article is largely tongue-in-cheek, I’d say, and should not be taken at face value, this being a parody of pre-1960 horror and sci-fi-movies. It does indeed show total sexual liberation and hedonism as coming with a heavy price, but the lingering impression is the flamboyant party-glamour and lascivious wickedness of Frank’n’Furter and his crew, imitated by so many ‘cult movie’ aficionados. When the movie is over, you will primarily remember the campy, over-the-top celebrations of kinky sexual libertinage, and less the punishment for egocentric Frank or the ultimately humiliating corruption of Brad and Janet.”

    I guess that’s why viewers need a teacher like Edmund Connelly to steer them in the right direction 🙂

  7. @Fr. John

    Fr. John, you make many excellent points but I will still have to plead “Not guilty” to your charges. But of course it’s not your fault that you don’t know about the usual slant of my writing, which can always be found at Kevin MacDonald’s Occidental Quarterly (
    and Occidental Observer (, where my attention to the JQ is surely well known. In this instance, I just wanted to have a little fun with “Rocky Horror” while not considering the JQ, though I did debate with myself exploring that aspect of it as well.

    More fundamentally, I’m surprised you didn’t support my effort to reveal RHPS as the “reactionary morality tale” I take it to be. Didn’t I make a good case for that?

    Also, if you check my comment just above this one, you’ll see that even though RHPS — when it includes the Superheroes scene — makes an explicit case for what I’m arguing, it’s still not cut and dried. Please read about that above.

    Finally, just to be a little more specific — and since you are arguing from a Christian (Catholic?) point of view — I’d like to add that as far as I know, I’m the world’s premier reviewer of E. Michael Jones’ work, especially “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit.” I won’t include all the links to that work but will add just two recent ones, one of which is my 100th submission to The Occidental Observer. It is:

    Jones vs. KMAC: Spirit or Material? Toward a Synthesis

    followed by last week’s

    David Ray Griffin and the Demonic

    In both cases, I think you’ll be able to see that I pay due attention to the JQ, and if you go back and read more of my work, you’ll better see that I’m sincere about criticizing the behavior of Frank-N-Furter et al. in RHPS. Let us know what you think after you’ve had a chance to do that. Thanks.

    • Thanks: Thor Walhovd
    • Replies: @Fr. John
  8. @Edmund Connelly

    The US version I saw included that final scene. I still remember the audience catcalls for the narrator’s speech at the end. Perhaps exhibitors put the scene back in after a few years had passed.

  9. I first became aware of RHPS in the early 1980’s. It was becoming a cultural milestone that every hip kid had to view, but nobody to my knowledge understood it.

    The mainstreaming of perversion in the 1990’s and 2000’s is like the arc of the movie. I’ve been predicting Peak Leftism would be reached, followed by a Riff Raff cultural correction.

    We’re almost there.

    • Replies: @Veteran Aryan
  10. Al Liguori says: • Website

    Even ignoring the absence of the JQ criticism due the film, the review strikes me as, “Let’s watch (promote) this porn one more time, but just so we can criticize it in fine detail—because the big picture gloss just wasn’t enough for us to reject it completely and permanently within the film’s first few moments.” Prurience is not plausible deniability. There is no value in the rationalization. I’m with Fr. John on this. Burn it all.

    Certainly the Synagogue of Satan (SS) abets their Father of Lies and Murder in his never-ending efforts to deny Heaven to us mere mortals. The SS is quite effective in their subversion of everything decent—and have been so for millennia. See Torah on Trannies:

  11. That 70s show is outdated, the new and improved Rocky Horror Picture Show have a new and improved cast and crew of 2SLGBTQQIAPWXYZ+ – Two Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual people, and Pedophiles, with a plus-sign added for good measure to cover any potentially overlooked groups.and numerous Magic Negroz to comply with racial and gender inclusive mandates as defined by the Film Actors Guild (FAG).

    One can only imagine a alternative universe where Hitler won and beautiful whites were cast and the couple seeking shelter were trannys on their way to perform at a elementary school for Drag Queen Story Time.

    • Replies: @SBaker
  12. Dumbo says:

    I never watched it and never understood the cult following it had. Except perhaps for Susan Sarandon in her underwear, it really seems to be just pure gay trash.

  13. mcohen says:

    I thought it was a great movie and quite funny.The music was fantastic.The whole package was entertaining and i never for once believed that rhps had any sort of morality tale at all.
    The fact that a new zealander wrote it is the real joke.This is the country that has a full blown cult following of a rugby team called The All Blacks.In the seventies macho men were the real deal There is a stadium called the “house of pain” if you have any doubts

    some of the comments here about the jq make me wonder about friars and many idiots and so little minds

  14. @Achmed E. Newman

    It was no longer fun to go to the theatre after I was told, for reasons of “safety” to put my lighter away. RHPS with rules is just wrong.

    Oddly enough, the last time I saw RHPS was on a trans-Atlantic flight.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Ray P
  15. @beavertales

    I’ve been predicting Peak Leftism would be reached, followed by a Riff Raff cultural correction.

    Maybe. But right now FnF is still running the show. And I’m not so sure that Riff Raff is coming to save us. Our alien guides are far less than impressive.

    Anyone else notice how Riff Raff looks like a rundown version of the male figure in ‘American Gothic?’ He’s standing right in front of it to highlight the comparison.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @GomezAdddams
  16. Or as William Blake said: “Sooner murder an infant in its cradle than nurse unacted desires.”

    But I really doubt that the creator of this musical play/movie meant it as a reactionary morality tale considering what a deranged depraved decadent weirdo transgender freak he is.

    • Agree: Rogue
  17. AKAHorace says:

    The Rocky Horror was “trangressive” when it was made, these days it would be considered transphobic (as well as too white). How long before it is cancelled ?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  18. Was Richard O’Brien aware of Magnus Hirschfeld? How he pioneered trans surgery and other sexual deviancy in the Weimar Republic , until the Nazis shut him down?

    Was Dr. FrankNfurter a caricature of Hirschfeld, and other gay pioneers who over-reached, and FrankNfurter’s party themed after Weimar’s excess?

    If so, O’Brien should be commended on following up the 1966 stage musical Cabaret with an offering which mines the same territory, while offering a glimpse of things to come in the post-hippie, post-punk gay liberation era.

  19. Anonymous[661] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s been decades since I saw Rocky in a theater, and the only distinct memory I have of watching it is that of being agonizingly bored.

    A movie that is more apropos for these times might be the 1966 film Le Roi De Coeur (The King of Hearts) with Alan Bates. I saw it in Cambridge, Mass, during its five-year run at one theater and it left a far greater impression.

  20. Kali says:
    @Fr. John

    The utter LACK of spiritual insight in this ‘review/jack-off fest’ of an article is so astounding, i

    Says Father John, before launching his tyrade of judgement, and condemnation, utterly devoid of spiritual insight or understanding.

    The article/review itself provides temendous insight into the godless society that has evolved around us. – Or rather been imposed upon us by the (((cultural engineers))) of the 20th century.

    But, let’s face it, the way was left WIDE OPEN for that imposition, by the hypocracy inherrent in a Church which glorified “patriotic” war and encouraged participation in those bloodbaths whilst simultaniously preaching “thou shalt not kill”; and a priest-class feining celebacy whilst indulging (or turning a blind eye to)homosexuality, oftern at the expence of the innocence of alter-boys.

    Surely you are right to decry the degeneracy of our current epoch, but to have missed the undertone of cultural, moral and spiritual elightenment within the article reveals that you yourself are missing the same.

    You condmn, one by one, the players in the peice whilst demonstrating your own lack of understanding or human empathy: “… THE focal point for both gays and tranny freaks’ self-legitimization.” – Does it not occur to you that these “freaks” have been deliberately cultured as such? Where is your understanding of their plight, spiritual or otherwise?

    Where is your recognition that The Church itself, through centuries of corruption of the meaning of Christs work, and ultimately corruption of those inculcated missinterpretations, literally paved the way for the godless nihilism we now confront, albeit in cohoots with (((gods chosen)))?

    What you mean by “spirituality” seems more akin to judgementalism than any spirituality I know, and is certainly not the spirituality taught by Christ, as I read it. Rather it is the empty condemnation of perverted “morality”, as practiced by “The Church” since it came into being to contain and stiffle the nature of God, of Chist and of mankind, whilst preaching “love” and “forgiveness”, but never truly practicing the same – exept for those willing to “pay the price” of admition to heaven!

    Your words are empty, sir.. I mean Father. They bring no light.

    My words are harsh, I know, but not without purpose. I don’t write in order to condemn you, but in hope to awaken some deeper awareness within you as a man. Shed your Churchly vestments, your costume, and look a little deeper. Because, unless you do so, you will only ever push those “freaks”, those lost-boys (and girls), into nihilism and meaninglessness.

    “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

    With LOVE,

    • Replies: @Blodgie
    , @Al Liguori
  21. Walter says:

    Essay misses the message.

    Movie is about how vice extends elite control and destroys civilization.

    “…Hence, too, a liking sprang up for our style of dress, and the “toga” became fashionable. Step by step they were led to things which dispose to vice, the lounge, the bath, the elegant banquet. All this in their ignorance, they called civilization, when it was but a part of their servitude….”

    Tacitus, the Agricola.

    • Replies: @Edmund Connelly
  22. Rogue says:

    The music is pretty good though.

    Actually, I liked the film and watched it quite a few times over the years.

    From a moral standpoint, it is quite obviously questionable. If it was made today probably wouldn’t be a big deal, but the fact that it was made in the mid 70’s did, no doubt, have a negative effect on morality.

    But, again, I liked the movie primarily for the music, and not for any morality (or immorality) message.

  23. SBaker says:

    The sexual liberation of queer child molestors was a big hit promotional seeking to normalize the rimming and felching crowd. Twinks are passed around queer bars without fear of rape charges and hollywood continues in the quest, to allow primarily male queers, access to little boys with impunity. NAMBLA members once marched openly in gay pride parades; now they have changed their name.

  24. SBaker says:

    Purely meant as a promotional for the rimming and felching crowd. The #1 vectors of infectious diseases.

  25. @The Alarmist

    I forgot the lighters, Alarmist. (I mean, I forgot to mention them. We brought them too.)

    That’d have been weird on a plane – I don’t know how the rice-throwing and dancing in front of the screen would go down with the crew, even if you did ditch the lighters at the TSA. Oh, man, they’ve ruined this country so much!

    Yes, for the guy who wrote in, the music was EXCELLENT. Without that, I guess I may have walked out, $10 poorer – no wait, my friend sprung for all the “supplies” for all of us.

    Oh, yeah, Susan Sarandon in her underwear. See she can’t do that today… and it’s just as damned well!

  26. SBaker says:

    kudos. I think you covered most of the bases: exception being the interspecies people, which are quite common in some middle eastern countries.

  27. @AKAHorace

    It’s BEEN cancelled, Horace, after running for 4 years in a row at the midnight movies. Probably it was the Kung Flu. Not many people go to the movies anymore. The fact that this country is now full of pussies and party-poopers is probably a factor too… then, yeah, per Alarmist, the fire code(?)

    • Replies: @Edmund Connelly
  28. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fr. John

    Good points. What I found particularly jarring is the author’s claim that the movie is – ackchyually – critiquing these lifestyles because it kills the main degenerate in the end. It’ a carbon-copy defence of the pro-pedo (and pedo recruitment/grooming) movie “Cuties” – in which pre-teens had endless loads of fun whoring themselves for the camera and everyone in sight – but ended up taking a break from it in the last 0.5% of the movie. You see, that was – ackchyually – the real, wholesome “message” and not the other 99.5% of the movie which plays like a “Top Gun” equivalent for the Pedo-Industrial-Complex.

    Edmund is such a sad clown. Imagine being a worshipper and promoter of this obvious degenerate propaganda garbage – end then imagine Edmund – who’s still doing it in 2021.

    • Replies: @chris
  29. Ray P says:
    @The Alarmist

    Was it played aboard the Lolita Express?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  30. @Walter

    Walter wrote, “Essay missed the message.”

    I have to disagree. Because it is so obvious, I assumed readers would know that the movie extends vice and attempts to destroy civilization. Everything up to the surprise entrance of Riff Raff as “The New Commander” is an over-the-top display of vice. Recall when I quote Dr. Scott: “We’ve got to get out of this place before this DECADENCE saps our wills.” (Until writing this essay, I always heard it as “Saps our WITS.”)

    Because the decadence is so obvious, I begin at the point of saying, “No, actually, this musical itself condemns the vice,” and then go on to argue how. (Admittedly, until we found out that one major version deletes the “Superheroes” scene, there could have been less evidence of the film condemning its main message until then.)

    • Replies: @Walter
  31. chris says:
    @Fr. John

    Yeah, agree completely. The author of the review, Mr. Connelly, is telling us that you can show a porn movie which has a prayer at the end and claim it’s a religious movie based on the overarching meaning of that prayer in the context of the movie. Who can believe that? It’s just too stupid of a claim.

    I’ve never seen this crappy movie never cared to see it ever since receiving a rave review from a very enthusiastic fan, years ago. From his description, I recognized it to be a very loosely disguised (enough to fool Mr. Connelly though) propaganda trying to use a prurient piece of trash to elicit the release of “suppressed” sexual orientation “fluidity” in order to maybe quantify it in that society. The movie’s popularity is a measure of that tendency in the society of that time.

    I considered the movie’s most ardent fans to be complete losers while feeling genuinely sorry for those whose confused emotions were being so blatantly manipulated.

  32. Che Guava says:

    Interesting article, but no revelations. except the idea of decades, Brad and Janet and the wedding people are sure in styles that would have been in fashion around the time of the JFK assassination.

    One interesting point missed, re-creation of the famous painting, I think titled American Gothic, by Hooper or Hopper.

    It was clear to me on first viewing that Riff Raff, Magenta, and Frank were meant to be aliens.

    A few things to recommend. Musical, the opening song from the London theatre production, instead of lips, teeth, and tongue, performed by an usherette. I much like it, no video, just a still, but worth listening, if you like the song, and easy to find.

    That song also has the worst lyric in the whole thing

    Dana Andrews said prunes,
    gave him the runes,
    and passing them used lots of skill.

    Atrocious, I never noticed until listening to the girl in the theatre recording.

    Also, Meat Loaf played both Eddie and his uncle, he was very disappointed at not doing that in the picture show, and talks abt. it at length, with a few examples.

    Richard o’Brien, also another musical that I can not remember much, should be seeing it again, many acting roles, but one that anyone who has not should see, Dark City, from which the original Matrix plot was a direct copy.

    I admit I have no idea who is Dana Andrews, but if he was in a B SF movie, pretty sure I have seen it.

    • Replies: @Edmund Connelly
    , @Ray P
    , @Ray P
  33. Ray P says:
    @Veteran Aryan

    Maybe this is why the U.S. Navy and NASA are now talking about the reality of aliens and flying saucers. We are being ruled by secret transexuals from the planet Transylvania. A gang of alien perverts who are busily corrupting the human population. See also William S. Burroughs’ oeuvre.

    • LOL: chris
    • Replies: @Veteran Aryan
  34. Thank you, I really enjoyed this article. I’d like to suggest to the author watching Terry Gilliam’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas with a critical eye. Every time I see the film, I pick up on new details and new meaning in it. My friends think it’s absurd. It’s just a film about doing drugs. But around the hundredth time I watched it, I realized: it’s not about drugs at all, anymore than James Bond is about cars. They’re just a prop.

    One of the easy messages of the movie you might catch the first time you see it. “Fear and Loathing, Population 0”. No one lives in fear and loathing; you just pass through those emotions on your way to something else. Like Barstow.

    • Replies: @mcohen
    , @Polistra
  35. chris says:

    Absolutely, it was exactly the movie Cuties his review reminded me of; the Rocky Horror of our time for the pedo crowd.

    It’s a most blatant piece of propaganda which the targeted group vehemently tries to deny.

    My point is that even if you’re the willing target of that propaganda it’s absurd to deny the overt manipulation involved.

    The self-delusion required to convince yourself that it’s not a cheap manipulation is staggering to the point that I believe it’s just dishonest.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  36. Blodgie says:

    It’s interesting to look back on how The Church got its ass kicked by the challenges of birth control, homosexuality and women’s sexual liberation

    They were basically a non-factor in stopping any of those movements, even in their own ranks.

    Yet no one called them on it. They meekly let the culture go into the shitter and no one objected.

    Why? Because the symbol of the religion is a humiliated, naked, murdered man. THAT is the ideal to live up to—your own personal humiliation and these movements gave them what they wanted.

    What clueless fool would still go to mass in 2021?

    • Replies: @ivan
  37. I saw the film at a small, single screen theater between Broadway and University Place on East 8th Street and the freaks who had come in costumes to watch it were all throwing something (I believe peanuts) at the screen. I don’t remember if I enjoyed it or was annoyed by it or by those costumed wannabes. I believe that film has greatly contributed to the rapid faggotization of the culture. BTW, that theater is an NYU property now, close to the public.

  38. Mom, on a day off from her job as an NYC taxi driver, took me to see RHPS in Greenwich Village way back in 1976. Although I was only nine years old at the time, the experience is still vivid and fresh in my memory and always will be. It frightened me even more than the disgusting biomedical terrors of Tommy which she had taken me to see the year before. More than anything else I remember seeing RHPS because it was the only time in my entire life, on a terrifying solo trip to the restroom, that I ever saw people injecting drugs into themselves with a needle in front of God and everybody.

    Although I appreciate the author’s convincing and detailed attempt to portray the film as a morality tale, an effort which actually makes me want to see the film again in this light, that’s not gonna happen. It’s just too creepy, and associated in my mind with all the obnoxious, materialistic, shallow, self-satisfied gay men who have given me the cold shoulder for my entire adult life. It’s their stupid party and they can keep it.

    And to Father John and those like him I would suggest they stop trying to lump all gay people into one basket. Some of us came of age in the 1980s when the aids crisis was in full swing, never had so much as even a cold sore (thank you very much), and have very traditional views of morality, religion, ethics and culture. It would have been very easy for me, like many gay men in the South and elsewhere live to this day, to marry a woman and live a very red state life with children and all the other trappings of “normal”, but for me that would have been living a lie and fundamentally unfair to the woman (possibly even dangerous to the extent that adultery would have been a strong temptation).

    Nevermind how the viciously decadent, Satanic and bloody wars, coups and imperial assaults this country have made against God’s creation and people all around the world for decades now, most of which were and continue to be ignored or cheered on by the “Christian” heteronormative majority in this country, makes RHPS look like a Southern Baptist garden party circa 1962. I mean honestly, the privilege of your finger pointing at “the gays” in this context makes my head explode. Peace.

    • Replies: @chris
    , @Ray P
  39. @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed wrote, “It’s BEEN cancelled, Horace, after running for 4 years in a row at the midnight movies.”

    Sorry, but did you mean “40 (FORTY) years in a row?”

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  40. Curle says:

    I saw it at an out of the way strip mall theater midnight showing around ‘77 or ‘78 where I used to go see Rock movies. I had exactly the same experience and takeaway, including the ‘get a life’ thought with the addition that Susan Sarandon made an impression on me.

  41. @Che Guava

    OK, Che Guava didn’t find my review interesting but based on his comment, I can’t afford Mr. Guava much credibility, as he writes:

    “One interesting point missed, re-creation of the famous painting, I think titled American Gothic, by Hooper or Hopper.”

    Gosh, Mr. Guava, didn’t my inclusion of this image speak to you:

    (If the image doesn’t come through here, just scroll above to see Riff Raff standing in front of Amerian Gothic)


    Or what about this claim you made: “It was clear to me on first viewing that Riff Raff, Magenta, and Frank were meant to be aliens.”

    Really? Please explain to us what the clues were.

    Honestly, I sometimes wonder about a few of the commenters to these sites. Take, for instance, this one from my original post at Counter-Currents ( by “Cee Cee Beaumont”:

    “You missed out on mentioning the actual lyrics of the brilliant songs in the film: Richard O’Brien clearly has a touch of the Irish lyrical genius in him. I love how it takes you multiple viewings to catch stuff like …”

    Meanwhile, my review was not only littered with lyrics, I clearly showed that I knew the songs forward and back because I’d seen most scenes about 100 times! Read the article before you comment.

    In marked contrast, we’ve had superb comments from the likes of “Petronius,” which you can read back at C-C (

    And here’s another one which shows great promise:

    Smithsfan84 (October 30, 2021) Isn’t Frank a modern, pop version of Mozart’s Don Giovanni? The don tries to break up a betrothed couple (Zerlina and Masetto – he invites the pair to stay at his castle and hold their wedding there but attempts Zerlina’s seduction during a masked ball) and ultimately gets dragged to hell as an unrepentant and proud sinner.

    I’d love for a reader or two to follow up on that one.

    So for at least some of you offering comments, I have to demand: “Come on, readers, step up your game a bit!”

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  42. @Jake Dee

    I just noticed that the groupie Columbia has the same name as the female avatar of North America.

    I figured that at least Weiss (white, being virginal) and Majors (allusion to and spoof of clean-cut Cold War American military regimentation) were certainly intentional.

  43. @Ray P

    No, but the Lolita Express’ entertainment selection did feature Spy Game and Happily Ever After: Fairy Tales for Every Child.

  44. @Ray P

    A gang of alien perverts who are busily corrupting the human population.

    Until recently, I would have dismissed this theory with a laugh. Now, not so much.

    I compare it to the ‘Loose Change’ looniness. The same people who had been telling me for years that W was a bumbling idiot were now telling me that he was a criminal mastermind in charge of a vast conspiracy. Just not believable. So when I look at TPTB today, do I see a group of people capable of pushing transgender madness on the entire western world in a matter of years? No, I do not. It’s just not believable. And yet it is clearly happening. Something else is going on.

  45. One college girlfriend dragged me to this movie in the 1980s. She was an aficionado and I was an initiate.

    So, I endured the rights of passage, being called on stage before the film and answering questions, like: “What is your favorite color?” (Magenta is the correct answer.) Anyway, it all felt stupid.

    We broke up shortly thereafter. That girlfriend, who so loved this movie, now lives in a subsidized apartment in a shitty part of Denver, near — wait for it — Martin Luther King Boulevard.

    This writer is good, but here he is simply regurgitating his youth. However, this commenter appreciates his sincere effort to lay it all out honestly. My experience of this film was not as enjoyable as his.

    Furthermore, I already knew everything that was presented in the movie, so nothing about the film surprised me or taught me anything. I lived in a place where we already knew all of that. Okay?

    I have to say, this article reeks of someone who wants t0 share his experience, like that old girlfriend of mine. The movie is great in its way, but this review goes way over the top. Maybe the writer tried on his mother’s stockings, garters and panties when he was home alone as a teenager. (You know, some boys do, and that’s okay.)

    And that’s okay! It is also, now, not big news.

    • Replies: @Ray P
  46. chris says:
    @Thor Walhovd

    I appreciate the point you’re making, Thor, and certainly agree about the existence of a vast moral chasm between true, monstrous crimes and personal morality, or “lifestyle choices” or whatever you may want to called it. And the duty of any moral person, whatever religion or (no religion) they might profess, is to clearly distinguish between the two.

    But to be fair to Fr. John (to my reading of it) his comment does not seem to betray any ambiguity about the two, simply because the latter did not come up in his text. It might be, as you say, but his words don’t betray it as such.

    To reiterate some of my previous comments, my problem with this review is that it ignores and tries to whitewash the propaganda aspect of the movie and preposterously pretends it’s a ‘morality play’ even as the movie’s own authors are obviously using this as a minuscule fig leaf to peddle their wares – however you feel about those wares themselves!

    • Thanks: Thor Walhovd
  47. @Edmund Connelly

    Yeah, Mr. Connelly, that was confusing on my part. Where I lived, the movie had a run of 4 years in a row – a record by a long shot – and that was nearing 40 years back. My point about the Kung Flu was just about it putting the kibosh on movies at the theater in general.

    Now, I will chime in at this point that I had no idea either that this movie was really anti-hedonism. After all, the staid white guy with the globe and “no neck” – it’s been a LONG while, so forgive me – was derided by the audience.* OTOH, that last scene was NOT part of the version I saw, unless I’d already left from the theater – I’m no late guy and wasn’t even in those days…

    To me, Rocky Horror Picture Show was an excuse for a big party with excellent music at a different type of venue.

    Anyway, thanks for the interesting review and memories.


    * Maybe we, the young movie-goers, some of whom – not me – were the weirdos of their age, did not get the point. OTOH, what 40 y/o man was going to sit there and get rice and bread thrown at him and soaked by water guns?

    Was there a book we should have read first?

  48. @Fr. John

    I agree with your views on society but I’m not convinced that RHPS itself wasn’t an artifact of an already diseased culture, rather than a contributing factor to further degeneracy.

    Perhaps Mr. Connelly should do a remake of RHPS which climaxes with an emaciated, lesion-bespeckled Frank-N-Furter expiring from an infectious body fluid borne wasting disease, followed by all of his lovers and his lovers’ lovers doing likewise instead of being zapped by space police. The existing ending is a bit of deus ex machina. This would, of course, more accurately chart the wake of sexual libertinism and degeneracy into the mid 1980s when the Frank-N-Furters of the world began turning into wasting mummies.

    I’ve written at Unz before that it seems to me that RHPS is only narrowly escaping the cancellation gallows at this point – it’s clear that you’re supposed to laugh at Frank-N-Furter for being a ridiculous transvestite from transsexual Transylvania and apparent bisexual buggerer. Now it is presumed that if someone made such a declaration that s/he is a “sweet transvestite from transsexual Transylvania” it would necessarily be greeted with absolute and compulsory credulity.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @Achmed E. Newman
  49. @Veteran Aryan

    A gang of alien perverts who are busily corrupting the human population.

    Until recently, I would have dismissed this theory with a laugh. Now, not so much.

    I compare it to the ‘Loose Change’ looniness. The same people who had been telling me for years that W was a bumbling idiot were now telling me that he was a criminal mastermind in charge of a vast conspiracy. Just not believable. So when I look at TPTB today, do I see a group of people capable of pushing transgender madness on the entire western world in a matter of years? No, I do not. It’s just not believable. And yet it is clearly happening. Something else is going on.

    I have to believe that the endocrine disruption that is showing up particularly in young men who are experiencing enormous declines in testosterone relative to their fathers and grandfathers has something to do with the susceptibility of younger people to sexual deviance and gender bending. I find it entirely odd that a significant and ongoing public health story such is this gets basically zero coverage in the Press, and when someone like Alex Jones does mention it the whole thing is dismissed as “he he gay frogs.”

    It could be that this was the desired result, or that it was a collateral effect of something else that the TPTB are up to and they’ve simply decided to lean into it and queer a generation or two – perhaps to cover for whatever thing they’re doing that is disrupting people’s hormones.

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
    • Replies: @Waitemata
  50. A couple more snippets…

    “Weiss” is pronounced “Vice”, although Janet objects to this.

    Dr. Scott is a Wernher Braun-type figure, who barely contains himself at Frank’s needling comment “Go on Dr. Scott… Or, should I say, Doctor VON Scott?”

    I think it’s a very clever film, with lots of details like this. And the Narrator is priceless! But it celebrates degeneracy, and mocks convention.

    The reviewer is overthinking it. The ending seems to be just a means to finishing off the story – the plot runs out of steam before the Floor Show.

    • Agree: Polistra
  51. Ray P says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Maybe the writer tried on his mother’s stockings, garters and panties when he was home alone as a teenager. (You know, some boys do, and that’s okay.)

    So long as one doesn’t turn into Norman Bates.

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  52. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:

    The self-delusion required to convince yourself that it’s not a cheap manipulation is staggering to the point that I believe it’s just dishonest.

    Who knows. The best case scenario is that Edmund, for whatever reason, is sincere but completely unable to see this particular trash heap for what it is. If I were in his shoes, I’d make sure to return them to the wife, apologise, buy her a new pair, and embark on a soul-searching journey. The problem is not so much sexual deviancy – most people can’t help it – but how it can lead to mental deviancy and delusions.

    Speaking of delusions: the only critique in the movie comes in the form of “exposing” the non-degenerate couple for their supposed failures. In the script, they are clearly eager to get ravaged by the beast – as long as it remains a secret – which means that their non-degeneracy was not only fake but based on fear.

    Amazing, isn’t it? They are (and always were) the unenlightened cowards in this story and the freaks are (and always were) the torch-bearers of enlightenment.

    This is the kind of “wisdom” that you might encounter in a club – from a mega-tattooed, mega-pierced and sickly creature eagerly informing you that no-one is really hetero and heteros are living in darkness and self-imposed slavery while they, themselves are free. Some of them will also point out that Lucifer is – ackchyually – the “light-bringer”.

    Needless to say – whether you’re religious or not – this is the point in the conversation where you’ll try to resist the urge to curbstomp them like a bug. You should resist it for legal reasons but the urge is authentic, true and useful. Most social animals will mercilessly eject trash in order to protect their kin.

    • Replies: @chris
  53. Ray P says:
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Sweet transvestite is an oxymoron these days and maybe always was.

  54. Ray P says:
    @Thor Walhovd

    Mom, on a day off from her job as an NYC taxi driver, took me to see RHPS in Greenwich Village way back in 1976. Although I was only nine years old at the time, the experience is still vivid and fresh in my memory and always will be. It frightened me even more than the disgusting biomedical terrors of Tommy which she had taken me to see the year before. More than anything else I remember seeing RHPS because it was the only time in my entire life, on a terrifying solo trip to the restroom, that I ever saw people injecting drugs into themselves with a needle in front of God and everybody.

    Well, this puts Travis Bickle taking Cybill Shepherd to see a sex flick during Taxi Driver in perspective. Her princess outrage seems a little excessive given what children were being dragged to. It also reminds me of the late Kathy Shaidle recollecting how she saw the Lenny (Bruce) movie with her mother (who had no idea what it was about and was looking to kill a couple of hours in the city) at the age of nine and how it had an immense effect on her life. It was her entree to a life-long devotion to stand-up comedy. She got into Rocky Horror as a teenager a few years later, dressing up in outlandish gear and going to performances with her girl-pals. Her mother was quite supportive. She also became a fan of John Waters’ films.

  55. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    As a good modern liberal, Alec (supposed to be hard at work), I say we should demand of the universities, big-“tech” corporations, government agencies, and even the PTO, formerly PTA, that Sweet Transvestites should be represented at least in proportion to their numbers in the general Transexual Transylvanian immigrant community (doing the jobs that Americans just won’t do).

    In fact, I may very well demand of my City Council first thing bidness-day tomorrow that they send an inspector to go up to the lab and see what’s on the slab.

  56. Hoyeru says:

    Americans dancing and performing during the RHPS is just one more proof just how shallow and dumb they really are because as the author says, they miss the WHOLE point of the movie: it condemns the lifestyle, doesn’t celebrate it.
    No wonder they are in such a shape today, letting Biden and Trump rule over them.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  57. anon[312] • Disclaimer says:

    This movie was hailed as a classic “college initiation” movie when I went to college in the late 80’s. I’m thankful I never saw it or I would’ve been traumatized by all the freak characters. Sounds like most of the movie was about debauchery, with the final two seconds of moral mumbo-jumbo thrown in to appease the parents/movie critics of the 70’s. This movie was the beginning of the end for our colleges, a debaucherous freak show pretending to be some moral tale. It obviously became a cult movie because all the college students got out of it for decades was the sex, drugs and “freedom” and not the 2 second conclusion on morality in the end — and that was by design. Typical Hollywood bullcrap. I’m disgusted you are force feeding it to all your (esp. foreign) students, regardless of what brilliant moral warning you think you claim it was about. Hollywood has got the likes of you figured out a long time ago to do their bidding.

    • Replies: @alfa
  58. some_loon says:

    I can see how the author views RHPS as a (time warped) morality play, but I am not sure how well that works.

    It is like gangster rap, with its defenders’ denying that it glorifies the drug trade or other crime.

    The real-life versions of the archetypes presented prove to be sadder and more boring than advertised. Actual druggies aren’t too interesting, and most trannies can’t even give good hair and makeup tips.

    Any attention would tend to glamorize, but we all like stories and shows about freaks and criminals, I suppose.

  59. Ray P says:
    @Che Guava

    Re: Dana Andrews and runes – he starred in the 1957 horror movie Night of the Demon (or Curse of the Demon) which was based on the famous M. R. James ghost story “The Casting of the Runes”. He’s an ardent anti-superstition skeptic out to debunk the paranormal who confronts an English magus who owns a stately pile in the home counties (a bit like Frank’s mansion house which was in that part of England). Andrews breaks into the magician’s estate and house one night looking for evidence that will prove him a fraud and gets mauled by his pussy and chased out through the woods by something demonic. Andrews no-nonsense rationalist is accompanied by an English girl (to the wall of the estate – he refuses to let the game girl come with him over the wall) who accompanies his investigation during the whole film while disagreeing with his opposition to the supernatural.

    Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) in The X-Files took her name in part from Andrews in this film I think.

    • Thanks: Che Guava
    • Replies: @Che Guava
  60. chris says:

    Speaking of delusions: the only critique in the movie comes in the form of “exposing” the non-degenerate couple for their supposed failures. ….

    Amazing, isn’t it? They are (and always were) the unenlightened cowards in this story and the freaks are (and always were) the torch-bearers of enlightenment.

    LOL, great point! Yeah, in other words, Democrats or middle of the road Republicans!

  61. Al Liguori says: • Website

    …“spirituality” …judgementalism … spirituality … spirituality taught by Christ, as I read it. …empty condemnation of perverted “morality”, as practiced by “The Church” since it came into being to contain and stiffle the nature of God, of Chist [sic] and of mankind, whilst preaching “love” and “forgiveness”, but never truly practicing the same – exept [sic] for those willing to “pay the price” of admition [sic] to heaven!

    Kali—as in The Destroyer? “Spirituality”—the signpost of self-indulgent manure dropped in front of us.

    “As [you] read it”– Oh puh-leez! You must have missed “Go and now sin no more” (John 8:11) and “…judged… measured by [the same standard].” (Matthew 7:2) Nobody escapes judgment by God’s standard.

    What “love” leaves a man perched on the precipice of Hell? None. The true love of a man is fraternal correction of that man to save his eternal soul.

    Your reading also missed that God Himself founded ONE Church to (singular, not plural, in Matthew 16:18), a visible Church with Divine Rights to govern (Matthew 16:19 & 18:18), teach (Matthew 28:19-20), and sanctify (Matthew 28:18-19; John 20:23), teaching oneness of doctrine without dissent or heresy (Matthew 12:25, 16:1; John 10:16, 17:20-23; Acts 4:32; Romans 12:5, 16:17; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13, 10:17, 11:18-19, 12:12-27, 14:33; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Ephesians 4:3-6; Philippians 1:27, 2:2-3; 1 Timothy 6:3-5; Titus 3:9-10; James 3:16; 2 Peter 2:1) and an organized hierarchy (Acts 1:20, 15:2-6, 20:28, 21:18; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-2, 5:17; Titus 1:7; Hebrews 11:2; 1 Peter 2:25, 5:1).

    “Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, [I have Spirituality!] shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” Matthew 7:21

    Spare us your fake namby-pamby Jesus and your risible two-millennia-too-late claim of discovering “misinterpretations.”

    Truly shocking that you can find sinners amongst Churchmen. Shocking, I say. Cave in to your concupiscence because all men sin. I smell feculent brimstone in that “other gospel.”

    • LOL: Kali
    • Replies: @Kali
  62. @Hoyeru

    Lighten up, Francis Hoyeru! It was a party. Nowadays, not only are young people not allowed to have fun like that (the movie attendance) due to highly oppressive nanny-state government that they are just fine with, but they don’t have enough decent music to even MAKE a movie like this!

    Why don’t you go and rise up to your ctrl-left college professors? We didn’t have any, cause it was a science/engineering realm, but if we did, we would have raised holy hell. You all don’t even know how to do that anymore. Bunch of face-diaper-wearing, social distancing, kiss-ass, compliant PC-note-leaving snowflakes.

    • Agree: TKK
  63. anon[617] • Disclaimer says:


    Do you generally behave in ways suggested by movie plots? Most people don’t, you know. Only CIA and the Pentagon make movies with didactic intent, and everybody agrees they suck. Could it be that this movie was not primarily a moral allegory?

    When you went to see this in midnight shows, did you laugh? Were you the only audience member in history who didn’t think it was funny? Were you scandalized by the verbal abuse heaped on Brad, with the coarse and vulgar epithet, Asshole? Did you find any characters to identify with? I, to obtrude the personal, did not.

    As an educator, you know that sometimes Socrates has to give up on the method because his interlocutors are just too dense. So. It is fruitless to examine this film in isolation without reference to other great canonical works of the 70s like Eraserhead, A Boy and his Dog, and The Texas Chainsaw massacre. And of course The Exorcist, which actually is an allegory, but political, not moral.

  64. mcohen says:

    exactly.the book is one of favourites.

  65. An admission against interest: little or nothing in the remarks that follow is relevant to this article. Still, I’m hoping that Ed might find them to have some marginal appeal.

    I am a longtime admirer and supporter of Ed Connelly’s work, and 90 percent of what I know of it I know via the Occidental Observer. Of the many writers whose articles have appeared at TOO in the roughly thirteen years I have been a habitué, he is one of only three (the others being Brenton Sanderson and Michael Colhaze*) with none of whose articles’ fundamental premises I have ever found myself in material disagreement. Since the present article didn’t originally appear at TOO, that streak is by no means in danger.

    Coyness aside, however, I have no considered opinion about the present article—nor should I have one, since I never saw either the film under discussion or the play, The Rocky Horror Show, on which it seems to be largely based. What I do have, however, and have in abundance are long-held, deep-set prejudices and preconceptions about both artifacts.

    Let me explain. I was almost thirty when the play opened in New York in 1973. A great many people I knew at Lincoln Center, where I had then been working about five years, dashed off to see the play in the roughly month and a half it survived on Broadway. Most of them knew of the play’s enthusiastic reception in London and Los Angeles, and they were not alone in being surprised at how badly it failed in New York. Given that all those who took the most delight in it were either fags or fag hags, however, its attraction for me (i.e., being neither) was nonexistent. Indeed, I recall a clever crack made at the time by a work buddy of mine, a limey who had recently permanently relocated to the States. “Who ever would have thought,” he drily noted, “that Broadway crowds would exhibit more taste than those in the West End!”

    When the movie appeared about two years later, all the queens and their hangers-on lined the sidewalks for the midnight showings, but lo and behold! now they were joined by seemingly endless throngs of black-clad undergrads from Columbia, Radcliffe, and NYU and even their more down-market contemporaries from the many bridge-and-tunnel colleges and unis within an hour’s commute of Manhattan. The attraction the film had for these untouchables warned me off it as effectively as if some Dantesque character had confronted me, shouting “Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’entrate.”

    Returning to the present, I must say, nearing conclusion, that what my prejudices tell me is that, had I ever seen either play or movie, my mind and heart would be with the critiques of Fr. John and Al Liguori** rather than with the deeply admired author. All the more reason for me to rejoice that my opinion, if I indeed had one, would be worthless.

    Finally, I would be extraordinarily pleased if, one day, Ed Connelly got an itch to draft an analysis of M. Night Shyamalan’s The Village. Besides its being, along with Dean Spanley,*** one of the very few truly notable specimens of film art of this rapidly aging and decaying century, The Village is, first and foremost, a profound critique of (((Satanic))) modernity and a defiant rejection of all its works and all its pomps. That none (save yours truly) seems to have spotted it as such perhaps explains why the film hasn’t suffered the fate of Song of the South.

    *Is that extraordinary writer and thinker still alive, I wonder?
    **Is it the gentleman’s real name or a hat tip to the great saint? It’s fine either way.
    ***I haven’t forgotten The Dish, though it would, I fear, be stretching the term to call it a great film. Still, it’s the funniest, most heartwarming movie I’ve seen in the past quarter-century.

    • Replies: @Al Liguori
  66. I thought the movie was trash.

    The story is about two sentences.

    The music is corny and the best singer (meat loaf) is killed by the fag after a single song.

    Maybe people thought it was edgy at the time. I’m not seeing it. Awful movie.

  67. Waitemata says:
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    @Alec Leamas:

    At last someone has mentioned this. Endocrine disruption is a topic that needs full coverage. I have considered this explanation ever since reading ‘Living Downstream’ by Sandra Steingraber a few years ago. Imagine if sexually damaged people sued plastics and chemical companies instead of capering about in gay parades.

  68. Walter says:
    @Edmund Connelly

    Yes, You’re right. My apologies.

  69. the movie is gay and so is this article.

    • LOL: chris
  70. Pontius says:

    I always wondered what all the fuss was about. Now I realize it was just the same BS from the cool kids who went on endlessly about The Velvet Underground and other boring shit.

  71. I’m fairly sure that any movie that must be viewed dozens of times for the supposedly “reactionary” message to become apparent is not reactionary in the least. Certainly not in societal effect, and almost certainly not in the filmmaker’s mind.

    It occurs to me that Mr. Connelly may have created a justification for liking a film which has themes that he also feels an aversion to.

    I’ll just be reactionary in never watching the Rocky Horror Picture Show at all, thanks very much.

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
  72. TKK says:
    @Fr. John

    “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” – Matt 18:6

    So…when is that True Up going to happen? Right…..any day now.

    It is astonishing to me that people who can string sentences together still believe this Big Guy in the Sky is going to make it all better.

    Grow up.

    • Disagree: Al Liguori
    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  73. AceDeuce says:

    Hay-soos, Kee-rist! I still have an attention span, but this was TL I wish I DR. Tolstoy wrote War and Peace more concisely.

    My take–I steered clear of this freak show sh!t when it came out. Hurray for me!

  74. Only years later, when I was a professor teaching modern American culture, did I realize that such an impression was entirely wrong, because at the climax of the musical there is an obvious turn of events indicting exactly this kind of behavior. In other words, The Rocky Horror Picture Show is one of the greatest reactionary science fiction musicals ever made!

    No, it doesn’t work out that way.

    For example, if a movie is rah-rah gung ho and shows war to be awesome but then, in the last five minutes, says war is awful, it doesn’t count as an anti-war movie.

    People take away the visceral experience, not some pat sermon at the end.

    It’s like SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER. Sure, it has a nice ending about growing up and being responsible. But NO ONE paid much attention to that. It became a super-hit because of the dancing and revelry.

    Also, whatever its message, ROCKY HORROR is both unwatchable and unlistenable. It is total garbage from beginning to end.

    • Agree: Barbarossa, John Johnson
  75. Good piece.

    Re the references in the opening song: the movie was going to originally spell them out, like this:

    • Thanks: some_loon
  76. Al Liguori says: • Website
    @Pierre de Craon

    Thank you. As a Catholic you may appreciate my Catholic site on Judaism, at least a few of the 105 topical pages 🙂

    My nom de guerre stems from my respect of that Saint and Doctor of the Church.

    • Thanks: Pierre de Craon
    • Replies: @ivan
  77. E_Perez says:

    The author sees too much into this miserable movie.

    There are no new ideas in ‘Rocky horror’
    , all rehashed horrors are from previous classic spectacles.

    – the castle in the middle of a thunderstorm night is standard from Dracula to Hitchcock’s Psycho.
    – the Frankenstein horror is as old as cinema
    – shocking transvestites shows are from Germany’s Weimar horrors
    and so on.

    I am not astonished that in New Zealand you get a statue from a local mayor for this type of recycled nonsense – after all New Zealanders wander around on this globe with brains down and feet up …

  78. Mr. Connelly, you may appreciate the late Kathy Shaidle’s someone similar take:

    • Replies: @Edmund Connelly
  79. @TKK

    I suppose God acts through men down here on earth. I can’t imagine God to tie a large millstone around someone’s neck and drown them in the depths of the sea; it would take a man or men to do this.

  80. Rando says:

    I didn’t make it halfway through this article, in fact I was a little astonished when it dawned on me that the author was going to go through the entire film, scene-by-scene, to make his point, which (I must confess) was lost on me. What I thought I remembered about Rocky Horror was that it was a bad movie, and the point of the entire midnight showings with their audience participation antics was to make fun of a bad movie, Mystery Science Theater 3000/Rifftrax style (before those things had been invented and somewhat anticipating them; perhaps even inspiring them). I didn’t know that the film contained hidden depths illuminating recent U.S. history (and perhaps the human condition as well! Like I said, I didn’t finish the article).

    To be fair to the author, Rocky is a good bad movie, in that was obviously worth the audience’s time to lampoon the thing (if you want to know the difference, you might check out The Apple, which was made a few years after RHPS and was obviously trying to ride the same cultural wave. I have seen the Rifftrax version, which I can recommend. I do not recommend trying to watch it without the jokes, it is one of the worst movies ever made). I do wonder, however, how much of Rocky’s “brilliance” as a film is back-projection on something that was a cultural success. I will confess to having watched the film’s “sequel,” Shock Treatment, at home by myself (really bored that night). It was also obviously trying to jump-start another cultural phenomenon. It didn’t. But I don’t remember that it was worse than RHPS.

    It might have been nice to read an article from someone who teaches film examining why this particular cinematic specimen was a hit. I don’t buy that it was some kind of brilliant allegory/analogue to the events of the 1960s. I saw it in theater in the late 80s, and I don’t remember that that was the draw. In fact, after eight years of Reagan I don’t think most of the young theater crowd even knew that the 1960s had ever happened (one of the audience jokes I remember: Narrator: “Heavy, black, pendulous.” Audience: “Describe my balls!’).

  81. Jake Dee says:

    I think many of the commenters here are refusing to give RHPS the respect it deserves.
    This is a work of art that has stayed in (limited) release for over 40 years. Simple pornography no matter how titillating simply doesn’t do that. A great work of art survives down the years because it has a deep resonance with powerful forces that are greater than any particular time, place or person.
    @ Anonymous[382] is certainly correct that its ratio of queer sex to righteous action is about 99.5 to 0.5, but it’s that final part which shows us what that queerness actually is. Frank ‘n Furter must be destroyed, Rocky must die, it’s the only ending that makes any sense. That’s not because of any lingering bourgeois morality on the part of Richard O’Brien, it’s because that’s the ending which has the deep resonance with the human psyche and the nature of reality, or if you like The Will of God.
    Over on The Occidental Observer, SmithsFan84 makes a very valid comparison between Frank ‘n Furter and Mozart’s Don Giovanni. Don Giovanni is intelligent, aristocratic and charming. He’s also a rapist and a murderer and must finally pay for his crimes. Mozart gives us vastly more time showing him being witty and seducing women rather than him being dragged down to hell by the ghost of the man he killed. But it is his final conclusion that shows us the man he truly was.
    What sort of stories would men like @ Fr. John have us make ? Stories that are just records of heroic manly men being masculine and brave then winning the love of the chaste and virtuous princess ? That’s no story at all. Or would you have us take Plato’s advice and ban poets from our Republic because you don’t know how to deal with them ?
    Turning your back on this type of art and refusing to engage because it’s too gay and queer is a cowardly and foolish choice. The decadence and queerness is part of the human condition and must be understood to be overcome.
    One final point concerning Richard O’Brien and the character of Riff Raff that he chose and presumably wrote for himself.
    Riff Raff and his sister Magenta are the only characters who end up with an honorable conclusion, only they get a redemption arc. Riff Raff was the decadent servant of an evil master but seizes command and drops the hammer of justice on him.
    That is the way The Hamilton City council chose to depict their most famous son when they immortalized him in bronze, not as the hunchbacked creepy butler but as the bold space commander with a weapon in his hand.
    O’Brien wanted to create and play the role of the hero and so he did, and so should we all.

  82. Toza says:

    The text is an interesting, inspired and thoughtful analysis of the film, I would say. However, it is a reactionary morality tale as much as Marquis de Sade’s Justine. De Sade condemns the actions in the novel with a tongue-in-cheek disclaimer. Even though the RHPS is a great musical, I think you have to be a little depraved to like it, and its cult following has to admire the sexual seduction and liberation depicted in it.

  83. Ray P says:
    @Che Guava

    Just to try and make the awful lyric clearer, in Curse/Night of the Demon, the English sorcerer, Dr. Julian Karswell, who heads a cult, tries to kill Dana Andrews’ character by passing him a note with invisible runes inscribed on it which is the titular curse – it sends a demon against the recipient which is unstoppable and Andrews manages to evade death by surreptitiously passing the rune-covered death-note back to Karswell which turns his demon lethal against him.

    The connection with Rocky Horror could be that Frank is Dr. Karswell and Riff-raff is the demon who turns against his master. Brad is Dana Andrews and Janet the English niece who helps him. There are also allusions to The Tempest (Forbidden Planet) with Frank as Prospero and Riff-raff as Caliban.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  84. A perversely moral reading of a perversely nihilistic film. Rocky Horror is one big spoof woven together out of countless mini-spoofs, all sung in the key of camp. The “moral” sci-fi deus ex machina ending is obviously ridiculous—a parody of moral Hollywood endings in which the villain gets his just desserts.

    While the Straussian reading of Plato and other classics is wrong, it applies well to Rocky Horror and its spoofed “moral” ending. The great thinkers were not secretly teaching nihilism, as neocons maintain. But Rocky Horror IS not-so-secretly teaching it. The point of the hilariously absurd “moral” ending is that all such morality tales are ridiculous, reinforcing the film’s core message: Enjoy yourself in this world because that’s all there is, and don’t stop at debauchery and murder if you can get away with it.

    Yes, the spoofed “moral ending” does have an ambivalent element of sadness—but it is not the sadness of genuine regret at a wasted life of immorality and debauchery, but the sadness of a shallow sybarite facing the inevitable end of his all-too-brief enjoyment of sick and twisted earthly delights.

    By the way, the best road map for interpreting parodies and satires, which involves figuring out the relationship between clashing voices, is Bakhtin’s work. Start with Rabelais and his World—Rocky Horror is nothing if not carnivalesque—and move on to Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  85. @Dave Pinsen

    Dave, thank you so much for this. Here, this link will take you directly to the short review:

    Shaidle also saw it as a morality tale and noted how so many others missed that:

    “Rocky Horror fans, despite having seen it hundreds and sometimes thousands of times, seem willfully oblivious to the movie’s cautionary coda.”

    Thanks again. I’ll write much more later this afternoon. Cycling beckons.

  86. @E_Perez

    I did see it in college with my girlfriend once at a midnight showing. As was the standard, there were a bunch of the film’s groupies acting out the scenes by the screen and in the aisles. One of them, yelling to the whole place, tried to embarrass us for sitting in the back of the theater. Something about the back row and blow jobs. I was later told this was a standard part of their act. This is all I remember from the film.

    The view back in the 80s was that this was a campy, terrible movie beloved by some for being just that. As with much of modern art, there is no deeper meaning to find. This author must be on drugs or else is just trying to justify his guilty pleasure.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  87. @Kevin Barrett

    While the Straussian reading of Plato and other classics is wrong, it applies well to Rocky Horror and its spoofed “moral” ending. The great thinkers were not secretly teaching nihilism, as neocons maintain.

    Well they don’t claim that all of Plato or all the classics contain a hidden subtext.

    They basically argue that nihilism has the stronger argument in one of Plato’s debates even though the reader is expected to take the side of universal moralism.

    The neocons under Struss think Plato doesn’t want to promote nihilism overtly but wants future leaders to be aware of its existence. It really isn’t that far from what Plato advocated in the republic where he suggests that political leaders have to know and tell a noble lie for society to exist in a ideal state. So Plato never believed in a God or religion derived morality. He openly called for political leaders to lie about reality. So he is kind of a nihilist regardless.

    Yes, the spoofed “moral ending” does have an ambivalent element of sadness—but it is not the sadness of genuine regret at a wasted life of immorality and debauchery, but the sadness of a shallow sybarite facing the inevitable end of his all-too-brief enjoyment of sick and twisted earthly delights.

    I was thrilled with the ending since it meant the movie was over.

    They should do an updated realistic ending where everyone gets butt aids.

  88. @Semi-Employed White Guy

    The view back in the 80s was that this was a campy, terrible movie beloved by some for being just that. As with much of modern art, there is no deeper meaning to find. This author must be on drugs or else is just trying to justify his guilty pleasure.

    I have no idea why but this movie connects with otherwise straight people in a weird way.

    It’s the marmite of musicals. Most of us cannot stand it but others will stand in line for it.

    What is truly disgusting is that high schools will actually perform it.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  89. lloyd says: • Website

    I saw a scene from the TV sitcom Get Smart that seemed to be the origin of the visit by the young straights to the castle. But O’Brien got his inspiration from all the cultural trash. So maybe. Trying to read deeper meaning into TROPS is a waste of time except subliminally. I recall New Zealand in that era. It had a thriving hedonist homo and transsexual scene. Totally non intellectual. I was a picture theatre manager in Auckland at the time and was in it but not of it. They were very aggressive and now that that scene dominates Western society, there is a tyranny that outclasses any since Nero.

    • Replies: @Ray P
  90. Toza says:

    I remember seeing a musical about a glam rock star, called Velvet Goldmine, with Ewan McGregor in the leading role, in the late 90s. It also has great music, probably even better than the RHPS, and it says on the internet that it still has a cult following. Even though I was pretty liberal at the time, I remember being shocked by the casual pedophilia portrayed in it. Even though the acting, the script and the music are pretty impressive, the cult followers must be mostly gays/pedophiles.

  91. ArtSage says:

    I love it. I’ve seen the film just a few times, most memorably at the Roxie theatre in San Francisco in the early 80s. Reviewing the clips linked, and upon reflection, I think it unfolds as well as Mr. Donnelly says it does, and is indeed the masterpiece he claims it to be.

    As a result of reading this article, I’ve looked up the life and career of Richard O’Brien. He seems like a really interesting, brilliant guy and probably an excellent conversationalist, good at a party. I’d like to meet him.

    Other commentators may perhaps prefer repeated viewings of Alexander Nevsky or the Swiss Family Robinson. I have no wish to burn whatever movies they happen to prefer, nor the makers thereof.

  92. @John Johnson

    Transvestites, sexual innuendo and titillation have long been part of the entertainment industry. I guess many straights see it as fun, like also in India and Thailand in a far bigger way than in the West.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  93. Ray P says:

    It seems strange that New Zealand went queer so quickly given its past proper pukka British Empire loyalist nature. However, hearing that O’Brien grew up on a sheep farm there reminded me about Greg Cochran’s notorious scrapie theory of the aetiology of homosexuality. NZ has a lot of sheep.

    It’s also worth remembering that the Rocky Horror movie has a quite British humour to it and this hasn’t always worked for North Americans. In the controversy over drag-queen hours at libraries in the USA I’ve wryly reflected on how in Britain since the 19th c. parents have taken their children at Christmas to watch grown men prance around on stage in women’s dresses with women dressed as boys. It’s pantomime. A few British comedians on national TV during prime-time in the nineteen seventies and eighties donned drag during skits as part of their act (e.g. Les Dawson, Dick Emery) and there was the Monty Python troupe of course. This was much more mainstream and acceptable in Britain than in the USA where drag-acts in comedy seemed confined to adults-only venues and weren’t on national tv just after tea-time as light entertainment.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  94. Che Guava says:
    @Edmund Connelly

    It was easy to decide to replying to you, given havlng a little time. So pompous and condescending is your writing and attempted supercilious bs in your reply to me.

    Even your intro. was pompous and tediously long, admittedly entertainng, at least, whether true or not. the parts from the pub to the car or truck accident and the arrival of police.

    I have been to Auckland Airport and then Hamilton with my parents as a child,

    Nothing to do with the article except ‘I had this great adventure’. As the Kiwis would say ‘Bully for you.’

    As for how to work out that Frank, Riff Raff, and Magenta are aliens within the first half-hour of a first viewing, Frank says that he is from ‘transsexual Transylvania’.

    Clearly not the region in Europe, but another planet. Also the way that their castle is so out of place and clearly artificial where it is. Also, that Frank, Riff Raff, and Magenta are from the same place.

    Also, obviously, the references of Science Fiction Double Feature.

    The only mystery is Columbia, but since Riff Raff executes her before their departure, she was likely a Transylvian, but a mystery,

    For you to have not worked that out without, as you claim, over a hundred viewings. you must be extremely imperceptive or obtuse as for what you attempt to teach.

  95. @Veteran Aryan

    Rocky –but where is Bullwinkle —-Time Warp —Sherman and Peabody —-in the Wayback Machine with Thing ???

  96. @Ray P

    Of course, drag as an absurdity is one thing. Treating it as some sacred expression of Higher Truth which must be venerated is another thing entirely.

  97. Che Guava says:
    @Ray P

    Thank you again.

    I think you stretch it too far, but see the ideas. Except for the Dana Andrews film, know all of the points of reference you cited.

    Must sleeping now.

  98. @Commentator Mike

    I really see no difference between Rocky Horror and putting on tranny porn to Benny Hill music.

    Maybe there are people that have weird perversions they can only express in the context of what is decreed to be art. There is a strange acceptance of the completely perverse and degenerate as long as it is called art.

    I remember reading about how Cabaret girls don’t see themselves as strippers. It’s an art form you see.

    It’s completely different cause they use boa feathers and jazz music. It isn’t like those dirty strip clubs with underwear and pop music.

  99. Factorize says:

    It is always astonishing to me when people ignore flagrant neuropsychiatric illness and perceive it instead as a form of art. Often few if any will comment on this obvious point. The Rocky Horror Picture Show merely documents the effects of pervasive lead neurotoxicity in its era. As the figure below demonstrates conclusively, lead poisoning caused a decivilization event through most of the post-WWII 20th century in developed nations, reaching a peak sometime in the mid-1990s. The 21st century has seen a dramatic return to standards of normality that far exceed those witnessed during the 1950s. With current polygenic technology it should be expected that the future will be profoundly normal. 2022 could be the transition year towards this totalitarian normality.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @Commentator Mike
  100. Ray P says:

    So it’s not scrapie in sheep turning the Kiwis queer? And it’s not plastics either? I handled lead miniature figurines as a boy which could explain a few odd moments such as finding RHPS amusing rather than revolting when I watched it at eighteen years of age.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  101. @Factorize

    The 21st century has seen a dramatic return to standards of normality that far exceed those witnessed during the 1950s.

    Really? We’ve got rising endocrine disruptors and steroid pollutants to contend with now.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  102. Factorize says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Commentator Mike, thank you for replying.

    Current indicators for the current generation are startling. Consider the figure in my last post. Those born after 2000 who have now reached their juvenile property crime years are exhibiting crime rates that have never been recorded — ever. At the far left of the figure the red dots are showing juvenile property crime rates of ~ 300 per 100,000. 300 is almost unbelievable. This is 80% below the levels from the 1950s. The current numbers are not merely low, they are massively low. They are far below anything we have ever seen before.

    Mainstream society appears almost completely oblivious to what is happening. The low lead levels that we are experiencing now correspond to ~7 point increase in IQ. Genetically enhancing IQ by another 10 points could create a society that might seem almost too good to believe. Yet, we can already see the large benefits that have occurred with a more modest intelligence improvement.

    The square 1950s had rates of ~1500. While the 1960s was a step to the left (one double from the 1950s levels), current rates are two steps to the right from those in the 1950s (i.e., 2 doubles less (that is, one quarter)). Notice in the figure that ~1973, the increase in lead levels of the criminals of that time resulted in a large response in arrests ( large red spike at that time). However, into the 1980s, increased lead levels no longer provoked more arrests. Apparently during the 1980s, social pathology was simply dumped into the community. It was no longer felt viable to provide help to those in need. The criminal justice system simply became overwhelmed by the social pathology caused by lead. While before this time there was typically a ~2 line separation in the figure between crime rates and lead levels (black line versus red line), in the 1980s these lines almost converged. They were arresting many fewer juveniles given their lead levels.

    The prosocial trend of today’s youth can be seen across a wide range of other indicators. These reduction in these other indicators magnify the positive effects from lead reduction. For example, smoking and alcohol multiply lead risk, though today’s young are staying away from both of these toxins. In fact, today’s young people appear to be staying away from all of the obvious vices that only increase social burden.

    The ability to use genetic selection and assortative mating could profoundly intensify the benefits. For example, only some people would be especially vulnerable to lead’s effects, selecting against those embryos with such risk could create a golden age for humanity on the near term horizon. The idea that somehow the 1960s, 1970s 1980s … can be socially engineered by grooming today’s children with progressive values seems hopelessly misguided. Drugs, sex and rock and roll was a plausible strategy for social collapse when there existed the neurotoxicity of lead of decades past; in today’s environment, there is no such tilt in the social landscape. Pretending that dressing kids in drag is going to recreate the 1970s would seem hopelessly unworkable. The obvious prediction is that we are approaching a massive social transition to what might be roughly termed the right on a right left normal spectrum.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  103. Factorize says:
    @Ray P

    Ray P, what needs to be remembered is that the US doesn’t have any sheep; the UK doesn’t have any sheep … Who has sheep? To be direct, what is the single common pathogen that could cause a global decivilization event? What is it that everyone had in their environment in the post-WWII era that could cause Western civilization to collapse? Occam’s razor.

    When you think of it like that the list of probable causes is remarkably small. The fact that there were thousands and thousands of tons of lead in the air supply of all of the major urban centers due to tetraethyl lead during these decades, then becomes a highly plausible if not singular explanation of the social collapse that occurred. The example from Chicago where they ran a multi-lane free way through a low income housing development and experienced profoundly extreme homicide rates gives chilling insight into the possible effects of airborne lead.

    In terms of handling miniature lead figurines as a boy, I would note that the most severe lead damage appears to occur during the first year or two of life during one of the brain’s critical periods. Notably, even though there has been massive reductions in airborne lead over the last few decades, those who were born during the 1950s,1960s, 1970s, ~1980s continue to demonstrate high crime rates decades after their early life exposure. In fact, what we are now seeing is that those in their fifties and sixties are filling up the prisons, while teenagers are almost entirely absent from the prison system.

    • Replies: @some_loon
  104. Stephen says:

    I am grateful to Mr. Connelly for bringing up this topic because I too over the years have thought about this movie as being a metaphor for the 1960s and 1970s America and the Sexual Revolution of that time period. I don’t know if my thoughts about this are too muddled, but I would like to add my contribution to this thread. Having written all this, I would like… if I may… to take you on a strange journey… through my thoughts… on this rather… strange film. I hope Mr. Connelly reads it:

    (1) The idea about this film being a metaphor for America and the West being transformed by the Sexual Revolution always seemed right, though I am not sure Richard O’Brien was aware of what he was doing. Even the opening where it sings about Brad and Janet fighting androids always made me think of the War and how our noble orderly enemies in Europe and Asia where always portrayed in Allied propaganda as robotic and hive minded. The Brads and Janets had stupidly destroyed the “androids” that were there to save them in favor of a far more bizarre and malevolent group of aliens represented well by Frank.

    (2.) Obviously, some of the elements in RHPS have a late 40s and 50s feel to them. Particularly interesting is that Dr. Scott is obviously Teutonophone and Operation Paperclip type origins are hinted for him.

    (3.) Other than looking at it as a metaphor and also its music, RHPS never really held much charm for me because I am a heterosexual. I’ve often thought, contrary to tradcon types, that when a civilization reaches a certain standard of living a sexual revolution is inevitable because it is really something that most people desperately want. I think monogamy is unnatural to both sexes and was never really idea and tradcons make a terrible mistake pretending like it was. Both sexes are naturally promiscuous; (heterosexual) men are naturally heteromanical (heterosexual polyamorous- expressed in its fully unmasked form in polygyny) and women are hypergamous. Tiny elites throughout history have had the standard of living to freely operate on their natural sexual urges and thus didn’t always practice strict monogamy. Indeed, common men throughout history visited prostitutes (whose profession was only criminalized in the 1888-1950 period) or obtained mistresses when they had the need and the excess money, status, and/or charm to gain such supplemental sexual variety. Nevertheless, given the opportunity, most heterosexual men would live happily like straight pornstars and most women appear to really want to live like Carrie Bradshaw, Lady Chatterley, or Ana Steele.

    Monogamy was simply a necessary evil for most people in most times: people were usually poor and too busy working, trying to survive, and raising families to go looking for additional sexual opportunities. There is a German citizen MGTOW called AlexanderMGTOW who used to be online. He essentially argued that when a certain level of prosperity is achieved for the masses in a civilization, the desire to live like the hedonist and libertine elite by the masses is baked into the human instinctual cake. AlexanderMGTOW pointed out that the desire for free love and divorce was already present in masses as early as the failed First Sexual Revolution of the 1920s. (This sexual revolution was the socio-cultural equivalent of the failed Russian Revolution of 1905 in politics.)

    For me, this hypothesis is confirmed by the tidal waves of divorces that followed on the end of the post-patriarchal Marriage 1.0 of the 1916-1969 period in America and elsewhere. Once fault divorce was replaced easy dissolution, massive amounts of couples who obviously hated each other and were really only together in name only simply legalized what they already were living. In this sense, it was only a matter of time before the law was simply forced to go along with what the people really wanted, no matter how much tradcons then and now like to cry bloody murder about this. Huge portions of the population were already divorced in their hearts.

    Something interesting to me is that unconventional more free sexuality can be divided into two major subdivisions: (a) voluptuous sexuality in quantity and quality and (b) bizarre sexuality. Voluptuous sexuality in quantity consists of heterosexual promiscuity, transactional straight sex, and unconventional straight pairings and group sexuality. Voluptuous sexuality in quality consists all host of role playing and non-reproductive heterosexual sexual activities done for pleasure. Bizarre sexuality consists of homosexuality, s & m, and activities involving a living adult human with some object somehow outside of the living adult human description.

    I think that while a sexual revolution for more free and voluptuous sexuality is inevitable when a civilization reaches a certain standard of living, normalizing bizarre sexuality didn’t necessarily have to happen. In some sense, the quest for voluptuous sexuality was already being pursued by the Lost Generation, GI Generation (Greatest Generation in Axis countries & Worst Generation in USA, British Commonwealth, & Russia), and Silent Generation from 1920 onward (which is interesting because prostitution was criminalized in America in 1916 and free love appeared shortly thereafter in a way that perhaps St. Augustine would have understood). So the 1960s Second Sexual Revolution can be seen as a continuation of the quest for greater and better heterosexual fulfilment that began earlier as a result of people being materially well of enough to desire such libertine living. I think that the desire for voluptuous sexuality was inevitable but I think that the deter into bizarre sexuality was the corruption of the sexual revolution by (((outside parties))) who wanted to subvert the sexual revolution in this direction for two reasons.

    The first reason was, contrary to the hostility and dogmas of tradcon prudes, more free voluptuous heterosexuality could still lead to viable white families and relationships, as it has for upper class hedonists since time immemorial. The (((outside parties))) were hoping to deter the sexual revolution into stranger lifestyles in the hopes of destroying the white birthrate and growing a larger lgbqt “community” for them to allied to against civilization. The second reason being that many members of the tribe are themselves extremely bizarre sexual perverts and they simply wanted more partners and more freaks like themselves from among the goyim. I think the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s would have been a more STRAIGHT forward affair concerned with heterosexual freedom had it not been for the tribe channeling down decadent paths. Without the tribe’s interference, perhaps the Sexual Revolution would have been more rational and focused on and succeeded into reversing the criminalization of sex work in 1916.

    (4) I really enjoyed your description of Eddie’s appearance. Its interesting how dominant and macho he is during his brief moment on the screen. Reading this, I started to reexamine Eddie’s nature. I had assumed in the past that Eddie was bisexual or alternatively was prostituting himself Hollywood style to Frank (perhaps for money but also access to Columbia). But the depiction of Eddie on screen by his uncle and in print by Connelly, makes me wonder if Eddie was completely straight and ended up frozen because he both overshadowed Frank and was too manly to fall victim to molestation in the fashion of Brad in spite of Furter’s best efforts. Perhaps Eddie was just superficially playing along with Frank (in the way that Schwarzenegger’s Conan lured a disgusting priest away from Thulsa Doom’s service to steal his clothes) in order to get Columbia and get out of dodge before Frank lost patience and froze him. I wonder what Eddie would represent in this context?

    (5) Riff-Raff the Savior who takes over and brings the correction appears to be a very unconventional heterosexual. Magenta, standing at Riff-Raff’s side like Geli and Eva stood at the side of the unconventional heterosexual who brought the correction to the tribe and the sexually bizarre in the 1930s, is bisexual, incestuous, and likely engaging in non-reproductive heterosexual sex practices. The representatives of the a more prudish sexuality in the film are the American Gothic churchians and Dr. Scott. The churchians are no were to be seen when Brad and Janet needed them just like when the Churches chickened out in the face of culture war. Dr. Scott is prim and proper and it turns out can only offer a crippled resistance to socio-sexual change. If correction comes, will it come from the sexually neurotic bible thumbing tradcon prudes (the other heterophobic sex negating side of the clown world coin to Frank’s bizarre and extreme sexuality) or from heterosexually promiscuous and unconventional Chads who had the tribe and homosexuals steel the sexual revolution from them? And will a post-correction Western Civilization be some sort of quasi-theocratic boring oppressive colorless sex negative society that tries to artificially enforce vanilla monogamy at gunpoint or will be a society that celebrates heterosexual freedom in a way that would win over the masses and dissolution the tradcons?

    • Replies: @Factorize
  105. @Factorize

    Thanks for an interesting interpretation. I wonder how much increased surveillance, security and crime prevention technology have contributed to the decrease in property and violent crimes, as well as police tolerance of petty crimes/thefts. Increasing IQ is in line with the Flynn effects but some have disputed this on UR claiming that IQ has been dropping.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  106. Factorize says:

    Stephen, I do not want to intrude, though you might find this post helpful.

    The post-WWII 20th Century should probably best be thought of as an aberration. The nearly universal presence of high environmental lead levels created a global crisis for Western civilization. Lead is known to damage the prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex is known as the organ of civilization for a very good reason: It is necessary in order to avoid the type of social crisis that happened in the 1960s, 19702, 1980s etc in America and elsewhere. Absent a pre-frontal cortex one would expect behavior similar to that of the lead in the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Specifically, complete lack of concern for others, sexually irresponsible behavior, etc.. This does not have to be merely at the level of moral prescription, brain imaging could clinically evaluate whether damage was or was not present in the prefrontal cortex.

    Given this background, the second half of the 20th Century tells us nothing about our future: It is an aberration. It should best be completely ignored when trying to peer into the future. Today’s teenagers have the lowest lead levels that have been recorded in centuries. Unsurprisingly, they are demonstrating extremely different behavior than has ever been recorded. For example, current teenage imprisonment numbers are not merely low they are approaching 0. See the example from Alabama below. In some of the latest statistics we are seeing 99% declines. It is hard to believe, though these are the numbers that have been reported. People continue to imagine that the past that they knew has somehow continued to the present. This is completely false. The second half of the 20th century was an aberration; the future is anything will be exactly the opposite of that time.

    Crime is only of many indicators that have found similar results. Teenage unwed fertility rates have plummeted, as have alcohol and drug use, teenage smoking rates, and school drop outs — the numbers are unequivocal. Today’s generation have done all the right things and they are posed for tremendous life success.

    If the 20th century is not a good model for them, then what might be a better predictor? Perhaps Japan. Japan was one of the world’s first nations to remove lead from gas and it has a remarkably well ordered society. Crime rates in Japan have been profoundly low for years and years. Monogamy within teenagers is the overwhelming choice. Given what we know it is not difficult to predict that the future will be something close to Japan for most other nations.

    Of course, the intensifier here is genetics. Embryos can be selected and assortative mating can occur. This is a highly powerful technological combo that could transform society over the near term. Natural reproduction within the context of this technology already seems primitive. Even fairly modest genetic selection of say 1 in ten embryos could have overwhelming social effects. Polygenic scores have been determined for a wide range of traits and conditions. Parents now have the ability to select for those polygenic traits that they want their children to have. In my recent full genome sequencing, it was reported that I had strong heteronormative tendencies etc.. Parents will make the choices that they want. However, it is not difficult to imagine that such choices will likely be biased to be highly normative.

    My overall impression is that we are now entering into an era of very high social functioning. Without lead contamination, population scale prefrontal cortical functioning should be higher than it has been in centuries. The behaviors that were demonstrated in the Rocky Horror Picture Show likely will be soon seen more as a master class in psychopathology than as a documentary of 1970s Western civilization. Genetic screening would dramatically magnify the normalizing effect. Genetic variants that increase IQ, improve prefrontal cortical functioning etc., could move us very very far from what many might consider possible now. Of course, in such a scenario, the necessity for natural reproductive behaviors would then be open to debate.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @Stephen
  107. @Factorize

    The prefrontal cortex is known as the organ of civilization for a very good reason: It is necessary in order to avoid the type of social crisis that happened in the 1960s, 19702, 1980s etc in America and elsewhere. Absent a pre-frontal cortex one would expect behavior similar to that of the lead in the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

    The problem with that theory is that the Weimar Republic was even more degenerate. Mass media fortunately was not available at the time so much of it was kept to the cities.

    Lead based theories have all been problematic because no one wants to threaten their own career by factoring out race. Numerous studies were also not been critiqued properly because no one wanted to point out the elephant in the room. No one can do a lead study honestly.

    Teenage unwed fertility rates have plummeted, as have alcohol and drug use, teenage smoking rates, and school drop outs — the numbers are unequivocal. Today’s generation have done all the right things and they are posed for tremendous life success.

    Drug/alcohol use is down but prescription drug use went up and so did teen suicide.

    Teenage smoking rates are down but vaping is up.

    Drop out rates are down but so are academic standards. It’s expected that anyone can pass high school by showing up.

    Unwed fertility rates went down with abortion.

    STDs are up even though promiscuity is down.

    Video game/TV isolation went massively up.

    It’s a mixed bag.

    I really don’t think lead has anything to do with it. It is nasty stuff but in the past they tried to blame it for higher levels of crime in juvenile Blacks. Well violent crimes by Black teens have increased since it was banned. There are always problems with those studies like where they don’t mention that lead paint was used in Canada but they didn’t have some explosion in juvenile crime. Like I said before they won’t factor out race for obvious reasons. They have to write the study on the basis that racial differences don’t exist or they will wade into dangerous territory.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  108. Factorize says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Commentator Mike, one important thing to keep in mind is that it is not merely low crimes rates that have emerged in this new era of near zero lead levels: everything else has moved to the positive as well. The current generation not only has low crime rates, but teenage fertility rates have collapsed, high schools are using tougher standards to graduate students because it is now felt that high school was simply too easy, they are smoking less, they are drinking and taking drugs less– everything seems to be going in the right direction. Once again Occam’s razor can be invoked. Could better security technology also explain all of these other improvements? Probably not.


    There is likely some single factor that has driven everything to the good. This is a remarkably powerful finding that should be highlighted. Apparently we have somehow been able to hit the main line of the life success factor. That is a very shocking idea. Most probably would not have thought that could even be possible. Without such a central connection every single step forward is
    a struggle and then every other step forward is a struggle. Your teenager smokes less, but then develops a nasty gambling problem; your teenage does better at school, though no longer tidies their room. Somehow the miracle that has occurred is that everything is now going in the right direction. Roughly we have somehow increased the g factor at population scale. Everyone who has ever tried to grapple with this problem likely knows exactly how futile fixing problems at the problem level can be.

    The way I have thought of this is in terms of the correlation matrix. There are all sorts of behaviors/indicators (drug, alcohol, academic, many others). You hit the main line factor in the factor analysis (e.g., call it the g factor (~IQ)). Everything starts going better. It is magic.
    The entire factor matrix starts to feedback upon itself like a well-tuned engine. Less crime leads to less alcohol use leads to better school performance … before you know it you are locked into a virtuous cycle. This cycle even now might not have fully claimed all the benefits from the low level activator.

    What we are witnessing with today’s teenagers has never been seen before. We have never just seen kids start behaving as if they had 7 more IQ points. It is truly remarkable to me that miracles happen and no one seems to notice or care. If we can reduce youth crime rates by ~99% from increasing IQ by ~7 points what happens when we genetically uplift the next generation by the much more than 20 IQ points that are currently known? This is a textbook example of what happens when you actually manipulate the main factor of life success. Without the near universal lead contamination it would have been much more difficult to see what happens when this factor changes. We can clearly see now that there are very very powerful social effects by manipulating the life success factor. Of course, now that we have the genome unlocked there is no reason why we could not use a genetic engineering approach to also change this factor. It is not difficult to imagine that such genetic engineering would truly profound social effects.

    Admittedly, I have spent years in the fetal position trying to understand all of this, though my current take on it is that the best way to understand what happens in the social world is by placing the human mind at the center. You can think of a great many things that are potentially involved in shaping social responses, though these are ultimately best thought of as peripheral. For example, income inequality could be suggested as the central feature that guides human well-being. However, this idea does not stand up to scrutiny when considering how dramatically crime rates have fallen over the last decade or two even while income inequality has if anything gotten worse. The most important factor of any factor analysis of social well-being almost certainly has to be the the human mind. This insight dramatically helps to provide clarity to social questions which otherwise become a tangled mess of confounders.

    So with the 1970s context in which the film was set it is almost certainly correct to imagine a strong single factor that one could call “g” (general cognitive ability), or possibly (prefrontal functioning), or even alternatively “normal 1950s behavior”. There is a strong factor of the mind guiding the narrative of the movie. However, films like the RHPS often try and smudge the question of g and suggest that a high intelligence scientist who just happened to have a missing prefrontal cortex is somehow plausible. I am not entirely sure on this point, as prefrontal cortex functioning is apparently not synonymous with IQ, though it would seem more likely a plot device to pretend that such a clear dividing line of neuropathology is possible. A main character who was psychopathic and not particularly intelligent would clearly not have the same charm nor have the cognitive range to behave as he did in the film.

    Regarding the Flynn effect, I will be somewhat ambivalent. It is disappointing to me how much the emergence of a genius generation has been popularly overlooked. IQ has become a central way to explain social reality. Yet, for whatever reason there is a disconnect between what is happening with today’s young people and the psychometric readouts. It is difficult to reconcile. From the perspective that life is an intelligence test and especially with highly socially relevant behaviors such as crime, drug use etc., it is almost as if the behaviors are more important by themselves than trying to put IQ in front of them. Otherwise, you wind up with the odd situation we have now where some might claim that IQ has decreased even with near 100% declines in youth crime. One possible workaround here is that especially with crime, there is a highly selected subpopulation that is typically involved. For example, ~5% of the youth population commit ~50% of the violent crime. It is possible that the most vulnerable members of the community have seen ~7 IQ enhancements in their IQ without this being widely appreciated. Indeed, with a relative measure such as IQ all the boats can rise together and the actual effect can be almost invisible to others. For a better feel of this you would really need to seek the insights of those with direct contact with the youth generation. It is not easy to see however how the large improvements in social behavior that we are seeing could not be reflected in direct measures of IQ.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  109. Factorize says:
    @John Johnson

    John Johnston, the crime numbers have fallen so much. It isn’t a small decline it is truly massive. That is the problem when people just look at the numbers and somehow are unimpressed, they think that what happened had to be “normal”. It wasn’t.

    During the 1960s, the line was those from the 1950s were so square. Much of the narrative from the movie is devoted to this idea. From the 1950s to the 1960s juvenile property crime rates doubled. The cool people in the 1960s were able to discern this difference in social behavior. Yet, ~2000 juvenile crime rates had returned to the 1950s levels. Over the last 2 decades the rates have fallen 80% below the 1950s levels. If I were given a guess, I would have probably said that the 1950s level would act as the floor for the crime rates. The crime rates would fluctuate from 1500 to 3000. That isn’t what happened. Coincident with the removal of lead, crime rates have collapsed. It is not obvious what other feature of society could have caused such a massive decline. Notice in the first figure that I posted that the largest economic crisis in a century in the Great Recession of 2008 caused an almost non-noticeable hump that lasted for about 2 years. Quasi-clinical research with lead has shown that those under treatment experienced 80% reduced crime/violence/etc. rates.

    It is frustrating to me that what would seem such a clear causal connection between lead and psychopathology can be so endlessly debated. In social science it almost seems that nothing is provable. Yet, there are neuroimagers; there are gene chips- proving the role of lead in the social disaster of the second half of the 20th century should be entirely doable. Loss of prefrontal activity has clear consequences for prosocial behaviors. In terms of race, the decline across the board in crime rates has been dramatic.

    I find it very sad though that social science seems nearly incapable of engaging in a productive discussion about these topics. The social crisis of the 1960s-1990s almost destroyed our society. Not being able to derive insights from such tragedy seems tragic. How is it possible that crime rates could fall 99% within the space of 20 years and no agreement can emerge as to why?

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  110. Stephen says:

    I am not impressed with the number crunching. I remember Benjamin Disraeli’s axiom about three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. I think there has been efforts from 1995 on, but especially the last two years, to simply falsify the numbers. The statistics are worthless if police have been told not to enforce the laws or at least not enforce them on racially protected classes.

  111. @Fr. John

    ‘…Need I go on? Sorry. But this film is an abomination. All of the people involved with it, are enemies of decency, and therefore, “traif” – to use a Jewish/Yiddish term. Every copy, every picture, every vestige of this hole of degeneracy, should be found, banned, and burned. Make the book burnings of the Nazis look like a summer parade, frankly. So many people dead of AIDS, and a lifestyle that, six years on from the release of this film, were due to the fallacy that ‘the wages of sin’ is NOT death…’

    Calm down. Speaking for myself, I just stopped reading the article half-way through.

  112. Che Guava says:
    @Ray P

    I found a downloadable file of the film.

    It is very long, in time and bytes. Next time I have free wi-fi, by Wed. I know much B SF and some Hammer, but not this darker stuff from so long ago.

    X-Files, didn’t much like it, only watched a few times, but I gave the two leads nicknames.

    Mouldy and Scolder.

  113. @E_Perez

    Mr. Perez firstly, I am no movie buff per se, myself. I like a good movie (usually my favorites are from the 1950s through early 80s), but I don’t give a rat’s ass who is in each one, what these Hollywood people are up to, who did the lighting cinematography, directing, production, whatever. I don’t care!

    However, I went to that movie with a film buff who knew a lot about many movies, including the classics. He pointed out that this movie was a take-off on lots of the old campy* Sci-Fi movies. That was part of the charm of this movie. I’d think you’d have to know more about old Science Fiction and that to appreciate that part of the movie.

    For me, it was a fun time and just a weird place for a party.

    PS: To me, any serious criticism of this movie based on morals is a waste of time. It’s like the time (I was around) when people were figuratively up in arms about Monty Python’s Life of Brian. Yes, it WAS a sacrilegious criticism of Christianity, no doubt, and you sure can’t get a way with making a Life of Mohammed without people being literally up in arms. However, all I can say, especially after I’ve had time to appreciate it more, there were so many funny scenes, it was well worth watching, no matter what your religion.


    * If nothing else, they were “campy” simply because the special effects were laughable for us today.

    • Replies: @E_Perez
  114. Good morning. We’ve been enjoying an Indian Summer, so I’ve been out cycling, etc. and haven’t been in front of the computer. I see there are many more comments to catch up on. I’m hesitant to single out individual commenters for praise because I know I will be leaving out others, but comments from Pierre de Craon are always of a high caliber. See TOO for many of them.

    Here I’d like to point out that Jake Dee’s comment #83 is the type that I really appreciate and learn from. In fact, he’s anticipated some of the comments I was forming in my own head. Please take time to go back and read his.

    Now let me go through the many new comments before I can respond. Thank you for taking the time to write, everyone!

    • Thanks: Pierre de Craon
  115. E_Perez says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Two points here:

    1) I think a movie – or TV-show, novel, article for that matter – must pass the originality test. Must produce some new ideas, concepts or at least a significant addition to existing ones.
    Look at movies as “Some like it hot”: two guys sneaking into a female orchestra – brilliant comedy. Look at “The apartment” and many other movies with ideas.
    When Western movies started to rehash the superhero nonsense, shooting from galloping horses, they became boring.

    2) When the originality consists in offending moral convictions, it indicates a lack of ideas. Moral standards and religious beliefs can be criticized, but should not be ridiculized.

    The “Rocky horror” failed on both points.

  116. OK, I’m somewhat persuaded by many who say the ending was just window dressing. Still, I’m not ready to let go; I think there is more to the morality tale.

    One: I think all but Frank realize (in their hearts) that something is wrong with this lifestyle. Recall the floor show; Columbia sings “It was great when it all began.” Soon after, as I carefully pointed out, the lifesaver upon which Frank sits in the pool has “SS Titanic” on it. Now think of the list of characters expressing resistance: almost all of them. Further, I’m going to re-emphasize the end of the movie, which is not just a passing scene tacked on.

    At the end of Rocky, Frank’s executioner could have been some white Baptist preacher or other reactionary, or a redneck in a pick-up as in, say, “Easy Rider,” but in fact it is the film itself that condemns itself. I would venture that Richard O’Brien himself knew of the immorality of Frank. He knew because the code was written in his heart. Had the film been created by, say, someone named Irving Berkowitz, I would have had an immensely different interpretation, no doubt rightly assuming the intent was subversion of goy society.

    Something with this clear intent is, I believe, represented by the Russian Jewish 1982 film “Liquid Sky” ( the brainchild of: Vladislav “Slava” Tsukerman is a Russian film director of Jewish origin.[1] He was born in the Soviet Union and emigrated in 1973 with his wife Nina Kerova to Israel. 

  117. @Factorize

    Your views run contrary to what most UR commenters often post here but I’m glad to see a positive prognosis for the future instead of all this gloom and doom. Maybe the kids these days aren’t learning Greek and Latin but I wouldn’t say that they are dumber or that their education is worse: they learn at school now what was once taught at university level – they’re learning to code at five years old and already know two programming languages by the time they reach high school. I hope you are right and that the kids growing up will be more sensible than past generations and help to solve the mess the world is in.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Factorize
  118. Stephen says:

    Also, I always found Rocky to be a tragic character much like the animals tortured to death by Fauci and his dishonest psychopath “scientists” and Tunisian muselmenn henchmen and the German children and babies genocided by the (((Tribe))), Slavs, and brainwashed Asians of the Red Army in the real Eastern Germany. Rocky is an innocent victim. He is basically a child and is being treated by Frank the way Mark Newton and his long-term boyfriend Peter Truong treated the little Russian boy they illegally purchased. I notice in the movie that Rocky wants to be heterosexual and normal and lead a normal life while Frank is keeping him as a sex slave.

  119. Anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Your views run contrary to what most UR commenters often post here but I’m glad to see a positive prognosis for the future instead of all this gloom and doom.

    LOL, he’s not making a “prognosis” – he’s saying that everything has been improving for decades.

    • Replies: @Factorize
    , @Factorize
  120. GeneralRipper [AKA "J.S. Tomlin"] says:

    I’m 60 years old and I’ve never seen this degenerate Jew inspired mess.

    Thank Christ.

    I can recall some acquaintances talking about their “interactive” theater experiences and it sounded fucked up and stupid.

  121. some_loon says:

    Fascinating hypothesis. I have heard mention of it, but have not seen the chart you have provided before. Thank you.

    Lead paint was banned in the US in 1978, though it still exists in many homes. Leaded gas was banned in 1996 (except for some applications). Lead solder is not allowed in electronic products sold in the EU (though this has caused other problems, particularly with what are called tin whiskers).

    If lead exposure becomes de minimis, it does not seem necessary to select for sensitivity to lead, genetically.

    I would assume that youthful lead exposure in Mexico and other developing countries remains high.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  122. Factorize says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Commentator Mike, thank you for commenting.

    Also thank you for bringing to the forefront my extreme optimism. Yes, I am Super Super Optimistic for what is now in store for global civilization. The current generation clearly are the Children of the Light, while everyone else can largely by relative comparison be described more as the People of Darkness.

    The stark comparison between the lead generations and the unleaded generation is already too self-apparent for productive debate. Across multiple dimensions the unleadeds are demonstrating what can only be described as profoundly different behavior: No crime, no teenage fertility, etc. It is startling. The url included from my above figures provides extensive details regarding the diametrically opposite social behaviors of the new generation. The psychometric identity of this new generation has already clearly coalesced: They are who they are.

    What is, of course, highly interesting is that this has gone so largely unnoticed on blog. As you noted there is so much doom and gloom. How could there be so much negativity, when the future will be so positive? The obvious point is that people are mostly contained within their own life experience, when they speak of doom and gloom they are speaking almost exclusively of the doom and gloom in their own lives … lives typically guided by near universal early life lead exposure. The lives of the emerging generation already are demonstrating very different life trajectories than have been reported in centuries. Yet, for them it would be thought of as being nothing special: doesn’t everyone have teenage years with near 0 crime rates? No. What they are casually accepting as normal could be up to two orders of magnitude from what was experienced within the last half century. This is a commonly recurring features in psychometrics: there is no past. People perceive their social environment only from their state of consciousness not from what might have been true even a generation before. It is very unclear to me how the current generation could ever stumble back into the dystopia of our near past. Attempting to socially engineer a reanimation of these “good ole days” would seem hopelessly unlikely.

    In terms of their IQ, I have acquired a new found respect for forensic psychometrics. The crime statistics from my figures above illustrate how consistent and evenly applied such measures can be. Operational definitions of criminal offenses have been applied with strong consistency across many decades. Forensic psychometrics uses firm benchmarks (so many number of robberies by this demographic, such and such rate of burglaries in this demographic). It is an absolute measure. With other measures such as cognitive ability tests, measures and meaning across time are not as consistent. What cognitive skills are thought of being of ecological value from one time to another? Foresnic psychometrics also has the benefit of population scale. With my first figure, each data point represents the life experience of ~10 million teenagers. This is the power of statistics; instead of being limited to your own experiences (anecdotes) you can achieve a sense of population scale behavior (statistics).

    Life is an IQ test. Staying out of jail and trouble with the law must at some level demonstrate a real world and highly relevant measure of adaptive behavior. The massive expenses associated with the criminal justice system is often a hot button political issue that popular psychometric writers refer. The often recited idea is that crime reflects low IQ; in the expanded view of this discussion we can speak more generally about the impulse control problems that poor functioning in the prefrontal cortex can cause. What is especially optimist here is that unlike the struggle to enhance g, we can clearly see with lead reduction that prefrontal cortical activity can be protected for those who avoid early life exposure. The transformation to higher functioning brought about by lead removal at population scale constitutes a profound civilizational level breakthrough.

    There is so much to see here optimistically. There is now no obvious route back to the social catastrophe of the late 20th Century. Today’s children are simply not wired up to think that way.The conveyor belt that has been moved people from early life lead exposure, then often to drug and alcohol exposure and then to increasingly severe psychopathology has largely been stopped for the next generation. It will be very exciting to watch as they use their talents to help us solve all the problems that the current generations have been unable to fix.

    • Thanks: Commentator Mike
  123. Factorize says:

    Anonymous[103], psychometricians have realized that important features of personhood are established quite early in life. For example, strong correlations between adult and childhood cognitive ability become apparent by ~ age 7. What’s past is prologue. The emerging generation has already scored at very extremely high levels of performance on a range of real world measures of adaptive behavior (including very low rates of crime, very low fertility behaviors etc.). A social singularity event is in progress, though for whatever reason this has not been widely appreciated.

    The socio-political implications would seem obvious: even while there is a leftward tilt in the overall political landscape, the actual behaviors demonstrated by the emerging generation could be described as very far right (on a left right scale that considers social needs). The current generation’s lifestyle apparently requires little if any community resources to sustain.

  124. @Jake Dee

    You nailed it hard, bro.
    “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action” – I think Ian Fleming wrote that. Speaking of Fleming, Charles Gray(the Narrator) played probably the best Blofeld besides Telly Savalas’ menace dripping pass at it.
    The web of synchromysticism around art generally is inescapable. From the bombastic Triumph of the Will of Ramses’ victory ‘newsreel’ on the Karnak walls to the veiled references in Fragonard’s L’Escarpolette to the mutilayered cultural critques of Rocky Horror, the writings of Frank Herbert and the music of Blue Oyster Cult, it’s like an ever shifting hologrammatic collage of meaning and connection.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @Pierre de Craon
  125. Factorize says:

    Anonymous, the direct rebuttal to your comment is that life has improved dramatically for the emerging generation relative to previous times, yet this has largely been unnoticed by mainstream society. At the same time, those with media, social, political and other power (i.e., those with early life lead exposure) have endlessly chronicled the psychopathology of their own lives. The unequivocal reality has been intensely manipulated. Recent attempts to groom the future through aggressive social engineering appear to be a desperate attempt to recreate the past for the sake of nostalgia? How this could be imagined as an effective strategy, is very very unclear to me. Fortunately, there does not appear to be any easy road back to the tragedy of the 20th Century. The statistics that have been evolving over the last 2 decades suggest that the return to normality continues to intensify. What is especially exciting is that we are now seeing the move towards a zero combustion society. Norway now has a majority of car sales as electric by ~2025 they are aiming to have 100% zero emitting vehicles. We might then see blood lead levels in Norway that approached 0.0. It would serve as a future benchmark for what is possible for maximal social well-being.

  126. Factorize says:

    Thank you for your comment some_loon.

    I have thought a great deal about the lead hypothesis and it is difficult to see how it is not correct. Even those who provide critical views on the hypothesis in peer reviewed articles often note in agreement that lead is a known neurotoxin that has no safe level in the human body. Lead can be seen as a theory of everything that has wide ranging power to explain important social features of modern life. A fairly notable omission in the discussion about this film is the near simultaneous conflict that was occurring in South East Asia. One does not always appreciate the observation that an instance of life is just a microcosm of macro reality, though it is difficult to ignore the pervasive social collapse that was happening during the early 1970s. When you recognize the linking feature of lead exposure life starts to have a clear logic. As does the fact that even in our own time Iraq and Afghanistan are very close to the last nations on the planet to remove lead from their gas.

    Yes, when you read further into the topic of lead what you find is that before the age of leaded gas which started sometime starting ~1920s, there was the age of leaded paint. The social devastation of this form of lead was noted especially in the 1880s. The problem with lead in the modern industrial setting has been present for well over a century.

    That is true about there not being any great need for genetic selection of lead resistance once lead has been removed. Even still having such genetic protection would be comforting. Lead poisoning has returned time after time and people simply have been almost completely unaware of how devastating the effects have been on their societies. People simply have been as if spectators in their own lives unable to realize how much danger was present with airborne lead. As with the movie, many somehow interpreted severe psychopathology as a form of art.

    The next step will be to amplify the social engineering effect through genetic enhancement. We can see how large a social benefit (~1 SD) can happen with merely cleaning up our toxic lead environment. It will be very interesting to see the effect when we genetically enhance society by ~2+ SD. It is not difficult now to imagine that this could create truly profound effects. Perhaps selection based upon a polygenic score for even more enhanced prefrontal cortical functioning might be considered.

    Regarding the experience in other nations, there has now been a wide scale move away from leaded gas. Nations in Central America (e.g., El Salvador, Honduras, etc.) have recently seen profound and extremely rapid declines in their violent crime rates. The El Salvador example is the most striking. The homicide rate went from ~105 to ~17. It is a truly extreme decline. It followed the now nearly universally reproduced rule of a ~20 lag between removal of gas and then the removal of crime. What is the most stunning part of the El Salvador result was the decline from 105 to 17 occurred between 2020 and 2015. Um, a ~10 reduction in homicide in 5 years? It becomes nearly impossible to seriously question the lead hypothesis with such results. The lead hypothesis clearly deserves a Nobel Prize: the lives of billions of people on this planet have been greatly enhanced by removing a known neurotoxin from our air supply.

  127. @Factorize

    If I were given a guess, I would have probably said that the 1950s level would act as the floor for the crime rates. The crime rates would fluctuate from 1500 to 3000. That isn’t what happened. Coincident with the removal of lead, crime rates have collapsed.

    What happened is that Black crime increased after the civil rights movement. Cities like NYC and Detroit saw huge spikes in crime as there was a period of pitying Black criminals and not locking up them up. Integration allowed Black criminals to move around and find victims in White areas.

    Black crime has also massively increased in the last 10 years. Most of it isn’t reported and the homicide rate would be much higher if not for modern technology. Chicago had its most violent year in 2016.

    I find it very sad though that social science seems nearly incapable of engaging in a productive discussion about these topics. The social crisis of the 1960s-1990s almost destroyed our society.

    Well the social sciences are inherently biased and don’t want to seriously analyze crime since it falls along racial lines.

    Studying the effects of lead is also problematic for liberals as they have to set a baseline level of intelligence for children which is contradictory to their beliefs. Liberals in fact reject setting any baseline if they feel the context isn’t favorable. Or in other words intelligence only exists when they say it does.

    Crime really isn’t studied in this country. It’s too offensive.

    Liberals pretend to study it but they are really just taking part in critical theory. Sociology takes the position that society is to ultimately to blame for individual behavior. It’s a preset conclusion that is not up for debate. Criminology isn’t much better. There are still certain lines they can’t cross. Anything related to race or genetics is out.

  128. @Factorize

    I had a brief look at the website from which your graphs are derived and the papers are impressive as they’ve been published in refereed peer reviewed learned journals but I haven’t had a chance to read them yet. I agree that lead has the effects you indicate but I’m not convinced that it is entirely, or overwhelmingly, responsible for the trends you show, or if those trends are entirely true. One can find statistics to show otherwise. Take for instance rapes in Sweden.

    Alright, we know most of those are not due to genuine Swedes and the immigrants may have been exposed to higher lead levels in childhood before moving to Sweden, but still the trend clearly shows a rise in a most despicable crime in a previously relatively crime-free Scandinavian country. It would be stretching it to blame this somehow on lead instead of on cultural and other factors.

    Then take the trend for not prosecuting thefts up to certain monetary value which is being adopted more and more in many countries. That means that petty theft has been virtually decriminalised whereas in the past it would have appeared in the crime statistics. Now you have to ask yourself why are they not prosecuting petty crime: is it because it is no longer and issue or is it because it is so prevalent that the police do not have the resources to deal with it?

    Or consider if all the people involved in recent violent riots in US, which also included theft, arson and damage to property had been arrested, then there would be a massive spike in those crime statistics.

    I have a question about childhood pregnancies. If these are now being dealt with by increasingly available abortions would they appear in the statistics? It could well be that more teenage girls are getting pregnant but that they are aborting.

    My general impression is that pop culture of the 1960s and 1970s was relatively innocent, despite the topic of this OP or some of the songs highlighted recently on Sailer’s blog (, compared to that of today, especially if you consider the popularity of rap and what those songs promote.

    I am all for eliminating harmful substances like lead but the policy has not been consistent. Consider that they have eliminated mercury from thermometers and tooth fillings yet have introduced it in light bulbs and vaccines. Where is the logic in that?

    • Replies: @Factorize
  129. some_loon says:

    I too find explanatory power in this, but I am not quite as persuaded that it explains everything. Leaded gas may have still been a thing recently in Afghanistan or wherever, for instance, but what are the average lead levels in the blood there? I would think quite low.

    And addressing a known neurotoxin correlates with other social and industrial changes, which have their own ramifications. Correlation does not equal causation, but I do grant the correlations appear quite strong.

    Still, the effects of lead poisoning were known in antiquity, and it is very good to minimize exposure.

    Maybe Ron Unz will consider publishing an article on this, as there is clearly some interest here.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  130. I don’t understand why the author would write a 5700 word essay on a play about transvestites. Such things only appeal to weird men who like to go downtown for some “action” and don’t care who they get it from. In other words, the sweepings of society. Move along, nothing to see here.

  131. Ray P says:
    @Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg

    Charles Gray wore drag while playing Blofeld in Diamonds are Forever (1971). He has a spinning globe at his elbow. The film also featured a pair of hilarious homo killers: Liberace joins Murder Inc. – Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd. Sean Connery seemed to be getting into the gay spirit of it too.

  132. @Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg

    … the veiled references in Fragonard’s L’Escarpolette

    “Veiled”? Don’t be coy. It’s a smutty picture redeemed solely by the brilliance of its painter. Even though the trollop’s elderly and foolish husband must have had to pay a pretty penny for her, he is the only one of the three who merits something other than contempt.

  133. @Jake Dee

    Over on The Occidental Observer, SmithsFan84 makes a very valid comparison between Frank ‘n Furter and Mozart’s Don Giovanni. Don Giovanni is intelligent, aristocratic and charming. He’s also a rapist and a murderer and must finally pay for his crimes. Mozart gives us vastly more time showing him being witty and seducing women rather than him being dragged down to hell by the ghost of the man he killed. But it is his final conclusion that shows us the man he truly was.

    This is the sort of paragraph for which the adjective specious was invented. Every statement in it has a soupçon of naughtiness calculated to appeal to the contrarian and iconoclast in all of us (well, in many of us). Yet very little of substance in the claims made about Giovanni survives close examination.

    1) There are no grounds for calling Giovanni a murderer. A seducer and womanizer, yes, but not a murderer. No court in then-contemporary Spain, far less a US court of today, would have convicted him of anything worse than involuntary manslaughter, probably with sentence suspended. Had Giovanni’s short fuse not prompted him to duel an old man whose defeat was a foregone conclusion, he would never even have had to face trial. (It’s not as if Giovanni killed a black thug who had already fired six shots at him. That would be a murder-plus-hate charge, with a conviction guaranteed.)

    2) Calling him “intelligent, aristocratic and charming” in the manner suggesting a soon-to-follow “but” is trite at best. Whether in the opera or in history, Giovanni was an aristocrat, and he was esteemed by all, as Ottavio confirms, for his intelligence and cultivation. Yet it is plain that not every woman was blind to his designs.

    3) Mozart decidedly does not spend a vast amount of time showing Giovanni at his witty, seductive best. On the contrary, the opera shows him having three utterly clumsy erotic encounters—the badly bungled bedroom invasion chez Anna, where, when the audience enters, Giovanni’s sole concern is getting away; the laughably abandoned seduction attempt of his unrecognized ex-wife, Elvira; and the thwarted seduction of the peasant bride Zerlina—and just one apparent success, with Elvira’s maid. (As those who know the opera know well, the disguised Leporello has more success with Elvira than Giovanni does.) Giovanni’s reputation as a lover, aggressive or otherwise, is something we are told we must believe by a man—viz., Leporello— whose continued employment requires constant flattery: “In Italia seicento e quaranta, in Almagna duecento e trentuna, cento in Francia, in Turchia novantuna, ma in Ispagna son già mille e tre!”

    4) In the final scene of the opera per se (i.e., excluding the epilogue), Giovanni is indeed dragged down to hell by demons who call him a great sinner. Still, despite the inadvisability of treating a supernatural visitor with the impoliteness Giovanni exhibits toward the Statue, straight through to the end of that scene he certainly lives up to his description of himself, the one given as he escapes a virtual army of pursuers at the end of act 1: “ma non manca in me coraggio!” He exhibits similar sangfroid in the graveyard scene, when Leporello is understandably trembling in terror.

    Taken all in all, the opera presents Giovanni as a bit of a bungler in the romantic arena but also as a man whose courage in the face of his enemies inspires profound admiration, even awe.

    SmithsFan 84 was dead wrong.

    • Replies: @Jake Dee
  134. Factorize says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Commentator Mike, thank you for replying again.

    Yes, I agree that it is important to review carefully seemingly extraordinary claims, though after my investigation into the evidence I must admit that I am convinced. Across a broad range of measures the current generation are achieving social outcomes that until recently would have seemed implausible. There has been a profound shift in youth behavior across much of the developed world and beyond. Lead does seem to be the best explanation.


    One aspect of the first figure that I posted (reposted below) that has captured my attention was the sense of nonchalance in which the emerging social collapse was understood at the time. Other posters have also referred to this. One has the idea that in the 1970s, there was a feeling that the problem was containable; that it might simply be temporary: It wasn’t. The movie showed us that there was adult supervision available if the youngsters got out of hand- not to worry . This adult supervision would have had low early life lead exposure. The previous generation might be able to bridge over the abyss that lead was causing. This feature of the movie has constantly been referred to on this thread as the reactionary morality aspect of the RHPS.

    When you examine the figure below the public policy reaction to the increased crime of the early 1970s is very clear: There was a massive prison buildout and mass arrests. Around the time of the movie’s release, the current generation of young people had an increase in their BLL of ~2 and this resulted in the marginal arrest of ~700 per 100,000 juveniles. One could almost imagine that after the mainstream public returned home from their viewing of the RHPS, they wanted a great many of the weird kids locked up. At the street level, the RHPS truly can be seen as a reactionary morality tale. The broad public interpreted what was happening around them as disturbing and they wanted a law and order solution.

    However, what is also of note is that ~1995 a similar sized increase in BLL of ~2 did not have a similar effect on arrests. In fact, one can clearly see starting in the 1980s, that the crime problem was ignored. The somewhat optimistic feeling of the 1970s that crime could be contained was replaced by the much more pessimistic realism that it couldn’t. After over two decades of exhausting public resources of the criminal justice system, the increase of ~2 only induced a ~150 per 100,000 increase in juvenile arrests for property crimes.

    There had been a quarter century of endless decline in the social fabric; the community had eventually largely abandoned any attempt at keeping up with it. The financial resources of the community were depleted and adult supervision to help guide the youngsters through the social catastrophe became mostly absent. In this respect RHPS should be seen more as a prequel to the descent that was approaching. RHPS was the beam of sunshine right before a social disaster. It could be seen as Casandra’s warning.

    One feature of the above graph that should also be noted is that there are several of these “blips” in the blood lead level line that are typically reflected in the red line. There is quite an astonishing level of near certain cause and effect like relationship in these “blips”. When people say correlation does not equal causation this is in the context of finding two time series that roughly seem to move together. The highly unique feature of the above lead figure and many other similar figures from different times and places is that BLL and the crime rates fit together almost like a hand and a glove– a fingerprint. You could probably find some time series that looked fairly similar to the inverted U with quite high correlation. Yet, what would be very difficult to find would be time series that could capture the several blips as the lead level appears to do. This would seem to indicate an extremely close relationship between BLL and social outcome. This a a much much tighter relationship than what people typically mean with the correlation not being causation tautology.
    With lead, correlation clearly can be causation.

    In the Swedish time series, one thing to keep in mind is that the Swedes were aware of the problem of lead neurotoxicity in the early 1970s and actively managed the problem early. Since they have had low lead exposure for decades, the explanation of their crime rates would need to be explained in another way. The better comparison is perhaps Japan. They took action against lead even earlier than Sweden and did not try to compensate for fertility decline with mass immigration. Japan has had decades to work through the lead burden in its community and now has profoundly low crime rates: essentially a crime free society. Such an outcome is the reasonably likely future for current low lead nations. The great irony of course is that in Japan crime is still a politically powerful topic- even when crime is virtually absent. This is likely a common feature of crime perception everywhere. It should then be no great surprise why crime is felt to be worse here than it is.

    Admittedly as you mentioned it does start to become confusing when the legal code itself appears to be in flux. It should though be remembered that near zero juvenile crime rates have already been achieved. They did not need to stop arresting juvenile criminals as a policing tactic; they have stop arresting juvenile criminals because there aren’t any.

    The url given in the above figures has a recent report about crime during 2020. 2020 was in fairness probably one of the most socially disrupted years of the last century. The school system shut down; the economy shut down; COVID prevented typical social interaction. It would not be
    entirely unexpected that such social chaos might create a more criminogenic environment. Surprisingly, it didn’t. Early results for 2020 find it had the lowest reported juvenile crime rate in all of history. It was lower than the previous lowest ever rate reported in 2019; which was the lowest since the previous lowest in 2018 which was the lowest since the previous lowest in 2017 which was the lowest since the previous lowest in 2016 which was the lowest since the previous lowest in 2015.
    Guess what preliminary 2021 results are suggesting? 2021 is now in line to be the new lowest low in history. It is not totally clear how much longer this can continue as it appears that they have decided to shut down the government office responsible for lead and declare victory.
    The latest BLL indicates that it has actually blipped up.

    The recent article specifically addresses the question of youth robbery, burglary, etc.. The strange thing that was noted was that the recent crime spree in America occurred in the context of a decrease in those crimes. Apparently the crime that happened in 2020 was more related to those form the leaded and not the unleaded generation.

    Commentator Mike, the url also has a recent article about recent teenage fertility and abortion patterns. These statistics are also quite startling. There has been an 85% decline in 15-17 year fertility rates from the peak ~1993 to the present. It is another startling social change. It also appears that abortion has declined even faster than the rate of unwed teenage parenthood. The numbers indicate that a bright future is in store.

    One of the other important features of this story to keep in mind is that the social benefits from low lead have repeatedly occurred precisely on schedule. As soon as lead is removed from the ambient air supply of an urban environment, you can pretty much set your clock for ~20 years and the crime rate will collapse to the minute. As soon as a newborn is exposed to a lead free prenatal postnatal environment then 20 years later that child will develop into a non-criminal; the children that might have only been born a few months earlier might be on the wrong side of the divide.

    This has been seen countless times around the world. The lead theorists have even boldly predicted years in advance when such collapses should occur and have been proven right time after time. The latest highlight is in Central America. The homicide rate of El Salvador fell from 105 to 17 from 2015 to 2020. How is that even possible? A ten fold reduction? El Salvador phased out lead from gas in ~ 1995, so the decline in homicide occurred at the exact time that was expected. America is actually somewhat ahead of the curve for lead reduction, so other places (for example in the UK which is ~10 years behind) have reported somewhat less stellar declines in crime in date. Perhaps those from the UK could post their current crime situation. Do you have juvenile crime rates?

    Overall I find the lead hypothesis extremely convincing. Lead is a widely known neurotoxin that government agencies consider to have no safe level. Lead is known to have toxic effects on the prefrontal cortex which is a required brain structure in order to maintain human civilization. We are currently recovering from a profound decivilization event in which the very behaviors associated with lead toxicity were abundantly present. We have entered into an era of near zero lead levels and are seeing a never before witnessed extreme in social well being. At a certain point the truth is self-evident and can be accepted or ignored.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  135. Jake Dee says:
    @Pierre de Craon

    Well Monsieur de Craon, have you be seduced by Mozart’s remarkable score or by Don Giovanni himself ? Strip away the music, costumes and scenery and you will see that Don Giovanni was a murderer and an evil man. Don’t be so sure that a then-contemporary Spanish court wouldn’t see that too and found him guilty.
    Here is an alternative version, which would have cut the opera very short but is worth considering, what if the authorities apprehend Don Giovanni and Luperello at the end of scene 1 and send both to trial ? What could they possibly say in their own defense that isn’t a total lie ? We don’t have to use the audiences’ eye of God or a C.S.I. Seville to do a finger print and D.N.A. analysis, we would have a deceased victim, blood all over Don Giovanni’s sword and clothes, and the testimony of Donna Anna herself.
    That “the badly bungled bedroom invasion chez Anna,” is an armed home invasion with intent to commit sexual assault. What’s a just sentence for that crime alone ? It’s worth 10 years to life in my jurisdiction, in then-contemporary Spain probably life as a galley slave.
    “Giovanni’s sole concern is getting away” yes, and he stabs to death the man who attempts to stop him, that’s murder. It’s not a “duel”, dueling between noblemen had very clear rules of conduct and he followed none of them.
    The Commendatore was killed by an armed intruder on his own property, defending his family against a man who had no legitimate business being there. That is a deliberate and considered homicide whilst in the commission of a crime, that’s not only murder but aggravated murder. The aggravating circumstances being entering by night and attempted rape. I’m not actually an expert on the jurisprudence of renaissance Spain but I can’t see how he escapes a capital sentence.
    The court, which presumably consists of noblemen, would also take into consideration the Commendatore’s age and many years of military service to the state when passing sentence. In my version of this hypothetical opera, the court leans on Luperello, and gives him immunity from prosecution as an accomplice to murder in return for his testimony. I think he would take the deal, he hates his master and only stays with him through threats and bribery.
    What could Luperello possibly say that could save the Don or mitigate his punishment ? If he speaks truthfully the court would learn that it’s hardly the first time he has tried to pull off something like this. Don Giovanni is only esteemed by all for his intelligence and cultivation because nobody (but Luperello) knows who he truly is.
    Those noblemen of the court would have homes and families themselves. They will see that if Donny G is allowed to walk then the next dead man lying in his own blood in his own garden after trying to defend his daughter from sexual assault could very well be them.
    They will convict him, they will hang him and they would be right to do so.
    In short what the Commendatore did was right. He was a noble man who spent his life in defense of the state and died in defense of his family. After his death the grateful people of the community raised a statue in his honor. What Don Giovanni did was wrong. He was aristocratic by birth but ignoble by nature. He was a murderer and a sexual predator who never did anything for anyone other than himself. After his death the people of the city will leave his corpse on the gallows for the crows.
    At least they will in my Neo Reactionary version of the opera. I’m working on the libretto right now, it shall be called;

    Il dissoluto punito con estrema rapidità, cioè Don Giovanni, (un’opera in 1 atto)
    Or if you prefer;
    Le débauché puni avec une extrême rapidité, c’est-à-dire Don Giovanni, (opéra en 1 acte)

    Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is unfortunately unavailable but I’ve had my people reach out to Yngwie Malmsteen’s people to see what he can do with the score.
    It should be ready for it’s Vienna debut in time for the 2023-24 season.

    • Replies: @Pierre de Craon
  136. @Jake Dee

    Thank you for proving that reading the comments is not a waste of time.

  137. @Jake Dee

    What follows concludes my part in this discussion, such as it is.

    The question before the house is not one of seduction but one of familiarity with the text and the score. I have sixty years’ worth of the latter. You can go on as long as you like about specifics or overall meaning, but there is little to nothing in the opera to support the positions you have taken. As I said at the start, SmithsFan84 was and is dead wrong in his characterization of what the opera presents. If you agree with his silly, too-clever-by-half characterization, you are dead wrong, too.

    Two small points in conclusion.

    (1) The name of the servant of Don Giovanni is Leporello.

    (2) In act 1, scene 2, when Giovanni is struggling to get free of Anna, her father, the Commendatore, appears. Here follows the brief dialogue preceding their duel (I have omitted Leporello’s comic asides and the several repetitions, in whole or in part, of the characters’ lines before Giovanni finally tells the Commendatore that he is at the latter’s disposal if he wishes to die):

    Lasciala, indegno! Battiti meco!

    Va, non mi degno di pugnar teco.

    Così pretendi da me fuggir?

    Misero, attendi, se vuoi morir!

    [They duel. The Commendatore is wounded and sinks to the ground, dying.]

    Ah, soccorso! son tradito! L’assassino m’ha ferito, e dal seno palpitante sento l’anima partir.

    [He dies.]

    Note that after being mortally wounded in the duel, a duel he demanded, the Commendatore dishonestly cries out that he has been betrayed and is the victim of an assassin. Thus, he dies with a lie on his lips. Put otherwise, both antagonists have, for no licit cause, permitted pride to dictate their actions, and the consequences have been mortal. No one emerges from this scene smelling like a rose. It is precisely this dimension of moral indecision and confusion that has been a contributing factor to the fascination with this remarkable opera for several centuries.

  138. Factorize says:

    I hope others are finding my comments informative; I know I am. Providing a possible explanation for the problems that developed in the later half of the 20th century and using these insights to explain newly emerging social features can help us to powerfully reimagine our future.


    The idea that I posted earlier that we appear to have struck the mainline primary factor (for convenience we can call this g) highlights the extraordinary power that has been tapped. While some might be duly unimpressed, the fact that everything has went to the positive at the same time, can really only mean that this latent factor (g) has been accessed. It is surprising to me that this has elicited not much more than a yawn. A 100% reduction in youth crime deserves much more than that.

    Several on thread have expressed strong moral sentiments about the content of the movie. I share similar sentiments; I have friends to mourn. Several of them did not survive through a childhood in the toxic sociocultural environment present in the modern era. The movie offers not much more than a psychopathic smirk in acknowledgement of these victims. I return their smirk with a sneer of complete indifference. Technology now allows us to create the worlds that we want to live in and not the worlds that just happen by accident. The catastrophe of the 20th century is a world no one would have consciously chosen. We can honor the memory of our friends by using the knowledge that we have gained to create these better worlds.

    On the issue of censorship, my opinion is that ideas even difficult ideas should be open for discussion. RHPS has offered us a fruitful vehicle to discuss issues surrounding social collapse that would be more difficult without common anchoring points. Burning books or silencing critics obstructs the conversations that finds the connections that might solve our problems. The discussion of the lead hypothesis in this thread possibly has motivated the forming of some connections in those reading the thread.

    Some on thread have also expressed strong repugnance at the film. I have tried my best to stay more objective. For me the movie serves as a strong warning of the complete lack of morality in the modern world and the highly destructive consequences that ensue.

    I am the first member of my family to ever grow up in a mega-city environment. It has been extremely confusing. When I have returned to my deep back country roots, you know who you are, you know who you are connected to; you know that you are part of the team not in opposition to it;. your family is deeply embedded into the fabric of life. There is no chance that the complete detachment of person and morality as depicted in the film could happen in the back country. There is an overwhelming sense of social control that you feel; it is inescapable.

    In the film everyone seems completely at a loss of what to do when this inherent social control mechanism is somehow mysteriously not present. Modern life has created a reality in which the typically naturally present force of morality is absent. No one realizes that they must act for themselves or even eventually to act in the interests of self-preservation.

    In my own experience, leaders in my community grappled intensely with how to recreate the back country style of social connection in the big city and eventually they just gave up. They knew how critically important cohesive society is, though they were at a complete loss as to how to actually create a viable connected social life with all the modern barriers. The result has been a move towards siloing which has merely intensified with COVID.

    The back country family have been fairly shocked by how our lives in the city have turned out. They can see all of the very short term thinking that leads us forward, though such thinking creates no longer term connections. Our leaders run from one short term strategy to the next in order to find a fix from their last short term fix. At some point demonstrating long term moral integrity might be the only choice.

    For what will stop everyone else from applying the same short term self-interested thinking themselves? Moral decay has simply lead to ever decreasing fertility rates. Wide scale immigration as a short term fix then merely amplifies the trend downward in fertility.

    In my own experience, almost right at the start of kindergarten the teachers were already overwhelmed by the social problems that they were expected to manage. These problems only intensified though time. When I tried online education it was such an enormous relief not to have to deal with all of these social problems anymore. All you have to do is learn from the textbook? That’s almost too easy.

    The emergence of an online education option is an enormous step forward. If bricks and mortar cannot compete, then virtual education will become the future. The social crisis depicted in the movie has everything to do with the fact that people become locked into a reality they have no meaningful way of escaping. Bricks and mortar school environments have never had a viable escape route for most students. No matter how much deterioration in the social landscape occurred people would simply adjust; just like the movie. From my perspective today, if I could be transported back to the kindergarten where the vastness of the social crisis was explained, then I would take the hint and leave and not return. It is only when people actually exercise their options does change ever happen. I have so much optimism that the modern world can create the options that will lead people to better lives.

    • Thanks: Commentator Mike
    • Replies: @Factorize
  139. Factorize says:

    some_loon, yes lead as a theory that explains everything was meant somewhat ironically. Whenever a cult, politician, etc. tries to explain the entire nature of human reality with some far reaching yet oversimplified theory– the critics will label it a theory of everything in mockery. Yet, with lead there really does appear to be broad explanatory power on many scales and across time.


    I had thought that Afghanistan would have high lead levels; from the url below it appears that I was correct. At 14.3 micrograms/dL, Afghanistan seems to have possibly the children with the world’s highest lead levels. Surprisingly, there are over 12 million children in Afghanistan with BLLs over 10 mcg/dL; this is more than the number even in Pakistan. Afghanistan likely has such high levels because the financial resources are simply not available to fix the problem. In almost any other developed nation a catalytic converter and other environmental technology which might add ~$2,000 to the cost of a new car would remove almost all of the harmful pollution. Without such technology pollution levels can become extreme. {Below url click on lead and then choose the indicator 10 mcg/dL).

    In fact most of the world’s most geopolitically unstable nations have quite high lead levels. Prioritizing lead reduction as a strategic goal would seem obvious and yet for whatever reason this does not appear to have happened. Creating a miracle generation in Afghanistan by reducing lead level would have essentially been an empty net goal.

    This is quite true that when you look at the world map from the url above, those with high lead levels today also have lower HDI values etc.. What is interesting though is that there are many levels of analysis that can be used. For example, there are several places in America with fairly high lead levels and this could be possibly useful to separating out causes and effects.

    What I have always found interesting is that when Doctor Alzheimer’s found a patient with amyloid dementia in the early 20th Century it was thought some sort of unique and highly interesting study in neuropathology. In the modern world Alzheimer’s pathology is almost a universal finding in the aged in developed nations. Lead (and possibly other metals) apparently are involved with this pandemic.

    I am not clear if this is typical though on this air quality map, Israel now appears to be experiencing an air quality emergency. The map is indicating that Israel is now “beyond index” (which is above 500 on the US AQI).

    • Replies: @some_loon
  140. Factorize says:

    Commentator Mike, thank you for your thanks.

    On the other side of the diatribe, it feels so great to be beyond all of that social collapse. In the virtual age, it is not necessary to put up with it for even 2 seconds; and I haven’t. I feel fantastic! Moving from a bricks and mortar environment to online gives one complete control over one’s physical surroundings. Escaping it feels like a cleansing bath. Why would why anyone make any other choice? In real life you are stuck in a two person game where one side could always play their low morality dominant strategy and win every time. No good counter-strategy seemed to exist once you made a long term commitment to be part of a community. Whenever, their attempted sociocide was not successful (as typically social collapse is not a long-term plan for social existence), then they could simply play the same strategy once again to a new set of victims after all the social wreckage that they caused was cleared away. Virtualizing completely removes the gross-out strategy. My impression is that the forces of evil are not overly happy that a powerful counter-strategy is now possible.

    During COVID, many people for the first time have realized that a virtual lifestyle is possible and I expect that many will never choose to return to bricks and mortar as usual. Bricks and mortar simply is not competitive and participating merely allows the same predictable and morally unacceptable outcome to recur.

  141. some_loon says:

    Thanks for the work you’ve done on this. I would very much like to see an article on this here, and perhaps you should be the one to write it.

    Maybe you could ask Ron Unz, to see if he is interested.

    Your thesis deserves a broader audience here than any comment made to some_loon deep in a thread about an old movie could ever garner.

    I wouldn’t worry about a lack of qualifications or credentials, if that’s an issue. Nor about how the heathens here (or some other site) might react. And simple pseudonymic handles aren’t really a problem – it seems one minor blogger here (Raches) uses a few to really express how much he contemns the rest of us.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  142. Factorize says:

    some_loon, thank you for replying. I do not want to be trolly on this thread as The Rocky Horror Picture Show is a fondly remembered cult classic that many probably have beloved memories as a fun night out. Anything about the film’s more profound meaning or how it relates to the social background of its time can easily be overlooked in favor of the good time it provided for people.


    However, I suspect that the dis-inhibiting effect of lead has been recognized for millennia and this knowledge has been maintained through time. Lead can induce behavior that others find amusing even at the expense of those doing the behavior. Mental illness as dramatically engaging; essentially art as a criminal offense. A crime as construed under international human rights legislation committed by the entire community against those with serious neuropsychopathology. Lead merely becomes a vehicle to commit societal scale human rights violations with few if any being aware of what is happening.

    For me the social catastrophe that was swirling all around at the time of the film’s production and would dramatically intensify in the years of the 1980s and 1990s cannot be casually dismissed. Considering the near universal presence of high lead on a global scale in all major urban centers in the developed world at that time, this epoch possibly represents an all time low in human civilization. It was a time at which complete societal level collapse could have plausibly occurred (even to a greater extent than it did actually collapse). One need not look far to see in the present time the ongoing lead crisis that is unfolding (in nations such as Afghanistan and others) that allow us from our present low lead context to analyze the social and cultural effects of lead neurotoxicity. They are now roughly where we were in ~1990 near the height of the disaster. The lead crisis is still with us and will be for many decades into the future.

    I thank you for your encouragement and kind words. The lead hypothesis has such wide application that it could be introduced to almost any of the threads on this blog: a theory of everything. I certainly agree that this is an extremely important topic to introduce to blog readers at a main thread level. It has wide scope and can be considered in relation to a range of important social topics including crime, race, intelligence, fertility patterns, global security, inter alia.

    My perspective is that the reduction in lead is a very positive and uplifting story… ultimately.
    Crime has essentially disappeared in today’s youth; African Americans have had a notably favorable change in their social standing; fertility rates in disadvantaged groups have greatly declined; global security applications exist … . It is a very positive story.

    We have now reached a nearly magical era of a utopian society. Interestingly, the lead hypothesis only emerged ~2000 when we broke below the crime levels of the 1950s. It was only then when people started to realize that something very strange was happening. Here we are 20 years later and crime rates are no longer somewhat below the levels in the 1950s; they are approaching zero. It is no longer possible to overlook that something strange has happened– something impossibly strange has happened.

    Zero crime? People construct theories to explain their life experiences that seem plausible– there is a high teenage crime rate– oh, that’s because there is a teenage brain that is prone to crime. Just so. Ok, now there is a zero teenage crime rate — oh, that’s because there is a teenage brain that is not prone to crime. Just so. The just so stories seem plausible until they don’t. There is an increasing crime rate in those over 50– oh, that’s because there is mature brain that is prone to crime. etc. fill in other demographic variables. Just so stories can at least help you get you through your day; if something crops up you can always make up another just so story. It would be helpful to have some theory that had somewhat more consistency through time as the lead hypothesis does.

    An evolutionary theory might also have some value. The level of social collapse that occurred in the 1970s-1990s should never have been plausible from an evolutionary perspective. The behavior that was demonstrated was so poorly maladaptive that humanity could never have survived if had existed in previous times. 10-20% of the population could not possibly have had that level of psychopathology in previous times when everyone had to pull their weight if the group were to survive. Zero crime should not be seen as some sort of miracle; up until recent times that would probably have been close to the norm. Crime is now where it should be based on humans evolutionary history. Just so.

    Strangely other explanations based purely on theories of IQ etc. still seem not to have heard the great news. From this perspective, crime, race, social collapse are as bad as ever… even without any crime. Perhaps a headline statement on the lead hypothesis could reset the conversation.

    I was thinking about writing about this and I thought it would actually be more fun to write this as an unz collective effort — a group writing exercise? Writing is typically a solitary activity where someone has much inspiration and perspiration and then everyone else can criticize that a comma is missing. Perhaps we could all contribute collaboratively. By collaborating in this way we could craft the blog to address the specific interests of those on thread. For example, we could agree on some high level outline and work from there.

    I have to admit that I do have some concerns about the extent of my involvement on unz as from what I remember it has been blocked by tech and it would not be overly surprising if …. how should I say this …. government monitoring is present? Freedom of speech is always in trouble when people get to this point of self-censorship. I also have some questions whether the blog is truly committed to free speech itself. Even with free speech there are certain questions and topics that
    become off-limits. Surprisingly, sometimes one can say all sorts of offensive things, but then some element of the truth is mentioned and then that is not ok.

    • Replies: @some_loon
  143. Factorize says:

    Dear webmaster could you please make the 2 following edits to my previous posts.


    The swiggly brackets contain the new text, the square brackets contain the text to edit out.
    Note in the first edit below the swiggly brackets are empty and thus no text should replace
    what is in the square brackets.

    I thought these changes would help to edify the thread conversation.

    1. November 7, 2021 at 2:20 am GMT • 8.0 days ago • 700 Words
    First Paragraph 3 lines up from bottom

    Specifically, complete lack of concern for others, [sexually irresponsible behavior,] etc..

    2. November 6, 2021 at 10:56 pm GMT • 8.2 days ago • 500 Words
    6 lines up from the bottom of post

    {The expected agents of social degeneracy were}
    [Drugs, sex and rock and roll was] a plausible strategy for social collapse when there existed the neurotoxicity of lead of decades past; in today’s environment, there is no such tilt in the social landscape.

    I would greatly appreciate if this edits were made.
    Thank you.

  144. some_loon says:

    However, I suspect that the dis-inhibiting effect of lead has been recognized for millennia and this knowledge has been maintained through time.

    The mental effects of the lead in pipes used to deliver water were known to the Romans. In most places, calcium deposits would soon form on the inside of the pipes isolating the lead from the water.


    Broader societal effects were postulated much more recently. This merits further exploration.

    I was thinking about writing about this and I thought it would actually be more fun to write this as an unz collective effort — a group writing exercise?

    An expository article followed by an active comment section can be productive. Turn the heathens and infidels here loose on it and it is unlikely that major parts of this will remain unexplored, however unsettled certain areas would remain and however unsettling the experience might be.

    But here’s my (very) small contribution to the project, point 13 in the article possibly being of the most interest to you:

    The article is more about two other heavy metals, arsenic and mercury, being implicated in polio, but lead seems involved as well.

    I have to admit that I do have some concerns about the extent of my involvement on unz as from what I remember it has been blocked by tech and it would not be overly surprising if …. how should I say this …. government monitoring is present?

    Do as you will.

    But this is an issue where I think you would have the LEAST issue with censorship or cancel culture or the rest. You are writing about what is truly an accomplished fact, if the theory is correct. I don’t know that Big Lead’s lobbyists are going to look to dox and discredit you and racial activists might just agree it’s good news, for a change. Or shake their heads about the ‘same old, same old’ how the Man poisoned children in the inner city.

    I doubt anyone important would look to factorize you into less than a prime number over such topics, but I understand your concerns.

    I also have some questions whether the blog is truly committed to free speech itself.

    Irrelevant so far as this issue goes, unless the true editorial stance is that doomsayers are too optimistic and good news has no place here.

    I doubt this.

    I think the proprietor would say yes or no based on issues of quality and if it is a good fit for the webzine.

    I shall stop my sales pitch here. Good luck with whatever you decide.

    Should you go through with this, you could always say some_loon talked you into it.

  145. Factorize says:

    some_loon, thank you for responding again and I especially appreciate your supporting words! Thank you. This topic is so uplifting for me and I feel so excited to be connecting the ideas and developing deeper insights. I feel great about the ideas that I have posted to this thread which I hope others will find informative.


    The headline continues to be that the kids are simply off the chart. What we are seeing now has never happened before; never ever. It is a magnitude of order lower than that at the peak of the social crisis. This is a genius generation. It’s that virtuous cycle I mentioned before, you hit the primary latent factor in the correlation matrix and magic happens. Yeah! You really have to wonder when is this all going to max out? It hasn’t as of yet.

    Point number two is that that was only point number 1. Point number 2 is genetic uplift. Basically repeat what happened with point number 1 and then cube it. What happens when we start adding full standard deviations to human IQ? The science has already established that IQ/behavior uplift is doable. We can see what happens with a minimal society wide uplift, now we can move into the full deal. We are on the threshold of a new humanoid species.

    So much joy; so much happiness. Our species is rising up. The kids have demonstrated responsible behavior — transfer the genetic technology to them and allow uplift to occur. It will be riding the tiger; it might not work out, though with a functioning prefrontal cortex there is a fighting chance– without one it would probably be best for us to continue as a primate species. Genetic Singularity could cause a similar social rupture as the lead catastrophe, yet as we have seen with deleading change does not necessarily lead to crisis; crisis happens when life sinks into an abyss not when life is transcending.

    Importantly, the transition to lab based reproduction should be understood. Natural reproduction is now laughably inadequate; it has no relevance in the modern GWAS age. All the advantages of genetic selection and genetic engineering would be lost. Natural reproduction is the low IQ option of the 21st century for reproduction that in time will be recognized as a social disaster on par with lead.

    With respect to your comments, I was being quite indirect in the first quote that you highlighted. It is one of the highly attractive features of these blogs that posts can be more conversational and clarifications can be sought. What I was skirting around was the sinister idea that the contamination of lead in the ambient air at a planetary scale was possibly an intentional act to create a social disaster. The psychopathology of lead has been recognized for millennia as you noted, it is not some new finding; people have known about it for thousands of years and yet for some reason it continues to recur and cause yet more social apocalypses. Why? My thought was perhaps that this was reintroduced because the brain damage that lead causes can create such a great party. People can have such a fun time during an era of lead dementia no matter how devastating and completely unsustainable their behavior might be.

    Within the last few weeks the CDC has lowered the reference range for blood lead down to 3.5 mcg/dL. Unbelievably, CDC guidance in 1960 was 60! That is approaching a lethal level. How could a near lethal level of a known neurotoxin ever have been the regulatory standard? The current guidance is that there is no safe level. The labs are now referring to any detectable lead has a concern.

    I read through your article on polio. It is so hard to imagine that such minimal concern was given to population health. This is even seen into the 1990s with ambient lead levels. The generally accepted standards of reasonable care were entirely overlooked. Since I have learned of the lead problem, I have bought a bottle of 7,8 dihydroxyflavone, a hepa filter which I have attached to a box fan along with an air quality monitor. Health regulators will need to rebuild confidence in their ability to protect the public’s health.

    In my previous post I requested that some of my previous posts be edited. I realized that I wanted to avoid the culture of the gutter that I had criticized in my posts. Please show your support for this request. It might be somewhat Orwellian, though why not be part of the uplifting force to the good that is now transforming our world?

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  146. @Factorize

    Some of your comments have been intriguing, but some just sound foolish. Have you heard about all of the property damage and rise in murder-rates of the last year? The only reason this was not counted as an increase in crime was political. Anything to tear Trump down was tolerated. But it’s hard to see the last year as a sign that “crime” in any meaningful sense is down. Were all of the people setting cars on fire afflicted with lead poisoning? I doubt it. You probably are right a broad trend. But broad trends can sometimes seem meaningless if one doesn’t track details more carefully.

  147. Factorize says:

    Patrick, thank you for entering the conversation. There is so much left to say on the topic of lead and it is a great deal of fun writing about it. It probably would be for the best if we could have our own blank thread to continue this discussion. Thread Revolt! One wants to observe thread etiquette.


    The url included on the figures that I have posted upthread specifically addresses the question of 2020 and the unrest in relation to juvenile crime in a recent blog post. Strangely, what was found was that crime continued to decrease in 2020 in specific crimes such as juvenile burglary, other property crime etc.. I am impressed with how consistently many of the criminal code violations have been reported over many decades. When you look at these specific crimes you find that even in 2020 the ongoing decline was maintained and various types of crime achieved multi-decade lows. The blog post reported that some of the media even noted this bifurcation- basically there was prominent rioting that did not also include an increase in typical street level crimes. Oddly, the rioting was interpreted more in terms of a political statement than as a de facto crime.

    Admittedly, this would need careful interpretation and a close analysis. As you noted there was a large upturn in homicide, though this was from near a century low. Another consideration is that the rioting was almost exclusively an American outcome. The lead hypothesis shows its strengths especially when it considers the broader trends that have been seen across multiple nations and across many decades.

    Nonetheless, the irony is that even the rioting can be reimagined in terms of a wider lead hypothesis narrative. In particular, the large reduction in lead levels (with the large crime reduction that followed) has lead to the emergence of a viable African American voice on the political scene.
    It is almost impossible to overlook the recent rise of wokeness as a cultural force in America. When people have a prefrontal cortex again all sorts of mental awarenesses can move to the forefront.

    This submerged subconscious is political action finding its voice. Rioting for the cause? I am not sure whether I am overly comfortable with the logic (I mean why not just talk it out and create some new working agreement?), though there is probably an element of truth in this. Finding the correct words for what one wants to say is typically more difficult than a more general mass expression within the context of a social movement. During the era of lead, disadvantaged communities became so locked into self-destruction that there was no realistic avenue available to them to productively communicate their sociopolitical needs to the larger community. The higher cognitive functioning that has emerged due to lower lead levels is allowing the social political system to integrate new voices that until recently had largely not been engaged by the macro power structure.

    Back to the question of crime. There are so many indicators that one could also consider that side steps crime. With Spearman’s indifference of the indicator concept almost anything should show the effects of lead: teen fertility would be a good one. While this figure does not appear to include 2020 it demonstrates a very similar relation to lead as does crime. This one is probably even better than crime during the 1980s when it appears the criminal justice system stopped arresting criminals. In the figure below we can see without such capacity constraints the social crisis in teen fertility at least hit a maximum ~1990 and has fallen dramatically ever since.

    There are a great many interesting ideas that have yet to been mentioned on thread. The tails of the normal distribution concept is one such powerful concept. Roughly, when mainstream society experienced a ~5 IQ point drop, this caused considerable stress, though the community was able to navigate through the crisis, especially as lead levels fell. Yet, when disadvantaged communities underwent a ~10 IQ point drop, this caused an apocalyptic result. These communities fell below minimum requirements for viability. Astonishingly, housing projects were bulldosed and the residents were paid to leave after it was agreed that these communities were simply too dysfunctional to be allowed to continue. All that remains are craters where the communities used to be. The extent of the crisis that was occurring in these communities was never able to reach the consciousness of the people in the suburbs.

  148. Kali says:
    @Al Liguori

    Kali—as in The Destroyer?

    Well, that’s me told! – Maybe I should brace myself for more such unoriginal banality? Aye.


    “Spirituality”—the signpost of self-indulgent manure dropped in front of us


    I didn’t choose the word, doood [sic? 🙂 ] I simply responded to one of you bible-bashers misuse of it. Maybe you should take your shit shovel to his post, no?

    Oh puh-leez!

    Oh, fuck off! LOL

    You must have missed “Go and now sin no more” (John 8:11)”

    Define “sin”, see if you can convince me, “the destroyer” (apparently) that your notion of “sin” in any way resembles my experienced reality of transcendence.

    I’ll ignore your incomprehensable sky-gods “standards” and “measures”, as you don’t so much as offer a yardstick to measure them against!

    What “love” leaves a man perched on the precipice of Hell? None. The true love of a man is fraternal correction of that man to save his eternal soul.

    Now we’re getting somewhere! Men perched on the precipice of … hell (!!) with a capital “H”, no less, as devised by the crazy sky-god, with a capital “G”, depicted in your scriptures no less, from which “sinners” must be saved by the ever-“loving”, ever-judgemental, ever-contadictory brotherly “love” I see you and your fellow bible-bashers smear so many comment threads with. Okey-doke.

    Your reading also missed that God Himself founded ONE Church to (singular, not plural, in Matthew 16:18), a visible Church with Divine Rights to govern (Matthew 16:19 & 18:18), teach (Matthew 28:19-20), and sanctify (Matthew 28:18-19; John 20:23), teaching oneness of doctrine without dissent or heresy (Matthew 12:25, 16:1; John 10:16, 17:20-23; Acts 4:32; Romans 12:5, 16:17; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13, 10:17, 11:18-19, 12:12-27, 14:33; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Ephesians 4:3-6; Philippians 1:27, 2:2-3; 1 Timothy 6:3-5; Titus 3:9-10; James 3:16; 2 Peter 2:1) and an organized hierarchy (Acts 1:20, 15:2-6, 20:28, 21:18; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-2, 5:17; Titus 1:7; Hebrews 11:2; 1 Peter 2:25

    Reads more like an authoritarian, totalitarian political manifesto than a doctine for actual spiritual growth or enlightenment to me. But, hey, what would I know having spent my entire adult life exploring such matters from so many angles and perspectives, following an entire childhood of bullshit “scripture” presented as “Christianity” as opposed to the “Saulianity” it is.

    After all, it looks like you’ve spent quite some time with your head burried in that one book, so of course it follows that you know oh, so much more about “spirituality” and ummmm “G”od than I do! Stands to reason!

    “Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, [I have Spirituality!] shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” Matthew 7:21

    Hahahaha! Oh, you’re funny! I wonder if you count yourself amongst those who will or will not enter “the kingdom of heaven”.

    Spare us your fake namby-pamby Jesus and your risible two-millennia-too-late claim of discovering “misinterpretations.”

    Spare me your 2 millenia fraud, your authoritarian “brotherly love”, your dogmatic, narrow judgementalism and your fucking mind-numbing, SOUL DESTROYING political manifesto dressed up as religion!

    There’s nothing at all “namby-pamby” about my veiw of Christ, or the life he lived – if he ever did exist as anything more than alegory or astrtheological mythology that is.

    Truly shocking that you can find sinners amongst Churchmen. Shocking, I say. Cave in to your concupiscence because all men sin. I smell feculent brimstone in that “other gospel.”

    I smell rather a lot of shit in your entire post doood. And I see quite a lot of projection in that last paragraph. But who am I to judge you, your beliefs, your psychological state, or anything else about you based on one single comment..?

    Anyway, as a great man is said to have once said, “Judge NOT, lest YOU be judged.”

    Go figure, huh!

    All the best,

    Oh, P.S. Just fyi, this -“[sic]” – hurts and shames me about as much as being reminded that the hindu goddess, Kali, is commonly known as “the destroyer” by people who have no idea why she’s so beloved of so many hindu’s. 😉

  149. @Dumbo

    Susan Sarandon in her underwear

    Louis CK once told Susan Sarandon about his boyhood memories of her in this film (0:57)

  150. The biker is none other than the iconic Meat Loaf, scarred and oozing primal male power

    For those who are wondering this movie was pre Bat Out of Hell, so this wasn’t a case of stunt casting. Meat Loaf earned this part by his ability to sing.

  151. alfa says:

    I saw this article on counter-currents, only looked at the pictures, read the plot on wikipedia and closed the tabs.
    Now I opened this article because I saw it had 153 comments and wanted to see if anyone was normal like me, with the same disgust instict for unnatural images.+
    I’m happy I am not the only one but I read moms brought their children watching this movie and that people dress-up while watching it.
    There’s something wrong in this world.

  152. ivan says:

    Church got its ass kicked because men were too degenerate and compromised to stand up to the coming rot. What did your type do stop it? Absolutely nothing, except to blame a Church which had no means of enforcing its edicts for centuries. But you are right keep blaming the Church for it, as Pope John Paul II, said about fellows of your spirit.

    “Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and all these other things will be added unto you”. The Church of Christ is not a tool for men’s ambitions in this world, or somewhere you send your children to learn manners. If you do not believe that Jesus is the Saviour, everything else; nation, flag, tribe, family and the rest do not matter in the long run.

  153. ivan says:
    @Al Liguori

    — His blood be upon us and our children–, I’ve always regarded this line as a marker of the authenticity of the Passion narrative. But not for the reason normally given: that the Jews are some supremely evil people; but rather it is just what people would say in the heat of the moment.

    It has the same truth status as say some parents cursing their kid “I hope you had never been born”, or similar. Obviously when matters cool down, they regret having said that.

  154. Polistra says:

    Any film whose actual meaning isn’t clear until after a hundred viewings has its meaning just a bit too submerged. Of course there is another possible explanation..

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Edmund Connelly Comments via RSS
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement