The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Haidt & Lukianoff's "The Coddling of the American Mind"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

2013: A Race Odyssey
by Steve Sailer

October 10, 2018

With the spectacular failure of clinical psychologist Dr. Prof. Christine Blasey Ford’s vague charges against Brett Kavanaugh to elicit any corroborating evidence, moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt’s new book about the apparent epidemic of politics-related mental illness that began around 2013, The Coddling of the American Mind, is exceptionally timely.

The spirit of the age cries out for tales of victimization, and, unsurprisingly, the supply has grown to meet the skyrocketing demand. What does it say about our culture that we just witnessed a professor of psychology be vastly praised for testifying to a purported chain of events without any additional evidence emerging that it wasn’t all just in her head?

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 165 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.

    I guess I’m getting old, since I can remember a time when good people didn’t go around punching others.

    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

    • Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers
    @Trevor H.

    Google the terms " emotional support squirrel " for today's coddling deficiency disorder (CDD) poster child. Another disease of the rich. The world is snickering at fat, infantilized, addicted, semi-literate Americans.

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Rosamond Vincy

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Trevor H.


    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

     

    Oh, you're still challenged. By this or that identity group club. Or by the denizens of the adjacent ghetto.
    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Trevor H.


    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!
     
    How language changes! In contemporary educational jargon "challenged" means mentally retarded.
  2. anon[381] • Disclaimer says:

    When I noticed campus demands to ‘feel safe’ as opposed to the common sense desire to ‘be safe’ it struck me as rather to much to expect to achieve.
    The subjectivity of fear has a certain logic as well as its obvious problems. CBF’s narrative was based on a subjective interpretation of crime. This was simply a bridge too far for Republicans. Crime involves a victim and a perp, and an implicit relation of symmetry. This completely broke down and people were enraged at the unfairness of being responsible for someone elses feelings.

  3. I have personally known or been friends with a number of psychiatrists and psychologists, including the famous Evelyn Hooker, and without exception, all had their own unresolved and serious psychiatric issues. I would say all were motivated to try to understand and resolve their own issues by the field they chose to work in, but never actually succeeded. That doesn’t mean there aren’t sane ones out there – Thomas Szasz comes to mind – just that substantial numbers do fall within that cohort, and are empty white coats.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Fran Macadam

    Would you care to expand on this Evelyn Hooker since she had so much influence on the delisting of homosexuality as a mental illness?

  4. It can be difficult to distinguish delusions from lies. That may matter if anyone is inclined to charge, or sue, Ms. Dr. Prof. Christine Blasey Ford.

  5. “The authors cite alarming evidence of a recent increase in emotional problems. For example, the percentage of college students who said they suffered from a “psychological disorder” increased among males from 2.7 percent in 2012 to 6.1 percent by 2016 (a 126 percent increase)”

    You could argue though that it is not actual psychological disorders that are increasing, but rather that emotions and behavior that were always normal and common are redefined as psychological disorders. A good example is the DSM 5’s inclusion of old-fashioned grief/sadness as a psychiatric disorder.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/opinion/15frances.html

    Think of it as a job-creation program for the thousands of students who get degrees in psychology every year.

  6. I don’t have to point out the African Witchcraft theory is racist stereotyping, do I? Especially if it’s accurate?

  7. I find generational labels to be stupid on multiple levels, but people born in the late 1990s are not “post-millennial” by any common definition. Younger ≠ after.

    Basic rule of thumb as to who qualifies as a millennial: they were alive but not over 18 at the turn of the millennium.

  8. I’ve seen a few these iGen people in my occupation, ones who’ve not gone to college. I think lots of them have gone through a coddled upbringing even without the extreme stupidity existent in the universities now. I’ve read over the years, and not just since the Øb☭ma administration, about the Title IX stupidity, the 1 in 4 rape lies, and about the organization F.I.R.E. being formed to fight this stuff.

    This stuff starts in elementary school. A misbehaving kindergartner, Steve, goes to RTC nowadays, for an hour or so. That’s the Responsible Thinking Center for those of you who still write “coed” ;-}. It’s the same as detention, in case you’re wondering, but you can’t even say detention anymore. It gets worse from there.

    The looks on some of these people’s faces when I talk to them in a manner lacking any PC whatsoever is, what do they say in those old commericals, oh, PRICELESS.

    Needless to say, great article again.

  9. Back in May, in a published letter to my local newspaper, I speculated about a connection between the rotten policies we live under and mass shooters, concluding:

    “Politicians are rightfully wary of fuzzy-wuzzy “root causes” public debates. Privately, they ought to recognize that tomorrow’s nut-job shooter surveys the same gratuitous cruelties and lunacies of American policy through the media as the rest of us, with who knows what consequences for his synaptic hygiene.”

    I suppose it’s pretty safe to say Prof. Blasey Ford’s accusation, unreported at the time to authorities or even a girl friend, and uncorroborated three decades later, counts as some sort of “cruelty” or “lunacy”.

  10. No link in your last sentence, Read the whole thing there.

  11. No link in your last sentence Read the whole thing there.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    @Mike Sylwester

    This "there" might have ceased to be the "there" it has been until recently.

  12. “Blasey Ford has enjoyed a fairly kick-ass life”

    Nice Idiocracy reference!

  13. Not a clinical psychologist. I read she wasn’t even licensed to practice in California. Research psychologist.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @rebunga

    True, she’s not licensed to practice.

  14. By eliminating the reasonable person standard, harassment was left to be defined by the self-reported subjective experience of every member of the university community

    This is one of a number of insidious and radical policies that the Obama administration implemented that were barely commented upon in the media. (Because agreement, of course.) Another was the plan to punish schools for disproportionately disciplining black students. Anyone who has worked with black kids knows that this would make control of the classroom nearly impossible. Fortunately, Trump quietly discontinued that policy.

    The case of Ford vs Kavanaugh is an example of the problem with self-reported subjective experience. Even if it happened, and I don’t believe it did, when does an awkward attempt to make out at a party turn into the chargeable offense of attempted rape? Ford claims she thought she was going to be raped, but was that intent in the mind of (imaginary) Kavanaugh? Probably not. When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they’re waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    • Agree: Travis, Marat
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Harry Baldwin

    When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they’re waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    I think the standard depending on what the person allegedly harassed depending on the perception of the alleged victim stems largely from employers being very wary of being put at risk of legal liability if female employees are sexually harassed in the workplace.

    Quite a few years ago a woman I knew well worked as a nurse in the psychiatric wing of a high security prison in Florida. It was an everyday occurrence for inmates to expose themselves and masturbate in front of female nurses. This practice was known as "gunning".

    Female nurses often wrote incident reports which were apparently just filed by the prison administration. A lot of the time the female nurses did not bother to file reports, because this was so routine, and it was extra paperwork, and they just chose to ignore the inmate behaviors.

    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.

    On the other hand, in the same time frame, a female nurse was fired from the same facility for paying inmates to masturbate in front of her.

    https://www.winknews.com/2018/02/26/florida-paid-11-million-sexual-harassment-claims/

    The diagram here shows that the amount paid out in the university systems was minuscule compared to Corrections and the Department of Juvenile Justice and or even the State Attorney's office which is presumably full of litigious women.

    The Florida Department of Corrections has since been forced to implement different policies.

    However, you can have too much of a good thing, and sexual harassment claims should not be used as a way of escalating minor grievances and personality clashes.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @AnotherDad, @J.Ross

  15. 2013, the year after 2012, the year that the Obama re-elect campaign kicked the identity arsonism of the Coalition of the Fringes into high gear. You’re right — The cause is Obama, not smartphones.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @countenance

    Smartphones tricked them into feeling their dominance was unchallenged. Obama’s re-election confirmed it in their minds.

    They were feeling their oats.

  16. Jonathan Haidt in his book:

    “In 2013, the Departments of Education and Justice issued a sweeping new definition of harassment…. By eliminating the reasonable person standard, harassment was left to be defined by the self-reported subjective experience of every member of the university community. It was, in effect, emotional reasoning turned into federal regulation.”

    By mandating University recipients of Title 9 funds change their standard of proof in sexual assault cases,from ‘clear and convincing’ to ‘preponderance of the evidence’ or lose their Title 9 funding, the Obama Administration changed the definition of sexual assault. Universities got 20% of their funding from Title 9 so most were eager to change. Its true that 70% had already changed to the preponderance standard but mandating this change brought the governmental hammer of Thor down on any independent institutions(Like Princeton or UVa).
    And so the very definition of sexual assault is changed to the disadvantage of men.
    Similarly the expanding definition of ‘racism’ has changed from Government suppression of rights to merely noticing race, has changed to the detriment of Whites.
    Also the way organizing to lobby for political advantage has been changed to permit only Black, Hispanic and Asian ‘activists’ to lobby but any Whites who lobby are ‘supremacists.’
    It is all in the new definitions put forth by our Cultural Commissars and the American Pravda media.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    @Conatus


    It is all in the new definitions put forth by our Cultural Commissars and the American Pravda media.
     
    Incredibly right and - - - wrong, too.

    (Wrong, because - let me hint at a Ramz Paul talking about - now hold your breath - - - Finland, and the experiences he made there quite recently. - And what did he find there? - The same gone berserk ANTIFA, the same unwillingness on the side of the government and the university officials, to defend reason - the same CODDLING of the mind like anywhere else in the anglosphere-dominated Western World. - By and large: You are not alone!)
  17. We must believe the woman, even if, in the case of Blasey Ford, those who know her best don’t seem to believe her.

    We need to start selling T-shirts that say “We must believe the 2 women” with some Arabic text below it (ideally the wording of the Sharia statute that says two women’s testimony is equal to that of one man, but maybe even better if it’s something totally random and haphazard, like “30% off red pepper humus at Aziz’s falafel house”)

    • LOL: Cortes
    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
    @Abe

    I believe Carolyn Bryant. Is that wrong?

    Replies: @Roderick Spode

    , @Anonymous
    @Abe

    Not normally a big sharia fan but they were onto something there. The witness statement from a stupid man will always have more probative value than from an above-average IQ bored/unfulfilled housewife. You know where the dolt is coming from.

    The child wizards/vampires fan-fiction-writing approach to life is fine, it has its place. But it does not scale in a functioning society

  18. Time to bring the incubus back? After all, there had to be a way to explain away pregnancies by high status unmarried females (politics), right? Maybe incubus attend DC suburban parties?

    • Replies: @Whiskey
    @Curle

    I was never a fan of that band.

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Curle

    The incubi and succubi are exclusive to Clinton Cult parties. I hear Bill and Hillary are holding a fundraiser for Kamala Harris on Epstein Island.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  19. For some reason this montage comes to mind:

    • Replies: @Sergeant Prepper
    @eah

    Good one. Reminds me of those memes comparing young Obama the pot smoker and young Bibi Netanyahu the Sayeret Matkal soldier:

    https://goo.gl/images/Sn9kM7

    , @Patrick in SC
    @eah

    That is priceless.

    , @Bard of Bumperstickers
    @eah

    Never send a woman astronaut to do a male astronaut's job; she might primp while Skylab burns: https://mywordandwelcometoit.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/women-are-idiots/ (Or hand her husband's retirement money to a Nigerian scammer, despite an advanced degree)

    , @Alden
    @eah

    Ha ha ha ha I’m still laughing Thanks for the laugh.

  20. @Harry Baldwin
    By eliminating the reasonable person standard, harassment was left to be defined by the self-reported subjective experience of every member of the university community

    This is one of a number of insidious and radical policies that the Obama administration implemented that were barely commented upon in the media. (Because agreement, of course.) Another was the plan to punish schools for disproportionately disciplining black students. Anyone who has worked with black kids knows that this would make control of the classroom nearly impossible. Fortunately, Trump quietly discontinued that policy.

    The case of Ford vs Kavanaugh is an example of the problem with self-reported subjective experience. Even if it happened, and I don't believe it did, when does an awkward attempt to make out at a party turn into the chargeable offense of attempted rape? Ford claims she thought she was going to be raped, but was that intent in the mind of (imaginary) Kavanaugh? Probably not. When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they're waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they’re waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    I think the standard depending on what the person allegedly harassed depending on the perception of the alleged victim stems largely from employers being very wary of being put at risk of legal liability if female employees are sexually harassed in the workplace.

    Quite a few years ago a woman I knew well worked as a nurse in the psychiatric wing of a high security prison in Florida. It was an everyday occurrence for inmates to expose themselves and masturbate in front of female nurses. This practice was known as “gunning”.

    Female nurses often wrote incident reports which were apparently just filed by the prison administration. A lot of the time the female nurses did not bother to file reports, because this was so routine, and it was extra paperwork, and they just chose to ignore the inmate behaviors.

    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.

    On the other hand, in the same time frame, a female nurse was fired from the same facility for paying inmates to masturbate in front of her.

    https://www.winknews.com/2018/02/26/florida-paid-11-million-sexual-harassment-claims/

    The diagram here shows that the amount paid out in the university systems was minuscule compared to Corrections and the Department of Juvenile Justice and or even the State Attorney’s office which is presumably full of litigious women.

    The Florida Department of Corrections has since been forced to implement different policies.

    However, you can have too much of a good thing, and sexual harassment claims should not be used as a way of escalating minor grievances and personality clashes.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Jonathan Mason

    I was just talking to my prison guard friend (Folsom Prison) whose current duty is to protect nurses as they examine and treat inmates. Were he not right there, with his imposing size, the female nurses would be attacked, at some level, constantly. Why then have female nurses? He says it's so hard to get any medical personnel to do these jobs that they take what they can get.

    I think I'd rather the policy be that if, as an inmate, you can't be self-controlled enough to submit to medical care, then you don't get any.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    , @AnotherDad
    @Jonathan Mason


    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.
     
    , @J.Ross
    @Jonathan Mason

    I wonder if hospital workers are favorite targets because of a perfect mix of educated credulity, money, access, and the fatal attitude of wanting to help others.
    I have a lot of relatives in white lab coats and they all have stories about being targeted by (thankfully nonviolent and non-tumescent) con men with "car trouble" or "coworkers" they've never seen before, appearing outside the staff parking lot in doctory-looking clothes, inexplicably in dire need of twenty bucks.

  21. I think that Lukianoff and Haidt are “trusting their feelings” about liberals too much…..this whole right wing notion of college campuses being hotbeds of intolerance is a complete red herring

    I don’t buy it. It’s just another version of the eternal “these kids these days…”: deeply conservative, although instead of complaining about the kids being rowdy and uncivilized, these guys complain that the kids aren’t rowdy and uncivilized enough… or something.

    There is little sign of politics of the Left or the Right on campus. What I do see is humanity courses that are nearly empty, undergrad students who sit in on lectures and flip through their phone,and absolutely packed classes in Marketing and Finance.

    As for a sea of entitled students, I suggest we set out the idea that maybe we cut medicare for the elderly, who overwhelmingly supported Trump, and transfer some of those funds to education. You want to hear howls of entitlement and victimization? Its a truism, we attack our kids for the failures of ourselves.

    This is just more white men evaluating experiences of Minority groups. Seriously? They make reasonable observations but might white women, or even better women of color, observe different strains in our current culture that present different conclusions?

  22. Getting damn sick and tired of being preached at by guys named “Haidt & Lukianoff.” Or Arendt. Or Krugman. Or Boot. Or….

    Not going to read the link to see what the context is. But whether they are on my side or not, I want them to take a big glass of STFU and go away for a long, long time.

    If your name is Jones or Kowalski I’ll listen. Kavanaugh even. But if your name is Haidt or Lukianoff, Shut Up.

    That goes for you too, Germans.

  23. What?! Where’s the Cryptonomicon review?

  24. clinical psychologist

    “Clinical” are the ones involved with treating patients. “Research” or “experimental” psychologists do things like design and conduct studies, perform meta-analyses, work with statistics. CBF is in the second category. She coauthored a book on getting the right sample size in studies and has degrees in experimental psychology and biostatistics. Her PhD is in educational psychology which could be anything. I’m guessing she does the more hands-off quantitative stuff. Nerdy and, as you put it earlier, “needs to be sheltered from the world”.

  25. By eliminating the reasonable person standard, harassment was left to be defined by the self-reported subjective experience of every member of the [corporation]

    This standard is busy making it’s way into your employer’s HR department. The amount of anti-harassment training, diversity training, unconscious bias training escalates year by year. It’s a good gig for someone to be sure. But in the meantime, what used to be called “managing your employees” is now called harassment by anyone who feels put upon.

  26. The spirit of the age cries out for tales of victimization, and, unsurprisingly, the supply has grown to meet the skyrocketing demand.

    What does it say about our culture that we just witnessed a professor of psychology be vastly praised for testifying to a purported chain of events without any additional evidence emerging that it wasn’t all just in her head?

    Palo Alto pissant psycho psychology professor, Christine Blasey Ford, is a Generation X harpy who fits in well with the evil globalizer scumbags who have infiltrated government at all levels.

    Steve Sailer also sometimes evinces some of these grotesque qualities.

    Sailer has done two things that may lead an ordinary person to believe that he has some sympathy for the mentally deranged distaff wacko, Blasey Ford:

    1) Steve Sailer refuses to incorporate monetary policy into his overall worldview; and 2) Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through — specifically comments relating to that horrible anti-White Neo-Conservative politician whore, Nikki Haley. Is Steve Sailer protecting Nikki Haley?

    Attention Steve Sailer:

    To answer your question about what it means to our culture to have the Blasey Ford types running amok in American politics and culture, I’ll say that the American Empire is imploding, and the implosion is accelerating. In order to protect and defend the cultural integrity of the United States as a home for the European Christian people, it is vital that the American Empire be imploded in a controlled manner. Pretentious crap, I know, but there might be something to it!

    Maybe something about that Bronx guy DeLillo who wrote a novel about Hitchcock’s Psycho being played ultra-slow to represent time or decay or disintegration or some damn thing else.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Charles Pewitt

    "Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through — specifically comments relating to that horrible anti-White Neo-Conservative politician whore, Nikki Haley. Is Steve Sailer protecting Nikki Haley?"

    It seems to me you're taking Steve's admittedly whimsical comment moderation policy very personally. Which, in case you didn't know, is a rather unpleasant and distinctly womanish way to take it.

    , @LondonBob
    @Charles Pewitt

    Trump firing Nikki Haley for attempting to undermine his stated policy positions is most welcome, maybe a successful mid-terms will see a new improved Trump burst forth.

    , @Anonymous
    @Charles Pewitt

    We need Trump to channel that blustery bravado and fight to get things done that he had on the campaign trail into action to carry the job out. Having a stronger economy is great, but in light of losing the country in the long term it hardly matters. At best it’s giving you a lazy-boy while the Titanic sinks.

  27. OT: It looks like some wag at the Chronicle of Higher Ed is trolling readers with his strategic placement of headlines today. The top two stories in latest news are:

    U. of Michigan Disciplines Professor Who Refused to Recommend a Student Heading to Israel

    American Grad Student, Barred From Entering Israel, Remains in Custody Over Alleged Activism

  28. @Curle
    Time to bring the incubus back? After all, there had to be a way to explain away pregnancies by high status unmarried females (politics), right? Maybe incubus attend DC suburban parties?

    Replies: @Whiskey, @SunBakedSuburb

    I was never a fan of that band.

  29. [insert complaint about Taki]

    • LOL: Abe, Kylie
    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    @Daniel Chieh

    Looks like you beat #11 by a few seconds, Dan.

  30. Taki Mag needs to reduce the number of video ads on their site. It is very irritating.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    @Lowe

    And they need to restore Disqus comments.

    , @F0337
    @Lowe

    AdBlockPlus to the rescue? I never see ads there. And I do contribute cash now and then, no wait a minute that's VDare LOL

  31. Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn’t focus ideologically or narratively on “equality” or “freedom”, but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves–in the template of Jewish minoritarianism–as an “oppressed minority”.

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it–with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism–unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns–enemies, threat, war–at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama’s election on a feelz–“Hope and Change”–campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i’m far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today’s culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men–esp. younger–i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children–raising the next generation. But the feminine package–feeling and nurturing–is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes “women” thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests–the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation–its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them–running a divide and conquer strategy–in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @AnotherDad

    Succinctly said:

    Nations and empires are organized for war.

    The ruling class of the American Empire is attacking the United States by using diversity and cultural rot to destroy the European Christian ancestral core of the United States.

    The American Empire has declared war on the United States of America.

    Replies: @miss marple

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @AnotherDad

    Yep, women - even very smart women - seem congenitally unable to think long-term and to move beyond stage one thinking. Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people? And they sure as hell don't move on to stage three thinking: What will be the long-term impact on crime, employment, politics, etc. of allowing people who are low IQ and a different race into the country?

    Again, I've noticed this repeatedly in smart, capable women, which says this inability is hardwired.

    Men have their own blindspots, of course. That's fine. Let's focus on the areas that we are naturally suited. Women, in general, are far superior to men when it comes to nurturing children. It's amazing to watch and essential to happiness.

    But holy shit are women terrible at politics and protecting the tribe. Women, in general, are far easier to manipulate via the media. The media is their guidebook to staying on the right side of the tribe's mores, and women, being so much more vulnerable than men since the beginning of time, desparately want to be accepted by the tribe.

    That's all well and good if the woman's tribe controls the media, but what happens if another tribe wrests control and women continue to follow the message? I suppose that we're witnessing just that scenario.

    At what point do Gentile white women realize that the media want to destroy their husbands, brothers, fathers and sons?

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We're simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Flip, @Jonathan Mason

    , @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling.

    There are no scores to settle. You are giving the aggressors moral high ground they do not deserve.

    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    @AnotherDad


    But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns–enemies, threat, war–at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history ...
     
    I'd submit this masculine, martial paradigm flipped once the Afghan and Iraq wars shifted to occupation and foreign aid. Now, we're no longer killing people and smashing things but nurturing our fledgling allies into functioning democracies! It's a jarringly feminized view coming on the heels of retaliation for an astounding criminal attack.

    So now our forces are under complicated rules of engagement and acting as a civil police force and international wet nurse instead of what militaries really are: legalized killers. Women and feminized men lap up this rebuild-and-reform stuff like kittens with crème. It's like the female fantasy of taming the rakish bad boy, except at the geopolitical level.

    It's also a stereotypically Semitic view: we'll accomplish our goals with clever rhetoric and savvy bribery instead of that uncouth, goy violence.
    , @WR
    @AnotherDad

    Very good analysis. This statement is crucial: "Men and women of a family have the same long term interests–the future of their children, and their future descendants." Now, how do you defeat your adversaries in this culture war? Your enemy controls the printed and visual media, most of K-12 and virtually all universities. Moreover, they can promote their agenda 24/7 via advertisement and the entertainment business. I think that the battle can be won but it needs to be fought by people with considerable free time and significant financial resources. I am afraid that very few of us commenting on this website possess the latter.

    Replies: @Samuel Skinner

    , @Whiskey
    @AnotherDad

    But if women have no husbands or marry late in life to a lower value male they settle for and resent?

    Why then indeed women are the natural and eternal enemy of the White male. How else could it be otherwise?

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    @AnotherDad

    "Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn’t focus ideologically or narratively on “equality” or “freedom”, but rather on grievance against men."

    Look at the Wiki category "feminists by religion". There's certainly a YUGE over-representation of one religion.

    As of now


    Feminists categorized by known religious (or ethnoreligious) affiliation.
    Subcategories

    This category has the following 8 subcategories, out of 8 total.

    B Buddhist feminists‎ (17 P)
    C Christian feminists‎ (7 C, 35 P)
    H Hindu feminists‎ (1 P)
    I Islamic feminists‎ (69 P)
    J Jewish feminists‎ (277 P)
    S Sikh feminists‎ (2 P)
    U Universalist feminists‎ (1 C)
    W Wiccan feminists‎ (10 P)
     
    And if you look at the talk on that topic, you'll see Wiki editors actually being politically neutral.

    This page needs to be deleted immediately. Bigots and misogynists are trying to use the number of Jewish feminists as some sort of political statement. This must be stopped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.200.5 (talk) 04:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

    You're the only bigot here. 204.52.135.203 (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

    That is ridiculous. To delete this page would be to censor factual information for the purpose of advancing your own agenda. Is there perhaps a conflict of interest for why you would want the background of popular feminists to be covered up? 140.180.255.79 (talk) 05:03, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

    Is it a "conflict of interest" to want to promote equality? There's absolutely no reason to have this page if its only use is as a weapon by racists. I'm not saying let's delete all the 'religion' info on each individual feminists' page, but removing an easy numerical categorization like this is a pretty fair request in my opinion. Please be reasonable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.200.2 (talk) 23:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

    You appear to be on a personal crusade here. There are plenty of pages sorting people by ethnic or religious background. Are these all created by racists? In my opinion you sound borderline paranoid and I highly doubt that you can back up your claims - it is really a far-stretched assumption anyway - that only racists care about the ethnicity of feminists. Please familiarize yourself with WP:CENSOR 91.49.221.249 (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
     

    Replies: @njguy73

    , @LondonBob
    @AnotherDad

    Hitler saw Marxism as an attempt to create class divisions when racial divisions were all that mattered, second wave feminism is the same along with every other ism. Create and highlight divisions whilst obscuring the one that really exists and matters.

  32. “…sexual harassment claims should not be used as a way of escalating minor grievances and personality clashes.

    Good luck with that.

  33. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    Succinctly said:

    Nations and empires are organized for war.

    The ruling class of the American Empire is attacking the United States by using diversity and cultural rot to destroy the European Christian ancestral core of the United States.

    The American Empire has declared war on the United States of America.

    • Replies: @miss marple
    @Charles Pewitt

    Exactly. And I thought I was the only one who noticed the powers-that-be were attempting to eradicate Western European culture along with traditional morality.

  34. She willed the event into fact: Believe her, or face certain peril. Who knew CBF was a Jedi master, albeit on the Dark Side.

    • Replies: @Paul Jolliffe
    @The Alarmist

    Oh, I doubt CBF willed the event entirely out of thin air: I bet there's at least a chance something happened to her at some distant party at some point, but it sure didn't involve Kavanaugh. And she knew that perfectly well. That's why she kept changing the details - to keep from getting caught.

    So why did she blame Kavanaugh?

    Because she was fixated on him. She didn't like his politics (maybe they reminded her of her parents, with whom she had made a political break), or maybe guys like Kavanaugh had not paid her any attention back in school. Who knows?

    Either way, she simply didn't want Kavanaugh's views represented on the Supreme Court and she justified lying about him in her own mind because she thought he had to be stopped.

    But note that she didn't want credit for stopping him - her letter was to be distributed anonymously. But Democratic operatives inside Feinstein's office, seeing no other way to halt the nomination, deliberately leaked her letter and stoked the firestorm that followed.

    It almost worked.

    And CBF wasn't so shy or reluctant to testify after all. She really was a true believer.

    A neurotic, lying, manipulative, wretched, absolutely pathetic excuse for a decent woman - a woman who should be held up as an example to all young males as to why you should never, never, never socially get anywhere near a crazy woman - but still, a true believer.

    Replies: @The Alarmist, @Anonymous

  35. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    Yep, women – even very smart women – seem congenitally unable to think long-term and to move beyond stage one thinking. Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people? And they sure as hell don’t move on to stage three thinking: What will be the long-term impact on crime, employment, politics, etc. of allowing people who are low IQ and a different race into the country?

    Again, I’ve noticed this repeatedly in smart, capable women, which says this inability is hardwired.

    Men have their own blindspots, of course. That’s fine. Let’s focus on the areas that we are naturally suited. Women, in general, are far superior to men when it comes to nurturing children. It’s amazing to watch and essential to happiness.

    But holy shit are women terrible at politics and protecting the tribe. Women, in general, are far easier to manipulate via the media. The media is their guidebook to staying on the right side of the tribe’s mores, and women, being so much more vulnerable than men since the beginning of time, desparately want to be accepted by the tribe.

    That’s all well and good if the woman’s tribe controls the media, but what happens if another tribe wrests control and women continue to follow the message? I suppose that we’re witnessing just that scenario.

    At what point do Gentile white women realize that the media want to destroy their husbands, brothers, fathers and sons?

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We’re simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We’re simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

     

    BINGO

    The Pewitt Plan to remove from power the current controllers of the corporate media will do just that.

    The current controllers of the corporate electronic media must be neutralized, removed from power and, if necessary, removed from the United States. The evil anti-White tyrants who control Google, Facebook, Twitter, Comcast/NBC, Viacom/CBS, Disney/ABC and the entirety of the Murdoch propaganda apparatus must be removed from power.

    Trump cut their taxes and plays word games with these corporate media people.

    If the corporate media is the enemy, they must be treated as such.

    Tavern Ranters Are A Neat Bit Of Colonial American History.

    I Am Proud To Be A Patriotic Tavern Ranter.

    God Bless UKIP and Trump and Salvini and Orban and Le Pen and many others!
    , @Flip
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    "Moreover, she is intellectually short-sighted, for although her intuitive understanding quickly perceives what is near to her, on the other hand her circle of vision is limited and does not embrace anything that is remote; hence everything that is absent or past, or in the future, affects women in a less degree than men."

    Schopenhauer- "On Women"

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people?
     
    I think rather than this being a man woman-woman thing it is a contrast between people who see problems at the executive and managerial level rather than at the service provider level.

    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.

    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.

    We could also offer voluntary castration and gender reassignment to all male felons as an alternative to the death penalty, who would then be sent to work camps to do knitting and sewing.

    However, I am sure a few liberal and softies on the Supreme Court would object to this well-meaning Program for Increasing Prosperity for Americans (PIPA), so maybe we need a middle path.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Samuel Skinner

  36. anonymous[821] • Disclaimer says:

    “Always trust your feelings”.
    Actually, not necessarily bad advice. It’s when one overrides their gut instincts that they often get into trouble. Your instinct is your early warning system. This Ford woman comes across on a subliminal level as cracked as well as a reflexive liar. She seemed weird, an older middle-aged woman sporting a puffed-up hairstyle as big as her head along with some large-frame glasses, the effect of which seemed to obscure her features. Just an odd affect. Listening to her one could sense her making things up as she went along. Things like the second door being a sort of fantasy escape hatch make no sense. When one looks at the facts her claims of fear of flying were a lie and the second door was more likely for renters or guests along with the report of cheating and ripping off a previous boyfriend one sees a pattern of deceit going back to her younger days, probably her whole life. The little girl voice pose was another manipulation tactic. We’re supposed to assign credibility to this person about some drunken roughhousing that this person claims to have taken place when all the involved parties were teenagers almost four decades ago? My feelings are that it’s always best to avoid these mentally off-kilter types as they’re prone to making false accusations.

  37. @Curle
    Time to bring the incubus back? After all, there had to be a way to explain away pregnancies by high status unmarried females (politics), right? Maybe incubus attend DC suburban parties?

    Replies: @Whiskey, @SunBakedSuburb

    The incubi and succubi are exclusive to Clinton Cult parties. I hear Bill and Hillary are holding a fundraiser for Kamala Harris on Epstein Island.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @SunBakedSuburb


    I hear Bill and Hillary are holding a fundraiser for Kamala Harris on Epstein Island.
     
    Is that the one on the New Jersey quarter?
  38. A well written and perceptive column, Steve.

    It’s remarkable how much of our current political “crisis” is not based on anything real. Instead, it’s completely in our own heads.

    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.

    But what’s the big issue out there today? Bad words spoken about illegal immigrants? Women not being listened to every last time they complain of sexual harassment? Transgenders not having 24 hour access to all bathrooms and locker rooms?

    Seriously?

    This is the stuff of a nervous breakdown, not a genuine problem.

    We don’t need protests and barricades and riots to solve our political woes. We need ECT and Zoloft.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @candid_observer


    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.
     
    The perceived threats and necessity that led the United States into the World Wars and Vietnam arguably were mostly confined to our own heads.
    , @stillCARealist
    @candid_observer

    I've been waiting for the right place to put a recent anecdote.

    I was at a minor league soccer game and it was Hispanic Heritage Month. Did you know that? I didn't. Anyway, over the loudspeaker they announce that they take their fans' well-being very seriously so there would be no offensive behavior or speech tolerated. Specifically no one was to say anything offensive concerning anyone's race or gender. If this happened, there would be staff nearby, ready to act and remove the offender. And would people kindly tell the staff all about it? Then there was a long list of possible punishments that could result from your wicked words. In fact, the mini-sermon went on for a long time and we rebels in the stands began to mock it. I could feel myself being transported back to 5th grade chapel where the guilt trips were laid on thick enough to pave a highway.

    This is all phony morality based on a false religion of self-worship. Nobody can live up to its impossible demands so we wind up with constant fear and anxiety. Sinners! And there can be no forgiveness or redemption, only the pillory.

    , @Sammler
    @candid_observer

    The big issue is metastatic identity politics, snowballing as new grievance groups coalesce. The question is whether Americans can stop our nation from splintering. The identitarian’s tactics include the claim that it is illegitimate to even try.

    , @Iberiano
    @candid_observer

    I'm not a psychologist, but I've tracked, with much curiosity, the phenomena you speak of--that being the continued and increasingly specialized focus on "First World Problems" (35 year old alleged 'assaults', transbathrooms, etc). Every day in the US, white women are literally raped, stabbed, burned to death, ran over by cars (that was today's), and otherwise murdered by black males...yet the biggest concern is an alleged "assault" by a teen, or very young adult on a female peer...ages ago. Setting aside that it is obviously contrived, the fact that it has been taken so seriously is the issue--not to mention, the fact that many taking it seriously, know it is manufactured.

    This is just the American version of the raping/pillaging going on by Muslims in Europe while the government enforcers roam the countryside looking for offenders within their own people. Similar to as someone once noted, a white driver will be ticketed for driving 5 miles over the speed limit in the LA area, and while the ticket is being written, food truck latinos will drop bags of trash on the same street, without any concern to the enforcers. It seems to be the end of a culture/civilization when it heightens scrutiny and enforcement of trivial matters, while increasingly avoiding/ignoring major or continuing social or legal violations.

    I wish I knew the answer, beyond a giant mushroom cloud.

  39. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling.

    There are no scores to settle. You are giving the aggressors moral high ground they do not deserve.

  40. Anonymous[835] • Disclaimer says:
    @candid_observer
    A well written and perceptive column, Steve.

    It's remarkable how much of our current political "crisis" is not based on anything real. Instead, it's completely in our own heads.

    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.

    But what's the big issue out there today? Bad words spoken about illegal immigrants? Women not being listened to every last time they complain of sexual harassment? Transgenders not having 24 hour access to all bathrooms and locker rooms?

    Seriously?

    This is the stuff of a nervous breakdown, not a genuine problem.

    We don't need protests and barricades and riots to solve our political woes. We need ECT and Zoloft.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @stillCARealist, @Sammler, @Iberiano

    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.

    The perceived threats and necessity that led the United States into the World Wars and Vietnam arguably were mostly confined to our own heads.

  41. A little bit off topic (only a little though!), but this looks like a good opportunity to call attention to a startling quote from a recent NYT article. The article was not not an op-ed, but a consideration of how many popular movies from the 80s ( “Risky Business” in particular) look very different in today’s moral climate. The Kavanaugh thing does come up, but the article is more about the attitudes of today’s young people, and what really caught my attention was this:

    So much about high-school life today looks very different than it did in the 1980s, or even from a decade ago. Last spring, the ninth grade daughter of a friend told me, for example, that she could think of only two people in her New York City private high-school class of approximately 80, who identified as straight. Most considered themselves Q, for questioning. They did not want to be confined.

    If this is actually true it is astonishing! For years we have been assured that homosexuals were not trying to convert our children, and that in fact such a thing was impossible, because sexual preferences were inborn and immutable. And yet if the author’s ninth grade informant is to be believed it would appear that a vast transformation in attitudes is quite possible. Even if it were mostly performative, that would be astonishing in and of itself. But is it? Do we know what percentage of this class is going to end up in some way “queer,” and what the percentage would have been with the same group of students 50 years ago? And is anybody going to have the courage to do the research?

    • Replies: @jb
    @jb

    My comment hasn't been approved yet, and I'm just posting this reply out of curiosity, to see if one can reply to one's own yet unapproved comment.

    Replies: @jim jones

    , @Roderick Spode
    @jb

    Yes, it is entirely performative!

    These kids have been told that straight is bad, and they don’t wanna be bad.

    “Questioning” is hetero with the edges taken off.

    i.e. “I may be straight but I’m not Straight so don’t you dare call me one of Them.”

    This all happened before during the glam rock era— it seems like it was more fun back then.

    , @Alden
    @jb

    It’s the schools. 2 years ago the grade schools of California, both K-6 and K-8 made an enormous celebration when they made the bathrooms uni sex both sex whatever.

  42. Exactly which flavor of person is at the tippy-top of the intersectional totem pole is not a subject that the Democratic coalition can afford to discuss if it hopes to hold together. But at least all Democrats can be urged to come together in hating the cishet white male common enemy at the bottom.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.

    I am confused here – are white men HIGHER or LOWER on the Diversity Totem Pole? OTOH, it makes sense to say that minorities rank higher but OTOH that means that those who are higher are punching down. Everything is inverted because in the New World Order the last shall be first, but doesn’t it make sense to observe the traditional ranking and put white men at the top of the pole so that everyone else can punch UP at them (the only kind of punching permitted)? Minorities are competing with each other to say who is the lowest of the low, the biggest victim, which gives you the biggest moral claim. In other words a race to the bottom, which is where any culture is headed when people compete to be The Biggest Loser.

    Trump of course understands this and his biggest theme is “I Love Winning”. He is not interested in elevation to future sainthood by being the biggest victim in this world. He doesn’t believe Less is More – More is More in his book (see the decorating scheme of his apartment in Trump Tower). He is the un-McCain.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Jack D

    Figuring out the identity of the single person on Earth who has sufficient intersectional prog pokemon points to tell everyone else on Earth to shut up would be an interesting thought experiment.

    But obviously Steve's point here is that the Democrats' coalition can only be pasted together if multiple grievance groups think they will have the most pokemon points come the revolution.

    I think we saw the beginnings of the cracks during the Occupy riots where attempts at the idea of the "progressive stack" were put into flesh-and-blood use to comical effect.

    The revolutionary paradise must always be in the future - and the revolution eternal - because if they ever get there they'd immediately start tearing one another limb from limb.

    , @inertial
    @Jack D

    Some totem poles do have a white man on top.

    https://photos.smugmug.com/Totem-Poles/Sitka-Totems/i-Gm2K7G6/1/8ac8c28f/L/0706023-040-L.jpg

    Appropriately enough, this is a shame pole.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Jack D

    Yes, I noticed that little discrepancy too, Jack.

    Steve, a sentence or two pointing out how being a certified Victim gives you the power to upend and perfectly invert the totem pole, so that you and your ilk perceive yourselves to be 'punching up' when you're generally doing just the opposite, would be helpful here.

    , @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    It's the slave morality thing, umpteenth generation.

  43. @Jonathan Mason
    @Harry Baldwin

    When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they’re waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    I think the standard depending on what the person allegedly harassed depending on the perception of the alleged victim stems largely from employers being very wary of being put at risk of legal liability if female employees are sexually harassed in the workplace.

    Quite a few years ago a woman I knew well worked as a nurse in the psychiatric wing of a high security prison in Florida. It was an everyday occurrence for inmates to expose themselves and masturbate in front of female nurses. This practice was known as "gunning".

    Female nurses often wrote incident reports which were apparently just filed by the prison administration. A lot of the time the female nurses did not bother to file reports, because this was so routine, and it was extra paperwork, and they just chose to ignore the inmate behaviors.

    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.

    On the other hand, in the same time frame, a female nurse was fired from the same facility for paying inmates to masturbate in front of her.

    https://www.winknews.com/2018/02/26/florida-paid-11-million-sexual-harassment-claims/

    The diagram here shows that the amount paid out in the university systems was minuscule compared to Corrections and the Department of Juvenile Justice and or even the State Attorney's office which is presumably full of litigious women.

    The Florida Department of Corrections has since been forced to implement different policies.

    However, you can have too much of a good thing, and sexual harassment claims should not be used as a way of escalating minor grievances and personality clashes.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @AnotherDad, @J.Ross

    I was just talking to my prison guard friend (Folsom Prison) whose current duty is to protect nurses as they examine and treat inmates. Were he not right there, with his imposing size, the female nurses would be attacked, at some level, constantly. Why then have female nurses? He says it’s so hard to get any medical personnel to do these jobs that they take what they can get.

    I think I’d rather the policy be that if, as an inmate, you can’t be self-controlled enough to submit to medical care, then you don’t get any.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @stillCARealist


    I think I’d rather the policy be that if, as an inmate, you can’t be self-controlled enough to submit to medical care, then you don’t get any.
     
    Well, to some extent that does already happen. For example prisoners who cut their wrists in their prison cells are often left until they lose consciousness, as prison officers really do not want to deal with combative inmate who are spraying blood around that might be a vector for certain unpleasant ailments such as HIV and hepatitis.

    However I rather fancy that the Supreme Court has ruled that inmates have a constitutional right to receive medical treatment, so, for example inmates on death row are given antidepressants and put on suicide watch so that they do not kill themselves and cheat justice which demands that they serve a prison sentence of many years prior to execution by taking shortcuts.

    https://www.hg.org/prisoner-rights-law.html

    One also has to consider that if inmates have contagious diseases, the employing authority has some obligation to try to provide treatment and prophylaxis to protect other inmates and staff from blood and airborn infections. Prisoners may, however, refuse medical treatment if they wish.

    Incidentally, attacking nurses within a prison could lead to additional charges and a longer sentence, so not as common as one might think.

  44. Today’s counter-Nietzschean conventional wisdom…

    It would be a little more clearer to call it the widsom of ‘The Last Man’:

    The last men are tired of life, take no risks, and seek only comfort and security.

    Social conflict and challenges are minimized. Every individual lives equally and in “superficial” harmony.

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

  45. OT, but amusing:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majorities-dislike-political-correctness/572581/

    Youth isn’t a good proxy for support of political correctness—and it turns out race isn’t, either.

    Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87percent), and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness.

    The one part of the standard narrative that the data partially affirm is that African Americans are most likely to support political correctness. But the difference between them and other groups is much smaller than generally supposed: Three quarters of African Americans oppose political correctness. This means that they are only four percentage points less likely than whites, and only five percentage points less likely than the average, to believe that political correctness is a problem.

  46. Don’t you just haidt it when Steve chaits by writing about two authors with similar names in the same week?

    Wonder what Jonah Lehrer Berger Goldberg down in the whale would say about this.

    Or Rod Douthat or Ross Dreher…

  47. @candid_observer
    A well written and perceptive column, Steve.

    It's remarkable how much of our current political "crisis" is not based on anything real. Instead, it's completely in our own heads.

    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.

    But what's the big issue out there today? Bad words spoken about illegal immigrants? Women not being listened to every last time they complain of sexual harassment? Transgenders not having 24 hour access to all bathrooms and locker rooms?

    Seriously?

    This is the stuff of a nervous breakdown, not a genuine problem.

    We don't need protests and barricades and riots to solve our political woes. We need ECT and Zoloft.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @stillCARealist, @Sammler, @Iberiano

    I’ve been waiting for the right place to put a recent anecdote.

    I was at a minor league soccer game and it was Hispanic Heritage Month. Did you know that? I didn’t. Anyway, over the loudspeaker they announce that they take their fans’ well-being very seriously so there would be no offensive behavior or speech tolerated. Specifically no one was to say anything offensive concerning anyone’s race or gender. If this happened, there would be staff nearby, ready to act and remove the offender. And would people kindly tell the staff all about it? Then there was a long list of possible punishments that could result from your wicked words. In fact, the mini-sermon went on for a long time and we rebels in the stands began to mock it. I could feel myself being transported back to 5th grade chapel where the guilt trips were laid on thick enough to pave a highway.

    This is all phony morality based on a false religion of self-worship. Nobody can live up to its impossible demands so we wind up with constant fear and anxiety. Sinners! And there can be no forgiveness or redemption, only the pillory.

  48. Bill Kristol has an unblemished record- he was wrong again:

    . @BillKristol (who wrote JOKE dissertation that no one respects) gets it wrong again. KAVANAUGH IN!Newsflash: the FAKE republican party that you want will NEVER come back again. ACCEPT IT!!!— DarrenJBeattie (@DarrenJBeattie) October 5, 2018

  49. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns–enemies, threat, war–at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history …

    I’d submit this masculine, martial paradigm flipped once the Afghan and Iraq wars shifted to occupation and foreign aid. Now, we’re no longer killing people and smashing things but nurturing our fledgling allies into functioning democracies! It’s a jarringly feminized view coming on the heels of retaliation for an astounding criminal attack.

    So now our forces are under complicated rules of engagement and acting as a civil police force and international wet nurse instead of what militaries really are: legalized killers. Women and feminized men lap up this rebuild-and-reform stuff like kittens with crème. It’s like the female fantasy of taming the rakish bad boy, except at the geopolitical level.

    It’s also a stereotypically Semitic view: we’ll accomplish our goals with clever rhetoric and savvy bribery instead of that uncouth, goy violence.

  50. Male of the Year sentenced to 6 months for massive identity theft in Mueller probe.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Lot

    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/02/17/world/17dc-pinedo/merlin_134000402_ab6138ae-01d1-4fe5-8207-0cf38ec328f5-popup.jpg

  51. @Lot
    Male of the Year sentenced to 6 months for massive identity theft in Mueller probe.

    Replies: @Lot

  52. @Jack D

    Exactly which flavor of person is at the tippy-top of the intersectional totem pole is not a subject that the Democratic coalition can afford to discuss if it hopes to hold together. But at least all Democrats can be urged to come together in hating the cishet white male common enemy at the bottom.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I am confused here - are white men HIGHER or LOWER on the Diversity Totem Pole? OTOH, it makes sense to say that minorities rank higher but OTOH that means that those who are higher are punching down. Everything is inverted because in the New World Order the last shall be first, but doesn't it make sense to observe the traditional ranking and put white men at the top of the pole so that everyone else can punch UP at them (the only kind of punching permitted)? Minorities are competing with each other to say who is the lowest of the low, the biggest victim, which gives you the biggest moral claim. In other words a race to the bottom, which is where any culture is headed when people compete to be The Biggest Loser.

    Trump of course understands this and his biggest theme is "I Love Winning". He is not interested in elevation to future sainthood by being the biggest victim in this world. He doesn't believe Less is More - More is More in his book (see the decorating scheme of his apartment in Trump Tower). He is the un-McCain.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @inertial, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous

    Figuring out the identity of the single person on Earth who has sufficient intersectional prog pokemon points to tell everyone else on Earth to shut up would be an interesting thought experiment.

    But obviously Steve’s point here is that the Democrats’ coalition can only be pasted together if multiple grievance groups think they will have the most pokemon points come the revolution.

    I think we saw the beginnings of the cracks during the Occupy riots where attempts at the idea of the “progressive stack” were put into flesh-and-blood use to comical effect.

    The revolutionary paradise must always be in the future – and the revolution eternal – because if they ever get there they’d immediately start tearing one another limb from limb.

  53. Regarding witchcraft or racism and white men’s supposedly ability to project it (even unconsciously) but not be on the receiving end, I think the best analogy is that of radio interference or static.

    If you ever still listen to AM radio, you will notice that as you drive town around the signal will sometimes get drowned out with static. There are certain devices that emit massive amount of a bad kind of radio energy in all frequencies – things that give off sparks (electric motors, spark plugs, fluorescent light fixtures) are particularly bad (before they figured out how to send out radio waves in a coherent way, the very first radio transmitters just emitted sparks). These devices are the “white men” in this metaphor. The owners of these devices are often not aware that they are giving off invisible static as a byproduct of their normal operation and the generation of the static does not interfere with their own operation – they drive down the street or operate their power tools massively interfering with every radio in their vicinity in a completely oblivious fashion. This static can affect radios that are inside nearby buildings and vehicles and not even visible to them and sometimes even miles away. The static goes right thru walls and other obstacles. Nor do these devices “care” if they themselves are being bombarded by static from other devices. They have no facility for detecting static.

    But radio receivers (women, minorities) (while giving off no static of their own) are exquisitely sensitive to any static that they receive.

    In certain cases, the FCC requires that devices that emit static or radio energy (for example computers whose chip frequencies overlap with radio frequencies) be registered with the FCC and shielded in such a way that they do not emit harmful static. We need a type of FCC registration and to install shielding for white men (e.g. campus speech codes) so they too can no longer emit harmful static simply by operating in their normal way.

    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @DIscharged EE
    @Jack D

    that is an excellent analogy. I will probably recycle the analogy.
    What is your job background? Obviously, don't reveal too much.....

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jim Don Bob

    , @Dieter Kief
    @Jack D

    "We need a type of FCC registration and to install shielding for white men (e.g. campus speech codes) so they too can no longer emit harmful static simply by operating in their normal way."

    From the days when an attractive woman could sing about being a country station (=a little bit corny...) - -- - Those Were The Days...

    "Turn me on, I'm a Radio".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw8Mn-iSOyc

  54. So, what about the political angle here?

    From my vantage point at 30,000 feet (I have scrupulously avoided any involvement in the Kavanaugh media circus, the subject for me being one of unbearable tedium), the whole affair seems to be nothing but a ruthlessly cynical attempt by the Democrats to deny Trump’s nominee and prevent a conservative takeover of the Supreme Court, which has been the Cultural Left’s main bastion of power for the last 50 years. This outcome is the only thing that ever really mattered. By focusing on the means employed, we miss the larger political significance.

    But with that being said, the fact that the battle took the form of an exaggerated and hallucinatory fusillade of MeTooism is indeed rather curious. Somebody—a great many people, no doubt—actually thought this would work, which raises interesting questions about the mindset of the principal players involved. With all the tactical means at their disposal, that the Democrats decided to press the attack precisely here carries a symbolic significance quite apart from the political outcome. It’s almost as if the urge to win a Pyrrhic victory for women outweighed all other considerations. If I was a True Blue Liberal, I would be outraged right now at the Democrats for having squandered such an opportunity on this meaningless morality play, and I would be among the loudest voices demanding an end to such public grievance-airings on the national stage. Have they learned nothing from the failure of the Alicia Machado gambit? What could possibly be so important about these women that it justifies throwing away the Presidency, the Congress, and the Court? Somewhere deep in the Lowerarchy of Democratic strategic command, someone has started asking himself these questions.

    But of all the eternal verities latterly submerged in eclipse, one cannot be doubted, viz. that scholars of the law love their history. The US Congress and the Supreme court are immensely enduring, powerful institutions whose every jot and tittle passes at once into the annals of empire, there to be preserved in books until the passing of the age. The Kavanaugh chapter, too, will be available for posterity to analyze and puzzle over; and what posterity will find in those pages is a national dialogue gone headlong off the rails in personal obsessions while the fabric of the state frayed visibly by the day. The impression will be that “in those days” the ruling classes had forgotten that fitness for the task at hand is the real object of politics, and that one irredeemably selfish generation had rushed upon the seats of power with no other object than to display its emotional feathers, in the process giving the political form a pranging from which it never recovered.

    • Agree: Dieter Kief
    • Replies: @Coemgen
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I wonder if #metoo will fizzle out now that it's raison d'etre has come and passed and #metoo failed.

    Unfortunately, for the Democrats, Kavanaugh was very confident that he did not sexually assault a woman at any point in his life.

    I suspect that most heterosexual men would not have that level of confidence.

    The Democrats gambled their #metoo credits that Kavanaugh was like most heterosexual men.

    Replies: @anon

    , @Jack D
    @Intelligent Dasein


    With all the tactical means at their disposal, that the Democrats decided to press the attack precisely here carries a symbolic significance quite apart from the political outcome. It’s almost as if the urge to win a Pyrrhic victory for women outweighed all other considerations.
     
    What tactical means? The only tactics they had available to them were dirty underhanded tactics. All the customary and legal means were gone. They had lost the Senate, squandered the filibuster. Kav was eminently qualified and endorsed by the ABA, etc. His only "defect" was that he was conservative and a conservative President and Senate, by law and custom, had every right to appoint him just as Obama had every right to, and did, appoint leftists such as the Wise Latina. K's approval was imminent and inevitable unless they could throw a last minute monkey wrench into the works.

    Now you could argue that they could have come up with other underhanded tactics - made false accusations of financial improprieties, had someone come forward and say that he used to smoke crack with K in high school. But female trouble was a proven winner, especially in this era of MeToo which has been so successful in taking down so many powerful men in the Current Year. If it had not kept Thomas off the court, that was a long time ago and times have changed, but in any event it turned his confirmation into "The Year of the Woman" at the ballot box. Thomas's confirmation WAS a Pyrrhic victory , but for the Republicans. It's not clear that, assuming they had a strategy at all and didn't just blindly blunder into this fiasco, the D strategy this time was really to keep K off the court or just to rile up the women's vote again or if they were shooting for both.

    Whatever you call the current mess, you can't call it a Pyrrhic victory for women. Kav going on the court was not (from the "feminist" POV) not a victory at all, Pyrrhic or otherwise. It really doesn't look like they are going to get the ballot box boost they hoped for either but if that materializes I wouldn't call it Pyrrhic (but I doubt that it will - the backlash is bigger than the lash at this point). Ideally it will be a loss all around (and maybe a few leak prosecutions or FBI beach lady losing her job) so they are not tempted to try nonsense like this again.
  55. @Jack D

    Exactly which flavor of person is at the tippy-top of the intersectional totem pole is not a subject that the Democratic coalition can afford to discuss if it hopes to hold together. But at least all Democrats can be urged to come together in hating the cishet white male common enemy at the bottom.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I am confused here - are white men HIGHER or LOWER on the Diversity Totem Pole? OTOH, it makes sense to say that minorities rank higher but OTOH that means that those who are higher are punching down. Everything is inverted because in the New World Order the last shall be first, but doesn't it make sense to observe the traditional ranking and put white men at the top of the pole so that everyone else can punch UP at them (the only kind of punching permitted)? Minorities are competing with each other to say who is the lowest of the low, the biggest victim, which gives you the biggest moral claim. In other words a race to the bottom, which is where any culture is headed when people compete to be The Biggest Loser.

    Trump of course understands this and his biggest theme is "I Love Winning". He is not interested in elevation to future sainthood by being the biggest victim in this world. He doesn't believe Less is More - More is More in his book (see the decorating scheme of his apartment in Trump Tower). He is the un-McCain.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @inertial, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous

    Some totem poles do have a white man on top.

    Appropriately enough, this is a shame pole.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @inertial

    Is that in British Columbia? It looks like it should be 3000 mi (5000 km) away, on the other side of the country:


    https://media.cntraveler.com/photos/53da8dbadcd5888e145bc3e2/master/w_1024,c_limit/canada-post-dildo-newfoundland-alamy.jpg

  56. @candid_observer
    A well written and perceptive column, Steve.

    It's remarkable how much of our current political "crisis" is not based on anything real. Instead, it's completely in our own heads.

    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.

    But what's the big issue out there today? Bad words spoken about illegal immigrants? Women not being listened to every last time they complain of sexual harassment? Transgenders not having 24 hour access to all bathrooms and locker rooms?

    Seriously?

    This is the stuff of a nervous breakdown, not a genuine problem.

    We don't need protests and barricades and riots to solve our political woes. We need ECT and Zoloft.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @stillCARealist, @Sammler, @Iberiano

    The big issue is metastatic identity politics, snowballing as new grievance groups coalesce. The question is whether Americans can stop our nation from splintering. The identitarian’s tactics include the claim that it is illegitimate to even try.

  57. @countenance
    2013, the year after 2012, the year that the Obama re-elect campaign kicked the identity arsonism of the Coalition of the Fringes into high gear. You're right -- The cause is Obama, not smartphones.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    Smartphones tricked them into feeling their dominance was unchallenged. Obama’s re-election confirmed it in their minds.

    They were feeling their oats.

  58. May I put in a plug for an extremely insightful article, by the politically incorrect woman novelist Lionel Shriver, that came out back in August and seems to have been largely overlooked? The point she makes, which goes against the conventional wisdom, is that today’s college students aren’t actually snowflakes — they’re vicious, power-hungry little bullies.

    https://spectator.us/2018/08/millennials-arent-taking-offence-theyre-hunting-victims/

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    @Simon


    The point she makes, which goes against the conventional wisdom, is that today’s college students aren’t actually snowflakes — they’re vicious, power-hungry little bullies.
     
    Sigh. You can't be a snowflake all of your life.
    , @Jasper Been
    @Simon

    That column was great, and so is Lionel.

  59. @jb
    A little bit off topic (only a little though!), but this looks like a good opportunity to call attention to a startling quote from a recent NYT article. The article was not not an op-ed, but a consideration of how many popular movies from the 80s ( "Risky Business" in particular) look very different in today's moral climate. The Kavanaugh thing does come up, but the article is more about the attitudes of today's young people, and what really caught my attention was this:

    So much about high-school life today looks very different than it did in the 1980s, or even from a decade ago. Last spring, the ninth grade daughter of a friend told me, for example, that she could think of only two people in her New York City private high-school class of approximately 80, who identified as straight. Most considered themselves Q, for questioning. They did not want to be confined.
     
    If this is actually true it is astonishing! For years we have been assured that homosexuals were not trying to convert our children, and that in fact such a thing was impossible, because sexual preferences were inborn and immutable. And yet if the author's ninth grade informant is to be believed it would appear that a vast transformation in attitudes is quite possible. Even if it were mostly performative, that would be astonishing in and of itself. But is it? Do we know what percentage of this class is going to end up in some way "queer," and what the percentage would have been with the same group of students 50 years ago? And is anybody going to have the courage to do the research?

    Replies: @jb, @Roderick Spode, @Alden

    My comment hasn’t been approved yet, and I’m just posting this reply out of curiosity, to see if one can reply to one’s own yet unapproved comment.

    • Replies: @jim jones
    @jb

    Some threads on UR consist of one person replying to himself multiple times.

  60. The Coddling of the Amazon Machine Mind

    Amazon.com Inc’s machine-learning specialists uncovered a big problem: their new recruiting engine did not like women…

    In effect, Amazon’s system taught itself that male candidates were preferable. It penalized resumes that included the word “women’s,” as in “women’s chess club captain.” And it downgraded graduates of two all-women’s colleges, according to people familiar with the matter. They did not specify the names of the schools.

    Amazon edited the programs to make them neutral to these particular terms. But that was no guarantee that the machines would not devise other ways of sorting candidates that could prove discriminatory, the people said.

    The Seattle company ultimately disbanded the team by the start of last year because executives lost hope for the project, according to the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

    Amazon scraps secret AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women

  61. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    Very good analysis. This statement is crucial: “Men and women of a family have the same long term interests–the future of their children, and their future descendants.” Now, how do you defeat your adversaries in this culture war? Your enemy controls the printed and visual media, most of K-12 and virtually all universities. Moreover, they can promote their agenda 24/7 via advertisement and the entertainment business. I think that the battle can be won but it needs to be fought by people with considerable free time and significant financial resources. I am afraid that very few of us commenting on this website possess the latter.

    • Replies: @Samuel Skinner
    @WR

    He happens to be wrong. If the tribe is defeated men have no children, but women do. Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe. In fact if their current tribe has a low fertility rate and the tribe conquering them has a high one, it is in their interest to invite in invaders.

    Replies: @Flip, @Rosamond Vincy, @notanon

  62. • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    @Rosamond Vincy

    That was the most deranged ramble that I have seen for some time.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Rosamond Vincy

    The analogy is a little inapt.

    I was once walking into a bar in a prostitute-rich area of the Dominican Republic when a woman cupped my groin with her hand and squeezed my testicles and other neighborhood equipment.

    Naturally I fainted with shock, and then when I had recovered I went straight to the Tourist Police outpost s to make a report and give a statement, or tried to, but the police just laughed at me and made rude hand gestures.

    After this I spent years in therapy which cost thousands of dollars. In spite of this I often wake up in the morning dreaming that a woman is touching my privates and hearing policemen laughing. Will this torture never go away?

    I feel that the only way I can obtain closure is to track down my attacker, which is difficult.

    However, I think that if all the local women of that area who were on the game 20 years ago could be rounded up and forced to cup my groin and whisper "massage, baby?" in my ear, I would be able to recognize the hand that caused a lifetime of PTSD and she could be called to account. And even if I could not identify her, it would not be a complete waste of time as it would desensitize me to this kind of assault.

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

  63. @Rosamond Vincy
    Well this should explain everything:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6256797/A-R-Moxon-explains-women-mad-Kavanaugh-testicle-kicking-analogy.html

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Jonathan Mason

    That was the most deranged ramble that I have seen for some time.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Daniel Chieh


    That was the most deranged ramble that I have seen for some time.
     
    A.R. Moxon =

    Ax moron.
    Roman ox.


    Now this is the way to ramble:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vpuFYQwZ5o
  64. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @AnotherDad

    Yep, women - even very smart women - seem congenitally unable to think long-term and to move beyond stage one thinking. Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people? And they sure as hell don't move on to stage three thinking: What will be the long-term impact on crime, employment, politics, etc. of allowing people who are low IQ and a different race into the country?

    Again, I've noticed this repeatedly in smart, capable women, which says this inability is hardwired.

    Men have their own blindspots, of course. That's fine. Let's focus on the areas that we are naturally suited. Women, in general, are far superior to men when it comes to nurturing children. It's amazing to watch and essential to happiness.

    But holy shit are women terrible at politics and protecting the tribe. Women, in general, are far easier to manipulate via the media. The media is their guidebook to staying on the right side of the tribe's mores, and women, being so much more vulnerable than men since the beginning of time, desparately want to be accepted by the tribe.

    That's all well and good if the woman's tribe controls the media, but what happens if another tribe wrests control and women continue to follow the message? I suppose that we're witnessing just that scenario.

    At what point do Gentile white women realize that the media want to destroy their husbands, brothers, fathers and sons?

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We're simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Flip, @Jonathan Mason

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We’re simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    BINGO

    The Pewitt Plan to remove from power the current controllers of the corporate media will do just that.

    The current controllers of the corporate electronic media must be neutralized, removed from power and, if necessary, removed from the United States. The evil anti-White tyrants who control Google, Facebook, Twitter, Comcast/NBC, Viacom/CBS, Disney/ABC and the entirety of the Murdoch propaganda apparatus must be removed from power.

    Trump cut their taxes and plays word games with these corporate media people.

    If the corporate media is the enemy, they must be treated as such.

    Tavern Ranters Are A Neat Bit Of Colonial American History.

    I Am Proud To Be A Patriotic Tavern Ranter.

    God Bless UKIP and Trump and Salvini and Orban and Le Pen and many others!

  65. @Daniel Chieh
    [insert complaint about Taki]

    Replies: @BenKenobi

    Looks like you beat #11 by a few seconds, Dan.

  66. @candid_observer
    A well written and perceptive column, Steve.

    It's remarkable how much of our current political "crisis" is not based on anything real. Instead, it's completely in our own heads.

    The US has of course endured crises in the past. Yet they were always based on something in the real world that was big: the Civil War, slavery, the World Wars, the Vietnam War, segregation.

    But what's the big issue out there today? Bad words spoken about illegal immigrants? Women not being listened to every last time they complain of sexual harassment? Transgenders not having 24 hour access to all bathrooms and locker rooms?

    Seriously?

    This is the stuff of a nervous breakdown, not a genuine problem.

    We don't need protests and barricades and riots to solve our political woes. We need ECT and Zoloft.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @stillCARealist, @Sammler, @Iberiano

    I’m not a psychologist, but I’ve tracked, with much curiosity, the phenomena you speak of–that being the continued and increasingly specialized focus on “First World Problems” (35 year old alleged ‘assaults’, transbathrooms, etc). Every day in the US, white women are literally raped, stabbed, burned to death, ran over by cars (that was today’s), and otherwise murdered by black males…yet the biggest concern is an alleged “assault” by a teen, or very young adult on a female peer…ages ago. Setting aside that it is obviously contrived, the fact that it has been taken so seriously is the issue–not to mention, the fact that many taking it seriously, know it is manufactured.

    This is just the American version of the raping/pillaging going on by Muslims in Europe while the government enforcers roam the countryside looking for offenders within their own people. Similar to as someone once noted, a white driver will be ticketed for driving 5 miles over the speed limit in the LA area, and while the ticket is being written, food truck latinos will drop bags of trash on the same street, without any concern to the enforcers. It seems to be the end of a culture/civilization when it heightens scrutiny and enforcement of trivial matters, while increasingly avoiding/ignoring major or continuing social or legal violations.

    I wish I knew the answer, beyond a giant mushroom cloud.

  67. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @AnotherDad

    Yep, women - even very smart women - seem congenitally unable to think long-term and to move beyond stage one thinking. Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people? And they sure as hell don't move on to stage three thinking: What will be the long-term impact on crime, employment, politics, etc. of allowing people who are low IQ and a different race into the country?

    Again, I've noticed this repeatedly in smart, capable women, which says this inability is hardwired.

    Men have their own blindspots, of course. That's fine. Let's focus on the areas that we are naturally suited. Women, in general, are far superior to men when it comes to nurturing children. It's amazing to watch and essential to happiness.

    But holy shit are women terrible at politics and protecting the tribe. Women, in general, are far easier to manipulate via the media. The media is their guidebook to staying on the right side of the tribe's mores, and women, being so much more vulnerable than men since the beginning of time, desparately want to be accepted by the tribe.

    That's all well and good if the woman's tribe controls the media, but what happens if another tribe wrests control and women continue to follow the message? I suppose that we're witnessing just that scenario.

    At what point do Gentile white women realize that the media want to destroy their husbands, brothers, fathers and sons?

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We're simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Flip, @Jonathan Mason

    “Moreover, she is intellectually short-sighted, for although her intuitive understanding quickly perceives what is near to her, on the other hand her circle of vision is limited and does not embrace anything that is remote; hence everything that is absent or past, or in the future, affects women in a less degree than men.”

    Schopenhauer- “On Women”

  68. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    But if women have no husbands or marry late in life to a lower value male they settle for and resent?

    Why then indeed women are the natural and eternal enemy of the White male. How else could it be otherwise?

  69. @Jack D
    Regarding witchcraft or racism and white men's supposedly ability to project it (even unconsciously) but not be on the receiving end, I think the best analogy is that of radio interference or static.

    If you ever still listen to AM radio, you will notice that as you drive town around the signal will sometimes get drowned out with static. There are certain devices that emit massive amount of a bad kind of radio energy in all frequencies - things that give off sparks (electric motors, spark plugs, fluorescent light fixtures) are particularly bad (before they figured out how to send out radio waves in a coherent way, the very first radio transmitters just emitted sparks). These devices are the "white men" in this metaphor. The owners of these devices are often not aware that they are giving off invisible static as a byproduct of their normal operation and the generation of the static does not interfere with their own operation - they drive down the street or operate their power tools massively interfering with every radio in their vicinity in a completely oblivious fashion. This static can affect radios that are inside nearby buildings and vehicles and not even visible to them and sometimes even miles away. The static goes right thru walls and other obstacles. Nor do these devices "care" if they themselves are being bombarded by static from other devices. They have no facility for detecting static.

    But radio receivers (women, minorities) (while giving off no static of their own) are exquisitely sensitive to any static that they receive.

    In certain cases, the FCC requires that devices that emit static or radio energy (for example computers whose chip frequencies overlap with radio frequencies) be registered with the FCC and shielded in such a way that they do not emit harmful static. We need a type of FCC registration and to install shielding for white men (e.g. campus speech codes) so they too can no longer emit harmful static simply by operating in their normal way.

    Replies: @DIscharged EE, @Dieter Kief

    that is an excellent analogy. I will probably recycle the analogy.
    What is your job background? Obviously, don’t reveal too much…..

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @DIscharged EE

    Legal, but I know a little bit about a lot of things.

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @DIscharged EE

    Jack D is the iSteve resident lawyer.

    Replies: @Anonym

  70. @SunBakedSuburb
    @Curle

    The incubi and succubi are exclusive to Clinton Cult parties. I hear Bill and Hillary are holding a fundraiser for Kamala Harris on Epstein Island.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I hear Bill and Hillary are holding a fundraiser for Kamala Harris on Epstein Island.

    Is that the one on the New Jersey quarter?

  71. Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We’re simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    Some women find men with crazy balls to be amusing. Politics is the art of the possible. You just don’t know what is possible till you try. Trumpy showed us that.

    Women might vote for somebody who promises to smash the evil, anti-White scum currently controlling the internet and other electronic media outlets in the United States.

    The Alphabet Corporation that controls Google and YouTube and other corporations must be destroyed or neutralized.

    Google is directed and controlled by a foreigner, Sundar Pichai, who can be described as being anti-White.

    The Alphabet Corporation is directed and controlled by a foreigner named Sergey Brin and an American named Larry Page.

    The Alphabet Corporation has too much control over the information flow on the internet. The Alphabet Corporation must be busted up or destroyed in order to protect free speech in the United States.

    https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1049861839960469504

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    @Charles Pewitt

    Sergey Brin is an American, he has the same background as Max Boot. Oh wait a minute......

  72. @Daniel Chieh
    @Rosamond Vincy

    That was the most deranged ramble that I have seen for some time.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    That was the most deranged ramble that I have seen for some time.

    A.R. Moxon =

    Ax moron.
    Roman ox.

    Now this is the way to ramble:

  73. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @AnotherDad

    Yep, women - even very smart women - seem congenitally unable to think long-term and to move beyond stage one thinking. Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people? And they sure as hell don't move on to stage three thinking: What will be the long-term impact on crime, employment, politics, etc. of allowing people who are low IQ and a different race into the country?

    Again, I've noticed this repeatedly in smart, capable women, which says this inability is hardwired.

    Men have their own blindspots, of course. That's fine. Let's focus on the areas that we are naturally suited. Women, in general, are far superior to men when it comes to nurturing children. It's amazing to watch and essential to happiness.

    But holy shit are women terrible at politics and protecting the tribe. Women, in general, are far easier to manipulate via the media. The media is their guidebook to staying on the right side of the tribe's mores, and women, being so much more vulnerable than men since the beginning of time, desparately want to be accepted by the tribe.

    That's all well and good if the woman's tribe controls the media, but what happens if another tribe wrests control and women continue to follow the message? I suppose that we're witnessing just that scenario.

    At what point do Gentile white women realize that the media want to destroy their husbands, brothers, fathers and sons?

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We're simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Flip, @Jonathan Mason

    Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people?

    I think rather than this being a man woman-woman thing it is a contrast between people who see problems at the executive and managerial level rather than at the service provider level.

    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.

    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.

    We could also offer voluntary castration and gender reassignment to all male felons as an alternative to the death penalty, who would then be sent to work camps to do knitting and sewing.

    However, I am sure a few liberal and softies on the Supreme Court would object to this well-meaning Program for Increasing Prosperity for Americans (PIPA), so maybe we need a middle path.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @Jonathan Mason


    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.
     
    The economics are not complex.

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we're housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we're losing money.

    Say's Law remains everywhere and always true: We pay for production with other production. If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Jonathan Mason, @Rob McX

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Jonathan Mason


    so maybe we need a middle path.
     
    The Japanese provide a pretty good model. No immigration. View the economy as a tool to help ALL of the people as opposed to a god that demands our sacrifice. Have an elite that views the people as members of their own family.

    No need for drastic measures.

    Sadly, that path closed for the United States long ago. I don't believe that another path under civic nationalism will work. Time for non-Jewish whites to try and carve out their own community in this new society.

    We're all Jews now, better start acting like it.
    , @Samuel Skinner
    @Jonathan Mason


    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.
     
    You are doing it wrong; that puts too much power into the hands of the state (who proceeds to murder people for fun). Do it the old Roman way- fathers decide if the kids live and bastards are exposed to the elements.
  74. @Abe

    We must believe the woman, even if, in the case of Blasey Ford, those who know her best don’t seem to believe her.
     
    We need to start selling T-shirts that say “We must believe the 2 women” with some Arabic text below it (ideally the wording of the Sharia statute that says two women’s testimony is equal to that of one man, but maybe even better if it’s something totally random and haphazard, like “30% off red pepper humus at Aziz’s falafel house”)

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose, @Anonymous

    I believe Carolyn Bryant. Is that wrong?

    • Replies: @Roderick Spode
    @Ghost of Bull Moose

    She made two contradictory claims (the second a recantation of the first) so I’d hope you believe at least one of them.

  75. @jb
    @jb

    My comment hasn't been approved yet, and I'm just posting this reply out of curiosity, to see if one can reply to one's own yet unapproved comment.

    Replies: @jim jones

    Some threads on UR consist of one person replying to himself multiple times.

  76. @Rosamond Vincy
    Well this should explain everything:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6256797/A-R-Moxon-explains-women-mad-Kavanaugh-testicle-kicking-analogy.html

    Replies: @Daniel Chieh, @Jonathan Mason

    The analogy is a little inapt.

    I was once walking into a bar in a prostitute-rich area of the Dominican Republic when a woman cupped my groin with her hand and squeezed my testicles and other neighborhood equipment.

    Naturally I fainted with shock, and then when I had recovered I went straight to the Tourist Police outpost s to make a report and give a statement, or tried to, but the police just laughed at me and made rude hand gestures.

    After this I spent years in therapy which cost thousands of dollars. In spite of this I often wake up in the morning dreaming that a woman is touching my privates and hearing policemen laughing. Will this torture never go away?

    I feel that the only way I can obtain closure is to track down my attacker, which is difficult.

    However, I think that if all the local women of that area who were on the game 20 years ago could be rounded up and forced to cup my groin and whisper “massage, baby?” in my ear, I would be able to recognize the hand that caused a lifetime of PTSD and she could be called to account. And even if I could not identify her, it would not be a complete waste of time as it would desensitize me to this kind of assault.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @Jonathan Mason

    You've really thought this out....

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  77. @jb
    A little bit off topic (only a little though!), but this looks like a good opportunity to call attention to a startling quote from a recent NYT article. The article was not not an op-ed, but a consideration of how many popular movies from the 80s ( "Risky Business" in particular) look very different in today's moral climate. The Kavanaugh thing does come up, but the article is more about the attitudes of today's young people, and what really caught my attention was this:

    So much about high-school life today looks very different than it did in the 1980s, or even from a decade ago. Last spring, the ninth grade daughter of a friend told me, for example, that she could think of only two people in her New York City private high-school class of approximately 80, who identified as straight. Most considered themselves Q, for questioning. They did not want to be confined.
     
    If this is actually true it is astonishing! For years we have been assured that homosexuals were not trying to convert our children, and that in fact such a thing was impossible, because sexual preferences were inborn and immutable. And yet if the author's ninth grade informant is to be believed it would appear that a vast transformation in attitudes is quite possible. Even if it were mostly performative, that would be astonishing in and of itself. But is it? Do we know what percentage of this class is going to end up in some way "queer," and what the percentage would have been with the same group of students 50 years ago? And is anybody going to have the courage to do the research?

    Replies: @jb, @Roderick Spode, @Alden

    Yes, it is entirely performative!

    These kids have been told that straight is bad, and they don’t wanna be bad.

    “Questioning” is hetero with the edges taken off.

    i.e. “I may be straight but I’m not Straight so don’t you dare call me one of Them.”

    This all happened before during the glam rock era— it seems like it was more fun back then.

  78. @Jonathan Mason
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people?
     
    I think rather than this being a man woman-woman thing it is a contrast between people who see problems at the executive and managerial level rather than at the service provider level.

    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.

    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.

    We could also offer voluntary castration and gender reassignment to all male felons as an alternative to the death penalty, who would then be sent to work camps to do knitting and sewing.

    However, I am sure a few liberal and softies on the Supreme Court would object to this well-meaning Program for Increasing Prosperity for Americans (PIPA), so maybe we need a middle path.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Samuel Skinner

    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.

    The economics are not complex.

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we’re housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we’re losing money.

    Say’s Law remains everywhere and always true: We pay for production with other production. If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen."

    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I'm pretty sure I willed to do it - because I loved them.

    Replies: @Tex, @Jim Don Bob, @Rosamond Vincy

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Intelligent Dasein


    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we’re housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we’re losing money.
     
    An excellent argument for abolishing the military and prisons, and yet the stockholders in weapons manufacture enterprises and private corrections corporations would not thank you.

    If these people are given SNAP (food stamps) cards, they are profitable for supermarkets and merchants who provide them with food at much more than the actual cost of the production of the food, so SNAP, which more than 10% of Americans receive, is actually a subsidy program for stockholders in companies like Walmart (WMT).

    Children, of course, are also economically unproductive for many years and require food, clothing, and numerous toys--and for the most part their lives are subsidized by their parent(s), but we all pay for them due to tax deductions that mean that parents pay less federal income tax than childless adults. To add insult to injury, childless adults also have to pay taxes for schools to babysit aforesaid unproductive children.

    Life just isn't fair. However the US is not a country like Haiti where there really isn't enough food to go round and it is quite common to see stunted children with malnutrition.

    , @Rob McX
    @Intelligent Dasein


    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods.
     
    That's true in the context of the economy as a whole. But some people make billions while contributing nothing to the overall health of the economy. It's especially lucrative for these people when the government is paying them.
  79. @Jonathan Mason
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people?
     
    I think rather than this being a man woman-woman thing it is a contrast between people who see problems at the executive and managerial level rather than at the service provider level.

    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.

    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.

    We could also offer voluntary castration and gender reassignment to all male felons as an alternative to the death penalty, who would then be sent to work camps to do knitting and sewing.

    However, I am sure a few liberal and softies on the Supreme Court would object to this well-meaning Program for Increasing Prosperity for Americans (PIPA), so maybe we need a middle path.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Samuel Skinner

    so maybe we need a middle path.

    The Japanese provide a pretty good model. No immigration. View the economy as a tool to help ALL of the people as opposed to a god that demands our sacrifice. Have an elite that views the people as members of their own family.

    No need for drastic measures.

    Sadly, that path closed for the United States long ago. I don’t believe that another path under civic nationalism will work. Time for non-Jewish whites to try and carve out their own community in this new society.

    We’re all Jews now, better start acting like it.

  80. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    “Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn’t focus ideologically or narratively on “equality” or “freedom”, but rather on grievance against men.”

    Look at the Wiki category “feminists by religion”. There’s certainly a YUGE over-representation of one religion.

    As of now

    Feminists categorized by known religious (or ethnoreligious) affiliation.
    Subcategories

    This category has the following 8 subcategories, out of 8 total.

    B Buddhist feminists‎ (17 P)
    C Christian feminists‎ (7 C, 35 P)
    H Hindu feminists‎ (1 P)
    I Islamic feminists‎ (69 P)
    J Jewish feminists‎ (277 P)
    S Sikh feminists‎ (2 P)
    U Universalist feminists‎ (1 C)
    W Wiccan feminists‎ (10 P)

    And if you look at the talk on that topic, you’ll see Wiki editors actually being politically neutral.

    This page needs to be deleted immediately. Bigots and misogynists are trying to use the number of Jewish feminists as some sort of political statement. This must be stopped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.200.5 (talk) 04:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

    You’re the only bigot here. 204.52.135.203 (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

    That is ridiculous. To delete this page would be to censor factual information for the purpose of advancing your own agenda. Is there perhaps a conflict of interest for why you would want the background of popular feminists to be covered up? 140.180.255.79 (talk) 05:03, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

    Is it a “conflict of interest” to want to promote equality? There’s absolutely no reason to have this page if its only use is as a weapon by racists. I’m not saying let’s delete all the ‘religion’ info on each individual feminists’ page, but removing an easy numerical categorization like this is a pretty fair request in my opinion. Please be reasonable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.200.2 (talk) 23:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

    You appear to be on a personal crusade here. There are plenty of pages sorting people by ethnic or religious background. Are these all created by racists? In my opinion you sound borderline paranoid and I highly doubt that you can back up your claims – it is really a far-stretched assumption anyway – that only racists care about the ethnicity of feminists. Please familiarize yourself with WP:CENSOR 91.49.221.249 (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

    • Replies: @njguy73
    @YetAnotherAnon


    U Universalist feminists‎ (1 C)
     
    They chant, "Hey, ho! Hey, ho! This patriarchy...well, who am I to say it should go?"

    "And what is patriarchy? Or gender?"
  81. @stillCARealist
    @Jonathan Mason

    I was just talking to my prison guard friend (Folsom Prison) whose current duty is to protect nurses as they examine and treat inmates. Were he not right there, with his imposing size, the female nurses would be attacked, at some level, constantly. Why then have female nurses? He says it's so hard to get any medical personnel to do these jobs that they take what they can get.

    I think I'd rather the policy be that if, as an inmate, you can't be self-controlled enough to submit to medical care, then you don't get any.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    I think I’d rather the policy be that if, as an inmate, you can’t be self-controlled enough to submit to medical care, then you don’t get any.

    Well, to some extent that does already happen. For example prisoners who cut their wrists in their prison cells are often left until they lose consciousness, as prison officers really do not want to deal with combative inmate who are spraying blood around that might be a vector for certain unpleasant ailments such as HIV and hepatitis.

    However I rather fancy that the Supreme Court has ruled that inmates have a constitutional right to receive medical treatment, so, for example inmates on death row are given antidepressants and put on suicide watch so that they do not kill themselves and cheat justice which demands that they serve a prison sentence of many years prior to execution by taking shortcuts.

    https://www.hg.org/prisoner-rights-law.html

    One also has to consider that if inmates have contagious diseases, the employing authority has some obligation to try to provide treatment and prophylaxis to protect other inmates and staff from blood and airborn infections. Prisoners may, however, refuse medical treatment if they wish.

    Incidentally, attacking nurses within a prison could lead to additional charges and a longer sentence, so not as common as one might think.

  82. @Intelligent Dasein
    @Jonathan Mason


    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.
     
    The economics are not complex.

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we're housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we're losing money.

    Say's Law remains everywhere and always true: We pay for production with other production. If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Jonathan Mason, @Rob McX

    “If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen.”

    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I’m pretty sure I willed to do it – because I loved them.

    • Replies: @Tex
    @YetAnotherAnon


    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I’m pretty sure I willed to do it – because I loved them.
     
    One might extend the logic to say that it is just & constructive to support doing so for strangers, if only because they are our fellow countrymen and thus a part of a community that we share. As the community shaped our lives, creating some affection for it, we can recognize our fellows as worthy of support, within the limits of reason and justice.

    Randos that show up at the border looking for a handout, not so much.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Me too. Two daughters and my mother in law.

    , @Rosamond Vincy
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Make the kids rake the leaves or wash the dishes, and your conscience is clear.

  83. @Jonathan Mason
    @Harry Baldwin

    When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they’re waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    I think the standard depending on what the person allegedly harassed depending on the perception of the alleged victim stems largely from employers being very wary of being put at risk of legal liability if female employees are sexually harassed in the workplace.

    Quite a few years ago a woman I knew well worked as a nurse in the psychiatric wing of a high security prison in Florida. It was an everyday occurrence for inmates to expose themselves and masturbate in front of female nurses. This practice was known as "gunning".

    Female nurses often wrote incident reports which were apparently just filed by the prison administration. A lot of the time the female nurses did not bother to file reports, because this was so routine, and it was extra paperwork, and they just chose to ignore the inmate behaviors.

    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.

    On the other hand, in the same time frame, a female nurse was fired from the same facility for paying inmates to masturbate in front of her.

    https://www.winknews.com/2018/02/26/florida-paid-11-million-sexual-harassment-claims/

    The diagram here shows that the amount paid out in the university systems was minuscule compared to Corrections and the Department of Juvenile Justice and or even the State Attorney's office which is presumably full of litigious women.

    The Florida Department of Corrections has since been forced to implement different policies.

    However, you can have too much of a good thing, and sexual harassment claims should not be used as a way of escalating minor grievances and personality clashes.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @AnotherDad, @J.Ross

    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.

  84. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Blacks may think voodoo-like, but the controllers of elite institutions are Jewish, so maybe we should look into the Jewish Mind.

    Jewish Mind is a strange neurosis of hyper-megalomania and ultra-paranoia. Why? Jewish mental culture and attitude developed with the idea that there is One God and He favors Jews to be rulers of the world. Thus Megalomania and Arrogance.

    But Jews realized through most of history that Other Peoples were bigger and stronger than Jews. The lowly and filthy pagans were greater conquerors and, if anything, Jews relied on their mercy to survive. Thus Paranoia and Self-Pity.

    So, Jewish mind has both over-dog and under-dog mentality. You see this with Moses in TEN COMMANDMENTS. When he goes to confront Ramses II, he is both Humble and Proud. He is a humble servant of God, the one true God. But he acts like he is greater than all the pharaohs put together because Divine Righteousness is on his side.

    Today in elite colleges all across the US, we see this neurosis among the elitists(who attitudes and worldview ape those of Jews as trendsetters). On the one hand, they(and their parents) have done everything to gain access to top institutions and do everything to make the most money or reach highest status. Arrogance and pride. But they just love to whimper like they are Forever Victims who are challenging the Power that, symbolically at least, remains in the Image of the Evil White Male. It’s hilarious that the Deep State and its Cronies would designate themselves as ‘the Resistance’. LOL.

    Granted, this Jewish Neurosis was also part of Christianity as its message has been about Humble Jesus martyred by humans but who turned out to be the Son of God. (Christianity is especially problematic as it is bound to feel guilty for everything it does to expand its power. On the one hand, Christians feel righteous and justified in spreading the Word of God. But this has entailed violence and brutality. So, in the long run, Christians feel self-loathing for what they’ve done and try to atone by spreading more of the Faith, but then, this entails even more violence that makes for more guilt.) Still, this neurosis is bigger among Jews because they’ve long maintained a religion that was about tribalism and universalism at once. Core of Christianity is to share the Love of God with all of mankind. Core of Judaism is to keep the special Love of God for the Jews. Everyone else can only get trickle-down Love after Jews hog most of it for themselves. In the US, we have Jews trying to maintain and amass more of Top Power as the rightful rulers of the world… but also playing the role of underdog. Incredibly, they got away with this shtick with Palestinians too. Even now, many Americans believe that Jews must defend themselves from powerful Palestinians than other way around. Jews hate Christianity because it is a reminder of Jewish moral-spiritual hypocrisy. Christianity forever reminds the Jews and the World that when Jews had a chance to share God with rest of humanity through the Love of Jesus, they not only rejected Him but killed Him. Even if we blame Romans more for the death, the fact remains that Jews rejected the New Way that would truly universalize God. Even though the Narrative teaches us that the goyim were to blame for the separateness of Jews, the fact is it was Jewish insistence on the special Covenant that prevented them from becoming one with rest of humanity. Christians didn’t shut the door to Jews. It was the Jews who chose to remain outside and shut their own doors. Even among secular Jews, we have this game of Jews-as-champions-of-all-of-humanity while doing everything to maintain what is special and unique about themselves. Also, Jews don’t promote Diversity in the West to ensure the melding of all peoples into one humanity. Rather, it is to promote contention and division among humanity so that Jewish elites could feel more secure at the top.

    Because Jewish Power evolved in a state of disadvantage, it doesn’t really know what to do when the Power falls on its lap. For most of history, the Jewish Advantage was longevity. Jews lost in sprints but won in the marathon. So, pagan folks rose high and fast and became great powers. But they usually declined and fell apart in a few centuries. Also, they didn’t just decline but often disappeared. What happened to the Hittites? Or Ancient pagan Egyptians? Or Babylonians? Because pagan cultures were all about the Great god-like rulers and idols, when those things fell, the entire culture fell. When the greater rulers were deposed and idols smashed, the people were without a culture and assimilated into the new power. Pagan Orders emphasized Might as basis for pride and rule. So, when they lost, they lost not only pride but a sense of identity. Jews emphasized righteousness as basis for their culture, and this meant they had value even in defeat IF they remained righteous in the eyes of God.
    The Covenant meant that Jewish culture was with every Jew as each Jew had this contract with God. And as this Covenant was about goodness and devotion, even a humble Jew could feel God was on His side.
    But another side of the Covenant said that if Jews stick with God, they will eventually become a great power who will rule over all others. Anyway, the Covenant allowed Jews to carry on even when their Order fell apart. Even when Jewish rulers were killed and even when Jewish Temples were smashed, the core idea of the Covenant remained with Jews as long as the Family and the Texts remained. As such, even in defeat, Jews could go survive for millennia, incredibly even as minorities in exile in foreign lands. So, Jews lost the sprint but won the marathon.

    But in the 20th century, Jews began to win the sprints as well, as in Bolshevik Russia and in postwar US(that also dominates EU). Flush with all this power and success, Jews didn’t know what to do. They were used to long distance measuring of power. Now, they had super-power in high doses. What was to be done? Too many Jews got over-eager and carried out radicalism to the hilt, like in USSR. Without pacing themselves in the game of power, Jews tried to do as much as possible to create utopia. If not radical idealism, there was wanton greed. With the freedom and opportunity to amass great wealth, certain Jews went wild like Jordan Belfort and fleeced everything they could. Also, Bernie Madoff and oligarchs in Russia.
    In the past, when Jews got over-eager in their ambition or greed, they were balanced out by ‘antisemitism’ that ranged from exile to violence. As unpleasant and nasty as such could be, they had a ‘corrective’ and sobering effect on Jewish power.
    It’s like market corrections are unpleasant but brings the economy back to reality.

    The problem is there hasn’t been a Power Correction for Jews in the West since end of WWII. And over the years, this Power Bubble has gone utterly nuts. Jewish Power has risen sky-high. Instead of Jews soberly trying to address its problems, they try to hide it by screaming White Evil, White Evil or Russia, Russia, Russia to distract us from the real Power Bubble which just keeps growing bigger and bigger.

    As for the Cultural Revolution in China, it was both top down and down-up. Mao meant it to be top-down but it soon went out of hand. A real Mao-like cultural revolution would certainly favor the white patriots in the US. The theme of cultural revolution was anti-elitism. Mao never lost his resentment for the upper crust. As a student of peasant-background, he never forgot the disdain he got from kids from better families. High School never ended with Mao, especially as China was more status-obsessed than the West. So, Mao saw the cultural revolution as mini-Maos attacking the new elites. He was siding with working class and rural youths against the New Urban Haute Communist elites. If a Mao-style Cultural Revolution broke out in the US, white working class youths would storm colleges, beat up elite teachers, and burn globo-homo texts.

    As horrible as the Cultural Revolution was, it may have been a long-term good for China in this sense. It reiterated the need for Common National Consciousness. It suppressed status-elitism. In contrast, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan didn’t undergo such and ended up with status-elitism that is now totally poisonous.
    Maybe a mild form of cultural revolution is good for society now and then. Spare the books but maybe elites need a little beating up once in a while. Imagine if the American Working Class went on a rampage in Yale, Princeton, and Harvard and taught those elites a lesson. Populist sacking of elite institutions would have the effect of the French Revolution where all those gay-ish French aristos with powdered wigs got their comeuppance.

    Mao sensed that Confucian elitism had turned dogmatic and kept China back. And he feared that the rise of New CCP class of elitists would lead to the same thing. So, why not shake things up a bit. But even he had no idea the kind of power he would unleash by telling kids to ‘bombard the headquarters’. Mao the top dog gave orders to the youths, but the youth rage reached pretty high, leading to the downfall of many top officials, some of whom Mao wanted deposed, some of whom Mao did not.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    @Anon


    In the past, when Jews got over-eager in their ambition or greed, they were balanced out by ‘antisemitism’ that ranged from exile to violence. As unpleasant and nasty as such could be, they had a ‘corrective’ and sobering effect on Jewish power.
    It’s like market corrections are unpleasant but bring the economy back to reality.
     
    And you draw the conclusion:
    "The problem is: There hasn’t been a Power Correction for Jews in the West since the end of WWII."

    There were power-corrections regarding the Jews before WWII in Europe. Thing is: Very little of those in Germany. That's the reason, that in the early thirties it was a wide-spread assumption, that if an anti-Jewish movement would start, it would for sure not happen in Germany, but in France, for example. But as it turned out, those assumptions were wrong.

    Very interesting is the Swiss example too, because, nothing much happened at all as far as anti-Semitism is concerned. The core of the Swiss society was too stable. It needed no corrections whatsoever. A historical best practice case, if ever there was one.

  85. They don’t coddle minds in Canada, where an Ontario law will allow turbanned Sikhs to ride motorcycles without helmets.
    https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/10/10/ontario-to-exempt-sikh-motorcyclists-from-helmet-law.html
    If you have not done so already, watch the opening sequence of Idiocracy (with the animated family tree) before proceeding further into the terrifying future.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @J.Ross

    And Sikh Mounties do not have to wear the Mountie hat. They don't look like this guy:

    https://www.secondspin.com/amgcover/dvd/large/u2/23/u22335pjjlx.jpg

  86. @Jonathan Mason
    @Harry Baldwin

    When a couple of young men follow me for several blocks down a dark city street, I may think they’re waiting for a chance to rob me. They may just be making their way home. Should my recollection of my concerns carry weight?

    I think the standard depending on what the person allegedly harassed depending on the perception of the alleged victim stems largely from employers being very wary of being put at risk of legal liability if female employees are sexually harassed in the workplace.

    Quite a few years ago a woman I knew well worked as a nurse in the psychiatric wing of a high security prison in Florida. It was an everyday occurrence for inmates to expose themselves and masturbate in front of female nurses. This practice was known as "gunning".

    Female nurses often wrote incident reports which were apparently just filed by the prison administration. A lot of the time the female nurses did not bother to file reports, because this was so routine, and it was extra paperwork, and they just chose to ignore the inmate behaviors.

    However the nurse I knew filed a report on every occasion. Several months later I heard that she had filed a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections and won a very large cash settlement.

    On the other hand, in the same time frame, a female nurse was fired from the same facility for paying inmates to masturbate in front of her.

    https://www.winknews.com/2018/02/26/florida-paid-11-million-sexual-harassment-claims/

    The diagram here shows that the amount paid out in the university systems was minuscule compared to Corrections and the Department of Juvenile Justice and or even the State Attorney's office which is presumably full of litigious women.

    The Florida Department of Corrections has since been forced to implement different policies.

    However, you can have too much of a good thing, and sexual harassment claims should not be used as a way of escalating minor grievances and personality clashes.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @AnotherDad, @J.Ross

    I wonder if hospital workers are favorite targets because of a perfect mix of educated credulity, money, access, and the fatal attitude of wanting to help others.
    I have a lot of relatives in white lab coats and they all have stories about being targeted by (thankfully nonviolent and non-tumescent) con men with “car trouble” or “coworkers” they’ve never seen before, appearing outside the staff parking lot in doctory-looking clothes, inexplicably in dire need of twenty bucks.

  87. @eah
    For some reason this montage comes to mind:

    https://theuglytruth.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/defense-minister.jpg

    Replies: @Sergeant Prepper, @Patrick in SC, @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Alden

    Good one. Reminds me of those memes comparing young Obama the pot smoker and young Bibi Netanyahu the Sayeret Matkal soldier:

    https://goo.gl/images/Sn9kM7

    • LOL: eah
  88. OT – Roger Waters channels his inner Bono.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/oct/10/roger-waters-jair-bolsonaro-brazil-concert

    “Waters took an even clearer swipe at Bolsonaro at another moment in the show, projecting his name on to a screen above the stage alongside those of Trump, Farage, Orbán and Marine Le Pen with the warning: “Neo-fascism is on the rise.”

    Waters’ intervention laid bare the bitter political divide that has split Brazil before what many call the most important election in its history.

    While part of the crowd reportedly cheered the performer’s attack on Bolsonaro, others reacted furiously, chanting: “Fora PT” or “Workers’ party out!”

    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).

    One video posted on YouTube, shows Bolsonaro supporters chanting their candidate’s nickname “Legend! Legend!” and one yelling at Waters: “Go f*** yourself, you idiot!”

    Waters will have other opportunities to pillory the Brazilian populist in the coming weeks. Between now and the second-round vote he is set to perform in Brasília, Salvador, Belo Horizonte, Rio de Janeiro and Curitiba, the southern city where former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is imprisoned on controversial corruption charges.”

    I look forward to the rest of the tour. Waters is another bubble-dweller, and his comparison of Farage, an old-fashioned free-market Tory, to Bolsonaro is disgraceful. But it’s certainly influencing people – I’m now hoping Bolsanaro wins just to p*** Waters off.

    An intersting omission from Waters’ list – where’s Duterte, the politician who is much closer to Bolsanaro?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @YetAnotherAnon


    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).
     
    Any Lusophones here to give us the original?

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    , @Tex
    @YetAnotherAnon

    So a dude from a country that punishes you for saying politically unacceptable things on social media is unironically calling some other country's leader a fascist.

    , @Anonym
    @YetAnotherAnon

    I am glad Waters is finally being told to go f*** himself. (For some reason, Bono and musical non-entity Geldof get much more publicity.) I remember listening to The Wall at one stage, thinking, my God, Waters is such a whining crybaby. So a teacher told him off at one stage of his life. Get over it!

    Then I thought to google it, and I found Gilmour had said that he thought much the same thing about Waters being so whiny, though I can't find the quote now.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  89. @Conatus
    Jonathan Haidt in his book:

    "In 2013, the Departments of Education and Justice issued a sweeping new definition of harassment…. By eliminating the reasonable person standard, harassment was left to be defined by the self-reported subjective experience of every member of the university community. It was, in effect, emotional reasoning turned into federal regulation."


    By mandating University recipients of Title 9 funds change their standard of proof in sexual assault cases,from 'clear and convincing' to 'preponderance of the evidence' or lose their Title 9 funding, the Obama Administration changed the definition of sexual assault. Universities got 20% of their funding from Title 9 so most were eager to change. Its true that 70% had already changed to the preponderance standard but mandating this change brought the governmental hammer of Thor down on any independent institutions(Like Princeton or UVa).
    And so the very definition of sexual assault is changed to the disadvantage of men.
    Similarly the expanding definition of 'racism' has changed from Government suppression of rights to merely noticing race, has changed to the detriment of Whites.
    Also the way organizing to lobby for political advantage has been changed to permit only Black, Hispanic and Asian 'activists' to lobby but any Whites who lobby are 'supremacists.'
    It is all in the new definitions put forth by our Cultural Commissars and the American Pravda media.

    Replies: @Dieter Kief

    It is all in the new definitions put forth by our Cultural Commissars and the American Pravda media.

    Incredibly right and – – – wrong, too.

    (Wrong, because – let me hint at a Ramz Paul talking about – now hold your breath – – – Finland, and the experiences he made there quite recently. – And what did he find there? – The same gone berserk ANTIFA, the same unwillingness on the side of the government and the university officials, to defend reason – the same CODDLING of the mind like anywhere else in the anglosphere-dominated Western World. – By and large: You are not alone!)

  90. @Trevor H.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I guess I'm getting old, since I can remember a time when good people didn't go around punching others.

    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

    Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason

    Google the terms ” emotional support squirrel ” for today’s coddling deficiency disorder (CDD) poster child. Another disease of the rich. The world is snickering at fat, infantilized, addicted, semi-literate Americans.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    @Bard of Bumperstickers

    Meanwhile, Icelanders are having their young boys wear nail polish and play with dolls:
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/iceland-s-answer-gender-equality-compensate-differences-between-boys-girls-n912606

    , @Rosamond Vincy
    @Bard of Bumperstickers

    When I first saw that, I thought it had to be a hoax. Didn't somebody bring a flamingo on a plane just to show it could be done?

  91. @eah
    For some reason this montage comes to mind:

    https://theuglytruth.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/defense-minister.jpg

    Replies: @Sergeant Prepper, @Patrick in SC, @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Alden

    That is priceless.

  92. @Intelligent Dasein
    So, what about the political angle here?

    From my vantage point at 30,000 feet (I have scrupulously avoided any involvement in the Kavanaugh media circus, the subject for me being one of unbearable tedium), the whole affair seems to be nothing but a ruthlessly cynical attempt by the Democrats to deny Trump's nominee and prevent a conservative takeover of the Supreme Court, which has been the Cultural Left's main bastion of power for the last 50 years. This outcome is the only thing that ever really mattered. By focusing on the means employed, we miss the larger political significance.

    But with that being said, the fact that the battle took the form of an exaggerated and hallucinatory fusillade of MeTooism is indeed rather curious. Somebody---a great many people, no doubt---actually thought this would work, which raises interesting questions about the mindset of the principal players involved. With all the tactical means at their disposal, that the Democrats decided to press the attack precisely here carries a symbolic significance quite apart from the political outcome. It's almost as if the urge to win a Pyrrhic victory for women outweighed all other considerations. If I was a True Blue Liberal, I would be outraged right now at the Democrats for having squandered such an opportunity on this meaningless morality play, and I would be among the loudest voices demanding an end to such public grievance-airings on the national stage. Have they learned nothing from the failure of the Alicia Machado gambit? What could possibly be so important about these women that it justifies throwing away the Presidency, the Congress, and the Court? Somewhere deep in the Lowerarchy of Democratic strategic command, someone has started asking himself these questions.

    But of all the eternal verities latterly submerged in eclipse, one cannot be doubted, viz. that scholars of the law love their history. The US Congress and the Supreme court are immensely enduring, powerful institutions whose every jot and tittle passes at once into the annals of empire, there to be preserved in books until the passing of the age. The Kavanaugh chapter, too, will be available for posterity to analyze and puzzle over; and what posterity will find in those pages is a national dialogue gone headlong off the rails in personal obsessions while the fabric of the state frayed visibly by the day. The impression will be that "in those days" the ruling classes had forgotten that fitness for the task at hand is the real object of politics, and that one irredeemably selfish generation had rushed upon the seats of power with no other object than to display its emotional feathers, in the process giving the political form a pranging from which it never recovered.

    Replies: @Coemgen, @Jack D

    I wonder if #metoo will fizzle out now that it’s raison d’etre has come and passed and #metoo failed.

    Unfortunately, for the Democrats, Kavanaugh was very confident that he did not sexually assault a woman at any point in his life.

    I suspect that most heterosexual men would not have that level of confidence.

    The Democrats gambled their #metoo credits that Kavanaugh was like most heterosexual men.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Coemgen

    Les [email protected] CBS has $150 million at stake. He was canned, but #metoo will be tested in court. I expect he will prevail. Harvey Weinstein was an outlier in that everyone knew.

    Weinstein was women ratting out women that have done well in Hollywood. The public wasn't getting this, although it was obvious to Steve. Hollywood needs this to go away. although it couldn't have happened to a better group.

    If you are a celebrity, gossip is part of the whole deal. I was surprised by the ferocity of the pack mentality. At first blood, women start piling on.

    Note that no one is complaining about Baby Driver, staring Kevin Spacey. If they retroactively mothballed all of his content, it would cost media companies big money.


    In #metoo vs $$$, it will get pushback.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

  93. @Simon
    May I put in a plug for an extremely insightful article, by the politically incorrect woman novelist Lionel Shriver, that came out back in August and seems to have been largely overlooked? The point she makes, which goes against the conventional wisdom, is that today's college students aren't actually snowflakes -- they're vicious, power-hungry little bullies.

    https://spectator.us/2018/08/millennials-arent-taking-offence-theyre-hunting-victims/

    Replies: @Dieter Kief, @Jasper Been

    The point she makes, which goes against the conventional wisdom, is that today’s college students aren’t actually snowflakes — they’re vicious, power-hungry little bullies.

    Sigh. You can’t be a snowflake all of your life.

  94. @Jack D
    Regarding witchcraft or racism and white men's supposedly ability to project it (even unconsciously) but not be on the receiving end, I think the best analogy is that of radio interference or static.

    If you ever still listen to AM radio, you will notice that as you drive town around the signal will sometimes get drowned out with static. There are certain devices that emit massive amount of a bad kind of radio energy in all frequencies - things that give off sparks (electric motors, spark plugs, fluorescent light fixtures) are particularly bad (before they figured out how to send out radio waves in a coherent way, the very first radio transmitters just emitted sparks). These devices are the "white men" in this metaphor. The owners of these devices are often not aware that they are giving off invisible static as a byproduct of their normal operation and the generation of the static does not interfere with their own operation - they drive down the street or operate their power tools massively interfering with every radio in their vicinity in a completely oblivious fashion. This static can affect radios that are inside nearby buildings and vehicles and not even visible to them and sometimes even miles away. The static goes right thru walls and other obstacles. Nor do these devices "care" if they themselves are being bombarded by static from other devices. They have no facility for detecting static.

    But radio receivers (women, minorities) (while giving off no static of their own) are exquisitely sensitive to any static that they receive.

    In certain cases, the FCC requires that devices that emit static or radio energy (for example computers whose chip frequencies overlap with radio frequencies) be registered with the FCC and shielded in such a way that they do not emit harmful static. We need a type of FCC registration and to install shielding for white men (e.g. campus speech codes) so they too can no longer emit harmful static simply by operating in their normal way.

    Replies: @DIscharged EE, @Dieter Kief

    “We need a type of FCC registration and to install shielding for white men (e.g. campus speech codes) so they too can no longer emit harmful static simply by operating in their normal way.”

    From the days when an attractive woman could sing about being a country station (=a little bit corny…) – — – Those Were The Days…

    “Turn me on, I’m a Radio”.

  95. @DIscharged EE
    @Jack D

    that is an excellent analogy. I will probably recycle the analogy.
    What is your job background? Obviously, don't reveal too much.....

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jim Don Bob

    Legal, but I know a little bit about a lot of things.

  96. @DIscharged EE
    @Jack D

    that is an excellent analogy. I will probably recycle the analogy.
    What is your job background? Obviously, don't reveal too much.....

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jim Don Bob

    Jack D is the iSteve resident lawyer.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Jim Don Bob

    "A", not "the". There are certainly other lawyers on here, not me though.

  97. My own experience, and what I’ve heard is the case, is that student governments at most colleges vastly overrepresent PoC. That was at least as early as a couple of years ago. And it was the case at my mostly white high school too. Maybe we were trying to get in on the Obama era fun? As meaningless as such organizations are, they’re still the vehicle through which students communicate with administration. There’s a vicious cycle of demands by both groups. The trendy thing in the 2010s was to vote for PoC student governments. I bet, in some cases at least, the student government was radicalized before the administration, or at least provided cover for admins to implement radical policy. So, not only was campus nutjobbery ramped up by Obama policy, but by his vibe in general.

  98. @J.Ross
    They don't coddle minds in Canada, where an Ontario law will allow turbanned Sikhs to ride motorcycles without helmets.
    https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/10/10/ontario-to-exempt-sikh-motorcyclists-from-helmet-law.html
    If you have not done so already, watch the opening sequence of Idiocracy (with the animated family tree) before proceeding further into the terrifying future.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    And Sikh Mounties do not have to wear the Mountie hat. They don’t look like this guy:

  99. @inertial
    @Jack D

    Some totem poles do have a white man on top.

    https://photos.smugmug.com/Totem-Poles/Sitka-Totems/i-Gm2K7G6/1/8ac8c28f/L/0706023-040-L.jpg

    Appropriately enough, this is a shame pole.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Is that in British Columbia? It looks like it should be 3000 mi (5000 km) away, on the other side of the country:

  100. @WR
    @AnotherDad

    Very good analysis. This statement is crucial: "Men and women of a family have the same long term interests–the future of their children, and their future descendants." Now, how do you defeat your adversaries in this culture war? Your enemy controls the printed and visual media, most of K-12 and virtually all universities. Moreover, they can promote their agenda 24/7 via advertisement and the entertainment business. I think that the battle can be won but it needs to be fought by people with considerable free time and significant financial resources. I am afraid that very few of us commenting on this website possess the latter.

    Replies: @Samuel Skinner

    He happens to be wrong. If the tribe is defeated men have no children, but women do. Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe. In fact if their current tribe has a low fertility rate and the tribe conquering them has a high one, it is in their interest to invite in invaders.

    • Replies: @Flip
    @Samuel Skinner

    That's why Latin Americans and South Asians have disproportionately Indo-European paternal genes and indigenous maternal genes.

    Replies: @notanon

    , @Rosamond Vincy
    @Samuel Skinner

    The Trojan Women weren't very happy about that.

    , @notanon
    @Samuel Skinner


    Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe.
     
    women share genes with the male half of their population so if conquered they lose around half their autosomal dna

    breeding with someone closely related increases the amount of your dna that gets passed on - which is why you get strong ethnic/familial resemblances with multi-generational cousin marriage
  101. @YetAnotherAnon
    OT - Roger Waters channels his inner Bono.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/oct/10/roger-waters-jair-bolsonaro-brazil-concert


    "Waters took an even clearer swipe at Bolsonaro at another moment in the show, projecting his name on to a screen above the stage alongside those of Trump, Farage, Orbán and Marine Le Pen with the warning: “Neo-fascism is on the rise.”

    Waters’ intervention laid bare the bitter political divide that has split Brazil before what many call the most important election in its history.

    While part of the crowd reportedly cheered the performer’s attack on Bolsonaro, others reacted furiously, chanting: “Fora PT” or “Workers’ party out!”

    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).

    One video posted on YouTube, shows Bolsonaro supporters chanting their candidate’s nickname “Legend! Legend!” and one yelling at Waters: “Go f*** yourself, you idiot!”

    Waters will have other opportunities to pillory the Brazilian populist in the coming weeks. Between now and the second-round vote he is set to perform in Brasília, Salvador, Belo Horizonte, Rio de Janeiro and Curitiba, the southern city where former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is imprisoned on controversial corruption charges."
     

    I look forward to the rest of the tour. Waters is another bubble-dweller, and his comparison of Farage, an old-fashioned free-market Tory, to Bolsonaro is disgraceful. But it's certainly influencing people - I'm now hoping Bolsanaro wins just to p*** Waters off.

    An intersting omission from Waters' list - where's Duterte, the politician who is much closer to Bolsanaro?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Tex, @Anonym

    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).

    Any Lusophones here to give us the original?

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @Reg Cæsar

    I know some Spanish cognates, but no Portuguese.

  102. @eah
    For some reason this montage comes to mind:

    https://theuglytruth.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/defense-minister.jpg

    Replies: @Sergeant Prepper, @Patrick in SC, @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Alden

    Never send a woman astronaut to do a male astronaut’s job; she might primp while Skylab burns: https://mywordandwelcometoit.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/women-are-idiots/ (Or hand her husband’s retirement money to a Nigerian scammer, despite an advanced degree)

  103. @Jonathan Mason
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    Women see a picture of sad-looking people at the border, and they want to help. But they seem unable to think about stage two: How do we house, feed and care for these people?
     
    I think rather than this being a man woman-woman thing it is a contrast between people who see problems at the executive and managerial level rather than at the service provider level.

    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.

    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.

    We could also offer voluntary castration and gender reassignment to all male felons as an alternative to the death penalty, who would then be sent to work camps to do knitting and sewing.

    However, I am sure a few liberal and softies on the Supreme Court would object to this well-meaning Program for Increasing Prosperity for Americans (PIPA), so maybe we need a middle path.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Samuel Skinner

    If the equation is the less people we have, then there more there is to go round for those who are left, than we ought to maximize abortion, implement euthanasia at 80, implement mandatory sterilization or castration for all who fail an IQ test at the first standard deviation, ban ALL immigration, and implement the death penalty for all felonies and use the remains for chicken feed.

    You are doing it wrong; that puts too much power into the hands of the state (who proceeds to murder people for fun). Do it the old Roman way- fathers decide if the kids live and bastards are exposed to the elements.

  104. @Charles Pewitt
    @AnotherDad

    Succinctly said:

    Nations and empires are organized for war.

    The ruling class of the American Empire is attacking the United States by using diversity and cultural rot to destroy the European Christian ancestral core of the United States.

    The American Empire has declared war on the United States of America.

    Replies: @miss marple

    Exactly. And I thought I was the only one who noticed the powers-that-be were attempting to eradicate Western European culture along with traditional morality.

  105. OT – the Atlantic, Donna Zuckerberg, Roissy and Ovid!

    https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/10/pickup-artists-ovid/572563/

    “But it’s not just pickup artists who appropriate the great texts of classical literature to justify their own beliefs. Zuckerberg (the younger sister of the Facebook CEO Mark) characterizes the “Red Pill” online community as the corner of the internet dominated by men’s-rights activists, the alt-right, pickup artists, and the sex-eschewing communities known as Men Going Their Own Way. According to Zuckerberg, virtually all these subgroups appropriate classical literature for their own purposes.”

    I think that’s called projection.

  106. @Fran Macadam
    I have personally known or been friends with a number of psychiatrists and psychologists, including the famous Evelyn Hooker, and without exception, all had their own unresolved and serious psychiatric issues. I would say all were motivated to try to understand and resolve their own issues by the field they chose to work in, but never actually succeeded. That doesn't mean there aren't sane ones out there - Thomas Szasz comes to mind - just that substantial numbers do fall within that cohort, and are empty white coats.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    Would you care to expand on this Evelyn Hooker since she had so much influence on the delisting of homosexuality as a mental illness?

  107. OT again – we have Brexit Derangement Syndrome (BDS) in the UK, TDS in the US, now Kav DS.

    https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/10/17952388/magic-ritual-spells-self-care-feminism-brett-kavanaugh

    First, take a candle.

    Then, pour some salt into your hand.

    Then, keeping the grains in your palm, take a pen to write out a thank you to Christine Blasey Ford, the woman whose allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee — and now justice — Brett Kavanaugh, stunned a nation.

    Or, if you prefer, simply say, “I believe you.”

    It’s just one of the many quasi-religious rituals circulating the internet — particularly pagan and #resistance circles — in the wake of Kavanaugh’s confirmation. These rituals help self-identified witches process trauma, anger, and grief.

    Witchcraft and ritual have become more prominently associated with progressive political causes in recent years with the rise of the contemporary #magicresistance. Last year, for example, a 13,000-strong Facebook group formed to cast regular binding spells on Donald Trump.

    But in the aftermath of the bitter fight over Kavanaugh’s confirmation, during which the judge firmly denied sexual misconduct against Ford or other women who came forward with similar allegations, rituals have become more than just an emotionally rewarding part of political energy-raising. They’ve also become a form of self-care.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Oh ffs....

  108. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    @Abe

    I believe Carolyn Bryant. Is that wrong?

    Replies: @Roderick Spode

    She made two contradictory claims (the second a recantation of the first) so I’d hope you believe at least one of them.

  109. @Samuel Skinner
    @WR

    He happens to be wrong. If the tribe is defeated men have no children, but women do. Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe. In fact if their current tribe has a low fertility rate and the tribe conquering them has a high one, it is in their interest to invite in invaders.

    Replies: @Flip, @Rosamond Vincy, @notanon

    That’s why Latin Americans and South Asians have disproportionately Indo-European paternal genes and indigenous maternal genes.

    • Replies: @notanon
    @Flip

    specifically male (ydna) and female (mtdna) is a small percentage of total dna. the majority is autosomal (adna) which both males and females carry.

    iirc Latin Americans have something like 40-60% European autosomal dna cos they lost the male half.

  110. @Simon
    May I put in a plug for an extremely insightful article, by the politically incorrect woman novelist Lionel Shriver, that came out back in August and seems to have been largely overlooked? The point she makes, which goes against the conventional wisdom, is that today's college students aren't actually snowflakes -- they're vicious, power-hungry little bullies.

    https://spectator.us/2018/08/millennials-arent-taking-offence-theyre-hunting-victims/

    Replies: @Dieter Kief, @Jasper Been

    That column was great, and so is Lionel.

  111. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen."

    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I'm pretty sure I willed to do it - because I loved them.

    Replies: @Tex, @Jim Don Bob, @Rosamond Vincy

    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I’m pretty sure I willed to do it – because I loved them.

    One might extend the logic to say that it is just & constructive to support doing so for strangers, if only because they are our fellow countrymen and thus a part of a community that we share. As the community shaped our lives, creating some affection for it, we can recognize our fellows as worthy of support, within the limits of reason and justice.

    Randos that show up at the border looking for a handout, not so much.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  112. What a bunch of loser whiners you all are. Sissies.

  113. anon[975] • Disclaimer says:
    @Coemgen
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I wonder if #metoo will fizzle out now that it's raison d'etre has come and passed and #metoo failed.

    Unfortunately, for the Democrats, Kavanaugh was very confident that he did not sexually assault a woman at any point in his life.

    I suspect that most heterosexual men would not have that level of confidence.

    The Democrats gambled their #metoo credits that Kavanaugh was like most heterosexual men.

    Replies: @anon

    Les [email protected] CBS has $150 million at stake. He was canned, but #metoo will be tested in court. I expect he will prevail. Harvey Weinstein was an outlier in that everyone knew.

    Weinstein was women ratting out women that have done well in Hollywood. The public wasn’t getting this, although it was obvious to Steve. Hollywood needs this to go away. although it couldn’t have happened to a better group.

    If you are a celebrity, gossip is part of the whole deal. I was surprised by the ferocity of the pack mentality. At first blood, women start piling on.

    Note that no one is complaining about Baby Driver, staring Kevin Spacey. If they retroactively mothballed all of his content, it would cost media companies big money.

    In #metoo vs $$$, it will get pushback.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @anon

    Note that no one is complaining about Baby Driver, staring Kevin Spacey.

    Spacey didn't harass any women, so women don't have a dog in this fight. And it's the anger of women that politicians fear.

  114. @Intelligent Dasein
    So, what about the political angle here?

    From my vantage point at 30,000 feet (I have scrupulously avoided any involvement in the Kavanaugh media circus, the subject for me being one of unbearable tedium), the whole affair seems to be nothing but a ruthlessly cynical attempt by the Democrats to deny Trump's nominee and prevent a conservative takeover of the Supreme Court, which has been the Cultural Left's main bastion of power for the last 50 years. This outcome is the only thing that ever really mattered. By focusing on the means employed, we miss the larger political significance.

    But with that being said, the fact that the battle took the form of an exaggerated and hallucinatory fusillade of MeTooism is indeed rather curious. Somebody---a great many people, no doubt---actually thought this would work, which raises interesting questions about the mindset of the principal players involved. With all the tactical means at their disposal, that the Democrats decided to press the attack precisely here carries a symbolic significance quite apart from the political outcome. It's almost as if the urge to win a Pyrrhic victory for women outweighed all other considerations. If I was a True Blue Liberal, I would be outraged right now at the Democrats for having squandered such an opportunity on this meaningless morality play, and I would be among the loudest voices demanding an end to such public grievance-airings on the national stage. Have they learned nothing from the failure of the Alicia Machado gambit? What could possibly be so important about these women that it justifies throwing away the Presidency, the Congress, and the Court? Somewhere deep in the Lowerarchy of Democratic strategic command, someone has started asking himself these questions.

    But of all the eternal verities latterly submerged in eclipse, one cannot be doubted, viz. that scholars of the law love their history. The US Congress and the Supreme court are immensely enduring, powerful institutions whose every jot and tittle passes at once into the annals of empire, there to be preserved in books until the passing of the age. The Kavanaugh chapter, too, will be available for posterity to analyze and puzzle over; and what posterity will find in those pages is a national dialogue gone headlong off the rails in personal obsessions while the fabric of the state frayed visibly by the day. The impression will be that "in those days" the ruling classes had forgotten that fitness for the task at hand is the real object of politics, and that one irredeemably selfish generation had rushed upon the seats of power with no other object than to display its emotional feathers, in the process giving the political form a pranging from which it never recovered.

    Replies: @Coemgen, @Jack D

    With all the tactical means at their disposal, that the Democrats decided to press the attack precisely here carries a symbolic significance quite apart from the political outcome. It’s almost as if the urge to win a Pyrrhic victory for women outweighed all other considerations.

    What tactical means? The only tactics they had available to them were dirty underhanded tactics. All the customary and legal means were gone. They had lost the Senate, squandered the filibuster. Kav was eminently qualified and endorsed by the ABA, etc. His only “defect” was that he was conservative and a conservative President and Senate, by law and custom, had every right to appoint him just as Obama had every right to, and did, appoint leftists such as the Wise Latina. K’s approval was imminent and inevitable unless they could throw a last minute monkey wrench into the works.

    Now you could argue that they could have come up with other underhanded tactics – made false accusations of financial improprieties, had someone come forward and say that he used to smoke crack with K in high school. But female trouble was a proven winner, especially in this era of MeToo which has been so successful in taking down so many powerful men in the Current Year. If it had not kept Thomas off the court, that was a long time ago and times have changed, but in any event it turned his confirmation into “The Year of the Woman” at the ballot box. Thomas’s confirmation WAS a Pyrrhic victory , but for the Republicans. It’s not clear that, assuming they had a strategy at all and didn’t just blindly blunder into this fiasco, the D strategy this time was really to keep K off the court or just to rile up the women’s vote again or if they were shooting for both.

    Whatever you call the current mess, you can’t call it a Pyrrhic victory for women. Kav going on the court was not (from the “feminist” POV) not a victory at all, Pyrrhic or otherwise. It really doesn’t look like they are going to get the ballot box boost they hoped for either but if that materializes I wouldn’t call it Pyrrhic (but I doubt that it will – the backlash is bigger than the lash at this point). Ideally it will be a loss all around (and maybe a few leak prosecutions or FBI beach lady losing her job) so they are not tempted to try nonsense like this again.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
  115. @YetAnotherAnon
    OT - Roger Waters channels his inner Bono.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/oct/10/roger-waters-jair-bolsonaro-brazil-concert


    "Waters took an even clearer swipe at Bolsonaro at another moment in the show, projecting his name on to a screen above the stage alongside those of Trump, Farage, Orbán and Marine Le Pen with the warning: “Neo-fascism is on the rise.”

    Waters’ intervention laid bare the bitter political divide that has split Brazil before what many call the most important election in its history.

    While part of the crowd reportedly cheered the performer’s attack on Bolsonaro, others reacted furiously, chanting: “Fora PT” or “Workers’ party out!”

    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).

    One video posted on YouTube, shows Bolsonaro supporters chanting their candidate’s nickname “Legend! Legend!” and one yelling at Waters: “Go f*** yourself, you idiot!”

    Waters will have other opportunities to pillory the Brazilian populist in the coming weeks. Between now and the second-round vote he is set to perform in Brasília, Salvador, Belo Horizonte, Rio de Janeiro and Curitiba, the southern city where former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is imprisoned on controversial corruption charges."
     

    I look forward to the rest of the tour. Waters is another bubble-dweller, and his comparison of Farage, an old-fashioned free-market Tory, to Bolsonaro is disgraceful. But it's certainly influencing people - I'm now hoping Bolsanaro wins just to p*** Waters off.

    An intersting omission from Waters' list - where's Duterte, the politician who is much closer to Bolsanaro?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Tex, @Anonym

    So a dude from a country that punishes you for saying politically unacceptable things on social media is unironically calling some other country’s leader a fascist.

  116. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen."

    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I'm pretty sure I willed to do it - because I loved them.

    Replies: @Tex, @Jim Don Bob, @Rosamond Vincy

    Me too. Two daughters and my mother in law.

  117. @Bard of Bumperstickers
    @Trevor H.

    Google the terms " emotional support squirrel " for today's coddling deficiency disorder (CDD) poster child. Another disease of the rich. The world is snickering at fat, infantilized, addicted, semi-literate Americans.

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Rosamond Vincy

    Meanwhile, Icelanders are having their young boys wear nail polish and play with dolls:
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/iceland-s-answer-gender-equality-compensate-differences-between-boys-girls-n912606

  118. @YetAnotherAnon
    OT - Roger Waters channels his inner Bono.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/oct/10/roger-waters-jair-bolsonaro-brazil-concert


    "Waters took an even clearer swipe at Bolsonaro at another moment in the show, projecting his name on to a screen above the stage alongside those of Trump, Farage, Orbán and Marine Le Pen with the warning: “Neo-fascism is on the rise.”

    Waters’ intervention laid bare the bitter political divide that has split Brazil before what many call the most important election in its history.

    While part of the crowd reportedly cheered the performer’s attack on Bolsonaro, others reacted furiously, chanting: “Fora PT” or “Workers’ party out!”

    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).

    One video posted on YouTube, shows Bolsonaro supporters chanting their candidate’s nickname “Legend! Legend!” and one yelling at Waters: “Go f*** yourself, you idiot!”

    Waters will have other opportunities to pillory the Brazilian populist in the coming weeks. Between now and the second-round vote he is set to perform in Brasília, Salvador, Belo Horizonte, Rio de Janeiro and Curitiba, the southern city where former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is imprisoned on controversial corruption charges."
     

    I look forward to the rest of the tour. Waters is another bubble-dweller, and his comparison of Farage, an old-fashioned free-market Tory, to Bolsonaro is disgraceful. But it's certainly influencing people - I'm now hoping Bolsanaro wins just to p*** Waters off.

    An intersting omission from Waters' list - where's Duterte, the politician who is much closer to Bolsanaro?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Tex, @Anonym

    I am glad Waters is finally being told to go f*** himself. (For some reason, Bono and musical non-entity Geldof get much more publicity.) I remember listening to The Wall at one stage, thinking, my God, Waters is such a whining crybaby. So a teacher told him off at one stage of his life. Get over it!

    Then I thought to google it, and I found Gilmour had said that he thought much the same thing about Waters being so whiny, though I can’t find the quote now.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Anonym


    I remember listening to The Wall at one stage, thinking, my God, Waters is such a whining crybaby.
     
    Both Waters and Al Stewart lost their fathers before or shortly after birth. Stewart, in sharp contrast, handled the loss much more maturely. He developed a deep interest in history.

    And wine. As in collecting, not guzzling.

    Replies: @JackOH

  119. @Jim Don Bob
    @DIscharged EE

    Jack D is the iSteve resident lawyer.

    Replies: @Anonym

    “A”, not “the”. There are certainly other lawyers on here, not me though.

  120. @Trevor H.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I guess I'm getting old, since I can remember a time when good people didn't go around punching others.

    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

    Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason

    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

    Oh, you’re still challenged. By this or that identity group club. Or by the denizens of the adjacent ghetto.

  121. @Anonym
    @YetAnotherAnon

    I am glad Waters is finally being told to go f*** himself. (For some reason, Bono and musical non-entity Geldof get much more publicity.) I remember listening to The Wall at one stage, thinking, my God, Waters is such a whining crybaby. So a teacher told him off at one stage of his life. Get over it!

    Then I thought to google it, and I found Gilmour had said that he thought much the same thing about Waters being so whiny, though I can't find the quote now.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I remember listening to The Wall at one stage, thinking, my God, Waters is such a whining crybaby.

    Both Waters and Al Stewart lost their fathers before or shortly after birth. Stewart, in sharp contrast, handled the loss much more maturely. He developed a deep interest in history.

    And wine. As in collecting, not guzzling.

    • Replies: @JackOH
    @Reg Cæsar

    Reg, I last saw Al Stewart in Kent (Ohio) this past summer, where he nearly sold out two consecutive nights at a small theater, and played to an appreciative audience.

    His voice was excellent, his back-up musicians likewise, and his gentlemanly stage persona ought to be an example to all performers. His "bigger" stage patter was confined to lightly championing 1960s British folkies, such as Pentangle and Bert Jansch, where he does speak with credible ex cathedra authority.

    One of the funny and instructive stories I recall about Stewart was about him hearing "Time Passages" in an elevator, and being shocked it was the actual song, and not a reworked orchestral version for department store sales boosting. He decided that Top 40 wasn't his thing, so he drew back from the business. He could afford to by that time, of course, but I wonder how many of us could leave money on the table because the line of work we're in is at odds with who we are.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

  122. @Trevor H.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I guess I'm getting old, since I can remember a time when good people didn't go around punching others.

    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

    Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason

    But then, I also remember that when we arrived at college, teachers and administrators warned us that we would be challenged. Challenged!

    How language changes! In contemporary educational jargon “challenged” means mentally retarded.

  123. @Jonathan Mason
    @Rosamond Vincy

    The analogy is a little inapt.

    I was once walking into a bar in a prostitute-rich area of the Dominican Republic when a woman cupped my groin with her hand and squeezed my testicles and other neighborhood equipment.

    Naturally I fainted with shock, and then when I had recovered I went straight to the Tourist Police outpost s to make a report and give a statement, or tried to, but the police just laughed at me and made rude hand gestures.

    After this I spent years in therapy which cost thousands of dollars. In spite of this I often wake up in the morning dreaming that a woman is touching my privates and hearing policemen laughing. Will this torture never go away?

    I feel that the only way I can obtain closure is to track down my attacker, which is difficult.

    However, I think that if all the local women of that area who were on the game 20 years ago could be rounded up and forced to cup my groin and whisper "massage, baby?" in my ear, I would be able to recognize the hand that caused a lifetime of PTSD and she could be called to account. And even if I could not identify her, it would not be a complete waste of time as it would desensitize me to this kind of assault.

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    You’ve really thought this out….

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Rosamond Vincy

    The subject of hypnagogic hallucinations is a deep one, though it does not go quite as deep as the hippocampus, but is described by popular author Charlie Dickens here in Oliver Twist, Chapter XXXIV (as most people will know.)

    There is a kind of sleep that steals upon us sometimes, which, while it holds the body prisoner, does not free the mind from a sense of things about it, and enable it to ramble at its pleasure. So far as an overpowering heaviness, a prostration of strength, and an utter inability to control our thoughts or power of motion, can be called sleep, this is it; and yet, we have a consciousness of all that is going on about us, and, if we dream at such a time, words which are really spoken, or sounds which really exist at the moment, accommodate themselves with surprising readiness to our visions, until reality and imagination become so strangely blended that it is afterwards almost matter of impossibility to separate the two. Nor is this, the most striking phenomenon incidental to such a state. It is an undoubted fact, that although our senses of touch and sight be for the time dead, yet our sleeping thoughts, and the visionary scenes that pass before us, will be influenced and materially influenced, by the mere silent presence of some external object; which may not have been near us when we closed our eyes: and of whose vicinity we have had no waking consciousness.

    Oliver knew, perfectly well, that he was in his own little room; that his books were lying on the table before him; that the sweet air was stirring among the creeping plants outside. And yet he was asleep. Suddenly, the scene changed; the air became close and confined; and he thought, with a glow of terror, that he was in the Jew's house again. There sat the hideous old man, in his accustomed corner, pointing at him, and whispering to another man, with his face averted, who sat beside him.

    'Hush, my dear!' he thought he heard the Jew say; 'it is he, sure enough. Come away.'

    'He!' the other man seemed to answer; 'could I mistake him, think you? If a crowd of ghosts were to put themselves into his exact shape, and he stood amongst them, there is something that would tell me how to point him out. If you buried him fifty feet deep, and took me across his grave, I fancy I should know, if there wasn't a mark above it, that he lay buried there?'

    The man seemed to say this, with such dreadful hatred, that Oliver awoke with the fear, and started up.

    Good Heaven! what was that, which sent the blood tingling to his heart, and deprived him of his voice, and of power to move! There—there—at the window—close before him—so close, that he could have almost touched him before he started back: with his eyes peering into the room, and meeting his: there stood the Jew! And beside him, white with rage or fear, or both, were the scowling features of the man who had accosted him in the inn-yard.

    It was but an instant, a glance, a flash, before his eyes; and they were gone. But they had recognised him, and he them; and their look was as firmly impressed upon his memory, as if it had been deeply carved in stone, and set before him from his birth. He stood transfixed for a moment; then, leaping from the window into the garden, called loudly for help.

    I know the feeling.

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

  124. @The Alarmist
    She willed the event into fact: Believe her, or face certain peril. Who knew CBF was a Jedi master, albeit on the Dark Side.

    Replies: @Paul Jolliffe

    Oh, I doubt CBF willed the event entirely out of thin air: I bet there’s at least a chance something happened to her at some distant party at some point, but it sure didn’t involve Kavanaugh. And she knew that perfectly well. That’s why she kept changing the details – to keep from getting caught.

    So why did she blame Kavanaugh?

    Because she was fixated on him. She didn’t like his politics (maybe they reminded her of her parents, with whom she had made a political break), or maybe guys like Kavanaugh had not paid her any attention back in school. Who knows?

    Either way, she simply didn’t want Kavanaugh’s views represented on the Supreme Court and she justified lying about him in her own mind because she thought he had to be stopped.

    But note that she didn’t want credit for stopping him – her letter was to be distributed anonymously. But Democratic operatives inside Feinstein’s office, seeing no other way to halt the nomination, deliberately leaked her letter and stoked the firestorm that followed.

    It almost worked.

    And CBF wasn’t so shy or reluctant to testify after all. She really was a true believer.

    A neurotic, lying, manipulative, wretched, absolutely pathetic excuse for a decent woman – a woman who should be held up as an example to all young males as to why you should never, never, never socially get anywhere near a crazy woman – but still, a true believer.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    @Paul Jolliffe

    A Company asset called up from the reserves when it was learned a connection, albeit tenuous, could be made to Kavanaugh. That the connection was only at High School age is a sign of how much of a Hail Mary they were willing to throw. Kavanaugh should be grateful that the even less credible Ramirez and Swetnick were found to sabotage Blasey's story.

    , @Anonymous
    @Paul Jolliffe

    For a middle-aged affluent lady I don't think CBF's behavior has been *unexpected*. Not saying it's acceptable or decent. But some empathy is in order-- the normal female impulse to sabotage somebody who's piqued you would not be so destructive in a different society. Yeah, shariah again

  125. @Bard of Bumperstickers
    @Trevor H.

    Google the terms " emotional support squirrel " for today's coddling deficiency disorder (CDD) poster child. Another disease of the rich. The world is snickering at fat, infantilized, addicted, semi-literate Americans.

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @Rosamond Vincy

    When I first saw that, I thought it had to be a hoax. Didn’t somebody bring a flamingo on a plane just to show it could be done?

  126. @Intelligent Dasein
    @Jonathan Mason


    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.
     
    The economics are not complex.

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we're housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we're losing money.

    Say's Law remains everywhere and always true: We pay for production with other production. If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Jonathan Mason, @Rob McX

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we’re housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we’re losing money.

    An excellent argument for abolishing the military and prisons, and yet the stockholders in weapons manufacture enterprises and private corrections corporations would not thank you.

    If these people are given SNAP (food stamps) cards, they are profitable for supermarkets and merchants who provide them with food at much more than the actual cost of the production of the food, so SNAP, which more than 10% of Americans receive, is actually a subsidy program for stockholders in companies like Walmart (WMT).

    Children, of course, are also economically unproductive for many years and require food, clothing, and numerous toys–and for the most part their lives are subsidized by their parent(s), but we all pay for them due to tax deductions that mean that parents pay less federal income tax than childless adults. To add insult to injury, childless adults also have to pay taxes for schools to babysit aforesaid unproductive children.

    Life just isn’t fair. However the US is not a country like Haiti where there really isn’t enough food to go round and it is quite common to see stunted children with malnutrition.

  127. @Samuel Skinner
    @WR

    He happens to be wrong. If the tribe is defeated men have no children, but women do. Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe. In fact if their current tribe has a low fertility rate and the tribe conquering them has a high one, it is in their interest to invite in invaders.

    Replies: @Flip, @Rosamond Vincy, @notanon

    The Trojan Women weren’t very happy about that.

  128. @Rosamond Vincy
    @Jonathan Mason

    You've really thought this out....

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    The subject of hypnagogic hallucinations is a deep one, though it does not go quite as deep as the hippocampus, but is described by popular author Charlie Dickens here in Oliver Twist, Chapter XXXIV (as most people will know.)

    There is a kind of sleep that steals upon us sometimes, which, while it holds the body prisoner, does not free the mind from a sense of things about it, and enable it to ramble at its pleasure. So far as an overpowering heaviness, a prostration of strength, and an utter inability to control our thoughts or power of motion, can be called sleep, this is it; and yet, we have a consciousness of all that is going on about us, and, if we dream at such a time, words which are really spoken, or sounds which really exist at the moment, accommodate themselves with surprising readiness to our visions, until reality and imagination become so strangely blended that it is afterwards almost matter of impossibility to separate the two. Nor is this, the most striking phenomenon incidental to such a state. It is an undoubted fact, that although our senses of touch and sight be for the time dead, yet our sleeping thoughts, and the visionary scenes that pass before us, will be influenced and materially influenced, by the mere silent presence of some external object; which may not have been near us when we closed our eyes: and of whose vicinity we have had no waking consciousness.

    Oliver knew, perfectly well, that he was in his own little room; that his books were lying on the table before him; that the sweet air was stirring among the creeping plants outside. And yet he was asleep. Suddenly, the scene changed; the air became close and confined; and he thought, with a glow of terror, that he was in the Jew’s house again. There sat the hideous old man, in his accustomed corner, pointing at him, and whispering to another man, with his face averted, who sat beside him.

    ‘Hush, my dear!’ he thought he heard the Jew say; ‘it is he, sure enough. Come away.’

    ‘He!’ the other man seemed to answer; ‘could I mistake him, think you? If a crowd of ghosts were to put themselves into his exact shape, and he stood amongst them, there is something that would tell me how to point him out. If you buried him fifty feet deep, and took me across his grave, I fancy I should know, if there wasn’t a mark above it, that he lay buried there?’

    The man seemed to say this, with such dreadful hatred, that Oliver awoke with the fear, and started up.

    Good Heaven! what was that, which sent the blood tingling to his heart, and deprived him of his voice, and of power to move! There—there—at the window—close before him—so close, that he could have almost touched him before he started back: with his eyes peering into the room, and meeting his: there stood the Jew! And beside him, white with rage or fear, or both, were the scowling features of the man who had accosted him in the inn-yard.

    It was but an instant, a glance, a flash, before his eyes; and they were gone. But they had recognised him, and he them; and their look was as firmly impressed upon his memory, as if it had been deeply carved in stone, and set before him from his birth. He stood transfixed for a moment; then, leaping from the window into the garden, called loudly for help.

    I know the feeling.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @Jonathan Mason

    He had a 2nd-story window with a balcony in the movie musical. This not only solved the problem of intruders, but also gave him a great vantage point for "Who Will Buy?"

    Fagin was played as a charming rogue by Ron Moody, who put his personal twist (PI) on the part forever, but the one who scared the $#1+ out of me was Bill Sykes. (I've heard Oliver Reed wasn't all that pleasant in real life, either.)

  129. @YetAnotherAnon
    OT again - we have Brexit Derangement Syndrome (BDS) in the UK, TDS in the US, now Kav DS.

    https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/10/17952388/magic-ritual-spells-self-care-feminism-brett-kavanaugh


    First, take a candle.

    Then, pour some salt into your hand.

    Then, keeping the grains in your palm, take a pen to write out a thank you to Christine Blasey Ford, the woman whose allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee — and now justice — Brett Kavanaugh, stunned a nation.

    Or, if you prefer, simply say, “I believe you.”

    It’s just one of the many quasi-religious rituals circulating the internet — particularly pagan and #resistance circles — in the wake of Kavanaugh’s confirmation. These rituals help self-identified witches process trauma, anger, and grief.

    Witchcraft and ritual have become more prominently associated with progressive political causes in recent years with the rise of the contemporary #magicresistance. Last year, for example, a 13,000-strong Facebook group formed to cast regular binding spells on Donald Trump.

    But in the aftermath of the bitter fight over Kavanaugh’s confirmation, during which the judge firmly denied sexual misconduct against Ford or other women who came forward with similar allegations, rituals have become more than just an emotionally rewarding part of political energy-raising. They’ve also become a form of self-care.
     

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    Oh ffs….

  130. @Lowe
    Taki Mag needs to reduce the number of video ads on their site. It is very irritating.

    Replies: @Lurker, @F0337

    And they need to restore Disqus comments.

  131. @Charles Pewitt

    The spirit of the age cries out for tales of victimization, and, unsurprisingly, the supply has grown to meet the skyrocketing demand.

     


    What does it say about our culture that we just witnessed a professor of psychology be vastly praised for testifying to a purported chain of events without any additional evidence emerging that it wasn’t all just in her head?

     

    Palo Alto pissant psycho psychology professor, Christine Blasey Ford, is a Generation X harpy who fits in well with the evil globalizer scumbags who have infiltrated government at all levels.

    Steve Sailer also sometimes evinces some of these grotesque qualities.

    Sailer has done two things that may lead an ordinary person to believe that he has some sympathy for the mentally deranged distaff wacko, Blasey Ford:

    1) Steve Sailer refuses to incorporate monetary policy into his overall worldview; and 2) Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through -- specifically comments relating to that horrible anti-White Neo-Conservative politician whore, Nikki Haley. Is Steve Sailer protecting Nikki Haley?

    Attention Steve Sailer:

    To answer your question about what it means to our culture to have the Blasey Ford types running amok in American politics and culture, I'll say that the American Empire is imploding, and the implosion is accelerating. In order to protect and defend the cultural integrity of the United States as a home for the European Christian people, it is vital that the American Empire be imploded in a controlled manner. Pretentious crap, I know, but there might be something to it!

    Maybe something about that Bronx guy DeLillo who wrote a novel about Hitchcock's Psycho being played ultra-slow to represent time or decay or disintegration or some damn thing else.

    Replies: @Kylie, @LondonBob, @Anonymous

    “Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through — specifically comments relating to that horrible anti-White Neo-Conservative politician whore, Nikki Haley. Is Steve Sailer protecting Nikki Haley?”

    It seems to me you’re taking Steve’s admittedly whimsical comment moderation policy very personally. Which, in case you didn’t know, is a rather unpleasant and distinctly womanish way to take it.

  132. …intent is not even necessary. If a member of an identity group feels offended or oppressed by the action of another person, then according to the impact-versus-intent paradigm, that other person is guilty of an act of bigotry.

    I once knew a lesbian radical feminist who confided that the sight of certain types of men made her feel physically sick. If the new rules make objectivity and intent irrelevant, then such men are going to be chased out of “safe spaces” and places of employment. Their crime is their mere existence.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @James N. Kennett

    At long last, the necessary corollary to Sailer's Second Law! Not only must ugly women be reconsidered as beautiful, but men must be absolutely perfect at all times, from table manners to body fat.

    , @Anonymous
    @James N. Kennett

    These kind of people have probably always been around but what’s different in modern times is that they’re condoned and in some places like universities even rewarded for it. I had a female English professor in college who flat out claimed one day that women were smarter and better than men. Had a man said such a thing about women he’d be drummed out of his job in a heartbeat. What was funny though was that when the professor was out of earshot you could even hear female students talking about how [email protected] nuts this woman was.

  133. @anon
    @Coemgen

    Les [email protected] CBS has $150 million at stake. He was canned, but #metoo will be tested in court. I expect he will prevail. Harvey Weinstein was an outlier in that everyone knew.

    Weinstein was women ratting out women that have done well in Hollywood. The public wasn't getting this, although it was obvious to Steve. Hollywood needs this to go away. although it couldn't have happened to a better group.

    If you are a celebrity, gossip is part of the whole deal. I was surprised by the ferocity of the pack mentality. At first blood, women start piling on.

    Note that no one is complaining about Baby Driver, staring Kevin Spacey. If they retroactively mothballed all of his content, it would cost media companies big money.


    In #metoo vs $$$, it will get pushback.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    Note that no one is complaining about Baby Driver, staring Kevin Spacey.

    Spacey didn’t harass any women, so women don’t have a dog in this fight. And it’s the anger of women that politicians fear.

  134. @Intelligent Dasein
    @Jonathan Mason


    But the economics of it all is complex. If people are to be housed, then work is created building homes, and selling things that go inside them like stoves, fridges, and beds. If people are to be fed, then profits are made by growing and selling food.
     
    The economics are not complex.

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods. If we're housing and feeding them at our own expense, then we're losing money.

    Say's Law remains everywhere and always true: We pay for production with other production. If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Jonathan Mason, @Rob McX

    There is no money to be made if the people being housed and fed have nothing of equivalent value to trade for these goods.

    That’s true in the context of the economy as a whole. But some people make billions while contributing nothing to the overall health of the economy. It’s especially lucrative for these people when the government is paying them.

  135. @Charles Pewitt

    Of course, white women could just as easily ask Gentile white men: At what point are you going to step up and take back control of message? We’re simply following the tribe in control, which, historically, is our safest bet.

     

    Some women find men with crazy balls to be amusing. Politics is the art of the possible. You just don't know what is possible till you try. Trumpy showed us that.

    Women might vote for somebody who promises to smash the evil, anti-White scum currently controlling the internet and other electronic media outlets in the United States.

    The Alphabet Corporation that controls Google and YouTube and other corporations must be destroyed or neutralized.

    Google is directed and controlled by a foreigner, Sundar Pichai, who can be described as being anti-White.

    The Alphabet Corporation is directed and controlled by a foreigner named Sergey Brin and an American named Larry Page.

    The Alphabet Corporation has too much control over the information flow on the internet. The Alphabet Corporation must be busted up or destroyed in order to protect free speech in the United States.

    https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1049861839960469504

    Replies: @Redneck farmer

    Sergey Brin is an American, he has the same background as Max Boot. Oh wait a minute……

  136. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "If we provide goods to the unproductive by fiat, then those goods are being wasted and/or stolen."

    I provided goods to a fair number of unproductive people for many years, and I'm pretty sure I willed to do it - because I loved them.

    Replies: @Tex, @Jim Don Bob, @Rosamond Vincy

    Make the kids rake the leaves or wash the dishes, and your conscience is clear.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  137. @rebunga
    Not a clinical psychologist. I read she wasn't even licensed to practice in California. Research psychologist.

    Replies: @Alden

    True, she’s not licensed to practice.

  138. @eah
    For some reason this montage comes to mind:

    https://theuglytruth.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/defense-minister.jpg

    Replies: @Sergeant Prepper, @Patrick in SC, @Bard of Bumperstickers, @Alden

    Ha ha ha ha I’m still laughing Thanks for the laugh.

  139. @jb
    A little bit off topic (only a little though!), but this looks like a good opportunity to call attention to a startling quote from a recent NYT article. The article was not not an op-ed, but a consideration of how many popular movies from the 80s ( "Risky Business" in particular) look very different in today's moral climate. The Kavanaugh thing does come up, but the article is more about the attitudes of today's young people, and what really caught my attention was this:

    So much about high-school life today looks very different than it did in the 1980s, or even from a decade ago. Last spring, the ninth grade daughter of a friend told me, for example, that she could think of only two people in her New York City private high-school class of approximately 80, who identified as straight. Most considered themselves Q, for questioning. They did not want to be confined.
     
    If this is actually true it is astonishing! For years we have been assured that homosexuals were not trying to convert our children, and that in fact such a thing was impossible, because sexual preferences were inborn and immutable. And yet if the author's ninth grade informant is to be believed it would appear that a vast transformation in attitudes is quite possible. Even if it were mostly performative, that would be astonishing in and of itself. But is it? Do we know what percentage of this class is going to end up in some way "queer," and what the percentage would have been with the same group of students 50 years ago? And is anybody going to have the courage to do the research?

    Replies: @jb, @Roderick Spode, @Alden

    It’s the schools. 2 years ago the grade schools of California, both K-6 and K-8 made an enormous celebration when they made the bathrooms uni sex both sex whatever.

  140. @James N. Kennett

    …intent is not even necessary. If a member of an identity group feels offended or oppressed by the action of another person, then according to the impact-versus-intent paradigm, that other person is guilty of an act of bigotry.
     
    I once knew a lesbian radical feminist who confided that the sight of certain types of men made her feel physically sick. If the new rules make objectivity and intent irrelevant, then such men are going to be chased out of "safe spaces" and places of employment. Their crime is their mere existence.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Anonymous

    At long last, the necessary corollary to Sailer’s Second Law! Not only must ugly women be reconsidered as beautiful, but men must be absolutely perfect at all times, from table manners to body fat.

  141. @Reg Cæsar
    @YetAnotherAnon


    According to one Brazilian reporter, the “words of kindness” showered on the British performer included: “Go f*** yourself in the a***”, “Son of a bitch” and “babaca” (“twat”).
     
    Any Lusophones here to give us the original?

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    I know some Spanish cognates, but no Portuguese.

  142. @Jack D

    Exactly which flavor of person is at the tippy-top of the intersectional totem pole is not a subject that the Democratic coalition can afford to discuss if it hopes to hold together. But at least all Democrats can be urged to come together in hating the cishet white male common enemy at the bottom.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I am confused here - are white men HIGHER or LOWER on the Diversity Totem Pole? OTOH, it makes sense to say that minorities rank higher but OTOH that means that those who are higher are punching down. Everything is inverted because in the New World Order the last shall be first, but doesn't it make sense to observe the traditional ranking and put white men at the top of the pole so that everyone else can punch UP at them (the only kind of punching permitted)? Minorities are competing with each other to say who is the lowest of the low, the biggest victim, which gives you the biggest moral claim. In other words a race to the bottom, which is where any culture is headed when people compete to be The Biggest Loser.

    Trump of course understands this and his biggest theme is "I Love Winning". He is not interested in elevation to future sainthood by being the biggest victim in this world. He doesn't believe Less is More - More is More in his book (see the decorating scheme of his apartment in Trump Tower). He is the un-McCain.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @inertial, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous

    Yes, I noticed that little discrepancy too, Jack.

    Steve, a sentence or two pointing out how being a certified Victim gives you the power to upend and perfectly invert the totem pole, so that you and your ilk perceive yourselves to be ‘punching up’ when you’re generally doing just the opposite, would be helpful here.

  143. Anon[198] • Disclaimer says:

    “Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through — specifically comments relating to … Nikki Haley.”

    Nikki-Tikki-Haley. A mongoose or a rat?
    She went after Trump –
    and struck out at bat.
    Sent straight to the dump –
    …and, uh [yeah, can’t think of anything else]

    –Rudyard Kipling, “Snakes in the Grass: a UN Tale.”

  144. @Paul Jolliffe
    @The Alarmist

    Oh, I doubt CBF willed the event entirely out of thin air: I bet there's at least a chance something happened to her at some distant party at some point, but it sure didn't involve Kavanaugh. And she knew that perfectly well. That's why she kept changing the details - to keep from getting caught.

    So why did she blame Kavanaugh?

    Because she was fixated on him. She didn't like his politics (maybe they reminded her of her parents, with whom she had made a political break), or maybe guys like Kavanaugh had not paid her any attention back in school. Who knows?

    Either way, she simply didn't want Kavanaugh's views represented on the Supreme Court and she justified lying about him in her own mind because she thought he had to be stopped.

    But note that she didn't want credit for stopping him - her letter was to be distributed anonymously. But Democratic operatives inside Feinstein's office, seeing no other way to halt the nomination, deliberately leaked her letter and stoked the firestorm that followed.

    It almost worked.

    And CBF wasn't so shy or reluctant to testify after all. She really was a true believer.

    A neurotic, lying, manipulative, wretched, absolutely pathetic excuse for a decent woman - a woman who should be held up as an example to all young males as to why you should never, never, never socially get anywhere near a crazy woman - but still, a true believer.

    Replies: @The Alarmist, @Anonymous

    A Company asset called up from the reserves when it was learned a connection, albeit tenuous, could be made to Kavanaugh. That the connection was only at High School age is a sign of how much of a Hail Mary they were willing to throw. Kavanaugh should be grateful that the even less credible Ramirez and Swetnick were found to sabotage Blasey’s story.

  145. Anonymous[934] • Disclaimer says:
    @Abe

    We must believe the woman, even if, in the case of Blasey Ford, those who know her best don’t seem to believe her.
     
    We need to start selling T-shirts that say “We must believe the 2 women” with some Arabic text below it (ideally the wording of the Sharia statute that says two women’s testimony is equal to that of one man, but maybe even better if it’s something totally random and haphazard, like “30% off red pepper humus at Aziz’s falafel house”)

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose, @Anonymous

    Not normally a big sharia fan but they were onto something there. The witness statement from a stupid man will always have more probative value than from an above-average IQ bored/unfulfilled housewife. You know where the dolt is coming from.

    The child wizards/vampires fan-fiction-writing approach to life is fine, it has its place. But it does not scale in a functioning society

  146. @Jack D

    Exactly which flavor of person is at the tippy-top of the intersectional totem pole is not a subject that the Democratic coalition can afford to discuss if it hopes to hold together. But at least all Democrats can be urged to come together in hating the cishet white male common enemy at the bottom.

    Anyway, if you are still confused, just remember that good people punch up, not down. So just look for who is being punched and, by definition, they are on top and therefore they are a bad person who deserves being punched.
     
    I am confused here - are white men HIGHER or LOWER on the Diversity Totem Pole? OTOH, it makes sense to say that minorities rank higher but OTOH that means that those who are higher are punching down. Everything is inverted because in the New World Order the last shall be first, but doesn't it make sense to observe the traditional ranking and put white men at the top of the pole so that everyone else can punch UP at them (the only kind of punching permitted)? Minorities are competing with each other to say who is the lowest of the low, the biggest victim, which gives you the biggest moral claim. In other words a race to the bottom, which is where any culture is headed when people compete to be The Biggest Loser.

    Trump of course understands this and his biggest theme is "I Love Winning". He is not interested in elevation to future sainthood by being the biggest victim in this world. He doesn't believe Less is More - More is More in his book (see the decorating scheme of his apartment in Trump Tower). He is the un-McCain.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @inertial, @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous

    It’s the slave morality thing, umpteenth generation.

  147. @Paul Jolliffe
    @The Alarmist

    Oh, I doubt CBF willed the event entirely out of thin air: I bet there's at least a chance something happened to her at some distant party at some point, but it sure didn't involve Kavanaugh. And she knew that perfectly well. That's why she kept changing the details - to keep from getting caught.

    So why did she blame Kavanaugh?

    Because she was fixated on him. She didn't like his politics (maybe they reminded her of her parents, with whom she had made a political break), or maybe guys like Kavanaugh had not paid her any attention back in school. Who knows?

    Either way, she simply didn't want Kavanaugh's views represented on the Supreme Court and she justified lying about him in her own mind because she thought he had to be stopped.

    But note that she didn't want credit for stopping him - her letter was to be distributed anonymously. But Democratic operatives inside Feinstein's office, seeing no other way to halt the nomination, deliberately leaked her letter and stoked the firestorm that followed.

    It almost worked.

    And CBF wasn't so shy or reluctant to testify after all. She really was a true believer.

    A neurotic, lying, manipulative, wretched, absolutely pathetic excuse for a decent woman - a woman who should be held up as an example to all young males as to why you should never, never, never socially get anywhere near a crazy woman - but still, a true believer.

    Replies: @The Alarmist, @Anonymous

    For a middle-aged affluent lady I don’t think CBF’s behavior has been *unexpected*. Not saying it’s acceptable or decent. But some empathy is in order– the normal female impulse to sabotage somebody who’s piqued you would not be so destructive in a different society. Yeah, shariah again

  148. @Anon
    Blacks may think voodoo-like, but the controllers of elite institutions are Jewish, so maybe we should look into the Jewish Mind.

    Jewish Mind is a strange neurosis of hyper-megalomania and ultra-paranoia. Why? Jewish mental culture and attitude developed with the idea that there is One God and He favors Jews to be rulers of the world. Thus Megalomania and Arrogance.

    But Jews realized through most of history that Other Peoples were bigger and stronger than Jews. The lowly and filthy pagans were greater conquerors and, if anything, Jews relied on their mercy to survive. Thus Paranoia and Self-Pity.

    So, Jewish mind has both over-dog and under-dog mentality. You see this with Moses in TEN COMMANDMENTS. When he goes to confront Ramses II, he is both Humble and Proud. He is a humble servant of God, the one true God. But he acts like he is greater than all the pharaohs put together because Divine Righteousness is on his side.

    Today in elite colleges all across the US, we see this neurosis among the elitists(who attitudes and worldview ape those of Jews as trendsetters). On the one hand, they(and their parents) have done everything to gain access to top institutions and do everything to make the most money or reach highest status. Arrogance and pride. But they just love to whimper like they are Forever Victims who are challenging the Power that, symbolically at least, remains in the Image of the Evil White Male. It's hilarious that the Deep State and its Cronies would designate themselves as 'the Resistance'. LOL.

    Granted, this Jewish Neurosis was also part of Christianity as its message has been about Humble Jesus martyred by humans but who turned out to be the Son of God. (Christianity is especially problematic as it is bound to feel guilty for everything it does to expand its power. On the one hand, Christians feel righteous and justified in spreading the Word of God. But this has entailed violence and brutality. So, in the long run, Christians feel self-loathing for what they've done and try to atone by spreading more of the Faith, but then, this entails even more violence that makes for more guilt.) Still, this neurosis is bigger among Jews because they've long maintained a religion that was about tribalism and universalism at once. Core of Christianity is to share the Love of God with all of mankind. Core of Judaism is to keep the special Love of God for the Jews. Everyone else can only get trickle-down Love after Jews hog most of it for themselves. In the US, we have Jews trying to maintain and amass more of Top Power as the rightful rulers of the world... but also playing the role of underdog. Incredibly, they got away with this shtick with Palestinians too. Even now, many Americans believe that Jews must defend themselves from powerful Palestinians than other way around. Jews hate Christianity because it is a reminder of Jewish moral-spiritual hypocrisy. Christianity forever reminds the Jews and the World that when Jews had a chance to share God with rest of humanity through the Love of Jesus, they not only rejected Him but killed Him. Even if we blame Romans more for the death, the fact remains that Jews rejected the New Way that would truly universalize God. Even though the Narrative teaches us that the goyim were to blame for the separateness of Jews, the fact is it was Jewish insistence on the special Covenant that prevented them from becoming one with rest of humanity. Christians didn't shut the door to Jews. It was the Jews who chose to remain outside and shut their own doors. Even among secular Jews, we have this game of Jews-as-champions-of-all-of-humanity while doing everything to maintain what is special and unique about themselves. Also, Jews don't promote Diversity in the West to ensure the melding of all peoples into one humanity. Rather, it is to promote contention and division among humanity so that Jewish elites could feel more secure at the top.

    Because Jewish Power evolved in a state of disadvantage, it doesn't really know what to do when the Power falls on its lap. For most of history, the Jewish Advantage was longevity. Jews lost in sprints but won in the marathon. So, pagan folks rose high and fast and became great powers. But they usually declined and fell apart in a few centuries. Also, they didn't just decline but often disappeared. What happened to the Hittites? Or Ancient pagan Egyptians? Or Babylonians? Because pagan cultures were all about the Great god-like rulers and idols, when those things fell, the entire culture fell. When the greater rulers were deposed and idols smashed, the people were without a culture and assimilated into the new power. Pagan Orders emphasized Might as basis for pride and rule. So, when they lost, they lost not only pride but a sense of identity. Jews emphasized righteousness as basis for their culture, and this meant they had value even in defeat IF they remained righteous in the eyes of God.
    The Covenant meant that Jewish culture was with every Jew as each Jew had this contract with God. And as this Covenant was about goodness and devotion, even a humble Jew could feel God was on His side.
    But another side of the Covenant said that if Jews stick with God, they will eventually become a great power who will rule over all others. Anyway, the Covenant allowed Jews to carry on even when their Order fell apart. Even when Jewish rulers were killed and even when Jewish Temples were smashed, the core idea of the Covenant remained with Jews as long as the Family and the Texts remained. As such, even in defeat, Jews could go survive for millennia, incredibly even as minorities in exile in foreign lands. So, Jews lost the sprint but won the marathon.

    But in the 20th century, Jews began to win the sprints as well, as in Bolshevik Russia and in postwar US(that also dominates EU). Flush with all this power and success, Jews didn't know what to do. They were used to long distance measuring of power. Now, they had super-power in high doses. What was to be done? Too many Jews got over-eager and carried out radicalism to the hilt, like in USSR. Without pacing themselves in the game of power, Jews tried to do as much as possible to create utopia. If not radical idealism, there was wanton greed. With the freedom and opportunity to amass great wealth, certain Jews went wild like Jordan Belfort and fleeced everything they could. Also, Bernie Madoff and oligarchs in Russia.
    In the past, when Jews got over-eager in their ambition or greed, they were balanced out by 'antisemitism' that ranged from exile to violence. As unpleasant and nasty as such could be, they had a 'corrective' and sobering effect on Jewish power.
    It's like market corrections are unpleasant but brings the economy back to reality.

    The problem is there hasn't been a Power Correction for Jews in the West since end of WWII. And over the years, this Power Bubble has gone utterly nuts. Jewish Power has risen sky-high. Instead of Jews soberly trying to address its problems, they try to hide it by screaming White Evil, White Evil or Russia, Russia, Russia to distract us from the real Power Bubble which just keeps growing bigger and bigger.

    As for the Cultural Revolution in China, it was both top down and down-up. Mao meant it to be top-down but it soon went out of hand. A real Mao-like cultural revolution would certainly favor the white patriots in the US. The theme of cultural revolution was anti-elitism. Mao never lost his resentment for the upper crust. As a student of peasant-background, he never forgot the disdain he got from kids from better families. High School never ended with Mao, especially as China was more status-obsessed than the West. So, Mao saw the cultural revolution as mini-Maos attacking the new elites. He was siding with working class and rural youths against the New Urban Haute Communist elites. If a Mao-style Cultural Revolution broke out in the US, white working class youths would storm colleges, beat up elite teachers, and burn globo-homo texts.

    As horrible as the Cultural Revolution was, it may have been a long-term good for China in this sense. It reiterated the need for Common National Consciousness. It suppressed status-elitism. In contrast, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan didn't undergo such and ended up with status-elitism that is now totally poisonous.
    Maybe a mild form of cultural revolution is good for society now and then. Spare the books but maybe elites need a little beating up once in a while. Imagine if the American Working Class went on a rampage in Yale, Princeton, and Harvard and taught those elites a lesson. Populist sacking of elite institutions would have the effect of the French Revolution where all those gay-ish French aristos with powdered wigs got their comeuppance.

    Mao sensed that Confucian elitism had turned dogmatic and kept China back. And he feared that the rise of New CCP class of elitists would lead to the same thing. So, why not shake things up a bit. But even he had no idea the kind of power he would unleash by telling kids to 'bombard the headquarters'. Mao the top dog gave orders to the youths, but the youth rage reached pretty high, leading to the downfall of many top officials, some of whom Mao wanted deposed, some of whom Mao did not.

    Replies: @Dieter Kief

    In the past, when Jews got over-eager in their ambition or greed, they were balanced out by ‘antisemitism’ that ranged from exile to violence. As unpleasant and nasty as such could be, they had a ‘corrective’ and sobering effect on Jewish power.
    It’s like market corrections are unpleasant but bring the economy back to reality.

    And you draw the conclusion:
    “The problem is: There hasn’t been a Power Correction for Jews in the West since the end of WWII.”

    There were power-corrections regarding the Jews before WWII in Europe. Thing is: Very little of those in Germany. That’s the reason, that in the early thirties it was a wide-spread assumption, that if an anti-Jewish movement would start, it would for sure not happen in Germany, but in France, for example. But as it turned out, those assumptions were wrong.

    Very interesting is the Swiss example too, because, nothing much happened at all as far as anti-Semitism is concerned. The core of the Swiss society was too stable. It needed no corrections whatsoever. A historical best practice case, if ever there was one.

  149. @Mike Sylwester
    No link in your last sentence Read the whole thing there.

    Replies: @Dieter Kief

    This “there” might have ceased to be the “there” it has been until recently.

  150. @Charles Pewitt

    The spirit of the age cries out for tales of victimization, and, unsurprisingly, the supply has grown to meet the skyrocketing demand.

     


    What does it say about our culture that we just witnessed a professor of psychology be vastly praised for testifying to a purported chain of events without any additional evidence emerging that it wasn’t all just in her head?

     

    Palo Alto pissant psycho psychology professor, Christine Blasey Ford, is a Generation X harpy who fits in well with the evil globalizer scumbags who have infiltrated government at all levels.

    Steve Sailer also sometimes evinces some of these grotesque qualities.

    Sailer has done two things that may lead an ordinary person to believe that he has some sympathy for the mentally deranged distaff wacko, Blasey Ford:

    1) Steve Sailer refuses to incorporate monetary policy into his overall worldview; and 2) Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through -- specifically comments relating to that horrible anti-White Neo-Conservative politician whore, Nikki Haley. Is Steve Sailer protecting Nikki Haley?

    Attention Steve Sailer:

    To answer your question about what it means to our culture to have the Blasey Ford types running amok in American politics and culture, I'll say that the American Empire is imploding, and the implosion is accelerating. In order to protect and defend the cultural integrity of the United States as a home for the European Christian people, it is vital that the American Empire be imploded in a controlled manner. Pretentious crap, I know, but there might be something to it!

    Maybe something about that Bronx guy DeLillo who wrote a novel about Hitchcock's Psycho being played ultra-slow to represent time or decay or disintegration or some damn thing else.

    Replies: @Kylie, @LondonBob, @Anonymous

    Trump firing Nikki Haley for attempting to undermine his stated policy positions is most welcome, maybe a successful mid-terms will see a new improved Trump burst forth.

  151. @AnotherDad
    Short summary: feminization.

    Steve ends with a racial note, and at the deep level this has been orchestrated due to ethnic animus, score settling. But the immediate issue is simply our society been so highly feminized.

    Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn't focus ideologically or narratively on "equality" or "freedom", but rather on grievance against men. Basically trying to pry white gentile women, from their men and get themselves to see themselves--in the template of Jewish minoritarianism--as an "oppressed minority".

    I think the Cold War kept a check on rampant feminization. The end of it--with the boomer generation which came into adulthood with feminism--unleashed these forces. But then 911 and the following wars again put male concerns--enemies, threat, war--at the top of the agenda.

    But with the wrap up in Iraq, 911 receding into history and Obama's election on a feelz--"Hope and Change"--campaign, feminization was again unleashed. And now as the pre-feminism generation has ambled off the stage, with very little serious male counter-weighting.

    While i have pretty stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, i'm far from a tough he-man type, yet i find today's culture ridiculously feminized and a lot of the men--esp. younger--i encounter overly soft, feminized and faggotty.

    ~~

    Finally, this can not go on. Women have their virtues. Their nurturing toolkit is there to engage them in their children--raising the next generation. But the feminine package--feeling and nurturing--is an *individually* useful package which is wholly unsuited for political decision making.

    In fact, nurturing and feeling are about the worst traits to take into the public realm where making good decisions to maintain your nation/civilization depends critically on the male traits of protection and reason.

    And again, we need Republican/conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take the leftist/coalition-of-the-fringes "women" thing head on. Men and women of a family have the same long term interests--the future of their children, and their future descendants. Which means the future of their race, culture, nation, civilation--its freedom and prosperity.

    And anyone trying to convince women that their interests are contrary to their husbands, is conning them, scamming them--running a divide and conquer strategy--in order to tear apart and destroy their race, their nation, their civilization.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Anonymous, @The Anti-Gnostic, @WR, @Whiskey, @YetAnotherAnon, @LondonBob

    Hitler saw Marxism as an attempt to create class divisions when racial divisions were all that mattered, second wave feminism is the same along with every other ism. Create and highlight divisions whilst obscuring the one that really exists and matters.

  152. @Reg Cæsar
    @Anonym


    I remember listening to The Wall at one stage, thinking, my God, Waters is such a whining crybaby.
     
    Both Waters and Al Stewart lost their fathers before or shortly after birth. Stewart, in sharp contrast, handled the loss much more maturely. He developed a deep interest in history.

    And wine. As in collecting, not guzzling.

    Replies: @JackOH

    Reg, I last saw Al Stewart in Kent (Ohio) this past summer, where he nearly sold out two consecutive nights at a small theater, and played to an appreciative audience.

    His voice was excellent, his back-up musicians likewise, and his gentlemanly stage persona ought to be an example to all performers. His “bigger” stage patter was confined to lightly championing 1960s British folkies, such as Pentangle and Bert Jansch, where he does speak with credible ex cathedra authority.

    One of the funny and instructive stories I recall about Stewart was about him hearing “Time Passages” in an elevator, and being shocked it was the actual song, and not a reworked orchestral version for department store sales boosting. He decided that Top 40 wasn’t his thing, so he drew back from the business. He could afford to by that time, of course, but I wonder how many of us could leave money on the table because the line of work we’re in is at odds with who we are.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @JackOH


    being shocked it was the actual song
     
    “Time Passages” is a masterpiece. It starts off slow and meanders, but builds to something really great.

    Elevator speakers are pretty crummy, maybe that’s what threw him off.

  153. I have to admit, this article of yours is quite revealing, particularly the section on how the shift in Obama-era guidelines had such a tremendous effect: “By eliminating the reasonable person standard, harassment was left to be defined by the self-reported subjective experience of every member of the university community.”

    Incidentally, your comparison to Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution is appropriate because it, much like the rise of the social justice jihadis, was an example of what political scientists call “policy drift”.

    A few years ago, I took a class called “Rational and Irrational Choices in Politics”. It was taught by a Chinese professor (where they lack political correctness) and much of what he taught was quite enlightening. It included the reality of how political collective action is easier in areas of perceived ethnic/cultural homogeneity. He later explained two concepts that were behind (among other things) Mao’s disastrous policies: “policy overshoot” and “policy drift”. Both relate to unintended consequences of political policies that encourage status-striving (He actually used that word) in directions the initial planners never intended. “Policy overshoot” refers to when status-striving encourages individuals and communities to perform way beyond expected and desired rates of the planners. This was the cause of the Great Leap Forward. “Policy drift” refers to when the lack of formal guidelines of an initial policy lead status-striving individuals and groups to try to fulfill it in…unexpected ways.

    Mao’s original intention when he announced the Cultural Revolution was never what it later entailed (Struggle Sessions, destruction of irreplaceable artifacts, mass killings); it was originally announced as a policy of China’s young (the first generation who grew up under Mao) to “instruct” an emerging “bourgeois class” inside the CCP. Needless to say the lack of formal guidelines soon lead to all sorts of authoritarian status-striving behavior by self-righteous young nitwits.

    It is extraordinary the parallels between an apparently harmless official statement, such as that regarding college harassment, can lead to such extraordinarily inventive ways to achieve it!

    Members of the 1960s counter-culture used to say, “There is a policeman in all our heads. He must be destroyed.” Contemporary SJWs now say, “There must be an affirmative action officer in all your deplorable heads or you will be destroyed.” In any case, at least the Chinese seem to be a vanguard for ending a Cutlural Revolution.

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/the-rise-and-fall-of-affirmative-action

  154. Anonymous[379] • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Pewitt

    The spirit of the age cries out for tales of victimization, and, unsurprisingly, the supply has grown to meet the skyrocketing demand.

     


    What does it say about our culture that we just witnessed a professor of psychology be vastly praised for testifying to a purported chain of events without any additional evidence emerging that it wasn’t all just in her head?

     

    Palo Alto pissant psycho psychology professor, Christine Blasey Ford, is a Generation X harpy who fits in well with the evil globalizer scumbags who have infiltrated government at all levels.

    Steve Sailer also sometimes evinces some of these grotesque qualities.

    Sailer has done two things that may lead an ordinary person to believe that he has some sympathy for the mentally deranged distaff wacko, Blasey Ford:

    1) Steve Sailer refuses to incorporate monetary policy into his overall worldview; and 2) Steve Sailer is not moderating my comments on through -- specifically comments relating to that horrible anti-White Neo-Conservative politician whore, Nikki Haley. Is Steve Sailer protecting Nikki Haley?

    Attention Steve Sailer:

    To answer your question about what it means to our culture to have the Blasey Ford types running amok in American politics and culture, I'll say that the American Empire is imploding, and the implosion is accelerating. In order to protect and defend the cultural integrity of the United States as a home for the European Christian people, it is vital that the American Empire be imploded in a controlled manner. Pretentious crap, I know, but there might be something to it!

    Maybe something about that Bronx guy DeLillo who wrote a novel about Hitchcock's Psycho being played ultra-slow to represent time or decay or disintegration or some damn thing else.

    Replies: @Kylie, @LondonBob, @Anonymous

    We need Trump to channel that blustery bravado and fight to get things done that he had on the campaign trail into action to carry the job out. Having a stronger economy is great, but in light of losing the country in the long term it hardly matters. At best it’s giving you a lazy-boy while the Titanic sinks.

  155. Anonymous[379] • Disclaimer says:
    @James N. Kennett

    …intent is not even necessary. If a member of an identity group feels offended or oppressed by the action of another person, then according to the impact-versus-intent paradigm, that other person is guilty of an act of bigotry.
     
    I once knew a lesbian radical feminist who confided that the sight of certain types of men made her feel physically sick. If the new rules make objectivity and intent irrelevant, then such men are going to be chased out of "safe spaces" and places of employment. Their crime is their mere existence.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Anonymous

    These kind of people have probably always been around but what’s different in modern times is that they’re condoned and in some places like universities even rewarded for it. I had a female English professor in college who flat out claimed one day that women were smarter and better than men. Had a man said such a thing about women he’d be drummed out of his job in a heartbeat. What was funny though was that when the professor was out of earshot you could even hear female students talking about how [email protected] nuts this woman was.

  156. @YetAnotherAnon
    @AnotherDad

    "Jewish 2nd wave feminism, didn’t focus ideologically or narratively on “equality” or “freedom”, but rather on grievance against men."

    Look at the Wiki category "feminists by religion". There's certainly a YUGE over-representation of one religion.

    As of now


    Feminists categorized by known religious (or ethnoreligious) affiliation.
    Subcategories

    This category has the following 8 subcategories, out of 8 total.

    B Buddhist feminists‎ (17 P)
    C Christian feminists‎ (7 C, 35 P)
    H Hindu feminists‎ (1 P)
    I Islamic feminists‎ (69 P)
    J Jewish feminists‎ (277 P)
    S Sikh feminists‎ (2 P)
    U Universalist feminists‎ (1 C)
    W Wiccan feminists‎ (10 P)
     
    And if you look at the talk on that topic, you'll see Wiki editors actually being politically neutral.

    This page needs to be deleted immediately. Bigots and misogynists are trying to use the number of Jewish feminists as some sort of political statement. This must be stopped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.200.5 (talk) 04:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

    You're the only bigot here. 204.52.135.203 (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

    That is ridiculous. To delete this page would be to censor factual information for the purpose of advancing your own agenda. Is there perhaps a conflict of interest for why you would want the background of popular feminists to be covered up? 140.180.255.79 (talk) 05:03, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

    Is it a "conflict of interest" to want to promote equality? There's absolutely no reason to have this page if its only use is as a weapon by racists. I'm not saying let's delete all the 'religion' info on each individual feminists' page, but removing an easy numerical categorization like this is a pretty fair request in my opinion. Please be reasonable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.200.2 (talk) 23:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

    You appear to be on a personal crusade here. There are plenty of pages sorting people by ethnic or religious background. Are these all created by racists? In my opinion you sound borderline paranoid and I highly doubt that you can back up your claims - it is really a far-stretched assumption anyway - that only racists care about the ethnicity of feminists. Please familiarize yourself with WP:CENSOR 91.49.221.249 (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
     

    Replies: @njguy73

    U Universalist feminists‎ (1 C)

    They chant, “Hey, ho! Hey, ho! This patriarchy…well, who am I to say it should go?”

    “And what is patriarchy? Or gender?”

  157. @Samuel Skinner
    @WR

    He happens to be wrong. If the tribe is defeated men have no children, but women do. Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe. In fact if their current tribe has a low fertility rate and the tribe conquering them has a high one, it is in their interest to invite in invaders.

    Replies: @Flip, @Rosamond Vincy, @notanon

    Therefore fertile women do not care about the survival of the tribe.

    women share genes with the male half of their population so if conquered they lose around half their autosomal dna

    breeding with someone closely related increases the amount of your dna that gets passed on – which is why you get strong ethnic/familial resemblances with multi-generational cousin marriage

  158. @Flip
    @Samuel Skinner

    That's why Latin Americans and South Asians have disproportionately Indo-European paternal genes and indigenous maternal genes.

    Replies: @notanon

    specifically male (ydna) and female (mtdna) is a small percentage of total dna. the majority is autosomal (adna) which both males and females carry.

    iirc Latin Americans have something like 40-60% European autosomal dna cos they lost the male half.

  159. @JackOH
    @Reg Cæsar

    Reg, I last saw Al Stewart in Kent (Ohio) this past summer, where he nearly sold out two consecutive nights at a small theater, and played to an appreciative audience.

    His voice was excellent, his back-up musicians likewise, and his gentlemanly stage persona ought to be an example to all performers. His "bigger" stage patter was confined to lightly championing 1960s British folkies, such as Pentangle and Bert Jansch, where he does speak with credible ex cathedra authority.

    One of the funny and instructive stories I recall about Stewart was about him hearing "Time Passages" in an elevator, and being shocked it was the actual song, and not a reworked orchestral version for department store sales boosting. He decided that Top 40 wasn't his thing, so he drew back from the business. He could afford to by that time, of course, but I wonder how many of us could leave money on the table because the line of work we're in is at odds with who we are.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    being shocked it was the actual song

    “Time Passages” is a masterpiece. It starts off slow and meanders, but builds to something really great.

    Elevator speakers are pretty crummy, maybe that’s what threw him off.

  160. @Jonathan Mason
    @Rosamond Vincy

    The subject of hypnagogic hallucinations is a deep one, though it does not go quite as deep as the hippocampus, but is described by popular author Charlie Dickens here in Oliver Twist, Chapter XXXIV (as most people will know.)

    There is a kind of sleep that steals upon us sometimes, which, while it holds the body prisoner, does not free the mind from a sense of things about it, and enable it to ramble at its pleasure. So far as an overpowering heaviness, a prostration of strength, and an utter inability to control our thoughts or power of motion, can be called sleep, this is it; and yet, we have a consciousness of all that is going on about us, and, if we dream at such a time, words which are really spoken, or sounds which really exist at the moment, accommodate themselves with surprising readiness to our visions, until reality and imagination become so strangely blended that it is afterwards almost matter of impossibility to separate the two. Nor is this, the most striking phenomenon incidental to such a state. It is an undoubted fact, that although our senses of touch and sight be for the time dead, yet our sleeping thoughts, and the visionary scenes that pass before us, will be influenced and materially influenced, by the mere silent presence of some external object; which may not have been near us when we closed our eyes: and of whose vicinity we have had no waking consciousness.

    Oliver knew, perfectly well, that he was in his own little room; that his books were lying on the table before him; that the sweet air was stirring among the creeping plants outside. And yet he was asleep. Suddenly, the scene changed; the air became close and confined; and he thought, with a glow of terror, that he was in the Jew's house again. There sat the hideous old man, in his accustomed corner, pointing at him, and whispering to another man, with his face averted, who sat beside him.

    'Hush, my dear!' he thought he heard the Jew say; 'it is he, sure enough. Come away.'

    'He!' the other man seemed to answer; 'could I mistake him, think you? If a crowd of ghosts were to put themselves into his exact shape, and he stood amongst them, there is something that would tell me how to point him out. If you buried him fifty feet deep, and took me across his grave, I fancy I should know, if there wasn't a mark above it, that he lay buried there?'

    The man seemed to say this, with such dreadful hatred, that Oliver awoke with the fear, and started up.

    Good Heaven! what was that, which sent the blood tingling to his heart, and deprived him of his voice, and of power to move! There—there—at the window—close before him—so close, that he could have almost touched him before he started back: with his eyes peering into the room, and meeting his: there stood the Jew! And beside him, white with rage or fear, or both, were the scowling features of the man who had accosted him in the inn-yard.

    It was but an instant, a glance, a flash, before his eyes; and they were gone. But they had recognised him, and he them; and their look was as firmly impressed upon his memory, as if it had been deeply carved in stone, and set before him from his birth. He stood transfixed for a moment; then, leaping from the window into the garden, called loudly for help.

    I know the feeling.

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    He had a 2nd-story window with a balcony in the movie musical. This not only solved the problem of intruders, but also gave him a great vantage point for “Who Will Buy?”

    Fagin was played as a charming rogue by Ron Moody, who put his personal twist (PI) on the part forever, but the one who scared the $#1+ out of me was Bill Sykes. (I’ve heard Oliver Reed wasn’t all that pleasant in real life, either.)

  161. the one who scared the $#1+ out of me was Bill Sykes

    Yes, Bill Sikes was a thoroughly unpleasant psychopath. While Dickens is well known for having started the child abuse industry, he is less lauded for also being a pioneer in domestic violence studies.

    This archetypal abused spouse song from Oliver! is here performed by Georgia Brown, whom I saw playing the role of Nancy on stage in London. She was born Lillian Klot, so I cannot imagine why she changed her name. Lionel Bart composed this song with her in mind.

    Believe it or not, when I was a teenager I was taken by my father to see the London stage version of Oliver! (and we had the long-playing record at home). The role of the Artful Dodger was at one point played by a boy of exactly my own age, who had the good fortune to have a mother who was a theatrical agent, who had evidently wangled the part for him in spite of his lack of singing talent. His name was Phil Collins. I do not know if I saw him in the role.

    In London the role was later played by Steve Marriot, a future Small Face, and on Broadway the role was also played by Davy Jones, who grew up to be a Monkee.

    One of the main auditioners who did not get the role as Bill Sikes was a young actor called Maurice Micklewhite who used the stage name Michel Caine. He was devastated when he did not get the part, and never got over it. Don’t know what happened to him after that.

    Those were the days.

    Interesting to note how the production sounds so Beatlesque, like Eleanor Rigby, as the hand of Paul McCartney was credited with the record production, though I am sure that George Martin must have been holding his hand.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @Jonathan Mason

    I wonder if Sykes would be more believable with Caine's charm. I couldn't imagine why Nancy wanted anything to do with him. It's like Valmont: believable as played by Alan Rickman, but with John Malkovich, you wonder how his victims could be so stupid they didn't see through him.

    Replies: @Kylie

  162. @Jonathan Mason

    the one who scared the $#1+ out of me was Bill Sykes
     
    Yes, Bill Sikes was a thoroughly unpleasant psychopath. While Dickens is well known for having started the child abuse industry, he is less lauded for also being a pioneer in domestic violence studies.

    This archetypal abused spouse song from Oliver! is here performed by Georgia Brown, whom I saw playing the role of Nancy on stage in London. She was born Lillian Klot, so I cannot imagine why she changed her name. Lionel Bart composed this song with her in mind.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2RylUgMrvM

    Believe it or not, when I was a teenager I was taken by my father to see the London stage version of Oliver! (and we had the long-playing record at home). The role of the Artful Dodger was at one point played by a boy of exactly my own age, who had the good fortune to have a mother who was a theatrical agent, who had evidently wangled the part for him in spite of his lack of singing talent. His name was Phil Collins. I do not know if I saw him in the role.

    In London the role was later played by Steve Marriot, a future Small Face, and on Broadway the role was also played by Davy Jones, who grew up to be a Monkee.

    One of the main auditioners who did not get the role as Bill Sikes was a young actor called Maurice Micklewhite who used the stage name Michel Caine. He was devastated when he did not get the part, and never got over it. Don't know what happened to him after that.

    Those were the days.

    Interesting to note how the production sounds so Beatlesque, like Eleanor Rigby, as the hand of Paul McCartney was credited with the record production, though I am sure that George Martin must have been holding his hand.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3KEhWTnWvE

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    I wonder if Sykes would be more believable with Caine’s charm. I couldn’t imagine why Nancy wanted anything to do with him. It’s like Valmont: believable as played by Alan Rickman, but with John Malkovich, you wonder how his victims could be so stupid they didn’t see through him.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Rosamond Vincy

    " It’s like Valmont: believable as played by Alan Rickman, but with John Malkovich, you wonder how his victims could be so stupid they didn’t see through him."

    Maybe they could see through him but they just didn't care. Malkovich was never good-looking but as Valmont, he was extremely sexy in a sinuous, disreputable way. I find nearly everything in movies that's supposed to be sexy/erotic/arousing a big yawn. But he was very seductive. Very.

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

  163. @Rosamond Vincy
    @Jonathan Mason

    I wonder if Sykes would be more believable with Caine's charm. I couldn't imagine why Nancy wanted anything to do with him. It's like Valmont: believable as played by Alan Rickman, but with John Malkovich, you wonder how his victims could be so stupid they didn't see through him.

    Replies: @Kylie

    ” It’s like Valmont: believable as played by Alan Rickman, but with John Malkovich, you wonder how his victims could be so stupid they didn’t see through him.”

    Maybe they could see through him but they just didn’t care. Malkovich was never good-looking but as Valmont, he was extremely sexy in a sinuous, disreputable way. I find nearly everything in movies that’s supposed to be sexy/erotic/arousing a big yawn. But he was very seductive. Very.

    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    @Kylie

    With Rickman as Valmont, I definitely wouldn't care.

    Malkovich, not so much.

  164. @Kylie
    @Rosamond Vincy

    " It’s like Valmont: believable as played by Alan Rickman, but with John Malkovich, you wonder how his victims could be so stupid they didn’t see through him."

    Maybe they could see through him but they just didn't care. Malkovich was never good-looking but as Valmont, he was extremely sexy in a sinuous, disreputable way. I find nearly everything in movies that's supposed to be sexy/erotic/arousing a big yawn. But he was very seductive. Very.

    Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    With Rickman as Valmont, I definitely wouldn’t care.

    Malkovich, not so much.

  165. @Lowe
    Taki Mag needs to reduce the number of video ads on their site. It is very irritating.

    Replies: @Lurker, @F0337

    AdBlockPlus to the rescue? I never see ads there. And I do contribute cash now and then, no wait a minute that’s VDare LOL

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS