The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Andrea Dworkin: The Reductio ad Absurdum of Feminists
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Andrea Dworkin (1946-2005) was a polarizing figure among feminists since she brought an Old Testament prophet’s fervor to the task of taking the logic of feminism to extreme lengths. And she was not illogical.

But she was also a physically and psychologically unattractive person, a Jabba the Hut-shaped stereotype of an unbalanced feminist. According to her own accounts of her life, her physical presence frequently turned men into the rapists they always were deep down. Her 2000 announcement that she had recently been drugged and raped by a room service waiter while unconscious in her Paris hotel room was not greeted with much credence or sympathy even by other feminists. We’re supposed to never question the victim but Dworkin had played her hand a few too many times, and in the wake of Feminism, Inc.’s defense of Bill Clinton, feminists were tired of her.

Here’s John Dolan’s admiring obituary.

Still, she was an interesting person in that she would occasionally notice things, from which she would draw feminist nerd conclusions and propound them fiercely: e.g., she was anti-pornography, a battle she appears to have lost overwhelmingly. She was a member of the Awkward Squad.

Like many famous feminists of her generation, she was highly ethnocentric, largely ignoring her own culture’s ancient patriarchal traditions while attacking the broader culture. Her 2000 book Scapegoat: Jews, Israel And Women’s Liberation contended:

Throughout history, argues brilliant feminist critic Andrea Dworkin, women and Jews have been stigmatized as society’s scapegoats. In this stunning and provocative book, Dworkin brings her rigorous intellect to bear on the dynamics of scapegoating. Drawing upon history, philosophy, literature, and politics, she creates a terrifying picture of the workings of misogyny and anti-Semitism in the last millennium. With examples that range from the Inquisition, when women were targeted as witches and Jews as heretics, to the terror of the Nazis, whose aggression was both race- and gender-motivated, Dworkin illustrates how and why women and Jews have been scapegoated and compares the civil inequality, prejudices, and stereotypes that have framed identity for both groups.

So it came as a shock to her highly developed ethnic loyalty when she finally visited Israel in 1988 to discover that it had a sabra culture that prized the manly military virtues. From a 2000 Guardian interview article:

Unlike many on the Left, including the Jewish Left, Dworkin was never anti-Israel. She attributed to the country ideas about socialism and equality which were indeed part of the founding vision, right up to the Declaration of Independence. So that 1988 visit, her first, came as a big shock: “I was devastated by the situation of women, so the obvious thing for me to ask was, why are Jewish women so subordinated and treated so badly, have so few rights? I met with a lot of activists, feminists, and I came back to the United States really, really angry that feminists who had been to Israel a whole lot more than I had, had basically been keeping all this stuff secret. It enraged me. And I couldn’t shake it. And that’s why I started writing.”

Aspergery folks who don’t get what other insiders understand tacitly can be useful guides to us outsiders in understanding society.

What she found in Israel was a male-dominated, militaristic society. Okay, women did compulsory military service but not in combat roles. The rabbis had to declare Golda Meir an honorary male before they could recognise her as prime minister. She understood why Israeli men were such tough nuts but was furious at the effect on society. “Pacifism was dead, killed by the Nazis along with the six million,” she writes. “There would be no more feminised, gentle, Jewish males, no more ‘Yid’.” With the death of the bookish “nebbish” – the Woody Allen type – the new, tough Jews emerged, not victims but the invincible Israeli army. Jewish machismo turned the 1948 Israeli Declaration of Independence, which specifically spoke of equality and women’s rights, into a travesty – “Debased men need to degrade women . . . Once debased, men become powerful men, the degrading of women becomes a state protected right.”

Is Woody Allen “the Woody Allen type?” (If you asked Woody Allen who he most resembled in fictitious cowardly persona, underlying personality, work ethic, longevity, etc. he’d probably say Bob Hope.)

The assumption here that, unlike in Israel, Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas. For example, D.W. Griffith’s WASP Victorianism made him more open to working with women on a basis of respect, and more sensitive to the horrors of rape (most famously expressed in Griffith’s Birth of a Nation), than the moguls who came after him. But that’s almost completely forgotten — I was in my 50s before Paleo Retiree, who grew up in upstate New York (Ground Zero of 19th Century WASP feminism), pointed it out to me.

Being fairly logical, Dworkin in effect took seriously Gerald Ford’s joke that there will never be a final victor in the battle of the sexes because there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. Dworkin thus came up with a logical way to reduce fraternizing with the enemy:

So now we come to what Andrea Dworkin wants and it is this: she wants women to have their own country. But that’s mad, I said to her. Why bother discussing it? It isn’t going to happen. To which she has a reply – didn’t they say that about Israel? And didn’t the world think that Theodor Herzl, the founder of the Zionist movement, was a crank? The Jews got a country because they had been persecuted, said that enough was enough, decided what they wanted and went out and fought for it. Women should do the same. And if you don’t want to live in Womenland, so what? Not all Jews live in Israel, but it is there, a place of potential refuge if persecution comes to call. Furthermore, Dworkin says, as the Jews fought for Israel so women have the right to execute – that’s right, execute – rapists and the state should not intervene. I couldn’t really believe she was serious, but she is.

“The last chapter – that’s my favourite chapter,” she said, regarding the section of her book proposing a nation state for women, and her face lit up when I referred to it. …

But that’s not going to happen, I protested, again. “It might happen, it could happen,” she said. Then we began to talk about this women’s country. Wouldn’t it wind up exactly like Israel itself – a utopian dream which like all utopias, inevitably turns out not quite as expected? “No, I don’t think it would be an ideal place,” Dworkin agreed. “Women tried to establish co-ops and communes throughout the 70s and a lot of them broke down, not because of outside pressure but because of internal politics. I’m not saying that’s the only solution but I’m saying it’s an incredible thing to overlook as a possibility. We’ve never dealt with the issue of sovereignty and I think that’s because we’ve never understood that what we want we can only get through a really serious political movement.”

Now, obviously, women having their own country is a really, really bad idea. But the reasons it’s a bad idea are highly illuminating — it serves as a reductio ad absurdum of feminist thinking — which is why you never hear about Dworkin’s proposal.

 
Hide 137 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “Awkward Squad.” being awkward is now the new cool

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. This article, sympathetic to Dworkin, says she “was in the sex trades.”

    http://www.anotherthink.com/contents/essays_on_faith/20050425_what_andrea_dworkin_got_right.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. It would be nice if we could all have our own, private, little country where we could retreat into for moments of solitude and relief. Alas, the Andrea Dworkins of the world are usually right there; policing our thoughts and actions despite the expectation of autonomy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Good ol’ Andrea the Hutt, at least she was entertaining compared to the current yenta matriarchs of feminism like Sandberg or Rosin. Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations would produce more sexual dimorphism. It’s also interesting to note that Israel still doesn’t have same-sex “marriage” despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    It doesn't have civil marriage at all.

    Gay unions are de facto legal and I think Israel is the surrogacy capital of the world. Doesn't matter, the religious will take over in a generation. Look at the numbers.
    , @Noah172
    It’s also interesting to note that Israel still doesn’t have same-sex “marriage” despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    The reason American Jews are into gay rights is the same reason they are into abortion, porn, secularism, war on Christmas, etc: because it angers bible-thumping goyim. Israel is Jewish turf, with no bible-thumping goyim to tick off, so there's no need to wage Kulturkampf.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    …Israel still doesn’t have same-sex “marriage” despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?
     
    Or to greater sanity. Or to a reality that greatly concentrates the mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. All of Mickey Rourke’s attempts to make himself look good seem to end up as miserable failures:

    “EXCLUSIVE: Fighter who lost professional boxing match to 62-year-old actor Mickey Rourke is sleeping rough in a California park and ‘was paid to throw the bout’”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2854714/Fighter-lost-professional-boxing-match-63-year-old-actor-Mickey-Rourke-homeless-paid-throw-fight.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Mickey was a fine amateur boxer a long, long time ago and has never been quite right in the head since. But, every so often, he can nail a role: e.g., the bombmaker in "Body Heat" or "The Wrestler."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. I’m not quite Talmudic enough to get what Steve means with his concluding line: “But reasons it’s a bad idea are highly illuminating, which is why you never hear about Dworkin’s proposal.” Will someone enlighten me?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    I also get confused by some of Steve's more cryptic statements. But I'm guessing that he is probably alluding to questions of national security and how the all-female country would defend themselves against outsiders pillaging their wealth. Such questions would draw unwanted attention to the recent fad for female soldiering in Western countries
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Andrea Dworkin was …..troubled. Even her greatest admirers found her rape story hard to swallow:

    In an article published in the New Statesman magazine and the Guardian newspaper in June, American radical feminist Andrea Dworkin told a harrowing story. She was, she told her readers, drinking her second kir royale one afternoon in the garden of a European hotel when she became ill (“sickish or weakish or something”). She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted. He appeared suddenly, already in.” Then she lost consciousness. When she awoke, it was night, the curtains hadn’t been drawn and she was in pain. “I hurt deep inside my vagina … I went to the toilet and found blood on my right hand, fresh, bright red, not menstrual blood, not clotted blood. I’m past bleeding. I tried to find the source of the blood. My hand got covered in it again.”

    In trying to puzzle out how she could have sustained a bloody injury while she was unconscious, Dworkin gradually became convinced she’d been drugged and raped. She speculated in detail about how her attackers might have done the deed: “I couldn’t remember, but I thought they had pulled me down toward the bottom of the bed so that my vagina was near the bed’s edge and my legs were easy to manipulate.” To a woman who had already experienced the full measure of sexual victimization in her life (her Web site autobiography recounts molestation as a child, beatings and torture as a wife, an assault in jail, rape and prostitution), the idea that she had been used sexually while unable to resist was particularly horrifying. “In my own life, I don’t have intercourse. That is my choice, ” Dworkin wrote. “I had decided long ago that no one would ever rape me again; he or they or I would die. But this rape was necrophiliac: they wanted to fuck a dead woman … I thought that being forced and being conscious was better, because then you knew; even if no one ever believed you, you knew.”

    Given Dworkin’s particularly visible and strident brand of feminism — highlighted by the argument in her provocative 1987 book “Intercourse” that even consensual sexual penetration is a paradigm of oppression — it’s conceivable that there are men in the world who would consider violating her a good evening’s entertainment. Dworkin seems to think her story should be taken as further evidence of masculine malevolence. There are those who would be willing to accept it as such, of course, if only they felt sure it really happened. Within a week, on the very day that Dworkin’s new book, “Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel and Women’s Liberation,” was published in the U.K., Guardian columnist Catherine Bennett voiced her doubts about the veracity of Dworkin’s story.

    In her response to Dworkin’s essay, Bennett first spends several paragraphs paying tribute to Dworkin’s previous reputation for factual precision, noting in particular her Web site’s carefully substantiated statements regarding several Dworkin rumors. But Bennett goes on to question why Dworkin did not seek medical attention for the pain and injuries she described: the unusual bleeding, the “big strange bruise” on one breast, the “huge deep gashes” on her leg. “The reluctance of a rape victim to be further violated by examination and questioning is understood,” Bennett writes, “but if this is what prevented Dworkin from seeking help it does not seem consistent with her current decision to relive the ordeal, in vivid detail, for readers of the New Statesman.” Bennett also wonders why Dworkin, an anti-rape activist who has devoted much time and energy to battling the crime, decided not to inform the police or hotel security when she realized what had happened to her: “Is this bartender, with his accomplice, to be allowed to continue drugging and raping female guests?” Bennett asks.

    Once the first doubts had been publicly expressed, an accusatory pile-on ensued in the U.K. press and on the Web. The rape story was dissected — and dissed — by a parade of disdainful commentators. There were nit-picking questions of logistics and logic: Why didn’t the rapists close the curtains; did they want to be seen committing the crime? Why would they have drawn her to the edge of the bed as she surmised; wouldn’t it be inconvenient for a standing man to try to insert his penis into a woman lying at the level of his knees? How was it that both the bartender and his assistant could be absent from their duties in the hotel without incurring questions — and what if they had alibis? And so on.

    http://www.salon.com/2000/09/20/dworkin/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    drinking her second kir royale one afternoon in the garden of a European hotel when she became ill (“sickish or weakish or something”). She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted… Dworkin gradually became convinced she’d been drugged and raped.

     

    Why is Bill Cosby working in a European hotel? Can't he get gigs in Vegas anymore?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. “The rabbis had to declare Golda Meir an honorary male before they could recognise her as prime minister.”

    Well, at least they were pioneers in trans-genderism(though Golda Meir could easily have been mistaken for a man in any case).

    ————

    “Dworkin thus came up with a logical way to reduce fraternizing with the enemy.”

    In her particular case, she need not have worried.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. @Anonymous
    All of Mickey Rourke's attempts to make himself look good seem to end up as miserable failures:

    "EXCLUSIVE: Fighter who lost professional boxing match to 62-year-old actor Mickey Rourke is sleeping rough in a California park and 'was paid to throw the bout'"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2854714/Fighter-lost-professional-boxing-match-63-year-old-actor-Mickey-Rourke-homeless-paid-throw-fight.html

    Mickey was a fine amateur boxer a long, long time ago and has never been quite right in the head since. But, every so often, he can nail a role: e.g., the bombmaker in “Body Heat” or “The Wrestler.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Here’s Catherine Benett on Dworkin’s rape story:

    This, possibly, explains the deafening silence – from the media, at least – which has followed Dworkin’s latest autobiographical fragment: the account of her recent rape published in the New Statesman and in these pages last week. From fellow readers, I’ve heard about as wide a range of reactions you could get, from horror to bafflement, from pity to frank disbelief. For those who did not see the piece: Dworkin alleges that, last year, at the age of 52, she was drugged and raped in a hotel room by two men, whom she believes – no, knows – to have been the hotel’s bartender and a serving boy.

    In the New Statesman she was precise about the town, a European city, and the date (although to be pedantic, the date she supplied did not, as she said, fall on a Wednesday). All the police need, then, is the name of the hotel and the men can be questioned. But Dworkin has not been to the police. She came round from the assault to find a “big, strange bruise” on one breast and “huge deep gashes” on one leg which would not stop bleeding.

    For some reason she did not call a doctor to staunch the bleeding; neither did she call hotel security nor the police. The reluctance of a rape victim to be further violated by examination and questioning is understood, but if this is what prevented Dworkin from seeking help it does not seem consistent with her current decision to relive the ordeal, in vivid detail, for readers of the New Statesman.

    Reflecting on the easiness of this new form of assault, she writes: “You can do this hundreds of times with virtually no chance of getting caught . . .” Well, you can if women you have raped do not call a doctor when they wake up bruised and bleeding. Is this bartender, with his accomplice, to be allowed to continue drugging and raping female guests?

    Dworkin says that her “feminist gynaecologist” (whom she called in New York) said “a gynaecological exam wouldn’t prove anything one way or the other and that the call from me convinced her that she should have an unlisted phone number”. No explanation is offered for this sudden outbreak of hostility.

    In the same year as this rape, Dworkin’s father died and she herself was seriously ill, becoming delirious. She writes, dreadfully: “I’m ready to die.” Maybe, at this grim stage in her life, we should just leave her alone. But her rape claim, like any other, seems to deserve scrutiny before it takes its place in the archive against intercourse. It is Dworkin, after all, who, consistent with her vow, chooses to use this experience for “women’s liberation”, depicting it as part of a wave of “foolproof rape”. Offered like this, as evidence, the article contains so many opacities, begs so many questions, that it reads almost as if Dworkin wants to be doubted.

    Most people beginning the piece would expect to find in it, somewhere, facts to verify it. Instead, Dworkin supplies inconsistency (“gashes” become “scratches”), absence of evidence, lack of support. Even the love of her life, John, “looked for any other explanation than rape”. Some of her readers will have done the same.

    Several have suggested to me that if illness has left Dworkin dangerously overweight and unwieldy, delirious in the streets of New York, the same could have happened in her European hotel. Could she not have fallen and cut and bruised herself? Elsewhere, she has written that: “There is always a problem for a woman: being believed.”

    True, but this account does nothing to help itself. Sometimes the Gradgrind approach is right. Facts, that’s what we need. A horse is a quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth. And a rape either occurred, or it did not.

    http://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/jun/08/society

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. I recall she was a frequent guest on Phil Donahue’s old day time show. As an impressionable teen, I found her repulsive in every respect. And she cemented in my mind forever the image of the feminist as ugly, angry and very much anti-male.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. “The assumption here that, unlike in Israel, Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas. “

    And who’s winning?

    “For example, D.W. Griffith’s WASP Victorianism made him more open to working with women on a basis of respect, and more sensitive to the horrors of rape (most famously expressed in Griffith’s Birth of a Nation), than the moguls who came after him.”

    For modern women under 30, “man who is sensitive to the horrors of rape” translates into “man I would never want to have sex with.” If it makes you losers angry, it’s because you know it’s true.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority of men see rape as a horrible crime. That's why it will get you a long prison sentence or the death penalty in any country where a sensible human being would ever want to live, and did even when women had almost no political power at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. “Andrea Dworkin was …..troubled. Even her greatest admirers found her rape story hard to swallow.”

    If someone raped Andrea, I feel sorry for the rapist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. In the past, fantasies of all-female nations–such as the Amazons of Greek mythology–were violent, militaristic and generally masculine. The Amazons replenished their race by annual raids on nearby towns where they raped the men living there. They kept the female children resulting from these visits, and killed or exposed the male children.

    In Ariosto’s extremely funny epic, “Orlando Furioso,” the knight protagonists are shipwrecked on the shore of an all-female nation, Laiazzo, where the women keep some male slaves for labor and replenishing their stock. A man unlucky enough to end up on the shore of Laiazzo can keep his life if he passes two tests that try his masculinity. First, he must kill in battle ten male slaves. Then, he must pleasure ten women in bed. If he passes both tests, he is allowed to stay in Laiazzo as a slave.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. Did Dworkin ever write about Wonder Woman? In the 1970s series premiere, Wonder Woman lives on an all-female island in the Bermuda triangle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. I always thought she looked exactly like Leslie West, the guitar player for Mountain.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:

    Before neocons took over the GOP and made a mess of it, there was a time when they said lots of sane things. Charen’s early piece in the National Review in the 1980s was a delight. It was about how college women really wanted to meet the right man.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. RE: Dworkin and the nationalistic solution to the Feminist question,

    As always, Science Fiction grants us insight into the political unconscious:

    Joanna Russ, The Female Man and “When It changed. Two tales that depict woman only utopias.Then there’s We Who Are About To, where a group of humans are stranded on an alien planet.There is only one woman, and she refuses to breed.When they try to rape her, she kills them all.Extinction is preferable to reproduction.

    James Tiptree, jr (the male pseudonym of Alice Bradley Sheldon):”Houston, Houston, Do You Read?”

    Astronauts get transported to a future Earth inhabited only by women.The women kill off the astronauts

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Abbot of Lufford
    John Wyndham wrote a novella about a future all-female dystopia, "Consider Her Ways", which was dramatized on the Alfred Hitchcock Hour

    [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJy-HYfMio[/url]
    , @The Abbot of Lufford
    John Wyndham wrote a novella about a future all-female dystopia, "Consider Her Ways", which was dramatized on the Alfred Hitchcock Hour

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJy-HYfMio
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. It would be a nation of immigrants, or at least largely so, I would imagine — though artificial insemination is also a possibility, selecting female embryos. As for where it would be, there is only one uninhabited place left on earth: Antarctica.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    there is only one uninhabited place left on earth
     
    Inhabited didn't stop US, Canada, Australia, misc south african, misc caribbean, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and more recently Israel.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. “Woody Allen”– stuttering, nebbishy, neurotic– is an entirely invented stage persona. Everyone who’s worked with Allen reports that he’s actually a highly confident, hard-charging, and charismatic guy. Which makes sense, given his long success and the quality of women he was able to attract in his prime. Watching Allen on set must have been like the old SNL sketch where Phil Hartman played a secretly energetic and ruthlessly brilliant Reagan who put on the “aw, shucks” persona strictly for the public.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I believe Woody Allen was captain of his high school basketball team. While still a teenager, he was a married man and father and had a joke-writing job that paid him more per week than probably 98% of Americans.
    , @syonredux

    “Woody Allen”– stuttering, nebbishy, neurotic– is an entirely invented stage persona. Everyone who’s worked with Allen reports that he’s actually a highly confident, hard-charging, and charismatic guy. Which makes sense, given his long success and the quality of women he was able to attract in his prime. Watching Allen on set must have been like the old SNL sketch where Phil Hartman played a secretly energetic and ruthlessly brilliant Reagan who put on the “aw, shucks” persona strictly for the public.
     
    Woody Allen freely admits that he stole his whole public persona from Bob Hope, another guy who played a nebbish in public but was quite different in real life
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. “Pacifism was dead, killed by the Nazis along with the six million,” she writes. “There would be no more feminised, gentle, Jewish males, no more ‘Yid’.”

    Somehow, I find it hard to picture Harry Cohn, Sam Goldwyn, Bugsey Siegel, etc, as “feminised, gentle, Jewish males.”

    Interesting to note, though, that she blames Gentiles for making Jewish men macho.See, before the evil Goyim slaughtered us in the Holocaust, Jews lived in a feminist utopia.More evidence for Steve’s feminism as misplaced Jewish ethnic grievance theory

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. At first I thought “Well, a country of lesbians could work, right? Lesbians can be plumbers and stuff.”
    But the kind of lesbians who can do stuff are the male-brained lesbians who tend not to hate men – indeed may prefer being around similar-minded men to being around regular women. So they don’t see much need for a manless country. The kind of lesbians who do hate men, the Dworkin types, tend to be very neurotic navel-gaezrs who are hopeless at anything practical, and certainly couldn’t run their own country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    An all female country could function well enough, but it would need either some new technology or lots of immigration (people or sperm) to survive long.

    David Brin's book Glory Season talks anout a sort of feminist utopia based on big families of female clones, in which men mostly live separate lives from women. Though Bujold's Ethan of Athos captures more of the sense of what Dworkin probably had in mind, albeit from the other side. (A utopian colony of men, with one man required to go out and interact in the bigger galaxy with women in it to save his planet.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @Earl Lemongrab
    "Woody Allen"-- stuttering, nebbishy, neurotic-- is an entirely invented stage persona. Everyone who's worked with Allen reports that he's actually a highly confident, hard-charging, and charismatic guy. Which makes sense, given his long success and the quality of women he was able to attract in his prime. Watching Allen on set must have been like the old SNL sketch where Phil Hartman played a secretly energetic and ruthlessly brilliant Reagan who put on the "aw, shucks" persona strictly for the public.

    I believe Woody Allen was captain of his high school basketball team. While still a teenager, he was a married man and father and had a joke-writing job that paid him more per week than probably 98% of Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Voltaire's Spinning Corpse

    I believe Woody Allen was captain of his high school basketball team. While still a teenager, he was a married man and father and had a joke-writing job that paid him more per week than probably 98% of Americans.
     
    Steve, there's a very good documentary on Netflix about Woody Allen. Goes into all that early history. Worth watching if you haven't seen it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed? That Israel is a macho culture? This is not exactly a big secret. That women are oppressed in Israel? Are you taking Andrea Dworkin’s word for it? This is Andrea Dworkin we are talking about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed?"

    No, it's not about Israel, it's about other Jewish feminists:

    "I came back to the United States really, really angry that feminists who had been to Israel a whole lot more than I had, had basically been keeping all this stuff secret. It enraged me."
    , @dcite
    I didn't believe it until I met a couple of transplanted American women (Jewish of course) who had married Israelis and were stuck in the country--they longed to return to America-- because the husbands didn't agree to a divorce and it is all up to him (or still was in the late 90s). There's a lot of laws like that, that were rather startling. On the surface, the Jewish ladies seemed much like here except they spoke a different language. Must be something in the water in that part of the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @inertial
    What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed? That Israel is a macho culture? This is not exactly a big secret. That women are oppressed in Israel? Are you taking Andrea Dworkin's word for it? This is Andrea Dworkin we are talking about.

    “What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed?”

    No, it’s not about Israel, it’s about other Jewish feminists:

    “I came back to the United States really, really angry that feminists who had been to Israel a whole lot more than I had, had basically been keeping all this stuff secret. It enraged me.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stealth
    Dare I ask? Feminism as anti-gentilism?
    , @Stealth
    Dare I ask? Feminism as anti-gentilism?
    , @inertial
    Nah. I am guessing that no secrets were kept about anything; it's just those unnamed feminists were simply a bit more adequate than Andrea Dworkin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @SEATAF
    I'm not quite Talmudic enough to get what Steve means with his concluding line: "But reasons it’s a bad idea are highly illuminating, which is why you never hear about Dworkin’s proposal." Will someone enlighten me?

    I also get confused by some of Steve’s more cryptic statements. But I’m guessing that he is probably alluding to questions of national security and how the all-female country would defend themselves against outsiders pillaging their wealth. Such questions would draw unwanted attention to the recent fad for female soldiering in Western countries

    Read More
    • Replies: @SEATAF
    Thanks, anon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. So now we come to what Andrea Dworkin wants and it is this: she wants women to have their own country.

    I remember when first hearing Dworkins opinions that I wanted her to have her own country as well……

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. @Earl Lemongrab
    "Woody Allen"-- stuttering, nebbishy, neurotic-- is an entirely invented stage persona. Everyone who's worked with Allen reports that he's actually a highly confident, hard-charging, and charismatic guy. Which makes sense, given his long success and the quality of women he was able to attract in his prime. Watching Allen on set must have been like the old SNL sketch where Phil Hartman played a secretly energetic and ruthlessly brilliant Reagan who put on the "aw, shucks" persona strictly for the public.

    “Woody Allen”– stuttering, nebbishy, neurotic– is an entirely invented stage persona. Everyone who’s worked with Allen reports that he’s actually a highly confident, hard-charging, and charismatic guy. Which makes sense, given his long success and the quality of women he was able to attract in his prime. Watching Allen on set must have been like the old SNL sketch where Phil Hartman played a secretly energetic and ruthlessly brilliant Reagan who put on the “aw, shucks” persona strictly for the public.

    Woody Allen freely admits that he stole his whole public persona from Bob Hope, another guy who played a nebbish in public but was quite different in real life

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @Steve Sailer
    "What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed?"

    No, it's not about Israel, it's about other Jewish feminists:

    "I came back to the United States really, really angry that feminists who had been to Israel a whole lot more than I had, had basically been keeping all this stuff secret. It enraged me."

    Dare I ask? Feminism as anti-gentilism?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Steve Sailer
    "What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed?"

    No, it's not about Israel, it's about other Jewish feminists:

    "I came back to the United States really, really angry that feminists who had been to Israel a whole lot more than I had, had basically been keeping all this stuff secret. It enraged me."

    Dare I ask? Feminism as anti-gentilism?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. The reason there is still no “gay marriage” in Israel is not so much Orthodox influence as lack of Reform influence. As in, none at all. What people have to understand is that Reform Judaism is entirely a project of American and west European Jewry–whatever it started as, after circa 1970 it essentially became a way station, allowing some Jews the room to go through the motions of religion while psychologically preparing themselves for the inevitability of their children celebrating Christmas and their grandchildren not identifying as Jews at all.

    Since in Israel there is no civil marriage, there are thus no Reform congregations to perform man-on-man ceremonies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. In Woody Allen’s old stand-up routine that is available on a recording, he describes himself as a great ladies’ man and the audience laughs. “You laugh?” he says, and the audience laughs again. Of course, the joke’s on them because he IS a great ladies’ man (albeit a creepy one).

    Here’s part of the transcript of his interviewed with Terry Gross in 2009:

    ALLEN: People do look for clues in my movies all the time…

    GROSS: For who you really are.

    ALLEN: In all of my movies. The people always look for clues in my movies, and they think, based on my movies, that they know me. And of course they don’t know me. And there are some things you could’ve learned about me over the years but not much, really. You know, I was never who anybody thought I was from when I started.

    When I first started as a comic in Greenwich Village, people thought that I was, at that time, some kind of a little beatnik and someone who, you know, was a kind of mousy intellectual. And, you know, none of these things were ever true. You know, I never lived in the Village. I always lived in a very nice neighborhood uptown in Manhattan.

    I was never intellectual. I was never interested in intellectual things. You know, when I explain to people I’m the guy that you see in his T-shirt with a beer watching the baseball game at night at home on television. They find that hard to square with the characters that I played in the movies. But in the movies, I’m just acting.

    But I’ve never been – you know, I was always a very athletic little boy, always, you know, never a loner or a loser, always the first one picked on any team.

    GROSS: You were the first one picked on any team?

    ALLEN: Always.

    GROSS: See, I wouldn’t have believed that.

    ALLEN: I know. I was always a very…

    GROSS: Very counter to your image.

    ALLEN: Very good athlete. I was interested even in playing professional baseball. I was, you know, won track medals, you know. But nobody thinks of me that way. They think of me as, you know, some kind of little bookworm because I have these big, black glasses, black-rimmed glasses, and they think of me as a bookworm and give me more credit for intellect than I have.

    And you know, I couldn’t make it through college. I couldn’t make it through my freshman year of college, you know. And this was not because I was some, you know, artist or intellectual above it. I couldn’t cut it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Very good athlete."

    ROTFL.

    Well, a yellow dork in a yellow school could also be a 'very good athlete', relatively speaking.

    "I was never intellectual. I was never interested in intellectual things."

    Yeah, that's why he was obsessed with Bergman.

    I don't trust this guy on anything.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. D.W. Griffith’s WASP Victorianism. WASP is a 1950s concept that came after Southerners, Yankees, and the various protestant sects homogenized into WASP, but before Christian Evangelicals became prominent. So I think it was his Southern manners, not his WASP sensibilities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. All of Mickey Rourke’s attempts to make himself look good seem to end up as miserable failures.

    In photos of him before his fight I thought he looked pretty damn good for 63, or however old he is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. Great posting, and many tks for the mention. One thing Andrea Dworkin can’t be accused of is not pushing things to extremes.

    FWIW, I once interviewed Andrea Dworkin by phone. It was a striking experience. We chatted for a few minutes before getting to the interview proper. She was a real type — a big, sleepy, smart, whiny-moaning, relaxed, childish, spoiled Jewish baby. Honestly I was sort of charmed by her. Then I started the interview … and started asking her about sex … And all the charm evaporated to be replaced by a militant, angry, hurt/wounded/righteous/indignant. crazy woman. It was like a Jekyll-Hyde thing. Andrea 1 I could have hung out with. Andrea 2 made me want to radio Bellevue for help.

    As for women, movies and Jews, the early American filmmaking scene was much more open and freewheeling than what we’ve had since. There were a lot of women writers, actresses like Mary Pickford who were their own bosses … Women didn’t get put in their place, so to speak, until the studio system put them there. And the guys in charge of the studio system were, like it or not, Jewish guys.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    With all due respect to Mary Pickford, Gish and all the great stars of the silent era, don't you think that the studio system (a) created greater female stars and (b) took care of them?

    Freewheeling systems tend to favor unusual women, and men. When the studio system broke up, it favored hyper-ambitious men who like to chart their own careers, like Burt Lancaster, and Kirk Douglas, for example. Women don't seem to do as well in freewheeling systems.
    , @ben tillman

    As for women, movies and Jews, the early American filmmaking scene was much more open and freewheeling than what we’ve had since. There were a lot of women writers, actresses like Mary Pickford who were their own bosses … Women didn’t get put in their place, so to speak, until the studio system put them there. And the guys in charge of the studio system were, like it or not, Jewish guys.

     

    Sounds like "diversity before diversity" again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @MKP

    "The assumption here that, unlike in Israel, Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas. "
     
    And who's winning?

    "For example, D.W. Griffith’s WASP Victorianism made him more open to working with women on a basis of respect, and more sensitive to the horrors of rape (most famously expressed in Griffith’s Birth of a Nation), than the moguls who came after him."
     
    For modern women under 30, "man who is sensitive to the horrors of rape" translates into "man I would never want to have sex with." If it makes you losers angry, it's because you know it's true.

    I’m pretty sure the overwhelming majority of men see rape as a horrible crime. That’s why it will get you a long prison sentence or the death penalty in any country where a sensible human being would ever want to live, and did even when women had almost no political power at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Steve Sailer
    "What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed?"

    No, it's not about Israel, it's about other Jewish feminists:

    "I came back to the United States really, really angry that feminists who had been to Israel a whole lot more than I had, had basically been keeping all this stuff secret. It enraged me."

    Nah. I am guessing that no secrets were kept about anything; it’s just those unnamed feminists were simply a bit more adequate than Andrea Dworkin.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Assuming the likelihood of a woman living in Womanland was positively correlated with her beauty, or at the very least independent (not likely, but go with it), Womanland would be #1 on my list of nations to conquer and pillage, especially if I was the warlord dictator of a backwards third-world patriarchal state.

    Woody Allen’s real-life contrast to his public image reminds of the South Park episode where it’s revealed that all of the Broadway musical writers are secretly bros.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. @Marcus
    Good ol' Andrea the Hutt, at least she was entertaining compared to the current yenta matriarchs of feminism like Sandberg or Rosin. Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations would produce more sexual dimorphism. It's also interesting to note that Israel still doesn't have same-sex "marriage" despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    It doesn’t have civil marriage at all.

    Gay unions are de facto legal and I think Israel is the surrogacy capital of the world. Doesn’t matter, the religious will take over in a generation. Look at the numbers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @inertial
    What is the big revelation about Israel that Dworkin had noticed? That Israel is a macho culture? This is not exactly a big secret. That women are oppressed in Israel? Are you taking Andrea Dworkin's word for it? This is Andrea Dworkin we are talking about.

    I didn’t believe it until I met a couple of transplanted American women (Jewish of course) who had married Israelis and were stuck in the country–they longed to return to America– because the husbands didn’t agree to a divorce and it is all up to him (or still was in the late 90s). There’s a lot of laws like that, that were rather startling. On the surface, the Jewish ladies seemed much like here except they spoke a different language. Must be something in the water in that part of the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:
    @Paleo Retiree
    Great posting, and many tks for the mention. One thing Andrea Dworkin can't be accused of is not pushing things to extremes.

    FWIW, I once interviewed Andrea Dworkin by phone. It was a striking experience. We chatted for a few minutes before getting to the interview proper. She was a real type -- a big, sleepy, smart, whiny-moaning, relaxed, childish, spoiled Jewish baby. Honestly I was sort of charmed by her. Then I started the interview ... and started asking her about sex ... And all the charm evaporated to be replaced by a militant, angry, hurt/wounded/righteous/indignant. crazy woman. It was like a Jekyll-Hyde thing. Andrea 1 I could have hung out with. Andrea 2 made me want to radio Bellevue for help.

    As for women, movies and Jews, the early American filmmaking scene was much more open and freewheeling than what we've had since. There were a lot of women writers, actresses like Mary Pickford who were their own bosses ... Women didn't get put in their place, so to speak, until the studio system put them there. And the guys in charge of the studio system were, like it or not, Jewish guys.

    With all due respect to Mary Pickford, Gish and all the great stars of the silent era, don’t you think that the studio system (a) created greater female stars and (b) took care of them?

    Freewheeling systems tend to favor unusual women, and men. When the studio system broke up, it favored hyper-ambitious men who like to chart their own careers, like Burt Lancaster, and Kirk Douglas, for example. Women don’t seem to do as well in freewheeling systems.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    I think most women in Hollywood have aggressive male agents looking out for them in their careers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Simon in London
    At first I thought "Well, a country of lesbians could work, right? Lesbians can be plumbers and stuff."
    But the kind of lesbians who can do stuff are the male-brained lesbians who tend not to hate men - indeed may prefer being around similar-minded men to being around regular women. So they don't see much need for a manless country. The kind of lesbians who do hate men, the Dworkin types, tend to be very neurotic navel-gaezrs who are hopeless at anything practical, and certainly couldn't run their own country.

    An all female country could function well enough, but it would need either some new technology or lots of immigration (people or sperm) to survive long.

    David Brin’s book Glory Season talks anout a sort of feminist utopia based on big families of female clones, in which men mostly live separate lives from women. Though Bujold’s Ethan of Athos captures more of the sense of what Dworkin probably had in mind, albeit from the other side. (A utopian colony of men, with one man required to go out and interact in the bigger galaxy with women in it to save his planet.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    An all female country could function well enough, but it would need either some new technology or lots of immigration (people or sperm) to survive long.
     
    Or they could evolve to be parthenogenetic, like whiptail lizards and mourning geckos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. A country of lesbians wouldn’t work. But Camille Paglia would make an interesting Secretary of State – or perhaps, Defense.

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

    “Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas. ”

    Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    Steve, you’re a big fan of “noticing.” Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sanjoaquinsam

    Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    Steve, you’re a big fan of “noticing.” Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.
     
    Fine trolling here; well done.
    , @ptrmaat
    It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude.

    I--and literally everyone else who's had to live near the Hasids-- can dispute this nonsense.

    educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    Oh, really? All my Jewish male friends with advanced humanities degrees (English, Comparative Lit, and Anthro) have managed to miss those "educated non-Jewish girls'" eagerness...

    My Jewish friends with IB careers, law degrees, or tech careers have seen connubial "eagerness" from Jewish and non-Jewish girls alike.

    Notice the difference?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Charles Eric Maine’s “World Without Men”, first published in 1958, is worth a read.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.

    There’s a saying, “Jewish women treat their husbands like their sons and their sons like their husbands.”

    I have a Jewish friend who has two sons and is severely henpecked. I asked him what he thought of this saying and he didn’t care for it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. For American Jews born between WWI and WWII, there was a big gender gap in access to higher education.

    See p. 41 of this book:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=LNKKI23R1vEC&source=gbs_navlinks_s

    Here’s a joke told my a Jewish lady stand-up (Rita Rudner?) a couple of decades ago:

    “To a Jewish mother, the two favorite things in the world to say are: “My son, the doctor” and “My daughter drove me.””

    In other words, a lot of Jewish women in the 1960s had good reason for their feelings of sibling rivalry: their parents really did invest more in their brothers’ educations than in their own.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    In other words, a lot of Jewish women in the 1960s had good reason for their feelings of sibling rivalry: their parents really did invest more in their brothers’ educations than in their own.
     
    Or one parent did. From Step Into the Spotlight, a marketing text by lawyer/comedienne/marketing guru Tsufit:

    My Dad's a Math Professor. My Mom? Professor of Everything. So for me, they had big expectations. My Dad wanted me to become a doctor and find a cure for cancer. My Mom wanted me to marry a doctor and find a good dining room set.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @WhatEvvs
    With all due respect to Mary Pickford, Gish and all the great stars of the silent era, don't you think that the studio system (a) created greater female stars and (b) took care of them?

    Freewheeling systems tend to favor unusual women, and men. When the studio system broke up, it favored hyper-ambitious men who like to chart their own careers, like Burt Lancaster, and Kirk Douglas, for example. Women don't seem to do as well in freewheeling systems.

    I think most women in Hollywood have aggressive male agents looking out for them in their careers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial
    Is there any evidence (aside from the usual feminist kvetsching) that women in Hollywood are treated worse than anyone else?
    , @WhatEvvs
    True. I think we're saying the same thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:

    Dworkin may have qualified as scapecow or scapehippo but as scapegoat, never.

    Given how the Bible begins with Eve being blamed for eating the fruit and making Adam eat it too, you’d think Dworkin would have figured out early that it’s foolish to draw comparisons between Jews and women.

    But it appears that what pisses off a lot of ugly women is that they themselves would never be seen as scapegoats. Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men. But beautiful women do, and that’s why beautiful women with the power to tempt and drive men crazy have been scapegoated. So, being scapegoated was a double-edged sword. It was condemnation but also a form of praise. It was the sexual power of beautiful women that men feared, worshiped, and went crazy over.
    It was the radiant face of Helen than the fat ass of Dworkin that launched a thousand ships. Dworkin’s face or arse would have sunk the Titanic faster than the iceberg did.

    Dworkin reminds me of the man-like sister of Jack Crabb in LITTLE BIG MAN. She talks about how them red savages are going to ravage her, but she’s upset that the savages mistake her for a man and have no sexual desire for her. Paradoxically, she’s the sort to get hysterical over rape because no one wants to rape her or have any kind of sex with her.

    http://youtu.be/Z6cOE5IenoY?t=8m1s

    It’s true. Men have scapegoated women in bad ways, but it was also an admittance of fear/worship of women’s desirability. What happens to the Pappas character in ZORBA THE GREEK is terrible, but her beauty did have power over men. Such power was not held by all women but only by beautiful women.

    .

    [MORE]

    .

    And even though ugly feminists always talked about sisterhood, they were the kind that no man would even look at, let alone touch. When I was in college, I attended a feminist gathering where a couple of feminists gave a speech with black bags over their heads. The idea was they were hiding their identities from men who might rape them. Later I found out who these particular campus feminists happened to be, and my god, they were ugly as sin. Even warthogs wouldn’t have humped them.
    My guess is ugly feminists are really envious of the fact that they themselves would never be ‘scapegoated’ because they have no sexual power over men. And most good-looking women look down on ugly women. So, ugly women feel ignored and abandoned, and so, like the silly twit in OLEANNA, they create this hysterical fantasy where all the men are out to rape them as if they’re Helen of Troy or something. By getting hysterical about rape, they subconsciously convince themselves that they are attractive enough to attract the wolfish desire of men.

    It’s the Milk-Faced Girl(with a cow’s eyes) Syndrome.

    http://youtu.be/YLp3ilTL8Us?t=3m41s

    In SAMSON AND DELILAH, a plain-looking Jewish woman cannot win the attention of Samson. So, she appeals to morality and spirituality. It’s the only way she can bind him to her people(and therefore hopefully to her): by a sense of duty to the tribe. Delilah, on the other hand, is a temptress and enchantress. She only need to use her beauty, allure, and wiles to get Samson’s attention.
    If all women looked like Andrea Dworkin, there would have been NO scapegoating of women. Indeed, men would have performed sex only to perpetuate the species or family line. There would have been no romance, no desire, no sex or dream of sex for pleasure. If Bathesheba looked like Dworkin, David would have mistaken her for a cow. If Helen looked like Dworkin, Paris would have ran from her, and her husband would have prayed that some other man take her. No need for scapegoating.

    Being scapegoated could be dangerous, but it was also complimentary because it meant that a woman drove men crazy. She was hot and desirable. Sometimes, scapegoating and killing a beautiful woman was like sexual game theory in action. In ZORBA THE GREEK, all the men of the town want Irene Pappas the widow. If they all fought for her, they would tear each other apart in sexual competition. So, they tacitly agree to kill her so that they can live with one another in peace. And of course, women egg the men on cuz they are envious of her. They are envious because they don’t have such effect on men. Their own husbands prefer her to them.
    Despite the danger of being a beautiful woman who might thus be scapegoated and killed, a beautiful woman felt the thrill of being the center of attention. She knew she could allure even the most powerful man in the world and turn him into jelly. Look what Cleopatra did to men around her.

    It was the temptresses and enchantresses that were scapegoated because of the power of their sexuality. Men came to hate them because they loved them(but couldn’t have them, or had them but were filled with jealousy that other men might take the women from them, like with Jake LaMotta in RAGING BULL). But in some ways, women hated such women more than men did. Women are jealous creatures. And through most of history, men and women ‘conspired’ in the scapegoating of beautiful temptresses. Men wanted the temptresses but their desire was driving them nuts. Most women hated temptresses because such gals should steal their men away with a flick of the eyebrow or a smile.

    But feminism created this myth that it was a war by all men on all women. In truth, the scapegoating of women was about beautiful women, and it was done by both men and women. The milk-faced girl(with a cow’s eyes) in SAMSON AND DELILAH has no sisterhood feelings for Delilah. She wouldn’t mind seeing Delilah being burned at the stake.
    The fact is Jewish girls realized that Jewish men got major hots for ‘shikses’, and so, they were consumed with jealousy, especially as non-Jewish men didn’t find Jewish women all that hot. Though Jewish men weren’t all that great in the sexual attraction department, they had two advantages. They were smart and made good money, and that attracted ‘shikses’. They were also known for their meaters as Ron Jeremy demonstrated. Jewish women, due to their deficiency in looks department, realized that the only way they can get any kind of respect was by making money or gaining power. A blonde shikse need only smile and show a little cleavage to have rich guys bow down at her feet, like in HEARTBREAK KID. But Jewish women better make money and gain power.
    Anyway, feminism created this myth that all men were oppressing all women, i.e. that all men were fantasizing about raping or having sex with Dworkin as much as about Farrah Fawcett or Suzanne Somers. Samson and other beastly men were just as horny for the milk-faced-girls of the world as for Delilahs.

    Of course, temptresses caused a lot of distress among men. A temptress is lusty and sensual. If men are obsessed with power, temptresses are obsessed about possessing men of power by having them possess them. Their form of surrender to men is a form of conquest of men. Because temptresses tend to be less inhibited and more attuned to natural desires, they have no tribal loyalties. They will shake their ass for whomever the top males happen to be. So, when Germans invaded France, while the milk-faced girls of France stuck with their own men, French temptresses ran into the arms of German men who were the masterful conquerors.
    It’s like milk-faced white girls tend to stick with white men, but lusty white temptresses will run off with Negro athletes or Jewish millionaires. They love power. By alluring men of power–physical or mental–, they gain power over men with power. It’s like what whoozits did to Napoleon. So, men love and hate temptresses. Temptresses are lusty, sensual, and hot. But their only sense of loyalty is to power.
    Take white temptresses and yellow temptresses. White temptress have no use for white nationalism or such. They are crazy about power. Just like Cleopatra went with the powerful Romans, white temptresses will go with whomever has the power. It’s like Teresa in the WILD BUNCH. Angel sees her teasing Mapache and walks up to confront her(who was his lover in the village). But Teresa the temptress gazes at Mapache and says she’s muy felice because he’s a real man. When Angel is dragged off by others of the Bunch as he mutters, ‘she was my woman’, she looks at him with a mixture of pity and contempt. She starts laughing, the damn ho. So, there you have it. Angel is crazy about Teresa. She is hot and lusty. She is one saucy mamacita. But temptresses will go with power. And Mapache has the power. Though such women surrender sexually to powerful men, powerful men also fall into their lusty web. Angel gets so pissed that he shoots her. One might say that the WILD BUNCH scapegoats the woman as the ‘hussy ho floozy’, but women enjoy having such power. Women are capable of feeling pity for men, but pity is mixed with contempt.
    Suppose a white woman sees a negro whup her white lover. She feels pity for her downed white lover, but also feels contempt for the loser. One part of her wants to take care of him, but another part of her looks down on him as a sap. The natural sexual side of her wants to give herself to the Negro. It’s the Teresa Syndrome. Anyway, beautiful white women have high market value, so they can go with any rich or powerful men. Loyalty means nothing to them. Power means everything to them. And if white guys are losers, white temptresses look down on them and go with rich Jewish guys or strong Negro guys.
    Same thing with yellow ho’s. Yellow women have high market value because men like femininity in women, and yellow ho’s got that. Yellow men have zero market value cuz they are a bunch of nerds and geeks. But not all yellow girls are hot and lusty. Some are plain-faced or ugly and overly shy. Such are the milk-faced yellow girls, and those kinds might stick with yellow men. But the yellow temptresses will go with power, and it’s often black, white, or (especially)Jewish as Jews make lots of money and have big meaters.

    To be sure, women cannot be simply be divided between temptresses and milk-faced girls. There are also ‘queen’ types that have the looks and beauty but tend to be, by nature or nurture, more restrained and more status-conscious than temptresses. Angela Lansbury in SAMSON AND DELILAH is the queen type. She too wants to go with power and want to be desired by men, but she wants it to be done right. She won’t just run into the arms of any stud like Delilah the hussy is prone to. Lansbury settles on marrying Samson but only because he courted her correctly and fulfilled the promise. He made himself respectable. Delilah, in contrast, is a temptress and she just wants to put her arms around the biggest stud-warrior in town.

    As for Dworkin, she doesn’t even count as a milk-faced-girl. She’s like toilet-water-hag. Even ugly men who can’t get pretty women wouldn’t want to end up with someone like that. She makes Lena Dunham look like a goddess, and Dunham is uglier than Miss Piggy. (But I suppose ugly feminists like Dunham because she puts forth the myth that all men would jump into bed with such a creature. We hear about how so many girls have been sexually abused when they were drunk in college. But what about the males? It seems as if ugly girls often get men drunk because only a totally wasted guy would want to hump someone like Dunham. So, who’s ‘raping’ whom?)

    Still, it’s interesting that Dworkin tried to find some kind of connection between issues of tribe and sex. Though her conclusions are different from that of white nationalists, the white nationalist idears come down to issues of sex and tribe. After all, the race is perpetuated by men and women of same race having children. For over 10,000s of yrs in Europe, white men and white women have produced white children. White genitals met and mixed over and over and over to perpetuate the race. But with massive immigration, the unity of white genitalia is being interrupted.
    Take a look at this picture:

    Every immigrant comes with not only hands and feet but with puds, and they will be aiming for white vaginas. With negro power in sports and music, white temptresses will run into arms of Negroes. And with African women having 7 or 8 children each, 100s of millions of blacks will flock to Europe. Against such invasion, EU has no defenses. No moral defense because ‘racism’ and ‘xenophobia’ are said to be so evil. Also, we now live in a world where airplane-loads of white women travel to Africa to have sex with black men. It’s sex travel. When white women are going to the trouble of flying to Africa to have sex with black men, why wouldn’t they put out to negroes who are coming to Europe in the millions?

    To be sure, milk-faced white girls will likely stick with white men, but white temptresses have no such loyalties. Just like Helen went off with Paris in the TROJAN WAR story, temptresses will go off with whoever has the power, the hunkiness, the macho allure.
    And in a way, the loss of temptresses is damaging to the DNA of a race. Temptresses have the looks, so if good-looking white women go off with Negroes, Negro looks will improve, but white looks will grow plainer as white men will have kids with milk-faced white girls.
    Also, though temptresses may be hussies and ho’s, they are magnetic, dynamic, and aggressive. There’s something fiery about them, in contrast to the drabness and dullness of milk-faced girls.
    Take Amy Chua. She’s smart and all that, but she has the personality of a temptress. She wanted to be with power and privilege. She wanted a real tall guy and found a handsome Jewish stud with great looks and a meater. She may be a hussy, but there’s something alive and dynamic about her, and those are precious qualities. In the Old World, she would have married a Chinese guy, and her vivaciousness would have remained within the race. But as she went with a Jewish guy, her spiritedness passed onto the Jews. It’s forever lost to the yellow race. Likewise, as white temptresses go with Negroes, the vivacious quality of white temptresses will be passed to other races.

    Woman is a mixture of culture and nature. Temptressness favores nature. Milk-faced-girl-ness favors culture, if only as a crutch. The milk-faced-girl in SAMSON AND DELILAH couldn’t be a temptress even if she wanted to because she doesn’t have the looks. She has the eyes of a cow. Though not exactly ugly as Dworkin, a song like “If you wanna happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife, take my personal point of view, get an ugly girl to marry you” applies to her.

    Most women are a mixture of nature and culture. Not all beautiful women are temptresses. Their cultural upbringing and social status-ness serve as brakes on their natural desires.
    Consider the Alice Harford’s Ho Dream in EYES WIDE SHUT. In her social life, she’s a good mother and wife. She prizes her role culturally. She has a sense of duty and obligation. So, even though she is beautiful, there is a milk-faced-girl cultural side of her. But there is also the temptress side, which comes out when she gets high with her hubby Billy. Despite their marriage and all the time they spent together, she confesses that she would have given up everything for a naval officer after seeing him for a few secs. So, a few seconds of looking at that guy had a greater impact on her than yrs of living with Billy boy. The tall handsome stud made her temptress side emerge from within her. Later she has a dream when she is naked with Billy. Billy goes running for clothes, aka culture-as-shield-and-protection. But she remains nude and indulges in her fantasy to the fullest. And in this fantasy, there is no loyalty to anything but power and pleasure. And she’s giving herself to all these studs while billy boy looks helplessly while holding the clothes. The temptress side finds him funny and pitiful. But she wakes up, and the cultural/moral side of her fills her with guilt. Life is really a struggle for power, and nature and cultures are weapons in this battle despite all the nice-sounding slogans about ‘equality’ and ‘diversity’.
    In PORTNOY’S COMPLAINT, the Jewish guy is torn between his horniness for shikses and his sense of obligation to Jews. When a Jewish Zionist woman excoriates him at the end for his lack of commitment, he is torn between culture and nature. Culture says STAY LOYAL TO JEWISHNESS but nature says BOING!!!! He can’t help chasing after shikse temptresses. Being Jewish in the traditional sense is especially frustrating because Jewish culture is linked with Jewish ‘nature’ or genetics. A Christian Pole could marry a Christian Englishman. Anyone could be a Christian. But Jewishness is defined by blood as well as by religion, so the idea was that Jewish men had to marry Jewish women, but too many Jewish women looked like the one in HEARTBREAK KID.

    Culture clouds things. At the root of all life is nature. Animals live in the world of nature. Humans have created culture and civilization from culture, and culture acts as a brake on nature. But nature is what it is, and in time, nature has its way of getting around culture and weakening its foundations and taboos. It’s like the Angkor Wat. Left to nature, trees have grown all around it and their roots have penetrated through the structures and brought them down.
    The interracist sexual dynamic we are seeing is the effect of nature that is taking place in the West. In the past, white culture kept black nature at bay. But it was only a matter of time before blacks would naturally show aggression toward whites, and it was only a matter of time before whites would surrender. Some white nationalists say interracism is unnatural, but is it? Suppose we take a bunch of pitbulls and beagles and put them in the same park. Will male pitbulls only hump female pitbulls or even make moves on female beagles? And what will happen to male beagles. They will be mauled by male pitbulls or cower like scaredy cats.
    Culture and our clothes act as brakes on nature, but humans in their natural state without clothes and culture will act like animals.

    If we take 100 blacks, 100 whites, 100 Jews, 100 yellows, and 100 mexicans, make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races, the men of other races will fight and lose. So, black men will be humping white girls who decide to surrender to the tougher studs. White men will lose top white girls to negroes, and they will seek out yellow girls. Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed. Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle. Pretty Jewish women will play the game, and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters. Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.
    That is nature, the kind dreamt by Alice Harford in EYES WIDE SHUT.
    The world we live in isn’t like that because culture and laws and etc. serve as brakes on the power of nature. But the power of nature is always there, as when Alice thought of giving up everything to go with the naval officer(who thankfully wasn’t a Negro). And just as the penetrating and burgeoning roots of trees eventually set stones of civilization apart, the growing power of nature will undermine the bonds of civilization in the West, especially as the mainstream has been pornographized.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    But it appears that what pisses off a lot of ugly women is that they themselves would never be seen as scapegoats. Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men. But beautiful women do, and that’s why beautiful women with the power to tempt and drive men crazy have been scapegoated. So, being scapegoated was a double-edged sword. It was condemnation but also a form of praise. It was the sexual power of beautiful women that men feared, worshiped, and went crazy over.
    It was the radiant face of Helen than the fat ass of Dworkin that launched a thousand ships. Dworkin’s face or arse would have sunk the Titanic faster than the iceberg did.
     
    Dworkin's problem was not that she was ugly. There are plenty of unattractive women who nonetheless have feminine psychologies and fall in love and marry, lets be honest, with equally unattractive men.

    Dworkin's problem was that she was mostly likely born with both a highly masculinized phenotype and psychology. Because for so long both the far left and most of the religious right have been in denial concerning evolution and naturally occurring congenital and other birth abnormalities and their impact on sexual identities, it was considered appropriate for Dworkin to be take seriously.

    Ask yourself if you would take a paranoid schizophrenic seriously just because they had written a half dozen books on the Kennedy assassination?

    Reasonably intelligent folks use to take Freudian psychology seriously. With the advent of modern psychiatry, it now seen as quackery. Same thing will happen with Blank Slate Gender Marxist radical feminism.

    , @syonredux
    I can't believe that I just read the whole thing; must be my masochistic streak at work.Anyway, amidst the stream-of-consciousness ranting, a few points emerged:

    If we take 100 blacks
     
    Which Blacks? East or West Africans?

    100 whites
     
    Which Whites? Estonians? Italians? Differing ethnies have differing rates of Don Juanism

    100 Jews,
     
    MMMM, since these Jews are separated from the Whites, I'm guessing that you are talking about Ethiopian Jews

    100 yellows,
     
    Which "yellows?" Chinese? Japanese? Thai?

    and 100 mexicans,
     
    What kind of Mexicans?Whites like Ricardo Montalban? Amerinds? Mestizos?

    make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races,
     
    So, Black girls will be frozen out

    the men of other races will fight and lose
     
    .

    Fight whom? Each other? The Blacks?If it's the Blacks, wouldn't their greater numbers (100 assorted Whites plus 100 Ethiopian Jews plus 100 assorted plus 100 assorted Mexicans plus 100 assorted Mexicans) give them the edge?

    So, black men will be humping white girls
     
    So, White Mexican girls will be left alone?

    who decide to surrender to the tougher studs.
     
    Wait, so the 100 assorted blacks defeated 400 guys from other groups in a fight?MMM, someone must have a rather elaborate personal mythology regarding Black physical prowess

    White men will lose top white girls to negroes,
     
    So, the 100 Blacks are just gang-banging the top ten White girls?

    and they will seek out yellow girls.
     
    While leaving the remaining 90 White girls to fend for themselves?

    Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed.
     
    But not going for the 90 unattached White girls?

    Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle.
     
    Middle of What?

    Pretty Jewish women will play the game,
     
    The Ethiopian Jewish girls will take up basketball?

    and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters.
     
    Not a very promising strategy

    Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.
     
    Shouldn't they be trying to convince the unattached girls to go Lesbo?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Dworkin was “married”. To an out of the closet gay man and fellow radical “feminist” of course.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stoltenberg

    http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/LivingWithAndrea.html

    Once we agreed to give a joint interview to the New York Times Style page–surely not the smartest thing we have ever done. Its editor refused to allow the writer to identify us as gay and lesbian, as we had asked. The article appeared on Women’s Equality Day 1985; the photo and excerpts later showed up in pornography magazines. Once Andrea was defrauded by a woman into giving an interview that touched on our private life and that then appeared sensationalized in Penthouse. So I state only the simplest facts publicly: yes, Andrea and I live together and love each other and we are each other’s life partner, and yes we are both out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. When I think of Andrea Dwarkin, I think of the lesbian pirates in R. Crumb’s Capt. Pissgums.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CJ
    Captain Pissgums is a creation of S. Clay Wilson, whose comics career was jump-started in 1967 with Ruby the Dyke and Her Six Perverted Sisters Stomp the Fags. This subject area was his obsession/specialty, a reminder of how much more constricted artistic expression is today.
    , @The Abbot of Lufford
    Or the Blob Princess in "Pheobe Zeit-Geist".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Dave Pinsen
    I think most women in Hollywood have aggressive male agents looking out for them in their careers.

    Is there any evidence (aside from the usual feminist kvetsching) that women in Hollywood are treated worse than anyone else?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Don’t forget you can use the “Insert MORE Tag”

    [MORE]

    See?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  54. Are these quotes from Dworkin’s own book? Why is she referred to in the third person?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Are these quotes from Dworkin’s own book? Why is she referred to in the third person?"

    They are from her publisher's promotional text on Amazon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. OT, quite an unfortunate situation

    James Watson selling Nobel prize ‘because no-one wants to admit I exist’

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/11261872/James-Watson-selling-Nobel-prize-because-no-one-wants-to-admit-I-exist.html

    ‘I am an unperson’: ‘Racist’ DNA discoverer forced to sell Nobel Prize medal

    http://rt.com/news/210059-watson-dna-nobel-racist/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. Just for a moment, assuming, Dworkin’s numerous claims of having been raped are true. I can’t help but imagine that the attackers have suffered from life long hysterical impotence from having encountered a clitoris the size of one’s thumb.

    http://www.newbornscreening.info/Parents/otherdisorders/CAH.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. @Anonymous
    "Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas. "

    Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can't be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    Steve, you're a big fan of "noticing." Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.

    Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    Steve, you’re a big fan of “noticing.” Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.

    Fine trolling here; well done.

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

    According to her own accounts of her life, her physical presence frequently turned men into the rapists they always were deep down. Her 2000 announcement that she had recently been drugged and raped while unconscious in her Paris hotel room was not greeted with much credence or sympathy even by other feminists. We’re supposed to never question the victim but Dworkin had played her hand a few too many times, and in the wake of Feminism, Inc.’s defense of Bill Clinton, feminists were tired of her.

    A lot of men are into big women. A lot more than you think. I suspect she was raped by a man into big women. If it had happened today, more people would have believed her because with the internet, it’s easy to find out about how lots of men are into big women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. @Steve Sailer
    I believe Woody Allen was captain of his high school basketball team. While still a teenager, he was a married man and father and had a joke-writing job that paid him more per week than probably 98% of Americans.

    I believe Woody Allen was captain of his high school basketball team. While still a teenager, he was a married man and father and had a joke-writing job that paid him more per week than probably 98% of Americans.

    Steve, there’s a very good documentary on Netflix about Woody Allen. Goes into all that early history. Worth watching if you haven’t seen it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Paleo Retiree
    Great posting, and many tks for the mention. One thing Andrea Dworkin can't be accused of is not pushing things to extremes.

    FWIW, I once interviewed Andrea Dworkin by phone. It was a striking experience. We chatted for a few minutes before getting to the interview proper. She was a real type -- a big, sleepy, smart, whiny-moaning, relaxed, childish, spoiled Jewish baby. Honestly I was sort of charmed by her. Then I started the interview ... and started asking her about sex ... And all the charm evaporated to be replaced by a militant, angry, hurt/wounded/righteous/indignant. crazy woman. It was like a Jekyll-Hyde thing. Andrea 1 I could have hung out with. Andrea 2 made me want to radio Bellevue for help.

    As for women, movies and Jews, the early American filmmaking scene was much more open and freewheeling than what we've had since. There were a lot of women writers, actresses like Mary Pickford who were their own bosses ... Women didn't get put in their place, so to speak, until the studio system put them there. And the guys in charge of the studio system were, like it or not, Jewish guys.

    As for women, movies and Jews, the early American filmmaking scene was much more open and freewheeling than what we’ve had since. There were a lot of women writers, actresses like Mary Pickford who were their own bosses … Women didn’t get put in their place, so to speak, until the studio system put them there. And the guys in charge of the studio system were, like it or not, Jewish guys.

    Sounds like “diversity before diversity” again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Hepp
    Are these quotes from Dworkin's own book? Why is she referred to in the third person?

    “Are these quotes from Dworkin’s own book? Why is she referred to in the third person?”

    They are from her publisher’s promotional text on Amazon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. “Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.”

    That’s not because the women think they’ll get to run the household, that’s because a Jewish dude is a lot more likely to have MD or DDS or JD after his name.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. @Priss Factor
    Dworkin may have qualified as scapecow or scapehippo but as scapegoat, never.

    Given how the Bible begins with Eve being blamed for eating the fruit and making Adam eat it too, you'd think Dworkin would have figured out early that it's foolish to draw comparisons between Jews and women.

    But it appears that what pisses off a lot of ugly women is that they themselves would never be seen as scapegoats. Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men. But beautiful women do, and that's why beautiful women with the power to tempt and drive men crazy have been scapegoated. So, being scapegoated was a double-edged sword. It was condemnation but also a form of praise. It was the sexual power of beautiful women that men feared, worshiped, and went crazy over.
    It was the radiant face of Helen than the fat ass of Dworkin that launched a thousand ships. Dworkin's face or arse would have sunk the Titanic faster than the iceberg did.

    Dworkin reminds me of the man-like sister of Jack Crabb in LITTLE BIG MAN. She talks about how them red savages are going to ravage her, but she's upset that the savages mistake her for a man and have no sexual desire for her. Paradoxically, she's the sort to get hysterical over rape because no one wants to rape her or have any kind of sex with her.

    http://youtu.be/Z6cOE5IenoY?t=8m1s

    It's true. Men have scapegoated women in bad ways, but it was also an admittance of fear/worship of women's desirability. What happens to the Pappas character in ZORBA THE GREEK is terrible, but her beauty did have power over men. Such power was not held by all women but only by beautiful women.

    .

    .

    And even though ugly feminists always talked about sisterhood, they were the kind that no man would even look at, let alone touch. When I was in college, I attended a feminist gathering where a couple of feminists gave a speech with black bags over their heads. The idea was they were hiding their identities from men who might rape them. Later I found out who these particular campus feminists happened to be, and my god, they were ugly as sin. Even warthogs wouldn't have humped them.
    My guess is ugly feminists are really envious of the fact that they themselves would never be 'scapegoated' because they have no sexual power over men. And most good-looking women look down on ugly women. So, ugly women feel ignored and abandoned, and so, like the silly twit in OLEANNA, they create this hysterical fantasy where all the men are out to rape them as if they're Helen of Troy or something. By getting hysterical about rape, they subconsciously convince themselves that they are attractive enough to attract the wolfish desire of men.

    It's the Milk-Faced Girl(with a cow's eyes) Syndrome.

    http://youtu.be/YLp3ilTL8Us?t=3m41s

    In SAMSON AND DELILAH, a plain-looking Jewish woman cannot win the attention of Samson. So, she appeals to morality and spirituality. It's the only way she can bind him to her people(and therefore hopefully to her): by a sense of duty to the tribe. Delilah, on the other hand, is a temptress and enchantress. She only need to use her beauty, allure, and wiles to get Samson's attention.
    If all women looked like Andrea Dworkin, there would have been NO scapegoating of women. Indeed, men would have performed sex only to perpetuate the species or family line. There would have been no romance, no desire, no sex or dream of sex for pleasure. If Bathesheba looked like Dworkin, David would have mistaken her for a cow. If Helen looked like Dworkin, Paris would have ran from her, and her husband would have prayed that some other man take her. No need for scapegoating.

    Being scapegoated could be dangerous, but it was also complimentary because it meant that a woman drove men crazy. She was hot and desirable. Sometimes, scapegoating and killing a beautiful woman was like sexual game theory in action. In ZORBA THE GREEK, all the men of the town want Irene Pappas the widow. If they all fought for her, they would tear each other apart in sexual competition. So, they tacitly agree to kill her so that they can live with one another in peace. And of course, women egg the men on cuz they are envious of her. They are envious because they don't have such effect on men. Their own husbands prefer her to them.
    Despite the danger of being a beautiful woman who might thus be scapegoated and killed, a beautiful woman felt the thrill of being the center of attention. She knew she could allure even the most powerful man in the world and turn him into jelly. Look what Cleopatra did to men around her.

    It was the temptresses and enchantresses that were scapegoated because of the power of their sexuality. Men came to hate them because they loved them(but couldn't have them, or had them but were filled with jealousy that other men might take the women from them, like with Jake LaMotta in RAGING BULL). But in some ways, women hated such women more than men did. Women are jealous creatures. And through most of history, men and women 'conspired' in the scapegoating of beautiful temptresses. Men wanted the temptresses but their desire was driving them nuts. Most women hated temptresses because such gals should steal their men away with a flick of the eyebrow or a smile.

    But feminism created this myth that it was a war by all men on all women. In truth, the scapegoating of women was about beautiful women, and it was done by both men and women. The milk-faced girl(with a cow's eyes) in SAMSON AND DELILAH has no sisterhood feelings for Delilah. She wouldn't mind seeing Delilah being burned at the stake.
    The fact is Jewish girls realized that Jewish men got major hots for 'shikses', and so, they were consumed with jealousy, especially as non-Jewish men didn't find Jewish women all that hot. Though Jewish men weren't all that great in the sexual attraction department, they had two advantages. They were smart and made good money, and that attracted 'shikses'. They were also known for their meaters as Ron Jeremy demonstrated. Jewish women, due to their deficiency in looks department, realized that the only way they can get any kind of respect was by making money or gaining power. A blonde shikse need only smile and show a little cleavage to have rich guys bow down at her feet, like in HEARTBREAK KID. But Jewish women better make money and gain power.
    Anyway, feminism created this myth that all men were oppressing all women, i.e. that all men were fantasizing about raping or having sex with Dworkin as much as about Farrah Fawcett or Suzanne Somers. Samson and other beastly men were just as horny for the milk-faced-girls of the world as for Delilahs.

    Of course, temptresses caused a lot of distress among men. A temptress is lusty and sensual. If men are obsessed with power, temptresses are obsessed about possessing men of power by having them possess them. Their form of surrender to men is a form of conquest of men. Because temptresses tend to be less inhibited and more attuned to natural desires, they have no tribal loyalties. They will shake their ass for whomever the top males happen to be. So, when Germans invaded France, while the milk-faced girls of France stuck with their own men, French temptresses ran into the arms of German men who were the masterful conquerors.
    It's like milk-faced white girls tend to stick with white men, but lusty white temptresses will run off with Negro athletes or Jewish millionaires. They love power. By alluring men of power--physical or mental--, they gain power over men with power. It's like what whoozits did to Napoleon. So, men love and hate temptresses. Temptresses are lusty, sensual, and hot. But their only sense of loyalty is to power.
    Take white temptresses and yellow temptresses. White temptress have no use for white nationalism or such. They are crazy about power. Just like Cleopatra went with the powerful Romans, white temptresses will go with whomever has the power. It's like Teresa in the WILD BUNCH. Angel sees her teasing Mapache and walks up to confront her(who was his lover in the village). But Teresa the temptress gazes at Mapache and says she's muy felice because he's a real man. When Angel is dragged off by others of the Bunch as he mutters, 'she was my woman', she looks at him with a mixture of pity and contempt. She starts laughing, the damn ho. So, there you have it. Angel is crazy about Teresa. She is hot and lusty. She is one saucy mamacita. But temptresses will go with power. And Mapache has the power. Though such women surrender sexually to powerful men, powerful men also fall into their lusty web. Angel gets so pissed that he shoots her. One might say that the WILD BUNCH scapegoats the woman as the 'hussy ho floozy', but women enjoy having such power. Women are capable of feeling pity for men, but pity is mixed with contempt.
    Suppose a white woman sees a negro whup her white lover. She feels pity for her downed white lover, but also feels contempt for the loser. One part of her wants to take care of him, but another part of her looks down on him as a sap. The natural sexual side of her wants to give herself to the Negro. It's the Teresa Syndrome. Anyway, beautiful white women have high market value, so they can go with any rich or powerful men. Loyalty means nothing to them. Power means everything to them. And if white guys are losers, white temptresses look down on them and go with rich Jewish guys or strong Negro guys.
    Same thing with yellow ho's. Yellow women have high market value because men like femininity in women, and yellow ho's got that. Yellow men have zero market value cuz they are a bunch of nerds and geeks. But not all yellow girls are hot and lusty. Some are plain-faced or ugly and overly shy. Such are the milk-faced yellow girls, and those kinds might stick with yellow men. But the yellow temptresses will go with power, and it's often black, white, or (especially)Jewish as Jews make lots of money and have big meaters.

    To be sure, women cannot be simply be divided between temptresses and milk-faced girls. There are also 'queen' types that have the looks and beauty but tend to be, by nature or nurture, more restrained and more status-conscious than temptresses. Angela Lansbury in SAMSON AND DELILAH is the queen type. She too wants to go with power and want to be desired by men, but she wants it to be done right. She won't just run into the arms of any stud like Delilah the hussy is prone to. Lansbury settles on marrying Samson but only because he courted her correctly and fulfilled the promise. He made himself respectable. Delilah, in contrast, is a temptress and she just wants to put her arms around the biggest stud-warrior in town.

    As for Dworkin, she doesn't even count as a milk-faced-girl. She's like toilet-water-hag. Even ugly men who can't get pretty women wouldn't want to end up with someone like that. She makes Lena Dunham look like a goddess, and Dunham is uglier than Miss Piggy. (But I suppose ugly feminists like Dunham because she puts forth the myth that all men would jump into bed with such a creature. We hear about how so many girls have been sexually abused when they were drunk in college. But what about the males? It seems as if ugly girls often get men drunk because only a totally wasted guy would want to hump someone like Dunham. So, who's 'raping' whom?)

    Still, it's interesting that Dworkin tried to find some kind of connection between issues of tribe and sex. Though her conclusions are different from that of white nationalists, the white nationalist idears come down to issues of sex and tribe. After all, the race is perpetuated by men and women of same race having children. For over 10,000s of yrs in Europe, white men and white women have produced white children. White genitals met and mixed over and over and over to perpetuate the race. But with massive immigration, the unity of white genitalia is being interrupted.
    Take a look at this picture:
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/africans-e1417205667791.jpg

    Every immigrant comes with not only hands and feet but with puds, and they will be aiming for white vaginas. With negro power in sports and music, white temptresses will run into arms of Negroes. And with African women having 7 or 8 children each, 100s of millions of blacks will flock to Europe. Against such invasion, EU has no defenses. No moral defense because 'racism' and 'xenophobia' are said to be so evil. Also, we now live in a world where airplane-loads of white women travel to Africa to have sex with black men. It's sex travel. When white women are going to the trouble of flying to Africa to have sex with black men, why wouldn't they put out to negroes who are coming to Europe in the millions?

    To be sure, milk-faced white girls will likely stick with white men, but white temptresses have no such loyalties. Just like Helen went off with Paris in the TROJAN WAR story, temptresses will go off with whoever has the power, the hunkiness, the macho allure.
    And in a way, the loss of temptresses is damaging to the DNA of a race. Temptresses have the looks, so if good-looking white women go off with Negroes, Negro looks will improve, but white looks will grow plainer as white men will have kids with milk-faced white girls.
    Also, though temptresses may be hussies and ho's, they are magnetic, dynamic, and aggressive. There's something fiery about them, in contrast to the drabness and dullness of milk-faced girls.
    Take Amy Chua. She's smart and all that, but she has the personality of a temptress. She wanted to be with power and privilege. She wanted a real tall guy and found a handsome Jewish stud with great looks and a meater. She may be a hussy, but there's something alive and dynamic about her, and those are precious qualities. In the Old World, she would have married a Chinese guy, and her vivaciousness would have remained within the race. But as she went with a Jewish guy, her spiritedness passed onto the Jews. It's forever lost to the yellow race. Likewise, as white temptresses go with Negroes, the vivacious quality of white temptresses will be passed to other races.

    Woman is a mixture of culture and nature. Temptressness favores nature. Milk-faced-girl-ness favors culture, if only as a crutch. The milk-faced-girl in SAMSON AND DELILAH couldn't be a temptress even if she wanted to because she doesn't have the looks. She has the eyes of a cow. Though not exactly ugly as Dworkin, a song like "If you wanna happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife, take my personal point of view, get an ugly girl to marry you" applies to her.

    Most women are a mixture of nature and culture. Not all beautiful women are temptresses. Their cultural upbringing and social status-ness serve as brakes on their natural desires.
    Consider the Alice Harford's Ho Dream in EYES WIDE SHUT. In her social life, she's a good mother and wife. She prizes her role culturally. She has a sense of duty and obligation. So, even though she is beautiful, there is a milk-faced-girl cultural side of her. But there is also the temptress side, which comes out when she gets high with her hubby Billy. Despite their marriage and all the time they spent together, she confesses that she would have given up everything for a naval officer after seeing him for a few secs. So, a few seconds of looking at that guy had a greater impact on her than yrs of living with Billy boy. The tall handsome stud made her temptress side emerge from within her. Later she has a dream when she is naked with Billy. Billy goes running for clothes, aka culture-as-shield-and-protection. But she remains nude and indulges in her fantasy to the fullest. And in this fantasy, there is no loyalty to anything but power and pleasure. And she's giving herself to all these studs while billy boy looks helplessly while holding the clothes. The temptress side finds him funny and pitiful. But she wakes up, and the cultural/moral side of her fills her with guilt. Life is really a struggle for power, and nature and cultures are weapons in this battle despite all the nice-sounding slogans about 'equality' and 'diversity'.
    In PORTNOY'S COMPLAINT, the Jewish guy is torn between his horniness for shikses and his sense of obligation to Jews. When a Jewish Zionist woman excoriates him at the end for his lack of commitment, he is torn between culture and nature. Culture says STAY LOYAL TO JEWISHNESS but nature says BOING!!!! He can't help chasing after shikse temptresses. Being Jewish in the traditional sense is especially frustrating because Jewish culture is linked with Jewish 'nature' or genetics. A Christian Pole could marry a Christian Englishman. Anyone could be a Christian. But Jewishness is defined by blood as well as by religion, so the idea was that Jewish men had to marry Jewish women, but too many Jewish women looked like the one in HEARTBREAK KID.

    Culture clouds things. At the root of all life is nature. Animals live in the world of nature. Humans have created culture and civilization from culture, and culture acts as a brake on nature. But nature is what it is, and in time, nature has its way of getting around culture and weakening its foundations and taboos. It's like the Angkor Wat. Left to nature, trees have grown all around it and their roots have penetrated through the structures and brought them down.
    The interracist sexual dynamic we are seeing is the effect of nature that is taking place in the West. In the past, white culture kept black nature at bay. But it was only a matter of time before blacks would naturally show aggression toward whites, and it was only a matter of time before whites would surrender. Some white nationalists say interracism is unnatural, but is it? Suppose we take a bunch of pitbulls and beagles and put them in the same park. Will male pitbulls only hump female pitbulls or even make moves on female beagles? And what will happen to male beagles. They will be mauled by male pitbulls or cower like scaredy cats.
    Culture and our clothes act as brakes on nature, but humans in their natural state without clothes and culture will act like animals.

    If we take 100 blacks, 100 whites, 100 Jews, 100 yellows, and 100 mexicans, make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races, the men of other races will fight and lose. So, black men will be humping white girls who decide to surrender to the tougher studs. White men will lose top white girls to negroes, and they will seek out yellow girls. Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed. Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle. Pretty Jewish women will play the game, and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters. Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.
    That is nature, the kind dreamt by Alice Harford in EYES WIDE SHUT.
    The world we live in isn't like that because culture and laws and etc. serve as brakes on the power of nature. But the power of nature is always there, as when Alice thought of giving up everything to go with the naval officer(who thankfully wasn't a Negro). And just as the penetrating and burgeoning roots of trees eventually set stones of civilization apart, the growing power of nature will undermine the bonds of civilization in the West, especially as the mainstream has been pornographized.

    But it appears that what pisses off a lot of ugly women is that they themselves would never be seen as scapegoats. Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men. But beautiful women do, and that’s why beautiful women with the power to tempt and drive men crazy have been scapegoated. So, being scapegoated was a double-edged sword. It was condemnation but also a form of praise. It was the sexual power of beautiful women that men feared, worshiped, and went crazy over.
    It was the radiant face of Helen than the fat ass of Dworkin that launched a thousand ships. Dworkin’s face or arse would have sunk the Titanic faster than the iceberg did.

    Dworkin’s problem was not that she was ugly. There are plenty of unattractive women who nonetheless have feminine psychologies and fall in love and marry, lets be honest, with equally unattractive men.

    Dworkin’s problem was that she was mostly likely born with both a highly masculinized phenotype and psychology. Because for so long both the far left and most of the religious right have been in denial concerning evolution and naturally occurring congenital and other birth abnormalities and their impact on sexual identities, it was considered appropriate for Dworkin to be take seriously.

    Ask yourself if you would take a paranoid schizophrenic seriously just because they had written a half dozen books on the Kennedy assassination?

    Reasonably intelligent folks use to take Freudian psychology seriously. With the advent of modern psychiatry, it now seen as quackery. Same thing will happen with Blank Slate Gender Marxist radical feminism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. “she was anti-pornography, a battle she appears to have lost overwhelmingly.”

    Right, and that’s a giveaway that a lot of rape “culture” hysteria is disingenuous. Adolescent boys immerse themselves in a daily bath of internet pornography; it’s the dark matter of twenty-first century male sexual development. If you judge by what they write about, this doesn’t terribly concern feminists, especially not third-wave feminists at Jezebel whose salaries are subsidized in part by the porn sites owned by Nick Denton. They’d rather talk about more pressing issues like damsel-in-distress tropes in video games or the problematic nature of Robin Thicke lyrics. It’s strange because a lot of internet porn scenarios would in fact constitute rape in the real world, and impressionable young men consume this stuff with compulsive repetition. But it’s not that strange: the need to affirm the sexual revolution, beginning to end, means that porn ultimately can’t be condemned. Plus, when you get down to it, reservations about porn are too prudish, too Christian, and hence — for college-educated young women — déclassé.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. @Priss Factor
    Dworkin may have qualified as scapecow or scapehippo but as scapegoat, never.

    Given how the Bible begins with Eve being blamed for eating the fruit and making Adam eat it too, you'd think Dworkin would have figured out early that it's foolish to draw comparisons between Jews and women.

    But it appears that what pisses off a lot of ugly women is that they themselves would never be seen as scapegoats. Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men. But beautiful women do, and that's why beautiful women with the power to tempt and drive men crazy have been scapegoated. So, being scapegoated was a double-edged sword. It was condemnation but also a form of praise. It was the sexual power of beautiful women that men feared, worshiped, and went crazy over.
    It was the radiant face of Helen than the fat ass of Dworkin that launched a thousand ships. Dworkin's face or arse would have sunk the Titanic faster than the iceberg did.

    Dworkin reminds me of the man-like sister of Jack Crabb in LITTLE BIG MAN. She talks about how them red savages are going to ravage her, but she's upset that the savages mistake her for a man and have no sexual desire for her. Paradoxically, she's the sort to get hysterical over rape because no one wants to rape her or have any kind of sex with her.

    http://youtu.be/Z6cOE5IenoY?t=8m1s

    It's true. Men have scapegoated women in bad ways, but it was also an admittance of fear/worship of women's desirability. What happens to the Pappas character in ZORBA THE GREEK is terrible, but her beauty did have power over men. Such power was not held by all women but only by beautiful women.

    .

    .

    And even though ugly feminists always talked about sisterhood, they were the kind that no man would even look at, let alone touch. When I was in college, I attended a feminist gathering where a couple of feminists gave a speech with black bags over their heads. The idea was they were hiding their identities from men who might rape them. Later I found out who these particular campus feminists happened to be, and my god, they were ugly as sin. Even warthogs wouldn't have humped them.
    My guess is ugly feminists are really envious of the fact that they themselves would never be 'scapegoated' because they have no sexual power over men. And most good-looking women look down on ugly women. So, ugly women feel ignored and abandoned, and so, like the silly twit in OLEANNA, they create this hysterical fantasy where all the men are out to rape them as if they're Helen of Troy or something. By getting hysterical about rape, they subconsciously convince themselves that they are attractive enough to attract the wolfish desire of men.

    It's the Milk-Faced Girl(with a cow's eyes) Syndrome.

    http://youtu.be/YLp3ilTL8Us?t=3m41s

    In SAMSON AND DELILAH, a plain-looking Jewish woman cannot win the attention of Samson. So, she appeals to morality and spirituality. It's the only way she can bind him to her people(and therefore hopefully to her): by a sense of duty to the tribe. Delilah, on the other hand, is a temptress and enchantress. She only need to use her beauty, allure, and wiles to get Samson's attention.
    If all women looked like Andrea Dworkin, there would have been NO scapegoating of women. Indeed, men would have performed sex only to perpetuate the species or family line. There would have been no romance, no desire, no sex or dream of sex for pleasure. If Bathesheba looked like Dworkin, David would have mistaken her for a cow. If Helen looked like Dworkin, Paris would have ran from her, and her husband would have prayed that some other man take her. No need for scapegoating.

    Being scapegoated could be dangerous, but it was also complimentary because it meant that a woman drove men crazy. She was hot and desirable. Sometimes, scapegoating and killing a beautiful woman was like sexual game theory in action. In ZORBA THE GREEK, all the men of the town want Irene Pappas the widow. If they all fought for her, they would tear each other apart in sexual competition. So, they tacitly agree to kill her so that they can live with one another in peace. And of course, women egg the men on cuz they are envious of her. They are envious because they don't have such effect on men. Their own husbands prefer her to them.
    Despite the danger of being a beautiful woman who might thus be scapegoated and killed, a beautiful woman felt the thrill of being the center of attention. She knew she could allure even the most powerful man in the world and turn him into jelly. Look what Cleopatra did to men around her.

    It was the temptresses and enchantresses that were scapegoated because of the power of their sexuality. Men came to hate them because they loved them(but couldn't have them, or had them but were filled with jealousy that other men might take the women from them, like with Jake LaMotta in RAGING BULL). But in some ways, women hated such women more than men did. Women are jealous creatures. And through most of history, men and women 'conspired' in the scapegoating of beautiful temptresses. Men wanted the temptresses but their desire was driving them nuts. Most women hated temptresses because such gals should steal their men away with a flick of the eyebrow or a smile.

    But feminism created this myth that it was a war by all men on all women. In truth, the scapegoating of women was about beautiful women, and it was done by both men and women. The milk-faced girl(with a cow's eyes) in SAMSON AND DELILAH has no sisterhood feelings for Delilah. She wouldn't mind seeing Delilah being burned at the stake.
    The fact is Jewish girls realized that Jewish men got major hots for 'shikses', and so, they were consumed with jealousy, especially as non-Jewish men didn't find Jewish women all that hot. Though Jewish men weren't all that great in the sexual attraction department, they had two advantages. They were smart and made good money, and that attracted 'shikses'. They were also known for their meaters as Ron Jeremy demonstrated. Jewish women, due to their deficiency in looks department, realized that the only way they can get any kind of respect was by making money or gaining power. A blonde shikse need only smile and show a little cleavage to have rich guys bow down at her feet, like in HEARTBREAK KID. But Jewish women better make money and gain power.
    Anyway, feminism created this myth that all men were oppressing all women, i.e. that all men were fantasizing about raping or having sex with Dworkin as much as about Farrah Fawcett or Suzanne Somers. Samson and other beastly men were just as horny for the milk-faced-girls of the world as for Delilahs.

    Of course, temptresses caused a lot of distress among men. A temptress is lusty and sensual. If men are obsessed with power, temptresses are obsessed about possessing men of power by having them possess them. Their form of surrender to men is a form of conquest of men. Because temptresses tend to be less inhibited and more attuned to natural desires, they have no tribal loyalties. They will shake their ass for whomever the top males happen to be. So, when Germans invaded France, while the milk-faced girls of France stuck with their own men, French temptresses ran into the arms of German men who were the masterful conquerors.
    It's like milk-faced white girls tend to stick with white men, but lusty white temptresses will run off with Negro athletes or Jewish millionaires. They love power. By alluring men of power--physical or mental--, they gain power over men with power. It's like what whoozits did to Napoleon. So, men love and hate temptresses. Temptresses are lusty, sensual, and hot. But their only sense of loyalty is to power.
    Take white temptresses and yellow temptresses. White temptress have no use for white nationalism or such. They are crazy about power. Just like Cleopatra went with the powerful Romans, white temptresses will go with whomever has the power. It's like Teresa in the WILD BUNCH. Angel sees her teasing Mapache and walks up to confront her(who was his lover in the village). But Teresa the temptress gazes at Mapache and says she's muy felice because he's a real man. When Angel is dragged off by others of the Bunch as he mutters, 'she was my woman', she looks at him with a mixture of pity and contempt. She starts laughing, the damn ho. So, there you have it. Angel is crazy about Teresa. She is hot and lusty. She is one saucy mamacita. But temptresses will go with power. And Mapache has the power. Though such women surrender sexually to powerful men, powerful men also fall into their lusty web. Angel gets so pissed that he shoots her. One might say that the WILD BUNCH scapegoats the woman as the 'hussy ho floozy', but women enjoy having such power. Women are capable of feeling pity for men, but pity is mixed with contempt.
    Suppose a white woman sees a negro whup her white lover. She feels pity for her downed white lover, but also feels contempt for the loser. One part of her wants to take care of him, but another part of her looks down on him as a sap. The natural sexual side of her wants to give herself to the Negro. It's the Teresa Syndrome. Anyway, beautiful white women have high market value, so they can go with any rich or powerful men. Loyalty means nothing to them. Power means everything to them. And if white guys are losers, white temptresses look down on them and go with rich Jewish guys or strong Negro guys.
    Same thing with yellow ho's. Yellow women have high market value because men like femininity in women, and yellow ho's got that. Yellow men have zero market value cuz they are a bunch of nerds and geeks. But not all yellow girls are hot and lusty. Some are plain-faced or ugly and overly shy. Such are the milk-faced yellow girls, and those kinds might stick with yellow men. But the yellow temptresses will go with power, and it's often black, white, or (especially)Jewish as Jews make lots of money and have big meaters.

    To be sure, women cannot be simply be divided between temptresses and milk-faced girls. There are also 'queen' types that have the looks and beauty but tend to be, by nature or nurture, more restrained and more status-conscious than temptresses. Angela Lansbury in SAMSON AND DELILAH is the queen type. She too wants to go with power and want to be desired by men, but she wants it to be done right. She won't just run into the arms of any stud like Delilah the hussy is prone to. Lansbury settles on marrying Samson but only because he courted her correctly and fulfilled the promise. He made himself respectable. Delilah, in contrast, is a temptress and she just wants to put her arms around the biggest stud-warrior in town.

    As for Dworkin, she doesn't even count as a milk-faced-girl. She's like toilet-water-hag. Even ugly men who can't get pretty women wouldn't want to end up with someone like that. She makes Lena Dunham look like a goddess, and Dunham is uglier than Miss Piggy. (But I suppose ugly feminists like Dunham because she puts forth the myth that all men would jump into bed with such a creature. We hear about how so many girls have been sexually abused when they were drunk in college. But what about the males? It seems as if ugly girls often get men drunk because only a totally wasted guy would want to hump someone like Dunham. So, who's 'raping' whom?)

    Still, it's interesting that Dworkin tried to find some kind of connection between issues of tribe and sex. Though her conclusions are different from that of white nationalists, the white nationalist idears come down to issues of sex and tribe. After all, the race is perpetuated by men and women of same race having children. For over 10,000s of yrs in Europe, white men and white women have produced white children. White genitals met and mixed over and over and over to perpetuate the race. But with massive immigration, the unity of white genitalia is being interrupted.
    Take a look at this picture:
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/africans-e1417205667791.jpg

    Every immigrant comes with not only hands and feet but with puds, and they will be aiming for white vaginas. With negro power in sports and music, white temptresses will run into arms of Negroes. And with African women having 7 or 8 children each, 100s of millions of blacks will flock to Europe. Against such invasion, EU has no defenses. No moral defense because 'racism' and 'xenophobia' are said to be so evil. Also, we now live in a world where airplane-loads of white women travel to Africa to have sex with black men. It's sex travel. When white women are going to the trouble of flying to Africa to have sex with black men, why wouldn't they put out to negroes who are coming to Europe in the millions?

    To be sure, milk-faced white girls will likely stick with white men, but white temptresses have no such loyalties. Just like Helen went off with Paris in the TROJAN WAR story, temptresses will go off with whoever has the power, the hunkiness, the macho allure.
    And in a way, the loss of temptresses is damaging to the DNA of a race. Temptresses have the looks, so if good-looking white women go off with Negroes, Negro looks will improve, but white looks will grow plainer as white men will have kids with milk-faced white girls.
    Also, though temptresses may be hussies and ho's, they are magnetic, dynamic, and aggressive. There's something fiery about them, in contrast to the drabness and dullness of milk-faced girls.
    Take Amy Chua. She's smart and all that, but she has the personality of a temptress. She wanted to be with power and privilege. She wanted a real tall guy and found a handsome Jewish stud with great looks and a meater. She may be a hussy, but there's something alive and dynamic about her, and those are precious qualities. In the Old World, she would have married a Chinese guy, and her vivaciousness would have remained within the race. But as she went with a Jewish guy, her spiritedness passed onto the Jews. It's forever lost to the yellow race. Likewise, as white temptresses go with Negroes, the vivacious quality of white temptresses will be passed to other races.

    Woman is a mixture of culture and nature. Temptressness favores nature. Milk-faced-girl-ness favors culture, if only as a crutch. The milk-faced-girl in SAMSON AND DELILAH couldn't be a temptress even if she wanted to because she doesn't have the looks. She has the eyes of a cow. Though not exactly ugly as Dworkin, a song like "If you wanna happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife, take my personal point of view, get an ugly girl to marry you" applies to her.

    Most women are a mixture of nature and culture. Not all beautiful women are temptresses. Their cultural upbringing and social status-ness serve as brakes on their natural desires.
    Consider the Alice Harford's Ho Dream in EYES WIDE SHUT. In her social life, she's a good mother and wife. She prizes her role culturally. She has a sense of duty and obligation. So, even though she is beautiful, there is a milk-faced-girl cultural side of her. But there is also the temptress side, which comes out when she gets high with her hubby Billy. Despite their marriage and all the time they spent together, she confesses that she would have given up everything for a naval officer after seeing him for a few secs. So, a few seconds of looking at that guy had a greater impact on her than yrs of living with Billy boy. The tall handsome stud made her temptress side emerge from within her. Later she has a dream when she is naked with Billy. Billy goes running for clothes, aka culture-as-shield-and-protection. But she remains nude and indulges in her fantasy to the fullest. And in this fantasy, there is no loyalty to anything but power and pleasure. And she's giving herself to all these studs while billy boy looks helplessly while holding the clothes. The temptress side finds him funny and pitiful. But she wakes up, and the cultural/moral side of her fills her with guilt. Life is really a struggle for power, and nature and cultures are weapons in this battle despite all the nice-sounding slogans about 'equality' and 'diversity'.
    In PORTNOY'S COMPLAINT, the Jewish guy is torn between his horniness for shikses and his sense of obligation to Jews. When a Jewish Zionist woman excoriates him at the end for his lack of commitment, he is torn between culture and nature. Culture says STAY LOYAL TO JEWISHNESS but nature says BOING!!!! He can't help chasing after shikse temptresses. Being Jewish in the traditional sense is especially frustrating because Jewish culture is linked with Jewish 'nature' or genetics. A Christian Pole could marry a Christian Englishman. Anyone could be a Christian. But Jewishness is defined by blood as well as by religion, so the idea was that Jewish men had to marry Jewish women, but too many Jewish women looked like the one in HEARTBREAK KID.

    Culture clouds things. At the root of all life is nature. Animals live in the world of nature. Humans have created culture and civilization from culture, and culture acts as a brake on nature. But nature is what it is, and in time, nature has its way of getting around culture and weakening its foundations and taboos. It's like the Angkor Wat. Left to nature, trees have grown all around it and their roots have penetrated through the structures and brought them down.
    The interracist sexual dynamic we are seeing is the effect of nature that is taking place in the West. In the past, white culture kept black nature at bay. But it was only a matter of time before blacks would naturally show aggression toward whites, and it was only a matter of time before whites would surrender. Some white nationalists say interracism is unnatural, but is it? Suppose we take a bunch of pitbulls and beagles and put them in the same park. Will male pitbulls only hump female pitbulls or even make moves on female beagles? And what will happen to male beagles. They will be mauled by male pitbulls or cower like scaredy cats.
    Culture and our clothes act as brakes on nature, but humans in their natural state without clothes and culture will act like animals.

    If we take 100 blacks, 100 whites, 100 Jews, 100 yellows, and 100 mexicans, make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races, the men of other races will fight and lose. So, black men will be humping white girls who decide to surrender to the tougher studs. White men will lose top white girls to negroes, and they will seek out yellow girls. Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed. Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle. Pretty Jewish women will play the game, and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters. Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.
    That is nature, the kind dreamt by Alice Harford in EYES WIDE SHUT.
    The world we live in isn't like that because culture and laws and etc. serve as brakes on the power of nature. But the power of nature is always there, as when Alice thought of giving up everything to go with the naval officer(who thankfully wasn't a Negro). And just as the penetrating and burgeoning roots of trees eventually set stones of civilization apart, the growing power of nature will undermine the bonds of civilization in the West, especially as the mainstream has been pornographized.

    I can’t believe that I just read the whole thing; must be my masochistic streak at work.Anyway, amidst the stream-of-consciousness ranting, a few points emerged:

    If we take 100 blacks

    Which Blacks? East or West Africans?

    100 whites

    Which Whites? Estonians? Italians? Differing ethnies have differing rates of Don Juanism

    100 Jews,

    MMMM, since these Jews are separated from the Whites, I’m guessing that you are talking about Ethiopian Jews

    100 yellows,

    Which “yellows?” Chinese? Japanese? Thai?

    and 100 mexicans,

    What kind of Mexicans?Whites like Ricardo Montalban? Amerinds? Mestizos?

    make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races,

    So, Black girls will be frozen out

    the men of other races will fight and lose

    .

    Fight whom? Each other? The Blacks?If it’s the Blacks, wouldn’t their greater numbers (100 assorted Whites plus 100 Ethiopian Jews plus 100 assorted plus 100 assorted Mexicans plus 100 assorted Mexicans) give them the edge?

    So, black men will be humping white girls

    So, White Mexican girls will be left alone?

    who decide to surrender to the tougher studs.

    Wait, so the 100 assorted blacks defeated 400 guys from other groups in a fight?MMM, someone must have a rather elaborate personal mythology regarding Black physical prowess

    White men will lose top white girls to negroes,

    So, the 100 Blacks are just gang-banging the top ten White girls?

    and they will seek out yellow girls.

    While leaving the remaining 90 White girls to fend for themselves?

    Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed.

    But not going for the 90 unattached White girls?

    Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle.

    Middle of What?

    Pretty Jewish women will play the game,

    The Ethiopian Jewish girls will take up basketball?

    and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters.

    Not a very promising strategy

    Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.

    Shouldn’t they be trying to convince the unattached girls to go Lesbo?

    Read More
    • Replies: @sanjoaquinsam

    Wait, so the 100 assorted blacks defeated 400 guys from other groups in a fight?MMM, someone must have a rather elaborate personal mythology regarding Black physical prowess
     
    ...and a strange fascination with "meaters".

    It was an interesting comment though.
    , @Anonymous
    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Dave Pinsen
    I think most women in Hollywood have aggressive male agents looking out for them in their careers.

    True. I think we’re saying the same thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:

    “Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men”

    Men don’t do much better.

    Michel Houellebecq (spelling? did I leave out a q?) writes about how the free market as applied to sex has screwed over the plain and the ugly.

    I would add that the demise of the family has also screwed female power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Men don’t do much better. Michel Houellebecq (spelling? did I leave out a q?) writes about how the free market as applied to sex has screwed over the plain and the ugly."

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that's a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he's smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.
    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side), the rule of ugly-loserdom applies to them less.

    And with women, personality can sometimes win out. Some Jewish girls are ugly and loathesome, but there are some that aren't really pretty(but far from ugly) and have very lively personalities. And that can turn men on. It's like some men found Pauline Kael sexy even though she came to prominence in her middle age. In high school, there were some Jewish girls that were sort-of-pretty but far from beautiful but they were very very popular because they were so lively, engaging, and love to be center-of-attention. Some men go for that. Indeed, such men may entice men more than dumb blonde bimbos might. Men go for personality as well as looks.

    Looks matter less with men, if by looks we mean facial prettiness. Tom Cruise is as pretty as can be. Even straight guys admit he's one cute feller. But he's not very big. Of course, he played on vulnerability as well as machismo. He had a bit of both. The tough guy side made girls go 'wow'. The vulnerable side made girls want to nurse him. It's like nurses in army hospital sometimes fall in love with wounded soldiers cuz they seem to helpless and needy. Even in EXCALIBUR, it's when Guinevere sees the wounded Lancelot in bed that she can't resist him any longer and soon rides out to make love to him. Prior to his injury, he was the shining stud. But after his injury, he looked so in need of the healing power of a woman's love. If FAREWELL TO ARMS were to be made again, Tom Cruise should star in it... though he may be too old for that. But then he still looks like he's in his 20s. Woman wants to be whore and mother.

    Even when men are ugly in face, they can attract women with the three M: muscle, money, and meater. That was Ron Jeremy's claim to fame. An ugly mofo but a meater-man.

    Maybe the greatest(at least in comic book way) philosopher of sex was Colonel Kurtz of APOCALYPSE NOW as Milius originally wrote it.

    http://filmcomment.com/article/apocalypse-now-heart-transplant

    “Up here is the truth. How much truth can you take, Captain? I've made sense of this war—war as you've never known it. We revel in our own blood; we fight for glory, for land that's under our feet, gold that's in our hands, women that worship the power in our loins. I summon fire from the sky. Do you know what it is to be a white man who can summon fire from the sky? What it means? You can live and die for these things—not silly ideals that are always betrayed. What do you fight for, Captain?”

    SHIIIIIIIITE!!!! That be some powerful stuff.

    That is why Michael Corleone got so pissed when Kay killed his kid. That was his kid. From his loins. 1000s of yrs of the Sicilian thing. But the wasp twat done snuffed it.

    This is why guys still romanticize war or violent conflict. Everything is reduced to the three F: Food, Fighting, and Fuc*ing. So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women. The angry peasant in SEVEN SAMURAI who takes a stand and urges others to fight lost his wife to the bandits, and he seethes with repressed rage makes Ethan look like Mr. Rogers. (I think Kurosawa was acutely aware of Japanese women being turned into whores in 'liberated' Japan. His movie QUIET DUEL, though about syphilis, is filled with repressed sexual rage of a man rendered 'dickless' and losing woman to other men. Throughout the movie, Mifune represses his frustration and remains calm and rational. But finally the dam bursts and we see his pain. It's almost as charged as the scene in EYES WIDE SHUT when Dr. Billy Boy finally breaks down and weeps like a pooter boy: http://youtu.be/jVZRkhInBaE?t=1h13m3s
    RASHOMON isn't only about rape but how the raped wife sort of enjoys it and surrenders to the conqueror while the tied up hubby is helpless. When she surrenders to the kiss of the bandit, it's like she likes it, she likes it! It's like the cereal commercial commercial where two boys look at Mikey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYEXzx-TINc
    But the real howler in Kurosawa's cinema comes in HIGH AND LOW when Kurosawa disapprovingly shows a dance bar filled with Negro GIs who dance with shameless Japanese hussy whores. There's one bigass Negro who runs around trying to high five everyone. That kills me everytime. It's so funny, a bigass mountain-sized Negro, and he aint interested in no white mouse. Of course, the other great Japanese film director Imamura approached the same themes with less moral judgmentalism as he was more accepting of human beings being a bunch of 'me so horny' creatures. There was one female character who did walk away from the Whore Life in PIGS AND BATTLESHIPS, but the hilarious thing is even as we see her walking away, we see many more girls walking in the opposite direction towards it as fresh American GI's come ashore.)

    Civilization is a veneer. US is supposed to be all about ideals and dignity and liberty and stuff, but during Vietnam War, it turned Saigon into one big brothel. And then there was Abu Grab(sic) with the Iraq War. Many in the military knew about it but were mum about it. Some reporters knew about it but were mum too. It only broke because New Yorker finally published it. US military tolerated that stuff.
    So, there they were, fine American men and women flexing their imperial muscle and reducing Muslim men to a bunch of sex toys. They did to Iraqis what black guys enjoy doing to white folks. Humiliate and demean.
    But then look at our culture. Disney is now into full-throttle porny-stuff-for-kids.
    A cretin like Miley Cyrus is considered an icon for the nation. Kanye West and Kim Kartrash are featured in glossy fancy fashion mags.

    The true sage-guru of our age is Beavis. With one word, he summed up all the books by Freud, all the movies by Kubrick, all the novels of Roth, and all the yammering of Colonel Kurtz.

    Occam's Boner.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoS1MCF8AeI
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @syonredux
    I can't believe that I just read the whole thing; must be my masochistic streak at work.Anyway, amidst the stream-of-consciousness ranting, a few points emerged:

    If we take 100 blacks
     
    Which Blacks? East or West Africans?

    100 whites
     
    Which Whites? Estonians? Italians? Differing ethnies have differing rates of Don Juanism

    100 Jews,
     
    MMMM, since these Jews are separated from the Whites, I'm guessing that you are talking about Ethiopian Jews

    100 yellows,
     
    Which "yellows?" Chinese? Japanese? Thai?

    and 100 mexicans,
     
    What kind of Mexicans?Whites like Ricardo Montalban? Amerinds? Mestizos?

    make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races,
     
    So, Black girls will be frozen out

    the men of other races will fight and lose
     
    .

    Fight whom? Each other? The Blacks?If it's the Blacks, wouldn't their greater numbers (100 assorted Whites plus 100 Ethiopian Jews plus 100 assorted plus 100 assorted Mexicans plus 100 assorted Mexicans) give them the edge?

    So, black men will be humping white girls
     
    So, White Mexican girls will be left alone?

    who decide to surrender to the tougher studs.
     
    Wait, so the 100 assorted blacks defeated 400 guys from other groups in a fight?MMM, someone must have a rather elaborate personal mythology regarding Black physical prowess

    White men will lose top white girls to negroes,
     
    So, the 100 Blacks are just gang-banging the top ten White girls?

    and they will seek out yellow girls.
     
    While leaving the remaining 90 White girls to fend for themselves?

    Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed.
     
    But not going for the 90 unattached White girls?

    Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle.
     
    Middle of What?

    Pretty Jewish women will play the game,
     
    The Ethiopian Jewish girls will take up basketball?

    and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters.
     
    Not a very promising strategy

    Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.
     
    Shouldn't they be trying to convince the unattached girls to go Lesbo?

    Wait, so the 100 assorted blacks defeated 400 guys from other groups in a fight?MMM, someone must have a rather elaborate personal mythology regarding Black physical prowess

    …and a strange fascination with “meaters”.

    It was an interesting comment though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    Thanks for the laugh. I don’t have an opinion as to whether “Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions”, but I certainly know at least one fairly average Jewish layer who treats his wife like a dog. So the exceptions to your rule are not limited to “super powerful heads of industry “. And the “orders of magnitude” thing is crazy.

    Steve, you’re a big fan of “noticing.” Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    Because they tend to have money. But they don’t have “orders of magnitude” more money, do they?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. @syonredux
    I can't believe that I just read the whole thing; must be my masochistic streak at work.Anyway, amidst the stream-of-consciousness ranting, a few points emerged:

    If we take 100 blacks
     
    Which Blacks? East or West Africans?

    100 whites
     
    Which Whites? Estonians? Italians? Differing ethnies have differing rates of Don Juanism

    100 Jews,
     
    MMMM, since these Jews are separated from the Whites, I'm guessing that you are talking about Ethiopian Jews

    100 yellows,
     
    Which "yellows?" Chinese? Japanese? Thai?

    and 100 mexicans,
     
    What kind of Mexicans?Whites like Ricardo Montalban? Amerinds? Mestizos?

    make them all nude and tell them to abandon all cultural inhibitions and give into their nature, the following will happen. Black males will make moves on girls of other races,
     
    So, Black girls will be frozen out

    the men of other races will fight and lose
     
    .

    Fight whom? Each other? The Blacks?If it's the Blacks, wouldn't their greater numbers (100 assorted Whites plus 100 Ethiopian Jews plus 100 assorted plus 100 assorted Mexicans plus 100 assorted Mexicans) give them the edge?

    So, black men will be humping white girls
     
    So, White Mexican girls will be left alone?

    who decide to surrender to the tougher studs.
     
    Wait, so the 100 assorted blacks defeated 400 guys from other groups in a fight?MMM, someone must have a rather elaborate personal mythology regarding Black physical prowess

    White men will lose top white girls to negroes,
     
    So, the 100 Blacks are just gang-banging the top ten White girls?

    and they will seek out yellow girls.
     
    While leaving the remaining 90 White girls to fend for themselves?

    Yellow boys and beta white males will be wussy boys whupped and beaten and looking dazed.
     
    But not going for the 90 unattached White girls?

    Mexican boys and girls will be somewhere in the middle.
     
    Middle of What?

    Pretty Jewish women will play the game,
     
    The Ethiopian Jewish girls will take up basketball?

    and Jewish guys will try to attract women with their meaters.
     
    Not a very promising strategy

    Ugly Jewish girls will growl like Dworkin.
     
    Shouldn't they be trying to convince the unattached girls to go Lesbo?

    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?

     

    Boredom
    , @Keith Vaz
    Because such people control our society; popularity has nothing to do with the Agenda imposed by the Hostile Elite.
    , @Priss Factor
    "Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?"

    If you strip away the culture, sexuality is 'deranged'.
    Kubrick understood this.
    It was why he was fascinated with war. War is like an experiment where culture/law falls into disarray and men are allowed to roam as predators, warriors, killers, humpers, and rapists.

    Look at Japanese behavior in Nanking.
    Look at Soviet behavior with German women.
    Look at the French soldiers taunting the German woman singer at the end of Paths of Glory.
    Deranged and lunatic, you say, but war shows the natural side of man. Just imagine what happened in the sack of Rome. Or Troy. Greek men killed Trojan men and turned Trojan women into sex slaves.

    War is paradoxical. Great war can only be waged and sustained by a great civilization with awesome organization, hierarchy, and discipline--as in the boot camp scene in Full Metal Jacket. But what is war really about? It's about the brute and barbaric use of force to fuc* the enemy in the ass.

    Dr. Strangelove knows. He's a sophistcated intellectual but also very much in tune with the nature of man. With the world blowing up, he says there's only one option. For the best men to seek refuge with best looking women so that they can have sex and breed like crazy. It's what Kidman says at the end of EYES WIDE SHUT. "Fuc*."
    That's what life--and by extension race--all comes down to. It's about who gets to fuc* whom.

    The essence of man and woman in state of nature can be seen in these scenes:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12tce-THLUE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUQsozpZUSw

    Oliver Stone saw the same thing but drew a different conclusion than the 'cold-eyed' Kubrick.

    Heaven and Earth is about war and commerce turning an entire nation into one big pooter.

    http://youtu.be/iORfsgeqZrM?t=56m15s

    He found it very sad. But it's reality.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:

    I’ve seen Woody Allen on the street twice. I was expected someone really short, so I was surprised that he’s about 5’7″ or so, but I only saw him briefly both times so I could be off. (I realize that he’s listed as 5’5″ on Celeb Heights.)

    He’s not handsome, but not bad looking. He photographs worse than he looks in person, which most people do, and he’s in an industry with a lot of handsome people, so he looks ugly by comparison.

    “but I certainly know at least one fairly average Jewish layer who treats his wife like a dog.”

    Those Jewish layers. They’ll get ya every time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "He’s not handsome, but not bad looking."

    Puleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze!!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. […] Source: Steve Sailer […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations

    This. It’s amusing to watch Jews & clueless heathens (“gentiles”) fumble about for ways to avoid saying this. They blame the Nazis, or the Muslims, or the Goyim, or the bla bla bla. All so they don’t have to admit that they had to grow up for once and act like adults; when a country’s well-being was at stake and they realized “oh, hey, this is our country, we can’t just do our best to wreck it like we do everyone else’s.”

    maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    Or the Nazis, or the Muslims, or the Terrorists, or the Palestinians, or the Goyim….

    She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted.

    And a rape-fantasy was born…

    Mickey was a fine amateur boxer a long, long time ago and has never been quite right in the head since. But, every so often, he can nail a role: e.g., the bombmaker in “Body Heat” or “The Wrestler.”

    I don’t pay much attention to celebrity bios, so I could easily be wrong here, but the impression I get is that he was never right in the head, which is what led him to leave an established career as a movie actor to go and try a career in boxing. And then being punched in the head a lot ruined his looks (leading to a cosmetic surgery death spiral) and made his mental problems worse. He seemed to have a bad case of adventure-seeking. He probably should have tried the military-then-PMC route instead.

    For modern women under 30, “man who is sensitive to the horrors of rape” translates into “man I would never want to have sex with.” If it makes you losers angry, it’s because you know it’s true.

    Wait, what?

    The reason there is still no “gay marriage” in Israel is

    Jews don’t want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.

    Dworkin may have qualified as scapecow or scapehippo but as scapegoat, never.

    The Jewish propensity for throwing around accusations of scapegoating is amusing. First, aren’t they they ones who delivered the concept to us (I think they got it from the Phoenicians, or something)? Second, they love scapegoating white heathens (“gentiles”) for anything and everything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    The reason there is still no “gay marriage” in Israel is

    Jews don’t want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.
     

    As the Tel Aviv election illustrates, gay Israelis have made significant legal and cultural strides throughout the last few decades. The ban on homosexual sodomy was repealed in 1988; an ENDA-style LGBTQ employment-discrimination ban passed in 1992; and gays have been able to serve openly in the military since 1993. Tel Aviv has become something of a haven for gay Israelis, even playing host to one of the world’s largest Pride festivals, blessed by Mayor Huldai and other national political figures.

    The gains are great—but so are the challenges. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel concludes that the LGBTQ community “still faces various forms of discrimination by government authorities and in the private sector.” In terms of societal attitudes, a recent Israel Democracy Institute survey revealed that it would bother 30.5 percent of Israeli Jews and 46.2 percent of Israeli Arabs to have a homosexual couple as neighbours, including 68.4 percent of ultra-Orthodox and 48.4 percent of religious Zionist Jews.
     

    Enter the marriage conundrum. In Israel, all valid marriages conducted abroad are recognized by the state, and foreign same-sex marriages are recorded for statistical purposes. That means a gay couple that weds in, say, the Netherlands remains wed in Israel. But that doesn’t mean a gay couple in Tel Aviv can walk down to city hall and procure a marriage license. Marriage is an exclusively religious institution in Israel, with separate religious authorities for Jews and Muslims, Christians and Druze. For Israeli Jews, marriage policy is dictated by the Chief Rabbinate, which is under the exclusive control of the Orthodox—and firmly opposed to gay marriage. Since the country has no civil marriage, gay couples seeking to marry within the borders of Israel are out of luck (as are any Jewish Israelis seeking a non-Orthodox marriage ceremony).
     

    This arrangement—whereby marriage is in the control of the Orthodox rabbinate—is part of what Israelis call the status quo: an understanding between secular and religious Jews regarding the balance between religion and state. The status quo affects not only marriage, but also the education system, family law, supervision of kosher restaurants, and the opening of shops and public transportation on shabbat.

    Altering the status quo, particularly concerning something as delicate as marriage, is the third rail of Israeli politics. This is not only because of the power and importance of ultra-Orthodox parties in the Israeli political system, but also due to a fear that changing the status quo would lead to the encroachment of secular values upon the religious—and vice-versa. Among Israel’s many political parties, only Meretz—a left-wing, social democratic faction—proposes to upend the status quo entirely by separating religion from state and legalising civil marriage.
     

    What the other political parties that represent secular interests discuss instead are civil unions under civil law that could, in theory, exist as a separate track alongside religious marriage. In the current government, Yesh Atid—a centrist party led by Finance Minister Yair Lapid—plans to introduce a bill that would legalize civil unions, including same-sex unions. Tzipi Livni, Israel’s justice minister, is promoting another bill that would allow for “domestic unions” between same-sex couples, thereby granting legal standing to an agreement between two residents of Israel to live together.
     

    But these proposals will almost certainly fail. Under the terms of the current coalition agreement, Jewish Home—a right-wing, religious Zionist party—not only controls the Ministry of Religious Services but insisted on a clause that mandates that all governing parties must be in agreement when it comes to changing the balance between religion and state. And Jewish Home’s position on the matter is clear: “There’s not a chance we’ll allow civil unions for gay couples,” a senior party official told Ha’aretz.
     
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2013/11/21/israel_won_t_legalize_gay_marriage_here_s_why.html
    , @Anonymous
    Jews don’t want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.

    It's not accurate to say that Jews want to weaken and prostrate non-Jewish countries without qualification. This site has several Jewish commenters with conservative inclinations who lament how the U.S. has been transformed within their lifetimes, so clearly not all Jews want to do that. And the commenter to whom you responded is onto something with respect to Reform Judaism, although I would add that non-affiliated secular Jews tend to have similar feelings about gay marriage. Both groups have elevated pursuit of social justice above belief in God and observance of Jewish law. The push for gay marriage is certainly not coming from the Orthodox.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. To understand feminism all you have to do is look at a video of Dworkin when she was in the Mamas and Papas. How’s one to compete with all those Michelle Phillips? Ah feminism.

    http://youtu.be/3kcmwXUdDCE

    (She wasn’t in the Mamas and Papas?)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. @Anonymous
    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?

    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?

    Boredom

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Ah, the Jewish ladies all bitch and moan and push the men around, and then wonder why there’s so much intermarriage…

    Sorry, my Aryan friends, I’m not marrying one of those harpies. ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    According to the Pew study on Jewish life, more Jewish women are intermarried than Jewish men. You can look it up yourself.

    Facts are funny things.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. [T]he need to affirm the sexual revolution, beginning to end, means that porn ultimately can’t be condemned. Plus, when you get down to it, reservations about porn are too prudish, too Christian, and hence — for college-educated young women — déclassé.

    –Well said.

    –@dna turtles: I wouldn’t care often to take syon’s side against you, but these dystopian Wu Tang porno-romp scenarios are the one thing that makes we worry sometimes that you’re a guy.

    I don’t attribute to Whiskey the fetishism many allege against him but perhaps you should, so to speak, “lay off the whiskey.”

    On a desert island, we’d probably go pretty Col. Kurtz pretty quickly on those Ferguson type-types. And in a sense, world history is a desert island too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "these dystopian Wu Tang porno-romp scenarios"

    http://youtu.be/VP1hPPFBht0?t=1m28s
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Prof. Woland
    When I think of Andrea Dwarkin, I think of the lesbian pirates in R. Crumb's Capt. Pissgums.

    Captain Pissgums is a creation of S. Clay Wilson, whose comics career was jump-started in 1967 with Ruby the Dyke and Her Six Perverted Sisters Stomp the Fags. This subject area was his obsession/specialty, a reminder of how much more constricted artistic expression is today.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    Thank you for setting me straight, I did not remember that. Perhaps Dworkin is a bit more like a female Checkered Demon.

    http://www.tcj.com/the-s-clay-wilson-interview/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. @Svigor

    Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations
     
    This. It's amusing to watch Jews & clueless heathens ("gentiles") fumble about for ways to avoid saying this. They blame the Nazis, or the Muslims, or the Goyim, or the bla bla bla. All so they don't have to admit that they had to grow up for once and act like adults; when a country's well-being was at stake and they realized "oh, hey, this is our country, we can't just do our best to wreck it like we do everyone else's."

    maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?
     
    Or the Nazis, or the Muslims, or the Terrorists, or the Palestinians, or the Goyim....

    She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted.
     
    And a rape-fantasy was born...

    Mickey was a fine amateur boxer a long, long time ago and has never been quite right in the head since. But, every so often, he can nail a role: e.g., the bombmaker in “Body Heat” or “The Wrestler.”
     
    I don't pay much attention to celebrity bios, so I could easily be wrong here, but the impression I get is that he was never right in the head, which is what led him to leave an established career as a movie actor to go and try a career in boxing. And then being punched in the head a lot ruined his looks (leading to a cosmetic surgery death spiral) and made his mental problems worse. He seemed to have a bad case of adventure-seeking. He probably should have tried the military-then-PMC route instead.

    For modern women under 30, “man who is sensitive to the horrors of rape” translates into “man I would never want to have sex with.” If it makes you losers angry, it’s because you know it’s true.
     
    Wait, what?

    The reason there is still no “gay marriage” in Israel is
     
    Jews don't want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.

    Dworkin may have qualified as scapecow or scapehippo but as scapegoat, never.
     
    The Jewish propensity for throwing around accusations of scapegoating is amusing. First, aren't they they ones who delivered the concept to us (I think they got it from the Phoenicians, or something)? Second, they love scapegoating white heathens ("gentiles") for anything and everything.

    The reason there is still no “gay marriage” in Israel is

    Jews don’t want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.

    As the Tel Aviv election illustrates, gay Israelis have made significant legal and cultural strides throughout the last few decades. The ban on homosexual sodomy was repealed in 1988; an ENDA-style LGBTQ employment-discrimination ban passed in 1992; and gays have been able to serve openly in the military since 1993. Tel Aviv has become something of a haven for gay Israelis, even playing host to one of the world’s largest Pride festivals, blessed by Mayor Huldai and other national political figures.

    The gains are great—but so are the challenges. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel concludes that the LGBTQ community “still faces various forms of discrimination by government authorities and in the private sector.” In terms of societal attitudes, a recent Israel Democracy Institute survey revealed that it would bother 30.5 percent of Israeli Jews and 46.2 percent of Israeli Arabs to have a homosexual couple as neighbours, including 68.4 percent of ultra-Orthodox and 48.4 percent of religious Zionist Jews.

    Enter the marriage conundrum. In Israel, all valid marriages conducted abroad are recognized by the state, and foreign same-sex marriages are recorded for statistical purposes. That means a gay couple that weds in, say, the Netherlands remains wed in Israel. But that doesn’t mean a gay couple in Tel Aviv can walk down to city hall and procure a marriage license. Marriage is an exclusively religious institution in Israel, with separate religious authorities for Jews and Muslims, Christians and Druze. For Israeli Jews, marriage policy is dictated by the Chief Rabbinate, which is under the exclusive control of the Orthodox—and firmly opposed to gay marriage. Since the country has no civil marriage, gay couples seeking to marry within the borders of Israel are out of luck (as are any Jewish Israelis seeking a non-Orthodox marriage ceremony).

    This arrangement—whereby marriage is in the control of the Orthodox rabbinate—is part of what Israelis call the status quo: an understanding between secular and religious Jews regarding the balance between religion and state. The status quo affects not only marriage, but also the education system, family law, supervision of kosher restaurants, and the opening of shops and public transportation on shabbat.

    Altering the status quo, particularly concerning something as delicate as marriage, is the third rail of Israeli politics. This is not only because of the power and importance of ultra-Orthodox parties in the Israeli political system, but also due to a fear that changing the status quo would lead to the encroachment of secular values upon the religious—and vice-versa. Among Israel’s many political parties, only Meretz—a left-wing, social democratic faction—proposes to upend the status quo entirely by separating religion from state and legalising civil marriage.

    What the other political parties that represent secular interests discuss instead are civil unions under civil law that could, in theory, exist as a separate track alongside religious marriage. In the current government, Yesh Atid—a centrist party led by Finance Minister Yair Lapid—plans to introduce a bill that would legalize civil unions, including same-sex unions. Tzipi Livni, Israel’s justice minister, is promoting another bill that would allow for “domestic unions” between same-sex couples, thereby granting legal standing to an agreement between two residents of Israel to live together.

    But these proposals will almost certainly fail. Under the terms of the current coalition agreement, Jewish Home—a right-wing, religious Zionist party—not only controls the Ministry of Religious Services but insisted on a clause that mandates that all governing parties must be in agreement when it comes to changing the balance between religion and state. And Jewish Home’s position on the matter is clear: “There’s not a chance we’ll allow civil unions for gay couples,” a senior party official told Ha’aretz.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2013/11/21/israel_won_t_legalize_gay_marriage_here_s_why.html

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

    Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations
     
    This. It's amusing to watch Jews & clueless heathens ("gentiles") fumble about for ways to avoid saying this. They blame the Nazis, or the Muslims, or the Goyim, or the bla bla bla. All so they don't have to admit that they had to grow up for once and act like adults; when a country's well-being was at stake and they realized "oh, hey, this is our country, we can't just do our best to wreck it like we do everyone else's."

    maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?
     
    Or the Nazis, or the Muslims, or the Terrorists, or the Palestinians, or the Goyim....

    She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted.
     
    And a rape-fantasy was born...

    Mickey was a fine amateur boxer a long, long time ago and has never been quite right in the head since. But, every so often, he can nail a role: e.g., the bombmaker in “Body Heat” or “The Wrestler.”
     
    I don't pay much attention to celebrity bios, so I could easily be wrong here, but the impression I get is that he was never right in the head, which is what led him to leave an established career as a movie actor to go and try a career in boxing. And then being punched in the head a lot ruined his looks (leading to a cosmetic surgery death spiral) and made his mental problems worse. He seemed to have a bad case of adventure-seeking. He probably should have tried the military-then-PMC route instead.

    For modern women under 30, “man who is sensitive to the horrors of rape” translates into “man I would never want to have sex with.” If it makes you losers angry, it’s because you know it’s true.
     
    Wait, what?

    The reason there is still no “gay marriage” in Israel is
     
    Jews don't want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.

    Dworkin may have qualified as scapecow or scapehippo but as scapegoat, never.
     
    The Jewish propensity for throwing around accusations of scapegoating is amusing. First, aren't they they ones who delivered the concept to us (I think they got it from the Phoenicians, or something)? Second, they love scapegoating white heathens ("gentiles") for anything and everything.

    Jews don’t want to weaken and prostrate their own country. Just yours.

    It’s not accurate to say that Jews want to weaken and prostrate non-Jewish countries without qualification. This site has several Jewish commenters with conservative inclinations who lament how the U.S. has been transformed within their lifetimes, so clearly not all Jews want to do that. And the commenter to whom you responded is onto something with respect to Reform Judaism, although I would add that non-affiliated secular Jews tend to have similar feelings about gay marriage. Both groups have elevated pursuit of social justice above belief in God and observance of Jewish law. The push for gay marriage is certainly not coming from the Orthodox.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Marcus
    Good ol' Andrea the Hutt, at least she was entertaining compared to the current yenta matriarchs of feminism like Sandberg or Rosin. Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations would produce more sexual dimorphism. It's also interesting to note that Israel still doesn't have same-sex "marriage" despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    It’s also interesting to note that Israel still doesn’t have same-sex “marriage” despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    The reason American Jews are into gay rights is the same reason they are into abortion, porn, secularism, war on Christmas, etc: because it angers bible-thumping goyim. Israel is Jewish turf, with no bible-thumping goyim to tick off, so there’s no need to wage Kulturkampf.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. I, for one, am looking forward to dna turtles’ new reality TV show.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. @Marcus
    Good ol' Andrea the Hutt, at least she was entertaining compared to the current yenta matriarchs of feminism like Sandberg or Rosin. Anyway, I guess it was predictable that having to live as a normal society instead of being rootless cosmopolitans among the nations would produce more sexual dimorphism. It's also interesting to note that Israel still doesn't have same-sex "marriage" despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    …Israel still doesn’t have same-sex “marriage” despite the homophilia of American Jewry: maybe this can be attributed to greater Orthodox and Sephardic influence?

    Or to greater sanity. Or to a reality that greatly concentrates the mind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @SFG
    Ah, the Jewish ladies all bitch and moan and push the men around, and then wonder why there's so much intermarriage...

    Sorry, my Aryan friends, I'm not marrying one of those harpies. ;)

    According to the Pew study on Jewish life, more Jewish women are intermarried than Jewish men. You can look it up yourself.

    Facts are funny things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sanjoaquinsam

    According to the Pew study on Jewish life, more Jewish women are intermarried than Jewish men.
     
    Could it be their mothers are more tolerant of it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Steve Sailer
    For American Jews born between WWI and WWII, there was a big gender gap in access to higher education.

    See p. 41 of this book:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=LNKKI23R1vEC&source=gbs_navlinks_s

    Here's a joke told my a Jewish lady stand-up (Rita Rudner?) a couple of decades ago:

    "To a Jewish mother, the two favorite things in the world to say are: "My son, the doctor" and "My daughter drove me.""

    In other words, a lot of Jewish women in the 1960s had good reason for their feelings of sibling rivalry: their parents really did invest more in their brothers' educations than in their own.

    In other words, a lot of Jewish women in the 1960s had good reason for their feelings of sibling rivalry: their parents really did invest more in their brothers’ educations than in their own.

    Or one parent did. From Step Into the Spotlight, a marketing text by lawyer/comedienne/marketing guru Tsufit:

    My Dad’s a Math Professor. My Mom? Professor of Everything. So for me, they had big expectations. My Dad wanted me to become a doctor and find a cure for cancer. My Mom wanted me to marry a doctor and find a good dining room set.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.

    If this were true, then why are so many feminists Jews? I always figured Jewish men were ogres towards their women. What else would explain their fiery desire for women’s liberation?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Traditional Judaism is a male-dominated religion. Women can't be rabbis, must sit in a separate gallery from men at services, aren't counted towards the necessary quorum for holding those services, and usually receive much less intense religious education than men. The patriarchal nature of the religion is less important for the younger generation of feminists who were less likely to grow up in an Orthodox home, but it probably did play a role in motivating the first generation of Jewish feminists. More recently, less attractive Jewish women are upset at the lack of attention from Jewish men. But as SFG wrote earlier, most of us aren't willing to wed harpies. I'd rather spend my whole life celibate and alone than attached to an Andrea Dworkin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @NOTA
    An all female country could function well enough, but it would need either some new technology or lots of immigration (people or sperm) to survive long.

    David Brin's book Glory Season talks anout a sort of feminist utopia based on big families of female clones, in which men mostly live separate lives from women. Though Bujold's Ethan of Athos captures more of the sense of what Dworkin probably had in mind, albeit from the other side. (A utopian colony of men, with one man required to go out and interact in the bigger galaxy with women in it to save his planet.)

    An all female country could function well enough, but it would need either some new technology or lots of immigration (people or sperm) to survive long.

    Or they could evolve to be parthenogenetic, like whiptail lizards and mourning geckos.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @WhatEvvs
    According to the Pew study on Jewish life, more Jewish women are intermarried than Jewish men. You can look it up yourself.

    Facts are funny things.

    According to the Pew study on Jewish life, more Jewish women are intermarried than Jewish men.

    Could it be their mothers are more tolerant of it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The child of a Jewish woman who intermarries will be accepted as Jewish by even the most stringently Orthodox. Conversely, the child of a Jewish man who intermarries will never be accepted as Jewish by Orthodox or Conservative Jews unless the child formally converts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @sanjoaquinsam

    According to the Pew study on Jewish life, more Jewish women are intermarried than Jewish men.
     
    Could it be their mothers are more tolerant of it?

    The child of a Jewish woman who intermarries will be accepted as Jewish by even the most stringently Orthodox. Conversely, the child of a Jewish man who intermarries will never be accepted as Jewish by Orthodox or Conservative Jews unless the child formally converts.

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

    I’m not sure Dworkin realized that the sort of Jewish male to survive the Holocaust is exactly the type who would have been militaristic by nature. He’d struggle to survive. The men who died were the nice, passive bookish types.

    As for Dworkin herself, any woman who voluntarily works as a prostitute (without a pimp to force her into it), and who rants about feminism the way she did, is a nutcase. Most women can’t stand being physically intimate with a man they don’t know and who they don’t have any interest in. It’s too much of a foreign intrusion into one’s psyche and personal space. The only sort of woman who likes it is on the sociopathic spectrum, and who feels no fear at such an act.

    Dworkin had no qualms about having her body being used, had no qualms about making herself a histronic public figure, and no moral qualms to prevent her from lying about being raped. My suspicion is that she was on the sociopathic spectrum, and basically said anything that would make herself the center of attention so she could get narcissistic support.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "I’m not sure Dworkin realized that the sort of Jewish male to survive the Holocaust is exactly the type who would have been militaristic by nature. He’d struggle to survive. The men who died were the nice, passive bookish types."

    No, it was luck. If you resisted and fought like a man, Nazis crushed you immediately.
    Jews could act tough in Israel because they constituted the majority and had the guns.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @iSteveFan

    Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.
     

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.
     
    If this were true, then why are so many feminists Jews? I always figured Jewish men were ogres towards their women. What else would explain their fiery desire for women's liberation?

    Traditional Judaism is a male-dominated religion. Women can’t be rabbis, must sit in a separate gallery from men at services, aren’t counted towards the necessary quorum for holding those services, and usually receive much less intense religious education than men. The patriarchal nature of the religion is less important for the younger generation of feminists who were less likely to grow up in an Orthodox home, but it probably did play a role in motivating the first generation of Jewish feminists. More recently, less attractive Jewish women are upset at the lack of attention from Jewish men. But as SFG wrote earlier, most of us aren’t willing to wed harpies. I’d rather spend my whole life celibate and alone than attached to an Andrea Dworkin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Traditional Judaism is a male-dominated religion. Women can’t be rabbis, must sit in a separate gallery from men at services, aren’t counted towards the necessary quorum for holding those services, and usually receive much less intense religious education than men."

    In terms of religion, yes.
    But Judaism was also very controlling of male behavior. More than pagan men, Jewish men were expected to be sexually mindful. There were many laws on proper sex and they applied to men as well as to women.

    Also, Jewishness wasn't just about culture but genetics. And Jewish women had nosy, pushy, and strong personalities. Jewish mothers drove their sons nuts. Jewish wives ragged on their hubbies.

    Suppose there's a 'progressive' community made up of mild Japanese and a 'traditional' community made up of pushy Jews.
    The women in the former community will have more legal power, but the women of the latter community will have more will power. Because Jewish history favored strong personality genes, even Jewish women in traditional setting were, in some ways, more empowered than nicer-personalitied women in modern societies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @syonredux
    Andrea Dworkin was .....troubled. Even her greatest admirers found her rape story hard to swallow:

    In an article published in the New Statesman magazine and the Guardian newspaper in June, American radical feminist Andrea Dworkin told a harrowing story. She was, she told her readers, drinking her second kir royale one afternoon in the garden of a European hotel when she became ill (“sickish or weakish or something”). She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted. He appeared suddenly, already in.” Then she lost consciousness. When she awoke, it was night, the curtains hadn’t been drawn and she was in pain. “I hurt deep inside my vagina … I went to the toilet and found blood on my right hand, fresh, bright red, not menstrual blood, not clotted blood. I’m past bleeding. I tried to find the source of the blood. My hand got covered in it again.”

    In trying to puzzle out how she could have sustained a bloody injury while she was unconscious, Dworkin gradually became convinced she’d been drugged and raped. She speculated in detail about how her attackers might have done the deed: “I couldn’t remember, but I thought they had pulled me down toward the bottom of the bed so that my vagina was near the bed’s edge and my legs were easy to manipulate.” To a woman who had already experienced the full measure of sexual victimization in her life (her Web site autobiography recounts molestation as a child, beatings and torture as a wife, an assault in jail, rape and prostitution), the idea that she had been used sexually while unable to resist was particularly horrifying. “In my own life, I don’t have intercourse. That is my choice, ” Dworkin wrote. “I had decided long ago that no one would ever rape me again; he or they or I would die. But this rape was necrophiliac: they wanted to fuck a dead woman … I thought that being forced and being conscious was better, because then you knew; even if no one ever believed you, you knew.”

    Given Dworkin’s particularly visible and strident brand of feminism — highlighted by the argument in her provocative 1987 book “Intercourse” that even consensual sexual penetration is a paradigm of oppression — it’s conceivable that there are men in the world who would consider violating her a good evening’s entertainment. Dworkin seems to think her story should be taken as further evidence of masculine malevolence. There are those who would be willing to accept it as such, of course, if only they felt sure it really happened. Within a week, on the very day that Dworkin’s new book, “Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel and Women’s Liberation,” was published in the U.K., Guardian columnist Catherine Bennett voiced her doubts about the veracity of Dworkin’s story.

    In her response to Dworkin’s essay, Bennett first spends several paragraphs paying tribute to Dworkin’s previous reputation for factual precision, noting in particular her Web site’s carefully substantiated statements regarding several Dworkin rumors. But Bennett goes on to question why Dworkin did not seek medical attention for the pain and injuries she described: the unusual bleeding, the “big strange bruise” on one breast, the “huge deep gashes” on her leg. “The reluctance of a rape victim to be further violated by examination and questioning is understood,” Bennett writes, “but if this is what prevented Dworkin from seeking help it does not seem consistent with her current decision to relive the ordeal, in vivid detail, for readers of the New Statesman.” Bennett also wonders why Dworkin, an anti-rape activist who has devoted much time and energy to battling the crime, decided not to inform the police or hotel security when she realized what had happened to her: “Is this bartender, with his accomplice, to be allowed to continue drugging and raping female guests?” Bennett asks.

    Once the first doubts had been publicly expressed, an accusatory pile-on ensued in the U.K. press and on the Web. The rape story was dissected — and dissed — by a parade of disdainful commentators. There were nit-picking questions of logistics and logic: Why didn’t the rapists close the curtains; did they want to be seen committing the crime? Why would they have drawn her to the edge of the bed as she surmised; wouldn’t it be inconvenient for a standing man to try to insert his penis into a woman lying at the level of his knees? How was it that both the bartender and his assistant could be absent from their duties in the hotel without incurring questions — and what if they had alibis? And so on.

     

    http://www.salon.com/2000/09/20/dworkin/

    drinking her second kir royale one afternoon in the garden of a European hotel when she became ill (“sickish or weakish or something”). She staggered up to her room and collapsed on the bed. The bartender’s assistant brought up her dinner. “I don’t know how he got inside,” Dworkin wrote, “since the door was dead-bolted… Dworkin gradually became convinced she’d been drugged and raped.

    Why is Bill Cosby working in a European hotel? Can’t he get gigs in Vegas anymore?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Back in the early 1990s when at university, I saw Dworkin at a public debate.

    I will always pity her.

    She was not simply illogical and incoherent, she was so physically ugly with an even uglier personality, that clearly no man — no matter how drunk — would ever even consider giving her a “mercy” f*ck. (I doubt any dyke — no matter how bull — would be willing to do so either).

    I honestly believe that woman never had a moment’s happiness in her entire life. She just reeked of permanent misery. It was actually awful.

    A very sad story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "I honestly believe that woman never had a moment’s happiness in her entire life. She just reeked of permanent misery. It was actually awful."

    If she were ugly and dumb, she would have been like a stupid black ho or 'white trash' mama. But she was ugly and smart, and the smart side of her wanted recognition. This is a common theme among many Jews. Though Belfort and Dworkin acted very differently, they were driven by the same complex.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. I’d rather spend my whole life celibate and alone than attached to an Andrea Dworkin.

    Who wouldn’t agree? You might as well say, “I’d rather spend my whole life celibate and alone than eat the contents of a vacuum cleaner bag every day.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. @CJ
    Captain Pissgums is a creation of S. Clay Wilson, whose comics career was jump-started in 1967 with Ruby the Dyke and Her Six Perverted Sisters Stomp the Fags. This subject area was his obsession/specialty, a reminder of how much more constricted artistic expression is today.

    Thank you for setting me straight, I did not remember that. Perhaps Dworkin is a bit more like a female Checkered Demon.

    http://www.tcj.com/the-s-clay-wilson-interview/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. “Gerald Ford’s joke that there will never be a final victor in the battle of the sexes because there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy.”

    The only quotations of that quip I’ve seen are from you, Steve, and you’ve always attributed it to Kissinger. You can’t just switch it on me like that…

    Oh never mind. I just read the article. Learn something new everyday,.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. @Lucius Somesuch

    [T]he need to affirm the sexual revolution, beginning to end, means that porn ultimately can’t be condemned. Plus, when you get down to it, reservations about porn are too prudish, too Christian, and hence — for college-educated young women — déclassé.
     
    --Well said.

    [email protected] turtles: I wouldn't care often to take syon's side against you, but these dystopian Wu Tang porno-romp scenarios are the one thing that makes we worry sometimes that you're a guy.

    I don't attribute to Whiskey the fetishism many allege against him but perhaps you should, so to speak, "lay off the whiskey."

    On a desert island, we'd probably go pretty Col. Kurtz pretty quickly on those Ferguson type-types. And in a sense, world history is a desert island too.

    “these dystopian Wu Tang porno-romp scenarios”

    http://youtu.be/VP1hPPFBht0?t=1m28s

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. No country for old men.

    “A country of lesbians wouldn’t work. But Camille Paglia would make an interesting Secretary of State – or perhaps, Defense.”

    No, not State or Defense. She can be very insightful on cultural, gender, artistic, and similar issues, but she is hopelessly naive and out of her depth in matters of State and Defense. She would make an interesting “culture czar” if there was such a thing. USA doesn’t have an equivalent of Minister of Culture does it? Maybe put her in charge of the National Endowment for the Arts.

    ” The push for gay marriage is certainly not coming from the Orthodox.”

    Apart from a few exceptions, it isn’t being opposed by Orthodox Jews, either.

    Here’s someone who has an opinion about why that might be:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yLbF0BtZs4

    “Gay marriage is for the goyim”. If Jews don’t identify with the larger culture, they won’t defend it. They don’t look on moral issues like gay marriage as a matter of right and wrong in abstract moral terms like Western gentiles do. It’s what’s good for the Jews. Who/Whom all the way down. Obviously liberal secularized Jews aren’t as up front about this as the Orthodox are, and may be “true believers” in social liberalism, but watch what they do not what they say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. ,
    the husbands didn’t agree to a divorce and it is all up to him (or still was in the late 90s).

    Apparently, this has not changed much.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. ,
    I’m pretty sure the overwhelming majority of men see rape as a horrible crime.

    almost.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. Dworkin had a very high IQ, yes.

    I’m not so sure about the “Aspergery” claim. I think she had the traits of a typical high-IQ person more than the traits of an average-IQ Aspie.

    Steve, I know you’ve actually read her; so have I. Most of the commenters, though, are really misaimed.

    Dworkin’s name came to represent “radical feminism,” and everyday people then fell into the fallacy of eqivocation on the meaning of “radical.” Those calling themselves “radical feminists” meant by it that “sex discrimination is at the root of all discrimination” (etymology: radical=root). But everyday people assumed “radical” just meant “extreme.” (Like I said: fallacy of equivocation.)

    So Dworkin’s name is now associated in everyday people’s minds with “extreme feminism,” and in that sense she totally is scapegoated: her name catches a lot of hate that would be better aimed at the more harmful and more truly extreme “feminisms” around today.

    [email protected] is an especially good example. Doesn’t know the whole story but does know how things are today, glommed onto a few isolated facts and drastically misinterpreted them *due* to how it is today…(It really should be obvious that Dworkin uh *did hate* being a prostitute and that’s *why* she developed PTSD-type issues…but Anon is looking at our culture as it is today, long after the ’90s-era “sex-positive” rebellion against Dworkin has wholly and completely won and taken over the culture…today’s young people now blame Dworkin for positions that are, basically, the anti-Dworkin. ;) )

    Those who actually read Dworkin’s books discover that she was a pretty typical very-high-IQ individual (BTW, her analysis of Tolstoy in /Intercourse/ is particularly interesting). Complete with the typical high-IQ commitment to honesty (it’s different from Aspie *inability to understand deception*; high-IQ folks understand but have a strong need to tell the truth anyway), and the typical high-IQ emotional intensity.

    Add to that the traumatic (in the psych-speak sense) experiences she had when young, and I’m not surprised she scared Paleo Retiree. High-IQ people in the grip of their typically-intense emotions *tend* to scare people. *Especially* with the kind of increase in intensity *everyone* gets with PTSD-type reactions.

    I’m going to return to the “deception” issue, because I didn’t explain in much detail, and I should have. Miraca Gross studied as many 160+ ratio IQ (very approx. 145+ deviation IQ) Australians as she could find; she began the study in the 1980s and it’s still going on, so the children she began with are now adults. (And yes: *for some reason* Asians and males are over-represented. ;))

    She found that at the ratio IQ 180+ level (very approx. deviation IQ 160+; BTW, one of these subjects was Terry Tao) there appeared a strong commitment to truth even when it hurt the individual. As an example, she quoted one subject’s parents on how “disturbing” was his tendency to go ahead and tell a white lie–but then feel bad about it, admit he lied and tell his true opinion. The (IQs in the 130s) parents thought that the “impulse” to tell a white lie was what was normal, and the impulse to apologize was disturbing. The child OTOH felt the impulse to tell the truth was normal (because it is, for very-high-IQ people), and felt he told white lies not out of any “impulse” to do so but in response to social pressure to do so.

    Obviously, we’re talking people who, far from being “Aspergerish,” are actually highly sensitive to social pressure. They just…also tend to be strongly committed to the truth, and want to tell it regardless.

    But yeah, Steve, in either case it leads to “taking ideas seriously.”

    So. I notice some commenters claiming that any high-IQ female “should not be taken seriously” merely because she is more unusual than a male of equivalent IQ (who, of course, is also unusual). Uh, is that really what we’re about, here? Surely we’re more about acknowledging *all* of reality? If no unusual people need apply, we’re gonna have to kick out Steve just for a start!

    That said, I’m not an NRx, so don’t listen to me. ;)

    OK back to the point…

    “Being fairly logical, Dworkin in effect took seriously Gerald Ford’s joke that there will never be a final victor in the battle of the sexes because there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. Dworkin thus came up with a logical way to reduce fraternizing with the enemy”

    Yes indeed. She was a “political lesbian”–remember those? (Sometimes it seems like everyone on the internet is 12. I’m obviously getting old. :)) And Stoltenberg was a political gay man. (Maybe I should say he was *the* political gay man. Since I’ve never heard of another. ;))

    If you *read Stoltenberg this becomes clear*. All this “oh Dworkin must have been unusually masculine because she was a lesbian”…ahaha no. She was a *political* lesbian. Stoltenberg gives *”antisexist” (het) sex tips* (it would be socially ept here to say “don’t ask,” but in fact, there’s nothing wrong with them: I can see where they’d be valuable for those with certain types of PTSD). And all of this unspoken stuff is going straight over y’all’s heads…

    Yeah. Far from being Aspie, Dworkin was quite capable of the unspoken when necessary. She was your typical high-IQ person: logical and tending to commit to causes–*especially* the cause of taking ideas seriously to the bitter end.

    :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    The wisdom of George Costanza:

    just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ
    , @Priss Factor
    "It really should be obvious that Dworkin uh *did hate* being a prostitute."

    If she hated it it, she should have stuck with it for a few more yrs. She would have sunk the entire industry.

    My guess is she esp hated being a prostitute because only the most hideous and ugly men paid money to have sex with her. I mean who but the lowest of the low would pay money to have sex with Jabba's daughter?
    Most men wouldn't do her if they were paid to do so. Gah!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. If Andrea Dworkin could blatantly, shamelessly and barefacedly lie about an incident such as that fantastical rape story, then absolutely nothing she has ever uttered should be believed, let alone be taken seriously.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  104. no hands-on Zionist ==in Zion== ever said he was trying to build an ideal society.

    The people who say that shit, are the people who want to live comfortably on the Upper West Side…. but who want to burnish their own reputation with reflected glory-light from the heroic deeds of the Palmach.

    Bialik himself wrote in his dairy:

    “When the first Jewish prostitute is arrested by the first Jewish policeman and sentenced by the first Jewish judge, we can consider ourselves a sovereign state.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/upshot/even-among-harvard-graduates-women-fall-short-of-their-work-expectations.html

    The data show that their diverging paths are explained in part by discordant expectations in marriages. (The researchers didn’t have data on sexual orientation and assumed opposite-sex partnerships.)

    About 60 percent of male graduates who were 32 to 67 years old expected that their careers would take priority over their wives’, and nearly three-quarters of the men said that turned out to be true. About 80 percent expected their spouses to do most of the child care, and that happened for 86 percent of them.

    Among women in that age group, however, only 17 to 25 percent expected their husbands’ careers to take precedence, but they did so 40 percent of the time. Half of the women expected to handle a majority of child care, but nearly three-quarters said they ended up doing so.

    That reality of biology is pesky, isn’t it?

    If I had a dollar every time an accomplished female lawyer or a doctor told me she cut back/de-prioritized work after having a baby or two… And it’s not “patriarchy” or some male conspiracy. Many women feel bad if they leave babies behind (or worse in daycare) while they go back to high-intensity work. It’s nature at work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  106. The assumption here that, unlike in Israel, Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas.

    American Jews flourished in many more industries than that — see medicine, science, and academia. And Jewish dominance of Hollywood begins in the 20s-30s, an era where movies were very respectful of women. You want a Jewish-dominated movie from that era, check out The Wizard of Oz. As usual, the mechanism of Jewish scapegoating is that whatever changes in national life the writer doesn’t like (the growth of pornography, gambling, or the cultural degradation of the movies) are attributed to the Jews, rather than recognizing that Jews reflected and participated in the culture around them as it changed. Jewish scapegoating is driven by an inability of Euro-American conservatives to understand the changes and pressures brought by modernity and a desire to place the blame for all of those changes on a traditional out-group. At the extreme, this portrays non-Jewish Euro-Americans as easily hypnotized sheep helplessly following a tiny machiavellian minority as it imposes its will on everyone else. This way of seeing the world has fallen into disrepute for good reason — not just the savagery and horrors of the Nazis, but because it just doesn’t make any sense.

    For example, D.W. Griffith’s WASP Victorianism made him more open to working with women on a basis of respect, and more sensitive to the horrors of rape (most famously expressed in Griffith’s Birth of a Nation), than the moguls who came after him.

    Pro-confederate ‘lost cause’ conservatives have traditionally been very sensitive to the horrors of rape of whites by blacks, it was a major part of the justification for Jim Crow ad legalized apartheid in the US

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "And Jewish dominance of Hollywood begins in the 20s-30s, an era where movies were very respectful of women."

    Then why did Jews see Hayes Code as an attack on Jews?

    In 2012, Bill Maher the Jew said white cons reacted to Obama's victory as if their wives were humped by a Negro. It say so much about Jewish attitudes.

    -----------

    "check out The Wizard of Oz"

    And yet, that movie isn't so innocent as it seems and became the object of many unhealthy fetishes.

    http://youtu.be/XIRN43cVMHI?t=38s

    It also inspired ZARDOZ.

    "GUN IS GOOD. PENIS IS EVIL!"

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Anonymous
    It would be a nation of immigrants, or at least largely so, I would imagine -- though artificial insemination is also a possibility, selecting female embryos. As for where it would be, there is only one uninhabited place left on earth: Antarctica.

    there is only one uninhabited place left on earth

    Inhabited didn’t stop US, Canada, Australia, misc south african, misc caribbean, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and more recently Israel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Keith Vaz [AKA "Sir Charles Pipkins"] says:
    @Anonymous
    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?

    Because such people control our society; popularity has nothing to do with the Agenda imposed by the Hostile Elite.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Lizardbreath
    Dworkin had a very high IQ, yes.

    I'm not so sure about the "Aspergery" claim. I think she had the traits of a typical high-IQ person more than the traits of an average-IQ Aspie.

    Steve, I know you've actually read her; so have I. Most of the commenters, though, are really misaimed.

    Dworkin's name came to represent "radical feminism," and everyday people then fell into the fallacy of eqivocation on the meaning of "radical." Those calling themselves "radical feminists" meant by it that "sex discrimination is at the root of all discrimination" (etymology: radical=root). But everyday people assumed "radical" just meant "extreme." (Like I said: fallacy of equivocation.)

    So Dworkin's name is now associated in everyday people's minds with "extreme feminism," and in that sense she totally is scapegoated: her name catches a lot of hate that would be better aimed at the more harmful and more truly extreme "feminisms" around today.

    [email protected] is an especially good example. Doesn't know the whole story but does know how things are today, glommed onto a few isolated facts and drastically misinterpreted them *due* to how it is today...(It really should be obvious that Dworkin uh *did hate* being a prostitute and that's *why* she developed PTSD-type issues...but Anon is looking at our culture as it is today, long after the '90s-era "sex-positive" rebellion against Dworkin has wholly and completely won and taken over the culture...today's young people now blame Dworkin for positions that are, basically, the anti-Dworkin. ;) )

    Those who actually read Dworkin's books discover that she was a pretty typical very-high-IQ individual (BTW, her analysis of Tolstoy in /Intercourse/ is particularly interesting). Complete with the typical high-IQ commitment to honesty (it's different from Aspie *inability to understand deception*; high-IQ folks understand but have a strong need to tell the truth anyway), and the typical high-IQ emotional intensity.

    Add to that the traumatic (in the psych-speak sense) experiences she had when young, and I'm not surprised she scared Paleo Retiree. High-IQ people in the grip of their typically-intense emotions *tend* to scare people. *Especially* with the kind of increase in intensity *everyone* gets with PTSD-type reactions.

    I'm going to return to the "deception" issue, because I didn't explain in much detail, and I should have. Miraca Gross studied as many 160+ ratio IQ (very approx. 145+ deviation IQ) Australians as she could find; she began the study in the 1980s and it's still going on, so the children she began with are now adults. (And yes: *for some reason* Asians and males are over-represented. ;))

    She found that at the ratio IQ 180+ level (very approx. deviation IQ 160+; BTW, one of these subjects was Terry Tao) there appeared a strong commitment to truth even when it hurt the individual. As an example, she quoted one subject's parents on how "disturbing" was his tendency to go ahead and tell a white lie--but then feel bad about it, admit he lied and tell his true opinion. The (IQs in the 130s) parents thought that the "impulse" to tell a white lie was what was normal, and the impulse to apologize was disturbing. The child OTOH felt the impulse to tell the truth was normal (because it is, for very-high-IQ people), and felt he told white lies not out of any "impulse" to do so but in response to social pressure to do so.

    Obviously, we're talking people who, far from being "Aspergerish," are actually highly sensitive to social pressure. They just...also tend to be strongly committed to the truth, and want to tell it regardless.

    But yeah, Steve, in either case it leads to "taking ideas seriously."

    So. I notice some commenters claiming that any high-IQ female "should not be taken seriously" merely because she is more unusual than a male of equivalent IQ (who, of course, is also unusual). Uh, is that really what we're about, here? Surely we're more about acknowledging *all* of reality? If no unusual people need apply, we're gonna have to kick out Steve just for a start!

    That said, I'm not an NRx, so don't listen to me. ;)

    OK back to the point...

    "Being fairly logical, Dworkin in effect took seriously Gerald Ford’s joke that there will never be a final victor in the battle of the sexes because there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. Dworkin thus came up with a logical way to reduce fraternizing with the enemy"

    Yes indeed. She was a "political lesbian"--remember those? (Sometimes it seems like everyone on the internet is 12. I'm obviously getting old. :)) And Stoltenberg was a political gay man. (Maybe I should say he was *the* political gay man. Since I've never heard of another. ;))

    If you *read Stoltenberg this becomes clear*. All this "oh Dworkin must have been unusually masculine because she was a lesbian"...ahaha no. She was a *political* lesbian. Stoltenberg gives *"antisexist" (het) sex tips* (it would be socially ept here to say "don't ask," but in fact, there's nothing wrong with them: I can see where they'd be valuable for those with certain types of PTSD). And all of this unspoken stuff is going straight over y'all's heads...

    Yeah. Far from being Aspie, Dworkin was quite capable of the unspoken when necessary. She was your typical high-IQ person: logical and tending to commit to causes--*especially* the cause of taking ideas seriously to the bitter end.

    :)

    The wisdom of George Costanza:

    just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. If someone tried to rape Andrea, it would have looked like this:

    http://youtu.be/GVp4HIj1JcA?t=29s

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  111. Dworkin was so obese at her death that her body apparently had to be retrieved from it’s first floor resting place by a crane or a cherry picker.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  112. @Harry Baldwin
    In Woody Allen's old stand-up routine that is available on a recording, he describes himself as a great ladies' man and the audience laughs. "You laugh?" he says, and the audience laughs again. Of course, the joke's on them because he IS a great ladies' man (albeit a creepy one).

    Here's part of the transcript of his interviewed with Terry Gross in 2009:

    ALLEN: People do look for clues in my movies all the time...

    GROSS: For who you really are.

    ALLEN: In all of my movies. The people always look for clues in my movies, and they think, based on my movies, that they know me. And of course they don't know me. And there are some things you could've learned about me over the years but not much, really. You know, I was never who anybody thought I was from when I started.

    When I first started as a comic in Greenwich Village, people thought that I was, at that time, some kind of a little beatnik and someone who, you know, was a kind of mousy intellectual. And, you know, none of these things were ever true. You know, I never lived in the Village. I always lived in a very nice neighborhood uptown in Manhattan.

    I was never intellectual. I was never interested in intellectual things. You know, when I explain to people I'm the guy that you see in his T-shirt with a beer watching the baseball game at night at home on television. They find that hard to square with the characters that I played in the movies. But in the movies, I'm just acting.

    But I've never been - you know, I was always a very athletic little boy, always, you know, never a loner or a loser, always the first one picked on any team.

    GROSS: You were the first one picked on any team?

    ALLEN: Always.

    GROSS: See, I wouldn't have believed that.

    ALLEN: I know. I was always a very...

    GROSS: Very counter to your image.

    ALLEN: Very good athlete. I was interested even in playing professional baseball. I was, you know, won track medals, you know. But nobody thinks of me that way. They think of me as, you know, some kind of little bookworm because I have these big, black glasses, black-rimmed glasses, and they think of me as a bookworm and give me more credit for intellect than I have.

    And you know, I couldn't make it through college. I couldn't make it through my freshman year of college, you know. And this was not because I was some, you know, artist or intellectual above it. I couldn't cut it.
     

    “Very good athlete.”

    ROTFL.

    Well, a yellow dork in a yellow school could also be a ‘very good athlete’, relatively speaking.

    “I was never intellectual. I was never interested in intellectual things.”

    Yeah, that’s why he was obsessed with Bergman.

    I don’t trust this guy on anything.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Priss Factor [AKA "terrapin gape"] says:
    @Lizardbreath
    Dworkin had a very high IQ, yes.

    I'm not so sure about the "Aspergery" claim. I think she had the traits of a typical high-IQ person more than the traits of an average-IQ Aspie.

    Steve, I know you've actually read her; so have I. Most of the commenters, though, are really misaimed.

    Dworkin's name came to represent "radical feminism," and everyday people then fell into the fallacy of eqivocation on the meaning of "radical." Those calling themselves "radical feminists" meant by it that "sex discrimination is at the root of all discrimination" (etymology: radical=root). But everyday people assumed "radical" just meant "extreme." (Like I said: fallacy of equivocation.)

    So Dworkin's name is now associated in everyday people's minds with "extreme feminism," and in that sense she totally is scapegoated: her name catches a lot of hate that would be better aimed at the more harmful and more truly extreme "feminisms" around today.

    [email protected] is an especially good example. Doesn't know the whole story but does know how things are today, glommed onto a few isolated facts and drastically misinterpreted them *due* to how it is today...(It really should be obvious that Dworkin uh *did hate* being a prostitute and that's *why* she developed PTSD-type issues...but Anon is looking at our culture as it is today, long after the '90s-era "sex-positive" rebellion against Dworkin has wholly and completely won and taken over the culture...today's young people now blame Dworkin for positions that are, basically, the anti-Dworkin. ;) )

    Those who actually read Dworkin's books discover that she was a pretty typical very-high-IQ individual (BTW, her analysis of Tolstoy in /Intercourse/ is particularly interesting). Complete with the typical high-IQ commitment to honesty (it's different from Aspie *inability to understand deception*; high-IQ folks understand but have a strong need to tell the truth anyway), and the typical high-IQ emotional intensity.

    Add to that the traumatic (in the psych-speak sense) experiences she had when young, and I'm not surprised she scared Paleo Retiree. High-IQ people in the grip of their typically-intense emotions *tend* to scare people. *Especially* with the kind of increase in intensity *everyone* gets with PTSD-type reactions.

    I'm going to return to the "deception" issue, because I didn't explain in much detail, and I should have. Miraca Gross studied as many 160+ ratio IQ (very approx. 145+ deviation IQ) Australians as she could find; she began the study in the 1980s and it's still going on, so the children she began with are now adults. (And yes: *for some reason* Asians and males are over-represented. ;))

    She found that at the ratio IQ 180+ level (very approx. deviation IQ 160+; BTW, one of these subjects was Terry Tao) there appeared a strong commitment to truth even when it hurt the individual. As an example, she quoted one subject's parents on how "disturbing" was his tendency to go ahead and tell a white lie--but then feel bad about it, admit he lied and tell his true opinion. The (IQs in the 130s) parents thought that the "impulse" to tell a white lie was what was normal, and the impulse to apologize was disturbing. The child OTOH felt the impulse to tell the truth was normal (because it is, for very-high-IQ people), and felt he told white lies not out of any "impulse" to do so but in response to social pressure to do so.

    Obviously, we're talking people who, far from being "Aspergerish," are actually highly sensitive to social pressure. They just...also tend to be strongly committed to the truth, and want to tell it regardless.

    But yeah, Steve, in either case it leads to "taking ideas seriously."

    So. I notice some commenters claiming that any high-IQ female "should not be taken seriously" merely because she is more unusual than a male of equivalent IQ (who, of course, is also unusual). Uh, is that really what we're about, here? Surely we're more about acknowledging *all* of reality? If no unusual people need apply, we're gonna have to kick out Steve just for a start!

    That said, I'm not an NRx, so don't listen to me. ;)

    OK back to the point...

    "Being fairly logical, Dworkin in effect took seriously Gerald Ford’s joke that there will never be a final victor in the battle of the sexes because there’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. Dworkin thus came up with a logical way to reduce fraternizing with the enemy"

    Yes indeed. She was a "political lesbian"--remember those? (Sometimes it seems like everyone on the internet is 12. I'm obviously getting old. :)) And Stoltenberg was a political gay man. (Maybe I should say he was *the* political gay man. Since I've never heard of another. ;))

    If you *read Stoltenberg this becomes clear*. All this "oh Dworkin must have been unusually masculine because she was a lesbian"...ahaha no. She was a *political* lesbian. Stoltenberg gives *"antisexist" (het) sex tips* (it would be socially ept here to say "don't ask," but in fact, there's nothing wrong with them: I can see where they'd be valuable for those with certain types of PTSD). And all of this unspoken stuff is going straight over y'all's heads...

    Yeah. Far from being Aspie, Dworkin was quite capable of the unspoken when necessary. She was your typical high-IQ person: logical and tending to commit to causes--*especially* the cause of taking ideas seriously to the bitter end.

    :)

    “It really should be obvious that Dworkin uh *did hate* being a prostitute.”

    If she hated it it, she should have stuck with it for a few more yrs. She would have sunk the entire industry.

    My guess is she esp hated being a prostitute because only the most hideous and ugly men paid money to have sex with her. I mean who but the lowest of the low would pay money to have sex with Jabba’s daughter?
    Most men wouldn’t do her if they were paid to do so. Gah!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Priss Factor [AKA "terrapin gape"] says:
    @Celt Darnell
    Back in the early 1990s when at university, I saw Dworkin at a public debate.

    I will always pity her.

    She was not simply illogical and incoherent, she was so physically ugly with an even uglier personality, that clearly no man -- no matter how drunk -- would ever even consider giving her a "mercy" f*ck. (I doubt any dyke -- no matter how bull -- would be willing to do so either).

    I honestly believe that woman never had a moment's happiness in her entire life. She just reeked of permanent misery. It was actually awful.

    A very sad story.

    “I honestly believe that woman never had a moment’s happiness in her entire life. She just reeked of permanent misery. It was actually awful.”

    If she were ugly and dumb, she would have been like a stupid black ho or ‘white trash’ mama. But she was ugly and smart, and the smart side of her wanted recognition. This is a common theme among many Jews. Though Belfort and Dworkin acted very differently, they were driven by the same complex.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    EThey are the race that were selected more for brains than looks for sure.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Priss Factor [AKA "terrapin gape"] says:
    @Anonymous
    Traditional Judaism is a male-dominated religion. Women can't be rabbis, must sit in a separate gallery from men at services, aren't counted towards the necessary quorum for holding those services, and usually receive much less intense religious education than men. The patriarchal nature of the religion is less important for the younger generation of feminists who were less likely to grow up in an Orthodox home, but it probably did play a role in motivating the first generation of Jewish feminists. More recently, less attractive Jewish women are upset at the lack of attention from Jewish men. But as SFG wrote earlier, most of us aren't willing to wed harpies. I'd rather spend my whole life celibate and alone than attached to an Andrea Dworkin.

    “Traditional Judaism is a male-dominated religion. Women can’t be rabbis, must sit in a separate gallery from men at services, aren’t counted towards the necessary quorum for holding those services, and usually receive much less intense religious education than men.”

    In terms of religion, yes.
    But Judaism was also very controlling of male behavior. More than pagan men, Jewish men were expected to be sexually mindful. There were many laws on proper sex and they applied to men as well as to women.

    Also, Jewishness wasn’t just about culture but genetics. And Jewish women had nosy, pushy, and strong personalities. Jewish mothers drove their sons nuts. Jewish wives ragged on their hubbies.

    Suppose there’s a ‘progressive’ community made up of mild Japanese and a ‘traditional’ community made up of pushy Jews.
    The women in the former community will have more legal power, but the women of the latter community will have more will power. Because Jewish history favored strong personality genes, even Jewish women in traditional setting were, in some ways, more empowered than nicer-personalitied women in modern societies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Priss Factor [AKA "terrapin gape"] says:
    @Anon
    I'm not sure Dworkin realized that the sort of Jewish male to survive the Holocaust is exactly the type who would have been militaristic by nature. He'd struggle to survive. The men who died were the nice, passive bookish types.

    As for Dworkin herself, any woman who voluntarily works as a prostitute (without a pimp to force her into it), and who rants about feminism the way she did, is a nutcase. Most women can't stand being physically intimate with a man they don't know and who they don't have any interest in. It's too much of a foreign intrusion into one's psyche and personal space. The only sort of woman who likes it is on the sociopathic spectrum, and who feels no fear at such an act.

    Dworkin had no qualms about having her body being used, had no qualms about making herself a histronic public figure, and no moral qualms to prevent her from lying about being raped. My suspicion is that she was on the sociopathic spectrum, and basically said anything that would make herself the center of attention so she could get narcissistic support.

    “I’m not sure Dworkin realized that the sort of Jewish male to survive the Holocaust is exactly the type who would have been militaristic by nature. He’d struggle to survive. The men who died were the nice, passive bookish types.”

    No, it was luck. If you resisted and fought like a man, Nazis crushed you immediately.
    Jews could act tough in Israel because they constituted the majority and had the guns.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Priss Factor [AKA "terrapin gape"] says:
    @Anonymous
    Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?

    “Why bother responding to an obviously sexually disturbed lunatic?”

    If you strip away the culture, sexuality is ‘deranged’.
    Kubrick understood this.
    It was why he was fascinated with war. War is like an experiment where culture/law falls into disarray and men are allowed to roam as predators, warriors, killers, humpers, and rapists.

    Look at Japanese behavior in Nanking.
    Look at Soviet behavior with German women.
    Look at the French soldiers taunting the German woman singer at the end of Paths of Glory.
    Deranged and lunatic, you say, but war shows the natural side of man. Just imagine what happened in the sack of Rome. Or Troy. Greek men killed Trojan men and turned Trojan women into sex slaves.

    War is paradoxical. Great war can only be waged and sustained by a great civilization with awesome organization, hierarchy, and discipline–as in the boot camp scene in Full Metal Jacket. But what is war really about? It’s about the brute and barbaric use of force to fuc* the enemy in the ass.

    Dr. Strangelove knows. He’s a sophistcated intellectual but also very much in tune with the nature of man. With the world blowing up, he says there’s only one option. For the best men to seek refuge with best looking women so that they can have sex and breed like crazy. It’s what Kidman says at the end of EYES WIDE SHUT. “Fuc*.”
    That’s what life–and by extension race–all comes down to. It’s about who gets to fuc* whom.

    The essence of man and woman in state of nature can be seen in these scenes:

    Oliver Stone saw the same thing but drew a different conclusion than the ‘cold-eyed’ Kubrick.

    Heaven and Earth is about war and commerce turning an entire nation into one big pooter.

    http://youtu.be/iORfsgeqZrM?t=56m15s

    He found it very sad. But it’s reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. We should try to keep the memory of the repulsive Andrea Dworkin alive. Feminism should forever be burdened with that millstone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  119. @Anonymous
    "Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas. "

    Say what you will about Jews in America, but this is just silly. It really can't be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude. Sure, super powerful heads of industry are giant assholes who treat everyone like crap, but thats like 1 percent of all u.s. Jews.

    Steve, you're a big fan of "noticing." Well, educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    And this all makes sense when you consider that most Jewish households are female dominated where the wife runs roughshod over the husband.

    It really can’t be disputed that Jewish American men treat their wives better than men of all other religions by orders of magnitude.

    I–and literally everyone else who’s had to live near the Hasids– can dispute this nonsense.

    educated non-Jewish girls tend to be eager to marry Jewish men, based on their keen ability to notice how much better off girls with Jewish guys are.

    Oh, really? All my Jewish male friends with advanced humanities degrees (English, Comparative Lit, and Anthro) have managed to miss those “educated non-Jewish girls’” eagerness…

    My Jewish friends with IB careers, law degrees, or tech careers have seen connubial “eagerness” from Jewish and non-Jewish girls alike.

    Notice the difference?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:
    @MQ
    The assumption here that, unlike in Israel, Jewish men in America were highly respectful toward women is not upheld by studying industries they flourished in, such as Hollywood, pornography, or Las Vegas.

    American Jews flourished in many more industries than that -- see medicine, science, and academia. And Jewish dominance of Hollywood begins in the 20s-30s, an era where movies were very respectful of women. You want a Jewish-dominated movie from that era, check out The Wizard of Oz. As usual, the mechanism of Jewish scapegoating is that whatever changes in national life the writer doesn't like (the growth of pornography, gambling, or the cultural degradation of the movies) are attributed to the Jews, rather than recognizing that Jews reflected and participated in the culture around them as it changed. Jewish scapegoating is driven by an inability of Euro-American conservatives to understand the changes and pressures brought by modernity and a desire to place the blame for all of those changes on a traditional out-group. At the extreme, this portrays non-Jewish Euro-Americans as easily hypnotized sheep helplessly following a tiny machiavellian minority as it imposes its will on everyone else. This way of seeing the world has fallen into disrepute for good reason -- not just the savagery and horrors of the Nazis, but because it just doesn't make any sense.

    For example, D.W. Griffith’s WASP Victorianism made him more open to working with women on a basis of respect, and more sensitive to the horrors of rape (most famously expressed in Griffith’s Birth of a Nation), than the moguls who came after him.

    Pro-confederate 'lost cause' conservatives have traditionally been very sensitive to the horrors of rape of whites by blacks, it was a major part of the justification for Jim Crow ad legalized apartheid in the US

    “And Jewish dominance of Hollywood begins in the 20s-30s, an era where movies were very respectful of women.”

    Then why did Jews see Hayes Code as an attack on Jews?

    In 2012, Bill Maher the Jew said white cons reacted to Obama’s victory as if their wives were humped by a Negro. It say so much about Jewish attitudes.

    ———–

    “check out The Wizard of Oz”

    And yet, that movie isn’t so innocent as it seems and became the object of many unhealthy fetishes.

    http://youtu.be/XIRN43cVMHI?t=38s

    It also inspired ZARDOZ.

    “GUN IS GOOD. PENIS IS EVIL!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @WhatEvvs
    I've seen Woody Allen on the street twice. I was expected someone really short, so I was surprised that he's about 5'7" or so, but I only saw him briefly both times so I could be off. (I realize that he's listed as 5'5" on Celeb Heights.)

    He's not handsome, but not bad looking. He photographs worse than he looks in person, which most people do, and he's in an industry with a lot of handsome people, so he looks ugly by comparison.

    "but I certainly know at least one fairly average Jewish layer who treats his wife like a dog."

    Those Jewish layers. They'll get ya every time.

    “He’s not handsome, but not bad looking.”

    Puleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze!!!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:
    @WhatEvvs
    "Ugly women have no sexual-romantic power over men"

    Men don't do much better.

    Michel Houellebecq (spelling? did I leave out a q?) writes about how the free market as applied to sex has screwed over the plain and the ugly.

    I would add that the demise of the family has also screwed female power.

    “Men don’t do much better. Michel Houellebecq (spelling? did I leave out a q?) writes about how the free market as applied to sex has screwed over the plain and the ugly.”

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that’s a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he’s smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.
    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side), the rule of ugly-loserdom applies to them less.

    And with women, personality can sometimes win out. Some Jewish girls are ugly and loathesome, but there are some that aren’t really pretty(but far from ugly) and have very lively personalities. And that can turn men on. It’s like some men found Pauline Kael sexy even though she came to prominence in her middle age. In high school, there were some Jewish girls that were sort-of-pretty but far from beautiful but they were very very popular because they were so lively, engaging, and love to be center-of-attention. Some men go for that. Indeed, such men may entice men more than dumb blonde bimbos might. Men go for personality as well as looks.

    Looks matter less with men, if by looks we mean facial prettiness. Tom Cruise is as pretty as can be. Even straight guys admit he’s one cute feller. But he’s not very big. Of course, he played on vulnerability as well as machismo. He had a bit of both. The tough guy side made girls go ‘wow’. The vulnerable side made girls want to nurse him. It’s like nurses in army hospital sometimes fall in love with wounded soldiers cuz they seem to helpless and needy. Even in EXCALIBUR, it’s when Guinevere sees the wounded Lancelot in bed that she can’t resist him any longer and soon rides out to make love to him. Prior to his injury, he was the shining stud. But after his injury, he looked so in need of the healing power of a woman’s love. If FAREWELL TO ARMS were to be made again, Tom Cruise should star in it… though he may be too old for that. But then he still looks like he’s in his 20s. Woman wants to be whore and mother.

    Even when men are ugly in face, they can attract women with the three M: muscle, money, and meater. That was Ron Jeremy’s claim to fame. An ugly mofo but a meater-man.

    Maybe the greatest(at least in comic book way) philosopher of sex was Colonel Kurtz of APOCALYPSE NOW as Milius originally wrote it.

    http://filmcomment.com/article/apocalypse-now-heart-transplant

    “Up here is the truth. How much truth can you take, Captain? I’ve made sense of this war—war as you’ve never known it. We revel in our own blood; we fight for glory, for land that’s under our feet, gold that’s in our hands, women that worship the power in our loins. I summon fire from the sky. Do you know what it is to be a white man who can summon fire from the sky? What it means? You can live and die for these things—not silly ideals that are always betrayed. What do you fight for, Captain?”

    SHIIIIIIIITE!!!! That be some powerful stuff.

    That is why Michael Corleone got so pissed when Kay killed his kid. That was his kid. From his loins. 1000s of yrs of the Sicilian thing. But the wasp twat done snuffed it.

    This is why guys still romanticize war or violent conflict. Everything is reduced to the three F: Food, Fighting, and Fuc*ing. So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women. The angry peasant in SEVEN SAMURAI who takes a stand and urges others to fight lost his wife to the bandits, and he seethes with repressed rage makes Ethan look like Mr. Rogers. (I think Kurosawa was acutely aware of Japanese women being turned into whores in ‘liberated’ Japan. His movie QUIET DUEL, though about syphilis, is filled with repressed sexual rage of a man rendered ‘dickless’ and losing woman to other men. Throughout the movie, Mifune represses his frustration and remains calm and rational. But finally the dam bursts and we see his pain. It’s almost as charged as the scene in EYES WIDE SHUT when Dr. Billy Boy finally breaks down and weeps like a pooter boy: http://youtu.be/jVZRkhInBaE?t=1h13m3s
    RASHOMON isn’t only about rape but how the raped wife sort of enjoys it and surrenders to the conqueror while the tied up hubby is helpless. When she surrenders to the kiss of the bandit, it’s like she likes it, she likes it! It’s like the cereal commercial commercial where two boys look at Mikey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYEXzx-TINc
    But the real howler in Kurosawa’s cinema comes in HIGH AND LOW when Kurosawa disapprovingly shows a dance bar filled with Negro GIs who dance with shameless Japanese hussy whores. There’s one bigass Negro who runs around trying to high five everyone. That kills me everytime. It’s so funny, a bigass mountain-sized Negro, and he aint interested in no white mouse. Of course, the other great Japanese film director Imamura approached the same themes with less moral judgmentalism as he was more accepting of human beings being a bunch of ‘me so horny’ creatures. There was one female character who did walk away from the Whore Life in PIGS AND BATTLESHIPS, but the hilarious thing is even as we see her walking away, we see many more girls walking in the opposite direction towards it as fresh American GI’s come ashore.)

    Civilization is a veneer. US is supposed to be all about ideals and dignity and liberty and stuff, but during Vietnam War, it turned Saigon into one big brothel. And then there was Abu Grab(sic) with the Iraq War. Many in the military knew about it but were mum about it. Some reporters knew about it but were mum too. It only broke because New Yorker finally published it. US military tolerated that stuff.
    So, there they were, fine American men and women flexing their imperial muscle and reducing Muslim men to a bunch of sex toys. They did to Iraqis what black guys enjoy doing to white folks. Humiliate and demean.
    But then look at our culture. Disney is now into full-throttle porny-stuff-for-kids.
    A cretin like Miley Cyrus is considered an icon for the nation. Kanye West and Kim Kartrash are featured in glossy fancy fashion mags.

    The true sage-guru of our age is Beavis. With one word, he summed up all the books by Freud, all the movies by Kubrick, all the novels of Roth, and all the yammering of Colonel Kurtz.

    Occam’s Boner.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoS1MCF8AeI

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that’s a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he’s smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.
     
    You think that Weiner's wiener is impressive? Looks quite average to me

    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side),
     
    I don't know how to break this to you, but Jewish men are pretty much average in the John Thomas department

    RE: Tom Cruise,

    As Roissy/Heartiste would say, he has fame game backing him up

    So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women.
     
    Point of the film being that Ethan is identical to the Amerinds that he fights.It's even implied that he has bedded Comanche girls:

    Ethan: Scar, eh? It's plain to see how ya got your name.
    Scar: You, Big Shoulders. (Then, pointing to Marty) The young one - He-Who-Follows. [Scar's name for Martin.]
    Ethan: You speak pretty good American, for a Comanch. (Did) someone teach ya?...
    Scar: (echoing Ethan's words) You speak good Comanch. (Did) someone teach you?
     
    Ethan is implying that Scar learned "American" from Ethan's abducted niece; Scar's rejoinder replies that the same possibility applies to Ethan
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @anon
    I also get confused by some of Steve's more cryptic statements. But I'm guessing that he is probably alluding to questions of national security and how the all-female country would defend themselves against outsiders pillaging their wealth. Such questions would draw unwanted attention to the recent fad for female soldiering in Western countries

    Thanks, anon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @Priss Factor
    "Men don’t do much better. Michel Houellebecq (spelling? did I leave out a q?) writes about how the free market as applied to sex has screwed over the plain and the ugly."

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that's a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he's smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.
    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side), the rule of ugly-loserdom applies to them less.

    And with women, personality can sometimes win out. Some Jewish girls are ugly and loathesome, but there are some that aren't really pretty(but far from ugly) and have very lively personalities. And that can turn men on. It's like some men found Pauline Kael sexy even though she came to prominence in her middle age. In high school, there were some Jewish girls that were sort-of-pretty but far from beautiful but they were very very popular because they were so lively, engaging, and love to be center-of-attention. Some men go for that. Indeed, such men may entice men more than dumb blonde bimbos might. Men go for personality as well as looks.

    Looks matter less with men, if by looks we mean facial prettiness. Tom Cruise is as pretty as can be. Even straight guys admit he's one cute feller. But he's not very big. Of course, he played on vulnerability as well as machismo. He had a bit of both. The tough guy side made girls go 'wow'. The vulnerable side made girls want to nurse him. It's like nurses in army hospital sometimes fall in love with wounded soldiers cuz they seem to helpless and needy. Even in EXCALIBUR, it's when Guinevere sees the wounded Lancelot in bed that she can't resist him any longer and soon rides out to make love to him. Prior to his injury, he was the shining stud. But after his injury, he looked so in need of the healing power of a woman's love. If FAREWELL TO ARMS were to be made again, Tom Cruise should star in it... though he may be too old for that. But then he still looks like he's in his 20s. Woman wants to be whore and mother.

    Even when men are ugly in face, they can attract women with the three M: muscle, money, and meater. That was Ron Jeremy's claim to fame. An ugly mofo but a meater-man.

    Maybe the greatest(at least in comic book way) philosopher of sex was Colonel Kurtz of APOCALYPSE NOW as Milius originally wrote it.

    http://filmcomment.com/article/apocalypse-now-heart-transplant

    “Up here is the truth. How much truth can you take, Captain? I've made sense of this war—war as you've never known it. We revel in our own blood; we fight for glory, for land that's under our feet, gold that's in our hands, women that worship the power in our loins. I summon fire from the sky. Do you know what it is to be a white man who can summon fire from the sky? What it means? You can live and die for these things—not silly ideals that are always betrayed. What do you fight for, Captain?”

    SHIIIIIIIITE!!!! That be some powerful stuff.

    That is why Michael Corleone got so pissed when Kay killed his kid. That was his kid. From his loins. 1000s of yrs of the Sicilian thing. But the wasp twat done snuffed it.

    This is why guys still romanticize war or violent conflict. Everything is reduced to the three F: Food, Fighting, and Fuc*ing. So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women. The angry peasant in SEVEN SAMURAI who takes a stand and urges others to fight lost his wife to the bandits, and he seethes with repressed rage makes Ethan look like Mr. Rogers. (I think Kurosawa was acutely aware of Japanese women being turned into whores in 'liberated' Japan. His movie QUIET DUEL, though about syphilis, is filled with repressed sexual rage of a man rendered 'dickless' and losing woman to other men. Throughout the movie, Mifune represses his frustration and remains calm and rational. But finally the dam bursts and we see his pain. It's almost as charged as the scene in EYES WIDE SHUT when Dr. Billy Boy finally breaks down and weeps like a pooter boy: http://youtu.be/jVZRkhInBaE?t=1h13m3s
    RASHOMON isn't only about rape but how the raped wife sort of enjoys it and surrenders to the conqueror while the tied up hubby is helpless. When she surrenders to the kiss of the bandit, it's like she likes it, she likes it! It's like the cereal commercial commercial where two boys look at Mikey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYEXzx-TINc
    But the real howler in Kurosawa's cinema comes in HIGH AND LOW when Kurosawa disapprovingly shows a dance bar filled with Negro GIs who dance with shameless Japanese hussy whores. There's one bigass Negro who runs around trying to high five everyone. That kills me everytime. It's so funny, a bigass mountain-sized Negro, and he aint interested in no white mouse. Of course, the other great Japanese film director Imamura approached the same themes with less moral judgmentalism as he was more accepting of human beings being a bunch of 'me so horny' creatures. There was one female character who did walk away from the Whore Life in PIGS AND BATTLESHIPS, but the hilarious thing is even as we see her walking away, we see many more girls walking in the opposite direction towards it as fresh American GI's come ashore.)

    Civilization is a veneer. US is supposed to be all about ideals and dignity and liberty and stuff, but during Vietnam War, it turned Saigon into one big brothel. And then there was Abu Grab(sic) with the Iraq War. Many in the military knew about it but were mum about it. Some reporters knew about it but were mum too. It only broke because New Yorker finally published it. US military tolerated that stuff.
    So, there they were, fine American men and women flexing their imperial muscle and reducing Muslim men to a bunch of sex toys. They did to Iraqis what black guys enjoy doing to white folks. Humiliate and demean.
    But then look at our culture. Disney is now into full-throttle porny-stuff-for-kids.
    A cretin like Miley Cyrus is considered an icon for the nation. Kanye West and Kim Kartrash are featured in glossy fancy fashion mags.

    The true sage-guru of our age is Beavis. With one word, he summed up all the books by Freud, all the movies by Kubrick, all the novels of Roth, and all the yammering of Colonel Kurtz.

    Occam's Boner.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoS1MCF8AeI

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that’s a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he’s smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.

    You think that Weiner’s wiener is impressive? Looks quite average to me

    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side),

    I don’t know how to break this to you, but Jewish men are pretty much average in the John Thomas department

    RE: Tom Cruise,

    As Roissy/Heartiste would say, he has fame game backing him up

    So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women.

    Point of the film being that Ethan is identical to the Amerinds that he fights.It’s even implied that he has bedded Comanche girls:

    Ethan: Scar, eh? It’s plain to see how ya got your name.
    Scar: You, Big Shoulders. (Then, pointing to Marty) The young one – He-Who-Follows. [Scar's name for Martin.]
    Ethan: You speak pretty good American, for a Comanch. (Did) someone teach ya?…
    Scar: (echoing Ethan’s words) You speak good Comanch. (Did) someone teach you?

    Ethan is implying that Scar learned “American” from Ethan’s abducted niece; Scar’s rejoinder replies that the same possibility applies to Ethan

    Read More
    • Replies: @Celt Darnell
    @ Syon.

    Re: "It’s even implied that he [Ethan] has bedded Comanche girls."

    Some film critics go even further than that and argue Scar may in fact be Ethan's son.

    But whatever the case, it's a great film.

    My thanks to you and DNA Turtles for reminding me I need to watch it again.
    , @Priss Factor
    "Ethan is implying that Scar learned 'American' from Ethan’s abducted niece; Scar’s rejoinder replies that the same possibility applies to Ethan."

    Shiite. I never thought of that.

    Now, here's a movie inspired by SEARCHERS and Mishima(who was as sexually freako as Schrader).
    I wonder if a movie like this could be made today.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_szlzh9Dgrw

    What women can do to men.

    Ah, the dreaded Marco.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWYBe0iCL08

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Priss Factor
    "I honestly believe that woman never had a moment’s happiness in her entire life. She just reeked of permanent misery. It was actually awful."

    If she were ugly and dumb, she would have been like a stupid black ho or 'white trash' mama. But she was ugly and smart, and the smart side of her wanted recognition. This is a common theme among many Jews. Though Belfort and Dworkin acted very differently, they were driven by the same complex.

    EThey are the race that were selected more for brains than looks for sure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @syonredux

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that’s a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he’s smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.
     
    You think that Weiner's wiener is impressive? Looks quite average to me

    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side),
     
    I don't know how to break this to you, but Jewish men are pretty much average in the John Thomas department

    RE: Tom Cruise,

    As Roissy/Heartiste would say, he has fame game backing him up

    So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women.
     
    Point of the film being that Ethan is identical to the Amerinds that he fights.It's even implied that he has bedded Comanche girls:

    Ethan: Scar, eh? It's plain to see how ya got your name.
    Scar: You, Big Shoulders. (Then, pointing to Marty) The young one - He-Who-Follows. [Scar's name for Martin.]
    Ethan: You speak pretty good American, for a Comanch. (Did) someone teach ya?...
    Scar: (echoing Ethan's words) You speak good Comanch. (Did) someone teach you?
     
    Ethan is implying that Scar learned "American" from Ethan's abducted niece; Scar's rejoinder replies that the same possibility applies to Ethan

    @ Syon.

    Re: “It’s even implied that he [Ethan] has bedded Comanche girls.”

    Some film critics go even further than that and argue Scar may in fact be Ethan’s son.

    But whatever the case, it’s a great film.

    My thanks to you and DNA Turtles for reminding me I need to watch it again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Some film critics go even further than that and argue Scar may in fact be Ethan’s son.
     
    Really? Now that's one interpretation that I have not heard before

    But whatever the case, it’s a great film.
     
    Absolutely; to my mind, The Searchers and My Darling Clementine are Ford's two greatest films

    Here's Scorsese on The Searchers:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlWT8kTccHw
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @syonredux

    All things being equal, yes. But if you got smarts and/or meaters, that’s a big plus. Take Anthony Weiner. He is one uglyass mothafuc*a. But he’s smart, has money, has clout, and a meater.
     
    You think that Weiner's wiener is impressive? Looks quite average to me

    As Jews are pretty smart and meaty(on the male side),
     
    I don't know how to break this to you, but Jewish men are pretty much average in the John Thomas department

    RE: Tom Cruise,

    As Roissy/Heartiste would say, he has fame game backing him up

    So primal. As angry as Ethan is in THE SEARCHERS, he revels in the ongoing war with Indians over land and women.
     
    Point of the film being that Ethan is identical to the Amerinds that he fights.It's even implied that he has bedded Comanche girls:

    Ethan: Scar, eh? It's plain to see how ya got your name.
    Scar: You, Big Shoulders. (Then, pointing to Marty) The young one - He-Who-Follows. [Scar's name for Martin.]
    Ethan: You speak pretty good American, for a Comanch. (Did) someone teach ya?...
    Scar: (echoing Ethan's words) You speak good Comanch. (Did) someone teach you?
     
    Ethan is implying that Scar learned "American" from Ethan's abducted niece; Scar's rejoinder replies that the same possibility applies to Ethan

    “Ethan is implying that Scar learned ‘American’ from Ethan’s abducted niece; Scar’s rejoinder replies that the same possibility applies to Ethan.”

    Shiite. I never thought of that.

    Now, here’s a movie inspired by SEARCHERS and Mishima(who was as sexually freako as Schrader).
    I wonder if a movie like this could be made today.

    What women can do to men.

    Ah, the dreaded Marco.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:

    It’s interesting that two films that made such a huge splash in the mid 70s were so opposite in their sexual message.

    In ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST, the message is this uptight castrating clinical matriarchal queen bitch has the balls of every men in her cold clammy hands. The rebel is McMurphy who sees and treats women like hoors. He’s a wild man, and he thinks the kind of therapy that the fellers in the funny farm really need is to get down and party and go nuts with booze and women.
    In the world of OFOTCN, even the Negroes are on the side of order. They are ‘house negroes’ serving the matriarchal nurse queen.

    In TAXI DRIVER, the message is NY is overrun with sexual filth, porn, prostitution, drugs, and etc. It’s like McMurphism has taken over. The filth is so everywhere that even Bickle, who has problems with that stuff, can’t find any other way to spend his time except go to porn movies(even though he finds them boring). No Nurse Ratched to zip up your pants in this urban jungle. And in the original script of TAXI DRIVER, the pimps are all black(because it reflected the reality at the time). Bickle is a strange character because, on the one hand, he’s a rebel like McMurphy. But his feelings about social chaos and disorder is rather Ratchedian. He wants it all to be cleaned up. He wants society and life to be ‘organizized’.

    Perhaps, the contrast between the two films is that OFOTCN, though very much a 70s-style film, is set is the early 60s before all hell broke loose. But then what Hitchcock warned in THE BIRDS happened. Society opened its sexual pandora’s box, and there was sex, drugs, and rock and roll all over. NY became a very seedy place, an open sewage with endless redlight districts. And this was before VHS and internet moved sex entertainment into the home.

    It’s interesting how McMurphy and Bickle go about trying to save someone.
    McMurphy thinks Billy Bibbit needs to get laid and swing his pud like a man. And though reluctant to do so, McMurphy’s bimbo whore/girlfriend goes along with the plan(like women are so pliable in MASH, a film that is hardly feminist). In contrast, Bickle wants Iris to get away from the filth and live a clean life as a wholesome girl. McMurphy: ‘fuc*, billy boy’. Bickle: ‘Iris, stop fuc*ing.’

    Both films struck a chord, often with the same people. I guess people are schizo in that way.
    Or maybe great films are just great films regardless of their message/meaning/themes. And indeed, both are great films.

    PS. speaking of power of temptresses, BLUE ANGEL. Even a professor was helpless and threw everything away for the hussy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Shiite. I never thought of that.
     
    Really? It gets brought up a lot in academic discussions of the film (Ethan as Comanche, etc)

    Now, here’s a movie inspired by SEARCHERS and Mishima(who was as sexually freako as Schrader).
     
    Ah, Schrader, the man who brought us a hyper-sexualized version of Cat People.The first big budget film for furries. Of course, he directed his own take on The Searchers, Hardcore:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Toj8nkaPdtA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TilO_dWEnGU

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHS591VUfN0

    RE:ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST,

    Possibly the most misogynistic film ever made, although MASH gives it a run for its money. Of course, as David Thomson notes, MASH might also be the most coldly cruel film of the '70s. The sequence where Burns is callously driven mad by by the film's "heroes " is shockingly brutal, right up there with anything that Kubrick did in Clockwork Orange.

    In the world of OFOTCN, even the Negroes are on the side of order. They are ‘house negroes’ serving the matriarchal nurse queen.
     
    On the other hand, Amerinds represent everything wild and free in the film's universe. Leslie Fiedler must have loved that movie.

    And in the original script of TAXI DRIVER, the pimps are all black(because it reflected the reality at the time).
     
    Tarantino notes how casting the White Harvey Keitel as the pimp was the film's biggest flaw.

    Bickle is a strange character because, on the one hand, he’s a rebel like McMurphy. But his feelings about social chaos and disorder is rather Ratchedian. He wants it all to be cleaned up. He wants society and life to be ‘organizized’.
     
    Note, too, how the film makes explicit the parallel between Ethan and Scar in The Searchers when Travis shaves his hair into a Mohawk at the film's climax.The White Man as savage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Celt Darnell
    @ Syon.

    Re: "It’s even implied that he [Ethan] has bedded Comanche girls."

    Some film critics go even further than that and argue Scar may in fact be Ethan's son.

    But whatever the case, it's a great film.

    My thanks to you and DNA Turtles for reminding me I need to watch it again.

    Some film critics go even further than that and argue Scar may in fact be Ethan’s son.

    Really? Now that’s one interpretation that I have not heard before

    But whatever the case, it’s a great film.

    Absolutely; to my mind, The Searchers and My Darling Clementine are Ford’s two greatest films

    Here’s Scorsese on The Searchers:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Here’s Scorsese on The Searchers:"

    Sometimes, Scorboy is so full of shit. Having found intellectualism via NYRB, maybe this shouldn't be too surprising. Also, he works in Hollywood where certain myths better not be messed with: McCarthyism was a great great horror and 'white racism baaaaaaaad'.

    His yammering about The Searchers is ridiculous, and I suspect he's saying what is permissible than what he really thinks(because his movies aren't so simple).
    He says Searchers represents the great problem of American 'racism', but come on. Ethan's feelings about tribe and sex and honor were hardly uniquely American. As an American of Southern-Italian origin, Scorboy should know. Italians were famously into tribalism, clannism, and honor. Much more so than the Anglo frontiersman in the American West. If anything, Ethan's particular blend of 'racism' rooted in tribe and honor stands out because its virulence goes against the American grain. Even fellow whites find him a bit too much. And Ford himself wasn't approving of it--though he understood the emotions. Ethan sticks out because, at the very least, there was a struggle within American history and soul between the race/tribe/honor-centrism and law/principle/ethics-ism.
    There was a struggle between ethnic and ethic. That's why Ethan seems rather odd in The Searchers. His hatred isn't particularly American. It's ancient and universal(at least in pre-modern setting). Japanese who were into blood rites and honor would have understood him. It's like the Japanese warlord in LAST SAMURAI is full of admiration of Custer when Cruise yammers about him. Custer may have been a killer of 'innocent' folks, but he was a warrior who fought honorably to the end. All cultures around the world admired such a man. Muslims did, Persians did, Romans did, Vikings did, Mongols did, Turks did, etc.

    So, Ethan's hate isn't particularly American or even particularly evil. If we were to situate him in any other culture than Anglo-American, he would seem normal.
    Take Zorba the Greek. There's a horrible blood rite in the killing of the widow. Zorba tried to save her, but the men killed her anyway. Horrible as it is, the community sees it as 'shit happens' and just goes on. Even Zorba's attitude is 'I did my best to save her, but whaddya expect from a bunch of Greeks?'

    The 'racism' in MEAN STREETS wasn't something the greaseballs picked up from Anglo-Americans? In the old world, they had such attitudes and they brought them here. Italians in the old world had negative feelings about peoples of other nations and tribes. They had their own prejudices. And more than Anglo-American men, Italian men were very possessive of their women, and if one disgraced the family, he might act like Pasqualino in Wertmuller's SEVEN BEAUTIES who figures on killing the pimp who disgraced his sister's honor.

    Seven Beauties came out the same year as Taxi Driver, but what seems out-of-place in TD seems normal in SB. Bickle lives in a world ruled by law and regulations(even if NY is a sewage), whereas Pasqualino lives in a world where the culture is tolerant of blood rites based on honor.
    In MEAN STREETS, fellas say 'racist' stuff all the time, most hilariously when Tony informs Michael that he saw Michael's girl 'kissing a N under a bridge', a kind of precursor to Scorsese's own scene in TD where he fumes about his wife being with a N. Italian men brought those attitudes from the old world. And Jewish idea of the dirty whore 'shikse' wasn't learned from Anglo-Americans. Jews had their own long standing tribal hatreds of other people. If anything, despite Anglo-American history of prejudice and the like, it was their example of rule of law and fair play that gradually made white ethnics drop their tribalism and blood-honor-ism and become more like principled Americans.

    The fact that Ethan is seen as a kind of anomaly even by people around him shows that American values weren't in sync with his, at least not entirely. Even as white folks are fighting alongside with Ethan against the Indians, they think in terms of building a civilization of rule of law. In contrast, Ethan stands out because there's something 'ancient' about him. It's like what Bronson says in Once Upon a Time in the West: "Man... an ancient race." Ethan is one of them.

    But then, such a man would have been at home in feudal Japan, Ottoman Turkey, traditional Greek society, and etc. I like how Aronofsky drew inspiration from Searchers for NOAH.
    Suppose SEARCHERS were set in the ancient Jewish world and suppose a non-Jewish tribe attacked and killed Jews and abducted a young Jewish girl whose mother was raped and killed by gentile attackers. Wouldn't Jews seek bloody revenge? And if the Jewish girl were to grow up to have babies for the enemy tribe, wouldn't Jewish men want to kill her? Doesn't sound outlandish to me.
    Besides, why is Ethan's revenge so horrible when Good Liberals have no problem with the revenge acts of US during WWII. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, so Good Liberals thought it was okay to drop nukes on Japan and wipe out entire populations. Ethan killed a handful of people in comparison. And look at at the rapes and atrocities carried out by Russians in Germany in WWII. Russians were out for revenge, and Americans sort of looked the other way. Compared to such bloodletting, Ethan is minor league. And look at how Israel responds to worthless rocket fire from Gaza that kills no one. Israel rains down bombs and kills and maims thousands. And yet, Ethan is somehow uniquely evil and represents something uniquely sick about America. Gimme a break.

    And the Jewish hunting of Nazis isn't just about justice. It's a tribal blood rite. If indeed Jews are into impersonal and universal application of justice, why have they expended so much energy on capturing criminals who killed Jews? Surely, there are tons of comparable loathsome criminals all over the world? And if Jews are beyond tribalism and for universal justice, why don't they also hunt former Jewish communists who were involved in Ukraine famine? Scratch the surface, and there's an Ethan in everyone, not least among Jews.

    Indeed, the whole hysteria about McCarthyism is also essentially tribal. Jews hate McCarthy because anti-communism targeted many leftists who happened to be Jewish. But most Jews aided and abetted Roosevelt in the dispossession and internment of Japamericans. So, where is the Jewish moral outrage on that? All very tribal.

    According to Jews, Jews left out of golf clubs was worse than other breaches of civil liberties or rights in America. Why? It happened to Jews, and Jewish moral outrage is most powerful when the 'victims' were Jews and mildest when Jews themselves were involved in the injustice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. This is a pretty good essay that captures some of the qualities that make Dworkin such an enduring figure, at least for those who can get past the caricature. As someone who has read most of her work, from her earliest prose-poetry to her sincerely pathetic account of being drugged and raped, I would add that Dworkin was simply a terrific writer. She was an exemplar of the classic style in her forays into literary criticism (her much maligned book, “Intercourse,” being a great example); she was a shrewd and clear polemicist (“Letters from a War Zone”); and she was a modern novelist of the first rank (“Mercy” is one of the most powerful novels I have ever read). Her critical essays often addressed the pretense of masculine conquest found in the works of writers like Henry Miller and Norman Mailer, but I think Dworkin actually saw herself in similar literary terms, and that she even saw herself on a similar mission (albeit from a martyr’s point of view) in blending life and art.

    While I understand what Sailer is getting at, I disagree strongly with the characterization of Dworkin as “aspergery.” She was acutely empathic, and this, curiously, can lead to the same breaches of team-oriented decorum.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. @Priss Factor
    It's interesting that two films that made such a huge splash in the mid 70s were so opposite in their sexual message.

    In ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST, the message is this uptight castrating clinical matriarchal queen bitch has the balls of every men in her cold clammy hands. The rebel is McMurphy who sees and treats women like hoors. He's a wild man, and he thinks the kind of therapy that the fellers in the funny farm really need is to get down and party and go nuts with booze and women.
    In the world of OFOTCN, even the Negroes are on the side of order. They are 'house negroes' serving the matriarchal nurse queen.

    In TAXI DRIVER, the message is NY is overrun with sexual filth, porn, prostitution, drugs, and etc. It's like McMurphism has taken over. The filth is so everywhere that even Bickle, who has problems with that stuff, can't find any other way to spend his time except go to porn movies(even though he finds them boring). No Nurse Ratched to zip up your pants in this urban jungle. And in the original script of TAXI DRIVER, the pimps are all black(because it reflected the reality at the time). Bickle is a strange character because, on the one hand, he's a rebel like McMurphy. But his feelings about social chaos and disorder is rather Ratchedian. He wants it all to be cleaned up. He wants society and life to be 'organizized'.

    Perhaps, the contrast between the two films is that OFOTCN, though very much a 70s-style film, is set is the early 60s before all hell broke loose. But then what Hitchcock warned in THE BIRDS happened. Society opened its sexual pandora's box, and there was sex, drugs, and rock and roll all over. NY became a very seedy place, an open sewage with endless redlight districts. And this was before VHS and internet moved sex entertainment into the home.

    It's interesting how McMurphy and Bickle go about trying to save someone.
    McMurphy thinks Billy Bibbit needs to get laid and swing his pud like a man. And though reluctant to do so, McMurphy's bimbo whore/girlfriend goes along with the plan(like women are so pliable in MASH, a film that is hardly feminist). In contrast, Bickle wants Iris to get away from the filth and live a clean life as a wholesome girl. McMurphy: 'fuc*, billy boy'. Bickle: 'Iris, stop fuc*ing.'

    Both films struck a chord, often with the same people. I guess people are schizo in that way.
    Or maybe great films are just great films regardless of their message/meaning/themes. And indeed, both are great films.

    PS. speaking of power of temptresses, BLUE ANGEL. Even a professor was helpless and threw everything away for the hussy.

    Shiite. I never thought of that.

    Really? It gets brought up a lot in academic discussions of the film (Ethan as Comanche, etc)

    Now, here’s a movie inspired by SEARCHERS and Mishima(who was as sexually freako as Schrader).

    Ah, Schrader, the man who brought us a hyper-sexualized version of Cat People.The first big budget film for furries. Of course, he directed his own take on The Searchers, Hardcore:

    RE:ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST,

    Possibly the most misogynistic film ever made, although MASH gives it a run for its money. Of course, as David Thomson notes, MASH might also be the most coldly cruel film of the ’70s. The sequence where Burns is callously driven mad by by the film’s “heroes ” is shockingly brutal, right up there with anything that Kubrick did in Clockwork Orange.

    In the world of OFOTCN, even the Negroes are on the side of order. They are ‘house negroes’ serving the matriarchal nurse queen.

    On the other hand, Amerinds represent everything wild and free in the film’s universe. Leslie Fiedler must have loved that movie.

    And in the original script of TAXI DRIVER, the pimps are all black(because it reflected the reality at the time).

    Tarantino notes how casting the White Harvey Keitel as the pimp was the film’s biggest flaw.

    Bickle is a strange character because, on the one hand, he’s a rebel like McMurphy. But his feelings about social chaos and disorder is rather Ratchedian. He wants it all to be cleaned up. He wants society and life to be ‘organizized’.

    Note, too, how the film makes explicit the parallel between Ethan and Scar in The Searchers when Travis shaves his hair into a Mohawk at the film’s climax.The White Man as savage.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Dworkin, or the idea of her, is why women now loathe to be called feminists. As you say, she is the worst reduction ad absurdum they could get.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  133. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:
    @syonredux

    Some film critics go even further than that and argue Scar may in fact be Ethan’s son.
     
    Really? Now that's one interpretation that I have not heard before

    But whatever the case, it’s a great film.
     
    Absolutely; to my mind, The Searchers and My Darling Clementine are Ford's two greatest films

    Here's Scorsese on The Searchers:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlWT8kTccHw

    “Here’s Scorsese on The Searchers:”

    Sometimes, Scorboy is so full of shit. Having found intellectualism via NYRB, maybe this shouldn’t be too surprising. Also, he works in Hollywood where certain myths better not be messed with: McCarthyism was a great great horror and ‘white racism baaaaaaaad’.

    His yammering about The Searchers is ridiculous, and I suspect he’s saying what is permissible than what he really thinks(because his movies aren’t so simple).
    He says Searchers represents the great problem of American ‘racism’, but come on. Ethan’s feelings about tribe and sex and honor were hardly uniquely American. As an American of Southern-Italian origin, Scorboy should know. Italians were famously into tribalism, clannism, and honor. Much more so than the Anglo frontiersman in the American West. If anything, Ethan’s particular blend of ‘racism’ rooted in tribe and honor stands out because its virulence goes against the American grain. Even fellow whites find him a bit too much. And Ford himself wasn’t approving of it–though he understood the emotions. Ethan sticks out because, at the very least, there was a struggle within American history and soul between the race/tribe/honor-centrism and law/principle/ethics-ism.
    There was a struggle between ethnic and ethic. That’s why Ethan seems rather odd in The Searchers. His hatred isn’t particularly American. It’s ancient and universal(at least in pre-modern setting). Japanese who were into blood rites and honor would have understood him. It’s like the Japanese warlord in LAST SAMURAI is full of admiration of Custer when Cruise yammers about him. Custer may have been a killer of ‘innocent’ folks, but he was a warrior who fought honorably to the end. All cultures around the world admired such a man. Muslims did, Persians did, Romans did, Vikings did, Mongols did, Turks did, etc.

    So, Ethan’s hate isn’t particularly American or even particularly evil. If we were to situate him in any other culture than Anglo-American, he would seem normal.
    Take Zorba the Greek. There’s a horrible blood rite in the killing of the widow. Zorba tried to save her, but the men killed her anyway. Horrible as it is, the community sees it as ‘shit happens’ and just goes on. Even Zorba’s attitude is ‘I did my best to save her, but whaddya expect from a bunch of Greeks?’

    The ‘racism’ in MEAN STREETS wasn’t something the greaseballs picked up from Anglo-Americans? In the old world, they had such attitudes and they brought them here. Italians in the old world had negative feelings about peoples of other nations and tribes. They had their own prejudices. And more than Anglo-American men, Italian men were very possessive of their women, and if one disgraced the family, he might act like Pasqualino in Wertmuller’s SEVEN BEAUTIES who figures on killing the pimp who disgraced his sister’s honor.

    Seven Beauties came out the same year as Taxi Driver, but what seems out-of-place in TD seems normal in SB. Bickle lives in a world ruled by law and regulations(even if NY is a sewage), whereas Pasqualino lives in a world where the culture is tolerant of blood rites based on honor.
    In MEAN STREETS, fellas say ‘racist’ stuff all the time, most hilariously when Tony informs Michael that he saw Michael’s girl ‘kissing a N under a bridge’, a kind of precursor to Scorsese’s own scene in TD where he fumes about his wife being with a N. Italian men brought those attitudes from the old world. And Jewish idea of the dirty whore ‘shikse’ wasn’t learned from Anglo-Americans. Jews had their own long standing tribal hatreds of other people. If anything, despite Anglo-American history of prejudice and the like, it was their example of rule of law and fair play that gradually made white ethnics drop their tribalism and blood-honor-ism and become more like principled Americans.

    The fact that Ethan is seen as a kind of anomaly even by people around him shows that American values weren’t in sync with his, at least not entirely. Even as white folks are fighting alongside with Ethan against the Indians, they think in terms of building a civilization of rule of law. In contrast, Ethan stands out because there’s something ‘ancient’ about him. It’s like what Bronson says in Once Upon a Time in the West: “Man… an ancient race.” Ethan is one of them.

    But then, such a man would have been at home in feudal Japan, Ottoman Turkey, traditional Greek society, and etc. I like how Aronofsky drew inspiration from Searchers for NOAH.
    Suppose SEARCHERS were set in the ancient Jewish world and suppose a non-Jewish tribe attacked and killed Jews and abducted a young Jewish girl whose mother was raped and killed by gentile attackers. Wouldn’t Jews seek bloody revenge? And if the Jewish girl were to grow up to have babies for the enemy tribe, wouldn’t Jewish men want to kill her? Doesn’t sound outlandish to me.
    Besides, why is Ethan’s revenge so horrible when Good Liberals have no problem with the revenge acts of US during WWII. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, so Good Liberals thought it was okay to drop nukes on Japan and wipe out entire populations. Ethan killed a handful of people in comparison. And look at at the rapes and atrocities carried out by Russians in Germany in WWII. Russians were out for revenge, and Americans sort of looked the other way. Compared to such bloodletting, Ethan is minor league. And look at how Israel responds to worthless rocket fire from Gaza that kills no one. Israel rains down bombs and kills and maims thousands. And yet, Ethan is somehow uniquely evil and represents something uniquely sick about America. Gimme a break.

    And the Jewish hunting of Nazis isn’t just about justice. It’s a tribal blood rite. If indeed Jews are into impersonal and universal application of justice, why have they expended so much energy on capturing criminals who killed Jews? Surely, there are tons of comparable loathsome criminals all over the world? And if Jews are beyond tribalism and for universal justice, why don’t they also hunt former Jewish communists who were involved in Ukraine famine? Scratch the surface, and there’s an Ethan in everyone, not least among Jews.

    Indeed, the whole hysteria about McCarthyism is also essentially tribal. Jews hate McCarthy because anti-communism targeted many leftists who happened to be Jewish. But most Jews aided and abetted Roosevelt in the dispossession and internment of Japamericans. So, where is the Jewish moral outrage on that? All very tribal.

    According to Jews, Jews left out of golf clubs was worse than other breaches of civil liberties or rights in America. Why? It happened to Jews, and Jewish moral outrage is most powerful when the ‘victims’ were Jews and mildest when Jews themselves were involved in the injustice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. @Prof. Woland
    When I think of Andrea Dwarkin, I think of the lesbian pirates in R. Crumb's Capt. Pissgums.

    Or the Blob Princess in “Pheobe Zeit-Geist”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @syonredux
    RE: Dworkin and the nationalistic solution to the Feminist question,

    As always, Science Fiction grants us insight into the political unconscious:


    Joanna Russ, The Female Man and "When It changed. Two tales that depict woman only utopias.Then there's We Who Are About To, where a group of humans are stranded on an alien planet.There is only one woman, and she refuses to breed.When they try to rape her, she kills them all.Extinction is preferable to reproduction.

    James Tiptree, jr (the male pseudonym of Alice Bradley Sheldon):"Houston, Houston, Do You Read?"

    Astronauts get transported to a future Earth inhabited only by women.The women kill off the astronauts

    John Wyndham wrote a novella about a future all-female dystopia, “Consider Her Ways”, which was dramatized on the Alfred Hitchcock Hour

    [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJy-HYfMio[/url]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @syonredux
    RE: Dworkin and the nationalistic solution to the Feminist question,

    As always, Science Fiction grants us insight into the political unconscious:


    Joanna Russ, The Female Man and "When It changed. Two tales that depict woman only utopias.Then there's We Who Are About To, where a group of humans are stranded on an alien planet.There is only one woman, and she refuses to breed.When they try to rape her, she kills them all.Extinction is preferable to reproduction.

    James Tiptree, jr (the male pseudonym of Alice Bradley Sheldon):"Houston, Houston, Do You Read?"

    Astronauts get transported to a future Earth inhabited only by women.The women kill off the astronauts

    John Wyndham wrote a novella about a future all-female dystopia, “Consider Her Ways”, which was dramatized on the Alfred Hitchcock Hour

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

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored