The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Judge Rules in Favor of Polygamy as Being Mandated by the Logic of Gay Marriage
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

Over the last few years, I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy). Now a judge in yet another one of these New York City rental lawsuits has ruled that “majoritarian animus” about marriage not being among more than two people is the unacceptable explanation for why the Obergfell gay marriage decision restricts marriage to two homosexuals.

Way back in 1989, the gay marriage juggernaut got launched over a tawdry New York City rent control imbroglio. A rent-controlled tenant died without spouse or issue (rent control status is hereditary in New York), so the landlord was going to raise the rent, but then the dead lessee’s roommate announced that he deserved to continue to pay the rent controlled rent because they were more than just roommates.

Now, we’ve seen a similar NYC rental dispute that might launch the polygamy trend of the 21st Century. From the Volokh Conspiracy in Reason:

“In Sum, the Problem With [the Same-Sex Marriage Cases] Is That They Recognize Only Two-Person Relationships”

A New York trial court judge concludes that polyamorous relationships are entitled to the sort of legal protection given to two-person relationships.

EUGENE VOLOKH | 9.24.2022 11:03 AM

The decision is yesterday’s West 49th St., LLC v. O’Neill, decided by New York Civil Court Judge Karen May Bacdayan. Scott Anderson and Markyus O’Neill lived together in an apartment; Anderson was on the lease, and O’Neill was not. After Anderson died, O’Neill would have had the right to renew the lease if he were “a non-traditional family member,” but Anderson was married to Robert Romano. The apartment building company therefore argued that O’Neill was just a roommate, but the court concluded that there needed to be a hearing about whether Anderson, Romano, and O’Neill were actually in a polyamorous relationship:

Romano, who was gay married to Anderson, and O’Neill, who lived with Anderson, hated each other. But, love is love, so whaddaya whaddaya?

Before gay marriage was legalized in any state, Braschi v Stahl Assocs. Co. (N.Y. 1989) was decided. The New York State Court of Appeals became the first American appellate court to recognize that a non-traditional, two-person, same-sex, committed, family-like relationship is entitled to legal recognition, and that the nontraditional family member is entitled to receive noneviction protections. The Braschi court interpreted the Rent Control Law in effect at a time when there was no legal recognition of same-sex marriage, and broadly construed the law to effectuate its remedial purposes.

Braschi is widely regarded as a catalyst for the legal challenges and changes that ensued. … However, Braschi and its progeny and Obergefell limit their holdings to two-person relationships. The instant case presents the distinct and complex issue of significant multi-person relationships.

… Why then, except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships?

In Our Democracy, the fact that most people are for something, such as defining a marriage to involve two people, as proof of sinister unconstitutional animus.

Is “two” a “code word” for monogamy? Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one? Why does the relationship have to be characterized by “exclusivity”? Why is holding each other out to the community as a family a factor? Perhaps, as in the instant case, the triad has chosen to closet their relationship from others? Perhaps the would-be successor is not “out”. Maybe they do not believe their “real” family is open to alternative kinds of relationships. “Holding out” discounts the existence of prejudice and misunderstanding about communities and people that are not “normie.” Do all nontraditional relationships have to comprise or include only two primary persons?

Indeed, the Braschi court’s referral to “normal familial activities” reveals an intent to limit the application of noneviction protections to someone who can demonstrate a traditional marriage but for their sexual orientation. …

However, what was “normal” or “nontraditional” in 1989 is not a barometer for what is normal or nontraditional now. Indeed, the definition of “family” has morphed considerably since 1989. Specifically, many articles have been written about multi-person relationships in recent years, revealing a preference that for some has long been known. For example, a recent article from The New Yorker magazine describes the broadening recognition of such relationships and how these relationships are challenging the norm:

“In February 2020, the Utah legislature passed a so-called Bigamy Bill, decriminalizing the offense by downgrading it from a felony to a misdemeanor. In June [2020], Somerville, Massachusetts, passed an ordinance allowing groups of three or more people who ‘consider themselves to be a family’ to be recognized as domestic partners….[T]he neighboring town of Cambridge followed suit, passing a broader ordinance recognizing multi-partner relationships. … American conservatism has long mourned the proliferation of single parents, but, if two parents are better than one, why are three parents worse?” { The New Yorker magazine, March 22, 2021 issue, How Polyamorists and Polygamists Are Challenging Family Norms. See also Polyamory and the Law, Harvard Law Today, August 3, 2021, available at https://hls.harvard.edu/today/polyamory-and-the-law/.}

This begs the question:

Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.

Should a person who would not meet the requirements for succession to a rent stabilized apartment after Braschi was decided in 1989, now, 33 years later, be evicted when they may qualify, as was the concluded in Braschi, under a more inclusive interpretation of a family?

… In sum, the problem with Braschi and Obergefell is that they recognize only two-person relationships. Those decisions, while revolutionary, still adhered to the majoritarian, societal view that only two people can have a family-like relationship; that only people who are “committed” in a way defined by certain traditional factors qualify for protection from “one of the harshest decrees known to the law—eviction from one’s home.”

Those decisions, however, open the door for consideration of other relational constructs; and, perhaps, the time has arrived. As Justice John Roberts foretold in his Obergefell dissent:

“Although the majority randomly inserts the adjective ‘two’ in various places, it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not.

It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage…. If not having the opportunity to marry serves to disrespect and subordinate gay and lesbian couples, why wouldn’t the same imposition of this disability … serve to disrespect and subordinate people who find fulfillment in polyamorous relationships (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)?” …

Here, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Romano, and Mr. O’Neill had a relationship to one another. There was knowledge of all persons about the others and, at least, passive consent, even if they did not all like each other. Was the relationship a “good” one? Mr. Romano describes Mr. O’Neill as “intimidat[ing],” and Mr. O’Neill describes Mr. Romano as “abusive.” It seems equally as unimportant as considering sexual relations to delve into the level of happiness in a relationship. Is one stripped of their rights to “marital property” on the basis of having a “bad” marriage? Would noneviction protections not devolve to an emotionally abusive spouse?

 
Hide 254 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Now a judge in yet another one of these New York City rental lawsuits

    Mr Steve, surely you mean one of these lawsuits involving a New York City rental judge.
    You pays your money and you gets your judgement. Seems obvious to me.

    • LOL: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Ted Kennedy
    @Verymuchalive

    They won't stop until fucking barnyard animals and your grandmothers dead corpse become legally protected actions of their affection.

  2. Here, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Romano, and Mr. O’Neill had a relationship to one another. There was knowledge of all persons about the others and, at least, passive consent, even if they did not all like each other.

    WTF. This opinion makes no sense on any level. It used to be “Marriage is Marriage,” then it was “Love is Love.” But now it also turns out that “Hate is Hate.” And they are all just different ways to have a “relationship.” And all “relationships” are equivalent to legal marriage, because otherwise the majority would be determining the law, and nothing threatens democracy like majority rule.

    Next up, “indifference” as a form of legally binding “relationship.” Why should people you’ve never met be excluded from getting half your stuff as community property? That’s just more majority rule B.S.

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
    @Hypnotoad666

    It’s much worse than that.

    Many years ago (20?), I read an essay by affirmative action novelist, Samuel Delany. Delany was grieving over lost “relationships.” He was writing of anonymous strangers whom he couldn’t even see clearly, with whom he’d had homosexual sex tens of thousands of times in dark porno theaters in Times Square, which had been demolished during the area’s Disneyfication. (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.) Delany insisted that every sexual act that he and an anonymous, unseeable man had had constituted “a relationship.”

    If Judge Karen May Bacdayan and law professor Eugene Volokh have their way, Delany’s abuse of language will become “the law of the land,” though I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John

    , @Kim
    @Hypnotoad666

    Can't see much "...and forsake all others" going on here.

  3. I suspect the judge’s spouse won’t allow her to take another spouse while still married.

    • Agree: Charon
    • Replies: @SFG
    @Redneck farmer

    She's already got a boyfriend or girlfriend, I bet, and if he complains she'll just divorce him and take half his stuff. She's a judge, she knows her way around the law.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @mmack

    , @RadicalCenter
    @Redneck farmer

    Sure she will.

  4. Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden. It’s all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can’t have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    • Troll: AnotherDad
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Daniel H

    This blog should have the "NUTS" option.

    , @Anon
    @Daniel H

    How is, in essence, a border dispute between two groups of Eastern Orthodox Christians now clash of civilizations? Are the series of border disputes among Oriental Orthodox Christians in the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Eritrea) also a clash of civilizations?

    , @AnotherDad
    @Daniel H


    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered…
     
    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.

    No, saving us requires the obvious--nationalism, attacking and defeating minoritarianism, defending borders, stopping the immivasion, restoring a healthy traditional majoritiarian culture-- improving fertility, eugenic fertility ... work. A lot of work.

    Putin's obsession with "the Great Rus", 19th century Russian imperialism. and 1914 style "we'll give those bastards a lesson" aggression has ... uh ... um ... yeah, that's right nothing to do with it. The world needs Russian imperialism the same way it needs American or Chinese or anyone else's imperialism ... not at all.

    In fact, not only is Putin's War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin's War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.
    and
    B) trashed the opportunity Putin had to aid nationalist-traditionists like Orban, be an alternative peacefully, friendly, well-run nationalist, traditionalist power that served as a counterweight to EU bullying. Demonstrate "better"--by having a secure border, tossing out illegals from the 'stans, (ideally cutting the Chechens loose/out), working assiduously on Russian "affordable family formation" and fertility turnaround so it's a not a half muzzie joint (like England and France) in 100 years.

    But ... Putin--sadly like a lot of "leaders"--is obsessed with being a big swinging dick and not with making Russia great for Russians.

    But hey ... I hear he needs bodies. Go sign up!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @anonymous

    , @Jack D
    @Daniel H


    for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered
     
    First of all, when Putin says "Christian" he means "Eastern Orthodox" which is a completely different kind of Christian, one that has existed more or less in constant opposition to Western Christianity (on one of the crusades, the Crusaders sacked Byzantium - they did more lasting damage to it than they did to the Moslems) and which has an alien notion of the relationship between church and state, worshipers and the church and so on.

    2nd, Putin is the head of a multi-cultural country - in his annexation speech he was careful to say (lying as usual) that Russia resisted Western colonialism by have " a strong centralized state in Russia, which developed and strengthened itself on the great moral values ​​of Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism." So even Putin doesn't claim to be fighting on behalf of Christianity. Assuming the very best about him, he is fighting for the interest of Russia, not your interests. He wouldn't hesitate to put a bullet between your ears if he thought that you were standing in the way of RUSSIAN greatness.

    3rd, if you are looking for cultured and ordered, Russia is the LAST place you should be looking. Russia has an alcohol problem that makes our drug problems look like amateur hour by comparison.


    If you think that Putin is your champion you are sorely, sorely mistaken. Go find another champion because Putin ain't it.

    Replies: @SFG

    , @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

  5. The use of the term “marriage equality” rather than “gay marriage” was a clue that this was coming.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri, mc23
  6. The new flag.

    • LOL: mmack
    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @Bill Jones

    That's pretty good. I see these flags all around, and they're never the same twice. I think they change every year as there's some new cause that has to be added. Some kind of arms race between the signalers.... Look! I have 12 colors and shapes, and you only have 8!

    In the old days we just flew American flags and that was enough. It meant we love America and Americans. No need to single out this or that group.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Buzz Mohawk

  7. In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.

    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn’t buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You’d think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)

    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?

    From a non-white: you don’t deserve, anything, Billy:

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Whereismyhandle


    You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.
     
    The next step is to bus the school kids into the theater. I"m not kidding that they haven't already thought of it, and probably not just High School.

    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal "Western" movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by '05, but without their reading there, it's very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @the one they call Desanex

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Whereismyhandle


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn’t buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.
     
    This hits at a gnawing insecurity for Alphabet people - they intuit that a large percentage of the population likely representing a majority was coerced into withdrawing their objections to exhibitionist homosexuality in short order and isn't sincere in its "acceptance." Their "rights" and cultural prominence are secured only by a soft terror exacted by the Press, the Academy, and now the "Civil Rights" structure of state and Federal governments. Two men engaging in sexual conduct with one another and even implied sexual conduct still trips the disgust reaction of very many people. People are simply falsifying their preferences as a means of self-defense against the punitive measures arrayed against anyone who would refuse to do so.

    So here, Eichner knows intuitively that lots of people find him personally and his film thoroughly disgusting and some of them even in spite of their professed political beliefs. The failure of his over-promoted "romcom" is evidence that people don't believe what they are required to say that they believe about Alphabet people and will engage in anonymous passive resistance. Eichner really just wants them to truly love Big Brother, and is frustrated that he currently lacks the means to make them do so.

    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?
     
    Brokeback Mountain was prior to Obergefell when Alphabet people had to pretend to be nice and quirky normal people, just with a different preference - although their cruel streak and catty meanness was obvious to anyone really paying attention. They appealed to pathos and sympathy then - they needed gay marriage because they were so weak and pathetic. They would leave your kids out of it! Just two consenting adults, consenting together! How does it harm your marriage? It will actually strengthen your marriage! Maybe you're secretly gay if you object! They want to visit one another in the hospital, that's all.

    This facade was immediately abandoned after Obergefell - as in, the next day. Now you had to accept gay marriage because they were strong and could hurt you. It's an entirely different dynamic in 2022 than what was the case in 2005. Additionally, people knew that Gyllenhaal and Ledger were acting - they didn't really want to sodomize one another so the audience was permitted an escape hatch from suspended disbelief within the film. This film is active homosexuals depicting active homosexuals dating one another - there's no way to conceive of the depicted sodomy within the film as somehow not real.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Whereismyhandle

    The primary demo for rom-coms is women, and women don't want to think about what the fabulously gay friends that Hollywood tells them they should have get up to when they're being fabulously gay with each other. Disgust -normal, human disgust - is a real thing, whether it be disgust at homosexuality, disgust with men who act like women, disgust at the idea of eating bugs, etc. Of course, the forces of cultural destruction are trying to chip away at those normal human reactions.

    , @Kylie
    @Whereismyhandle

    "You’d think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not."

    Lol! I wouldn't if I knew he was gay.

    , @Daniel H
    @Whereismyhandle


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?
     
    Haven't seen this new movie, but one reason for the spectacular indifference of the general public is that it is BOTH Gay and Jewish. Too much to bear.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Whereismyhandle

    One of the commenters somewhere said the movie would have done ok if just 5% of the poofter population had turned out to see it. But it's all the fault of the Deplorables he hates.

    I have not seen Brokedick Hill and I never will.

  8. The ideal solution to this particular dilemma would be to abolish rent control.

    • Replies: @guest007
    @International Jew

    If one wants to eliminate rent control, then one should also support all of the ways that people avoid paying their local property taxes.

    , @Jimbo
    @International Jew

    No, the ideal solution would be to abolish New York City.

    Replies: @Prester John, @Carroll price

  9. “Over the last few years, I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy).”

    But did you predict it would be the context of homosexual phony marriages?

    Lower rent and free spousal medical insurance. Those homos would almost be inspirational in their pragmatism is it weren’t for all the filth and disease and glitter.

    • Replies: @Alan Mercer
    @Mike Tre

    Good point about the free spousal medical insurance. Suppose someone considers everyone he partied with at the festivals last summer to be family. Suppose he also pays the "family" medical insurance premium at work. Must his employer now extended coverage to them all?

    On the basis of such a lawsuit, I guess government-run universal healthcare could be sold as politically unavoidable.

    Replies: @Barnard

    , @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Mike Tre

    Lower rent and free spousal medical insurance.

    Also, a lucrative new market for divorce lawyers to exploit, too. (Due to the marriage strike, those guys had been hurting badly prior to Obergefell .) Everybody wins!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG3uea-Hvy4

  10. OT:

    “the Ultimate Hollywood Survivor; the bimbo and the mangina”: Al Ruddy, Part II (videos)

    https://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2022/10/the-ultimate-hollywood-survivor-bimbo.html

  11. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-mitch-mcconnell-death-wish-insults-wife-elaine-chao-2022-9

    Donald Trump says Mitch McConnell has a ‘death wish’ and insults his wife, Elaine Chao, after the senator voiced support for the Electoral Count Act reforms

    He also insulted McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao, referring to her as the “China loving wife, Coco Chow.”

    “In any event, either reason is unacceptable,” Trump wrote. “He has a DEATH WISH.”

    The former president proceeded to insult McConnell’s wife, former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao: “Must immediately seek help and advise from his China loving wife, Coco Chow

    “Coco Chow.”

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @JohnnyWalker123


    “Coco Chow.”
     
    Great name for a chocolate flavored dog food. Though dogs aren't supposed to eat chocolate.

    It instead sounds like a cheap Chinese cereal knock off of "Coco Puffs."

    I suppose that's what Trump was aiming for.

    Trump is funny this way. He knows he's not really newsworthy but when he pulls off one of his insult stunts, it sets off the Dogs of Journalism and their howls of racism or whatever.

    Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and well. Probably incurable.

    You know Trump is in the neighborhood when you can hear those dogs barking long and loud.

    Mike Lindell should hire Trump to endorse one of his My Pillow products on TV (Fox News!). The frenzied media would give Lindell a billion dollars worth of free publicity.

    Maybe even a specially designed "Trump My Pillow", with his face on it. You could rest easily each night with your head on Trump's grinning visage. And the comrades could use them for punching pillows. Get some of that Anger Management out of their system. Win-Win.
  12. This one’s been stewing in progressive circles as ‘polyamory’ for a while. (‘Polygamy’ is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can’t get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren’t enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V’s where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the ‘hinge’ who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N’s, V’s, W’s, X’s, and so on.

    I read ‘The Polyamorists Next Door’, by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently ‘The Ethical Slut’, by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It’s sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists–there’s the ‘swinger’ culture that’s considerably more conservative and doesn’t overlap much. (There’s quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable (‘they all underwent change’ was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don’t). There’s also the fact that it’s a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you ‘open up your relationship’ due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it’s hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they’re just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself–women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP (‘one penis policy’) that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90’s. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn’t privy to. I’m convinced it’s one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you’ll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn’t a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they’ll get a harem, and that’s not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too–but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won’t go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they’re always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @SFG

    I'll sign on to all of this, except fighting it. That battle is lost (even more than the tranny thing).

    Something approaching lifetime monogamous marriage is (tragically) both (1) necessary for a modern Western society in the long-run, and (2) deeply unnatural and therefore exists only with institutional and cultural support. Unless you accept deep religious principles as inherently binding on society, this is the real argument against gay marriage and the sexual revolution more broadly: sooner or later you end up living in Guatemala.

    America -- and the West as a whole -- surrendered on this issue something like 50 years ago. It's all just mopping up operations now.

    , @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @SFG

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Yes:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/04/one-man-many-wives-big-problems/304829/

    When even some liberal outlets like The Atlantic are coming out against a certain form of sexual perversion, it's bad--very, very bad. Luckily, our Trumpist Supreme Court will probably smack this thing down when it gets there.

    Replies: @SFG

    , @Almost Missouri
    @SFG

    Thanks for the inside dope.


    I know there isn’t a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.)
     
    One way or another, polygamy will reach the US Supreme Court, if not from this case, then from another one. If the Dems haven't packed the Court by then, we might hope for something like the following:

    The Justices agree with New York judge Bacdayan that Roberts was correct that inserting the word "two" into Obergefell was arbitrary, and therefore ... Obergefell is overturned. But universal polygamy (anyone and everyone can be married to anyone and everyone) would render marriage into amorphous meaninglessness, so Baker v. Nelson (which Obergefell had overturned) becomes controlling precedent once again: states can do what they want.

    Based Black Judge Thomas has already laid the groundwork for this in Dobbs, when he noted that "substantive due process" (upon which almost every leftwing legal revolution was built) is fake law.

    My own preference would be that the Feds just get out of the marriage game entirely, since very time they touch it, they make it worse. So if the Supremes say flatly that marriage is State business, not Federal business, that would be the best case scenario.

    Replies: @Bill Jones, @SFG

    , @Gabe Ruth
    @SFG

    Lol, uh, thanks?

    Don’t think you need to spend that much time on Reddit to discern the obvious failure modes here though, and potentially the hidden driver of this.

    There’s a guy who comments here sometimes that writes extensive and detailed book reviews, Contemporary Heretic. He’s a bit kooky on some things (MGTOW I think), but I remember one article where he talks about our society’s bizarre elite behavior where the more successful you are the fewer kids you have (not that simple but very weird that more wealth rarely leads too more progeny).

    IIRC he believes this state is due to our ideological fixation on equality, and so the big man getting more pussy makes us really uncomfortable. His big example was everybody freaking out about Slick Willy and a chubby intern. But if polyamory is normalized, we’ll end up with a sizable social blast radius of hopeless unhappy people whose tough lot is worsened by bad advice from society, with a small, quiet minority of men with the means to handle a few households at once doing quite well. Parallels to the trannie situation as described by our host.

    , @AnotherDad
    @SFG

    Nice run down SFG.

    But the bottom line here is guys may temporarily put up with nonsense for sex. But there is zero stability there.

    When it comes to the actual function of marriage--raising the next generation--polyamory with two dudes involved doesn't work at all.

    Polygamy does work all over the world. Women will share a guy ... if he's--relative to other options--a big swinging dick with resources. But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he's got ... or take some from somebody else.

    There's a reason every actual civilization that accomplishes anything settles into monogamy. That's how you create a situation where the dudes can trust each other enough to stop fighting and start working ... allowing the children to be raised with more resources, and the society to have a surplus allowing it to out compete--and maybe conquer--less productive societies.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    , @Muggles
    @SFG

    Multiple wives?

    Uh, no.

    You'd never get any peace and quiet and soon, no "piece" much either.

    You'd be quickly outvoted on everything.

    Now a better idea is to bring back good old-fashioned brothels. Not that I've been to one, but it seems this service solved many problems. A good living for some, a good time for all. Variety without the guilt or commitment problems.

    Also no "social media" Tinder lying or psychos. Just good time tested market behavior.

    Instead of ruining actual marriage, or faking it a la gays, try something that works. Marriage +.

    No, Amazon won't deliver it to your door, but Uber or Lyft can give you a ride to/fro. Volume discounts!

    The missuses won't mind. You'll be out of her hair for a few hours and might pick up some new, uh, tricks of the trade.

    The first one to successfully franchise this, legally, is an instant billionaire.

    , @Cato
    @SFG

    Thanks for this. Your post is what ethnography of social media would look like.

    A few observations:

    Sexual jealousy is a big problem with "polyamory". No male would readily tolerate another male diddling his woman, and no female would readily tolerate her man falling in love with another female.

    Polygyny occurs in most societies, though most marriages -- even in societies that allow polygyny -- are monogamous.

    The few ethnographically observed example of polyandry (Tibet and South India) take the form of brothers sharing a wife, because of poverty. Not at all relevant in our country.

    Implications:

    Polygamy needs to be legalized in the US, now that same-sex marriage is legal, because it actually should have been legalized first. It will overwhelmingly take on the form of polygyny because that is what we see cross-culturally. And this will be beneficial in some segments of societies, such as among underclass blacks, because more children will now have Dads, and they will learn what a responsible father looks like.

  13. @Redneck farmer
    I suspect the judge's spouse won't allow her to take another spouse while still married.

    Replies: @SFG, @RadicalCenter

    She’s already got a boyfriend or girlfriend, I bet, and if he complains she’ll just divorce him and take half his stuff. She’s a judge, she knows her way around the law.

    • Thanks: Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @SFG

    Manospherods know that already ....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzuSsS1IHaE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOgvwlQE_6A

    Replies: @SFG

    , @mmack
    @SFG

    "She’s a judge, she knows her way around the law."

    1) You'd be shocked how many judges DON'T know their way around the law, even though they adjudicate cases. Heard this first hand privately from some lawyers, including my Mrs.

    2) She'd better not be the higher earning partner in her marriage, if indeed she is married. I know at least two cases where the higher earning ex-wife owed her husband maintenance or child support after the divorce. Granted, it was Silly-nois, but as women climb the career ladder and end up out earning their spouses they may get a nasty shock via the law, even in NY. 😳

  14. @International Jew
    The ideal solution to this particular dilemma would be to abolish rent control.

    Replies: @guest007, @Jimbo

    If one wants to eliminate rent control, then one should also support all of the ways that people avoid paying their local property taxes.

  15. Polyamory is a waste of time & energy. Also, manosphere is full of stories from men whose wives, all of a sudden, began to insist on “open marriage”, polyamory & similar stuff.

    All those marriages collapsed, sooner or later.

    Perhaps some “progressives” with alternative life-styles want to try this, but they are in the minority, and it all wears off with time.

    Fat, bald, stupid, middle aged… is no way to go through erotic life, man.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Recently Based, @Jay Fink

    , @John Johnson
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Perhaps some “progressives” with alternative life-styles want to try this, but they are in the minority, and it all wears off with time.

    Polyamory - When liberal women are completely bored with their unnatural and childless marriage to a gutless man and want to sleep with the guy at the office but without appearing responsible for the resulting divorce.

  16. Ah, where would America 🇺🇸 be without liberal, activist justices?

    Oh wait, it’s a TRIAL court judge?

    Yeah Junior, you’re too low level to get ideas above your station. Your job is to adjudicate using legal precedent.

    “Legal precedent means that a decision on a certain principle or question of law has already been made by a court of higher authority, such as an appeals or supreme court. Following such a decision, lower courts defer to, or adhere to, that prior decision in similar cases.”

    Has anybody in NY State said Polymory is legal? Has anyone in the US Supreme Court said Polymory is the law of the land? No? Then stop grasping at straws.

    Q for the Oh So Learned Judge here: If “straights” do it, is it legal too? Ponder a husband estranged from his wife who sets up shop with his lil’ blonde or brunette side piece. His wife won’t give him the satisfaction of a divorce. He keels over dead. Does the little chickie get the apartment? Imagine a wife estranged from her husband. He won’t divorce her since he’ll lose half of everything. She sets up shop with a hunky boy toy and after a few years passes away. Does the side piece get the apartment? What if you have an “Odd Couple” like set up where an estranged but not divorced husband gets an apartment and invites a platonic male friend to split the rent? Does the friend get to stay if the estranged husband dies?

    You see judge, that’s why judges like you read and abide by legal precedent. So you Stay In Your Lane.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @mmack


    Has anybody in NY State said Polymory is legal? Has anyone in the US Supreme Court said Polymory is the law of the land? No? Then stop grasping at straws. ... You see judge, that’s why judges like you read and abide by legal precedent. So you Stay In Your Lane.
     
    Yes, of course you are correct ... in theory. In Non-Clown World, the next level court would just say, "that's not the law", reverse it, and case closed. But we are in Clown World. In Clown World, some case will go to the Supreme Court, if not this one, then another similar one.

    That's how Obergefell came about. No statute created gay marriage. Gay marriage lost every election in which it was mooted. So instead, a few homos got lawyers and whinged their way up the judicial hierarchy until low-IQ SCROTUS judge Anthony Kennedy gave them a 5-4 New Constitutional Right. And now it is infinite precedent: more unquestionable than anything actually written in the Constitution.
  17. @International Jew
    The ideal solution to this particular dilemma would be to abolish rent control.

    Replies: @guest007, @Jimbo

    No, the ideal solution would be to abolish New York City.

    • Replies: @Prester John
    @Jimbo

    Goldwater wanted to saw off Manhattan and let it float out to sea.

    , @Carroll price
    @Jimbo

    With rumor having it that Putin has dispatched Belgorod to NY Harbor, the solution may be closer than you think.

  18. I’m concluding that Mr Romano, the legal spouse, didn’t live in the apartment. And since he and Mr O’Neil didn’t like each other, can we assume the legal marriage was a dead letter? Also, even if the Romano/Anderson union was only “going through a rough patch,” it certainly was not a three-way marriage, instead two separate relationships. So this begs the question, how long was Mr O’Neil living with Mr Anderson (did I use the phrase right, Steve?), and does the O’Neil/Anderson relationship meet the standard of a common law marriage or even California’s famous Marvin v Marvin palimony case?

    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.

    So, legally, Mr O’Neil doesn’t have a leg to stand on without changing the laws written in Albany through “our” democratic process. Maybe our scribe simply omitted any quotes from the article mentioning the property rights of the landlord, but this also begs the question, does the landlord have any rights?

    I have a friend with a rent controlled three-bed, two-bath walk-up in a great neighborhood (upper east side), very successful, that he has been leasing since 1980. He’s lived on the west coast for over twenty years but still maintains the apartment, illegally sub-letting to friends and relatives (keeping his name on the doorbell). I love the guy like a brother, but it ain’t right.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Woodsie

    From (an older edition of):

    https://www.amazon.com/Garners-Modern-English-Usage-Garner/dp/0197599028/


    beg the question. This phrase has not traditionally meant “to invite an obvious follow-up question,” as some mistakenly believe. The strict meaning of beg the question is “to base a conclusion on an assumption that is as much in need of proof or demonstration as the conclusion itself.” The formal name for this logical fallacy is petitio principii....

    All that having been said, the use of beg the question to mean raise another question is so ubiquitous that the new sense has been recognized by most dictionaries and sanctioned by descriptive observers of language. Still, though it is true that the new sense may be understood by most people, many will consider it slipshod.

    Garner, Bryan. Garner's Modern American Usage (p. 355). Oxford University Press.
     
    Novelist David Foster Wallace was a fan of Garner's usage guide and reviewed it in a notorious Harper's book review, "Tense Present":

    https://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-04-0070913.pdf
    , @Anonymous
    @Woodsie


    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.
     
    Why is it always "a quick internet search"? Why not a leisurely or desultory internet search? Or a thorough internet search? Or a slow, plodding internet search?

    What the hell is wrong with people?

    Replies: @Joe S.Walker, @Woodsie

  19. @Bardon Kaldian
    Polyamory is a waste of time & energy. Also, manosphere is full of stories from men whose wives, all of a sudden, began to insist on "open marriage", polyamory & similar stuff.

    All those marriages collapsed, sooner or later.

    Perhaps some "progressives" with alternative life-styles want to try this, but they are in the minority, and it all wears off with time.

    Fat, bald, stupid, middle aged... is no way to go through erotic life, man.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @John Johnson

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Steve Sailer

    True, but Heinlein was emotionally under-developed (and I think, most sci fi types). Atypical inquisitive individualists with something immature in them should, in my view, be permitted to taste their own medicine. As much as they can endure it in real life.

    , @SFG
    @Steve Sailer

    Very much true, but I suspect the shortage of women in these circles has something to do with it too.

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.
     
    The "polyandrous" relationships that were promoted in online media a while back seemed to be like this - two to four spindly male nerds likely "on the spectrum" orbiting an overweight nerdy woman. I suppose it makes a certain bit of sense if you presume that any one of the male nerds couldn't capture the exclusive attention of the overweight nerdy woman, and the overweight nerdy woman doesn't get enough of an ego boost from any one of the low status nerdy men pursuing her. Within the nerd subcultures nerdy men are abundant, and any sort of woman scarce, so it makes some sort of bare "economic" sense where the men with dubious hygiene get some access to sex and the otherwise generally undesirable woman gets some sort of status elevator by being doted on by multiple men while flouting social conventions. The common language of the nerdy obsession is probably the only thing permitting the building of these relationships with that kind of man.

    I strongly suspect that the attractive cosplay girls who get into that space are at least partially motivated by the prospects or marketing their social media presences for profit - whether instagram followers or gaming channels or even Onlyfans, but a young hot unattached girl hanging around awkward nerdy men without an ulterior motive is rare given the visceral disgust women tend to have towards these men. That disgust tends to be mitigated by having those same men donate to a Patreon account.
    , @Recently Based
    @Steve Sailer

    My observation (existing but not extensive) is that the "sci-fi types" who are into it tend to be guys that have a real problem getting laid due to some combination of fatness and social awkwardness and are prepared to accept sharing a (generally pretty heinous-looking) chick to full-on celibacy.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Jay Fink
    @Steve Sailer

    I think men who aren't jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @SFG, @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Brutusale

  20. @Daniel H
    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It's all connected. You can't be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered... and root for Zelensky/Biden. It's all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can't have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bardon Kaldian, @Anon, @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @John Johnson

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    • Agree: Houston 1992
    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    Hey Stevie, what happened to flattening the curve?

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco, @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Unintended Consequence
    @Steve Sailer

    Ukraine is not a real country!

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Nicholas Stix

    , @Bill Jones
    @Steve Sailer

    The Ukraineers fatherland wasn't the fatherland of their fathers, anymore than Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia was. All just slapped together yard sale creations of bolsheviks.

    , @obwandiyag
    @Steve Sailer

    NATO/ the US keeps "fighting" for whatever.

    Ukrainians are just cannon fodder. They would run away if they could. It's like the Nisei in WWII. Know why the Nisei were so decorated? Because they stuck the all-Americans behind them, and they were given a choice of getting shot by Nazis or getting shot by Americans.

    , @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer


    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.
     
    And Americans and Northern Europeans keep bringing into their countries massive amounts of foreigners. By your logic, that must therefore be in the best long-term interests of the natives and their homelands.

    Replies: @SFG

    , @Muggles
    @Steve Sailer

    Whenever I read some missive here replete with references to "Globohomo" I fear the person who's writing this is well, insecure about their own masculinity.

    Or really confused about globes.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  21. @Steve Sailer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Recently Based, @Jay Fink

    True, but Heinlein was emotionally under-developed (and I think, most sci fi types). Atypical inquisitive individualists with something immature in them should, in my view, be permitted to taste their own medicine. As much as they can endure it in real life.

  22. @Daniel H
    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It's all connected. You can't be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered... and root for Zelensky/Biden. It's all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can't have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bardon Kaldian, @Anon, @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @John Johnson

    This blog should have the “NUTS” option.

    • Agree: SFG
  23. @Steve Sailer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Recently Based, @Jay Fink

    Very much true, but I suspect the shortage of women in these circles has something to do with it too.

  24. In the totem pole hierarchy ‘racism’ is the ace of trumps.
    Therefore once a head of steam is generated by journalists/activists/politicians etc that opposition to polygamy is ‘racist’, you will be damn *certain* that polygamy will not only be instituted, and swiftly, but actively celebrated.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    Right now, it's considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Anonymous

  25. @Mike Tre
    "Over the last few years, I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy)."

    But did you predict it would be the context of homosexual phony marriages?

    Lower rent and free spousal medical insurance. Those homos would almost be inspirational in their pragmatism is it weren't for all the filth and disease and glitter.

    Replies: @Alan Mercer, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Good point about the free spousal medical insurance. Suppose someone considers everyone he partied with at the festivals last summer to be family. Suppose he also pays the “family” medical insurance premium at work. Must his employer now extended coverage to them all?

    On the basis of such a lawsuit, I guess government-run universal healthcare could be sold as politically unavoidable.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @Alan Mercer

    From what I have seen, employers are trying to make unappealing to add your spouse and kids onto your insurance plan. They are still offering a generous subsidy for the employee and then doing things like not allowing the spouse to enroll if he or she is employer offered coverage or capping the total amount they will contribute per household. Situations like this probably weren't the inspiration, but I bet it didn't hurt.

  26. More common practioners of polygamy like Mormons and Muslims are looked down upon as backwards and oppressive to women, but the progressive left will destroy all societal norms of restraint if it involves any part of the Alphabet People coalition, social cohesion and stability be damned. It even trumps their fealty to race, which is really saying something.

    The obsession with and valorization of extreme outliers in society have been a disaster, and I think a majority of the public would agree with this. However the total incompetence of the Republican party over the last 30 years of focusing on what’s supposedly best for business at the expense of the culture and fiscal sanity has set the table for what is likely to be an extremely turbulent several decades whose outcome is by no means assured of going well.

    • Agree: Jim Bob Lassiter
    • Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Arclight

    However the total incompetence of the Republican party over the last 30 years

    The GOP is about as incompetent as the Washington Generals, which is to say not at all. You just have to realize what their true function is.

  27. @Anonymous
    In the totem pole hierarchy 'racism' is the ace of trumps.
    Therefore once a head of steam is generated by journalists/activists/politicians etc that opposition to polygamy is 'racist', you will be damn *certain* that polygamy will not only be instituted, and swiftly, but actively celebrated.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    Right now, it’s considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.

    • Agree: Recently Based
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    Right now, it’s considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.
     
    I think the freaks who are destroying society don't particularly like the traditional polygamist structure of a powerful man accumulating multiple wives - the "polyamory" move is for the benefit of those freaks themselves and for the usual purpose of epater la bourgeoisie. They'll continue to associate polygamy with exploiting and grooming underage girls even if the participants all came to the arrangement as autonomous adults. They feel it's wrong, because a heterosexual man is happy and that shouldn't be allowed.

    Is “two” a “code word” for monogamy? Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one? Why does the relationship have to be characterized by “exclusivity”? Why is holding each other out to the community as a family a factor? … Why then, except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships?
     
    Why do we have laws? Why do we have Courts? Why does the Judge wear a robe? Why does the Judge get to make the decisions? Why do we even have a Judge in the first place? Who is to say?

    Legal pilpul qua left wing power politics under the guise of "Living Constitutionalism" was nonsense in the hands of very clever 150 IQ Jewish Judges. It's positively ridiculous in the hands of triple affirmative action cases making it on to benches now upon the demands of the fringes for "representation."

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Recently Based

    , @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    Really, it's only a question of time.

    Once big enough diasporas build up, and feet are placed firmly under the table, the whining will start and the magic word 'racist' will be bandied about. And then the whole wanky lefty front will jump on the band wagon - there will some serious kudos, not to mention votes to be won.
    As a comparison, it was exceedingly rare to see hijabs, burkhas etc on UK streets before the Rushdie affair broke in 1989.

  28. In Our Democracy, the fact that most people are for something, such as defining a marriage to involve two people, as proof of sinister unconstitutional animus.

    This is basically the interpretive rubric of our institutions of legal casuistry for some time now – they propose that “rights are anti-majoritarian;”* therefore, anything that they like that is not popular (viz, upends established society and its mores) is required because it is important to a less than fifty percent segment of society.

    * They’re lying about this – each of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights is the product of a majoritarian democratic process. It’s just that often rights that are established through a democratic process need to be enforced against the will of a majority and it is only in this sense that rights are “anti-majoritarian.” For example, the rights against self-incrimination and to counsel were the product of majoritarian democratic processes, but people often get mad when someone is accused of a notorious and horrible crime and the will of the majority tends towards “locking him up and throwing away the key without a trial.”

    • Agree: AnotherDad
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)


    In Our Democracy, the fact that most people are for something, such as defining a marriage to involve two people, as proof of sinister unconstitutional animus.
     
    Agree. This really is the core of it. Once you give it any thought, you realize that minoritarianism is actually inverse of civilization.

    Whatever norms a particular society needs to hold itself together, function properly and reproduce itself--i.e. what a "civilization" does--are "oppressive" and must be tossed out. Minoritarianism is anti-civilization.

    I do give this judge credit for pretty clearly and directly citing this ideology. "Majoritarian animus"--i.e. how our society does things--is bad and must be tossed out.

    ~~

    I think the two dumbest things Europeans have done:

    1) Bringing blacks to the new world.

    2) Allowing Jews to live among them as a separate, non-integrating tribe.

    Colonization is huge as well, but I think a poor #3 to the damage those two have wrought.
  29. I can see the next step in this sequence of minoritarianism* coming right in this excerpt. Why does a relationship have to be defined by something involving agreements? That’s an old outdated tradition. There’s no reason people in strong disagreements with each other can’t be considered to be in relationships too. Oops, among each other, I mean.

    This way it would cover 3-ways with jealousy included, jail sex, unwilling farm animals, and also, for you traditionalists, the majority of 2-person (how quaint?) M-F marriages. Divorce law may need to be updated though ..

    .

    * ©- AnotherDad

    [EDIT:] Just now read Hypnotoad’s comment – yeah, that’s what I mean.

  30. @Whereismyhandle
    In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn't buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You'd think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren't that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?


    From a non-white: you don't deserve, anything, Billy: https://youtu.be/fk3svL0GPWI?t=1157

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr. Anon, @Kylie, @Daniel H, @Jim Don Bob

    You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    The next step is to bus the school kids into the theater. I”m not kidding that they haven’t already thought of it, and probably not just High School.

    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.
     
    Brokeback Mountain was nominated for nine Oscars and received tens of millions of dollars worth of unpaid publicity. The Wikipedia entry for it features the names Larry McMurtry (who co-wrote the screenplay), Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams - all back to back. Those are all big name stars, both then and now (though one is deceased).

    “Bros” has…Billy Eichner. There aren’t more than about ten people in the country who go to a movie because it has Billy Eichner in it. Still, it managed to earn $4.8 million in its first weekend. That’s like $96 million in gay dollars.

    P.S. It’s interesting that the biggest and first gay blockbuster featured a cast of all straight people. I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Ralph L, @Achmed E. Newman, @BB753

    , @the one they call Desanex
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I saw a good western the other day starring two homos: Frontier Marshal, with Randolph Scott as Wyatt Earp and Cesar Romero as Doc Holliday.
    https://onceuponatimeinawestern.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/PROMO-Randolph-Scott-as-Wyatt-Earp-with-Cesar-Romero-as-Doc-Halliday-in-Frontier-Marshal-1939.jpg

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby

  31. The judge said,

    Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one?

    And so I say, why does only a human person have the right to be committed to another person in such a way as to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one?

    This settles it: If my wife and I go before him, we’re leaving our house to the dog.

    Next step: WWB.

  32. Get ready for World War B (bestiality).

  33. Way back in 1989, the gay marriage juggernaut got launched over a tawdry New York City rent control imbroglio. A rent-controlled tenant died without spouse or issue (rent control status is hereditary in New York), so the landlord was going to raise the rent, but then the dead lessee’s roommate announced that he deserved to continue to pay the rent controlled rent because they were more than just roommates.

    Before that, in 1982, Larry Brinkin started the idea of Domestic Partnership, after getting no bereavement leave after his gay partner died (suicide). He later was one of the first ‘gay married’ people. Brinkin was later sentenced for only six months for having a large collection of child pornography, mainly children aged 1 to 3. When you you think of the gay marriage outcome, Larry Brinkin tipped over the first domino. The same thing happens now with the transgender types, who all, for some strange reason, want to work with children.

  34. “I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy).”

    Perhaps, but I think the Next Big Thing will be animal rights. They are coming after your cheeseburger. You are seeing a lot more stories about the many benefits of consuming bugs in order to save the planet.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Spud Boy

    You will live in the pod.

    You will eat the bugs.

    You will own nothing.

    You will have no privacy.

    And you'll be happy.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/shopping-i-cant-really-remember-what-that-is-or-how-differently-well-live-in-2030/

  35. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    Right now, it's considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Anonymous

    Right now, it’s considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.

    I think the freaks who are destroying society don’t particularly like the traditional polygamist structure of a powerful man accumulating multiple wives – the “polyamory” move is for the benefit of those freaks themselves and for the usual purpose of epater la bourgeoisie. They’ll continue to associate polygamy with exploiting and grooming underage girls even if the participants all came to the arrangement as autonomous adults. They feel it’s wrong, because a heterosexual man is happy and that shouldn’t be allowed.

    Is “two” a “code word” for monogamy? Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one? Why does the relationship have to be characterized by “exclusivity”? Why is holding each other out to the community as a family a factor? … Why then, except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships?

    Why do we have laws? Why do we have Courts? Why does the Judge wear a robe? Why does the Judge get to make the decisions? Why do we even have a Judge in the first place? Who is to say?

    Legal pilpul qua left wing power politics under the guise of “Living Constitutionalism” was nonsense in the hands of very clever 150 IQ Jewish Judges. It’s positively ridiculous in the hands of triple affirmative action cases making it on to benches now upon the demands of the fringes for “representation.”

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    I think the freaks who are destroying society don’t particularly like the traditional polygamist structure of a powerful man accumulating multiple wives

    What the left doesn't want is open polygamy for Whites. That is why they haven't promoted polygamy like gay marriage.

    Mormons aren't even the main concern.

    They don't want single White women to have culturally sanctioned polygamy. The left doesn't trust White women to engage polygamously with all races at equal levels. Which they wouldn't.

    The left doesn't want anything that might encourage eugenics in Whites.

    , @Recently Based
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    I think there is tremendous pressure to create poly relationships from multiple angles.

    There certainly is the "I am completely screwed up by my genetics + bad parents, am deeply disturbed and want to work out my psychological issues on a broader canvas" group. (ie, what you are calling freaks).

    But I think the biggest driver of this is bottom-up demand driven by feminism + deregulation of the sexual marketplace. Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.

    It's not some ironclad rule, but women do tend strongly to be hypergamous, i.e., will rarely date somebody who makes less than they do, etc. when it comes to dating, or way hotter than they are when it comes to hooking up at the foam cannon party in Cancun. As women make about as much money as men and the sexual market has now pretty much fully deregulated and has globalized through apps, most men are unattractive to most women. A small fraction of guys are getting an enormous amount of sex, and a majority of guys are getting very little to no sex. Most women are able to get sex with the hot/rich guys that they want, but mostly can't get relationships from them since these won't settle down (why would they, when these are the guys that can keep nailing tons of girls). In other words: de facto polygamy.

    Replies: @Lurker, @Corvinus

  36. @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    Hey Stevie, what happened to flattening the curve?

    • Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    @Anonymous

    What happened with excess deaths? Steve stopped posting about excess deaths after the vaccines were introduced. He also stopped talking about the efficacy of vaccines when the boosters were given emergency authorization last month...everything was memory holed to avoid admitting mistakes and miscalculations.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Anonymous

    It got changed to this:

    https://www.peakstupidity.com/images/post_1674A.jpg

  37. Gay marriage seems to have extended retirement benefits to homosexual marriage. I do not remember this being legislated, so a new government spending program was created by the judiciary. I believe private sector contracts were also altered by the judicial branch.

    I wonder how the courts will handle these poly relationships.

  38. @SFG
    @Redneck farmer

    She's already got a boyfriend or girlfriend, I bet, and if he complains she'll just divorce him and take half his stuff. She's a judge, she knows her way around the law.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @mmack

    Manospherods know that already ….

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Indeed. I was filling everyone else in.

  39. On America’s untold stories the other day they were reporting on Alec Baldwin’s shooting case in New Mexico. The prosecutor has punted to a Republican prosecutor who is running for state rep at the same time. They had one case which the sodomite negro-philes were promoting for legal incest and this prosecutor reportedly stomped on that one. I didn’t look up the details but they made it sound like she is doing a one woman quixotic crusade on the behalf of some decency and common sense in New Mexico.

    Any way what these Satanic perverts want to do is stick their weener into children and cocker spaniels. Polygamy ain’t it. My goodness can you imagine the hell it would be to have two women wanting to boss you around 24/7?

  40. @Whereismyhandle
    In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn't buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You'd think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren't that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?


    From a non-white: you don't deserve, anything, Billy: https://youtu.be/fk3svL0GPWI?t=1157

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr. Anon, @Kylie, @Daniel H, @Jim Don Bob

    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn’t buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    This hits at a gnawing insecurity for Alphabet people – they intuit that a large percentage of the population likely representing a majority was coerced into withdrawing their objections to exhibitionist homosexuality in short order and isn’t sincere in its “acceptance.” Their “rights” and cultural prominence are secured only by a soft terror exacted by the Press, the Academy, and now the “Civil Rights” structure of state and Federal governments. Two men engaging in sexual conduct with one another and even implied sexual conduct still trips the disgust reaction of very many people. People are simply falsifying their preferences as a means of self-defense against the punitive measures arrayed against anyone who would refuse to do so.

    So here, Eichner knows intuitively that lots of people find him personally and his film thoroughly disgusting and some of them even in spite of their professed political beliefs. The failure of his over-promoted “romcom” is evidence that people don’t believe what they are required to say that they believe about Alphabet people and will engage in anonymous passive resistance. Eichner really just wants them to truly love Big Brother, and is frustrated that he currently lacks the means to make them do so.

    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?

    Brokeback Mountain was prior to Obergefell when Alphabet people had to pretend to be nice and quirky normal people, just with a different preference – although their cruel streak and catty meanness was obvious to anyone really paying attention. They appealed to pathos and sympathy then – they needed gay marriage because they were so weak and pathetic. They would leave your kids out of it! Just two consenting adults, consenting together! How does it harm your marriage? It will actually strengthen your marriage! Maybe you’re secretly gay if you object! They want to visit one another in the hospital, that’s all.

    This facade was immediately abandoned after Obergefell – as in, the next day. Now you had to accept gay marriage because they were strong and could hurt you. It’s an entirely different dynamic in 2022 than what was the case in 2005. Additionally, people knew that Gyllenhaal and Ledger were acting – they didn’t really want to sodomize one another so the audience was permitted an escape hatch from suspended disbelief within the film. This film is active homosexuals depicting active homosexuals dating one another – there’s no way to conceive of the depicted sodomy within the film as somehow not real.

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)


    They want to visit one another in the hospital, that’s all.
     
    That reason for gay marriage always struck me as patently absurd. It made me wonder what hospitals these people were visiting, or whether they had ever actually visited a sick loved one in the hospital at all. I’ve visited loved ones in hospitals and nursing homes literally hundreds of times (not an exaggeration). I have been asked to sign in, but I have never once been asked to prove that I’m a relative or a spouse. Never never never ever.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    That was a very good comment, but WTH is "Obergefell"?

  41. @Alan Mercer
    @Mike Tre

    Good point about the free spousal medical insurance. Suppose someone considers everyone he partied with at the festivals last summer to be family. Suppose he also pays the "family" medical insurance premium at work. Must his employer now extended coverage to them all?

    On the basis of such a lawsuit, I guess government-run universal healthcare could be sold as politically unavoidable.

    Replies: @Barnard

    From what I have seen, employers are trying to make unappealing to add your spouse and kids onto your insurance plan. They are still offering a generous subsidy for the employee and then doing things like not allowing the spouse to enroll if he or she is employer offered coverage or capping the total amount they will contribute per household. Situations like this probably weren’t the inspiration, but I bet it didn’t hurt.

  42. stillCARealist [AKA "ForeverCARealist"] says:
    @Bill Jones
    https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/mobile/000/039/841/isupportthecurrentthing.jpg


    The new flag.

    Replies: @stillCARealist

    That’s pretty good. I see these flags all around, and they’re never the same twice. I think they change every year as there’s some new cause that has to be added. Some kind of arms race between the signalers…. Look! I have 12 colors and shapes, and you only have 8!

    In the old days we just flew American flags and that was enough. It meant we love America and Americans. No need to single out this or that group.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @stillCARealist


    I see these flags all around, and they’re never the same twice. I think they change every year as there’s some new cause that has to be added. Some kind of arms race between the signalers…. Look! I have 12 colors and shapes, and you only have 8!
     
    This year during Memorial Day weekend (which of course coincides, unintentionally, with the start of Gay Pride Month) I counted hundreds of Pride flags. There were more Pride flags than American flags. Of the hundreds of yards with Pride flags (which I’m guessing were given out for free by some organization or other) I only counted one American flag along with it.

    I started to feel like some Jewish person in pre-war Germany as he watches the German flag get replaced by Nazi Swastikas. At first the Pride flag was cute, then it was obnoxious. But now it’s downright frightening. We literally have an entire generation of Americans being indoctrinated in the glories of intentional childlessness. Of course we also had that with priestly/monastic celibacy for centuries, but back then we had the birthrates to sustain it.
    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @stillCARealist

    A gay couple in my town put out a yard sign like that underneath an upside-down American flag. That was on Labor Day.

    They have since turned the US flag right-side-up. Maybe someone told them that a lot of reactionary conservatives use the upside-down, "distress" flag as a sign of dissatisfaction with what those gay guys' own force is doing to our once great country.

    The gay yard sign has our town's name on it, in some kind of faux solidarity. Those signs are here and there, in front of the same properties that once featured Black Lives Matter signs. The gay sign has the word "pride" next to our town's name.

    I walk by their house a lot on my six-mile exercise (10 km.) Their dogs always bark at me. Recently I tried to wave at one of the gay guys there watering his grass. He acted as if I was invisible, and I felt bad. I don't know why he acted that way, because gay guys used to like me, I mean really like me.


    https://64.media.tumblr.com/a2b65f3467073d6f8a7df8a3ab7b5ff9/tumblr_inline_mhionfKvDW1qz4rgp.gif

  43. @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    Ukraine is not a real country!

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    , @Nicholas Stix
    @Unintended Consequence

    The Ukraine is not a real country! FIFY

    Please get your fake countries straight.

  44. @SFG
    @Redneck farmer

    She's already got a boyfriend or girlfriend, I bet, and if he complains she'll just divorce him and take half his stuff. She's a judge, she knows her way around the law.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @mmack

    “She’s a judge, she knows her way around the law.”

    1) You’d be shocked how many judges DON’T know their way around the law, even though they adjudicate cases. Heard this first hand privately from some lawyers, including my Mrs.

    2) She’d better not be the higher earning partner in her marriage, if indeed she is married. I know at least two cases where the higher earning ex-wife owed her husband maintenance or child support after the divorce. Granted, it was Silly-nois, but as women climb the career ladder and end up out earning their spouses they may get a nasty shock via the law, even in NY. 😳

  45. @Unintended Consequence
    @Steve Sailer

    Ukraine is not a real country!

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Nicholas Stix

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It’s almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    • LOL: John Johnson
    • Troll: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @SFG
    @Steve Sailer

    He may have brought about the action he most feared. Now a bunch of central and Eastern European countries are trying to get them into NATO. Globohomo manipulation? Maybe, maybe they’re afraid Russia will invade them next?

    , @Unintended Consequence
    @Steve Sailer

    But a warmongering entity isn't any more a country than the US military. It is, in fact, a military. In the case of Ukraine military forces, they are an amalgamation of the militaries of the US, UK and several EU countries. Zelensky himself merely represents a political faction which has been provided with arms and training by foreign countries seeking to legitimize their aggression towards the Russian Federation. This use of the territory in a proxy war doesn't make it a real country!

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @JimDandy
    @Steve Sailer

    I was talking to an old man the other day about Ukraine, and, like many old men, he didn't really give a shit about facts. He felt a certain way and he wasn't budging. He ultimately said that if the bible is correct, "America will win" because America represents Christian values vs. Russia's godless values.

    Some things are hopeless.

    , @JimDandy
    @Steve Sailer

    Well, Putin certainly helped make Ukraine more like a real country by sucking the Donbass out of it.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Jack D

    , @Dennis Dale
    @Steve Sailer


    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country
     
    .

    Yeah, with other people's money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    , @Mike Tre
    @Steve Sailer

    Real countries get all of their money and arms from another country halfway around the world.

    Real countries bomb part of their own country where icky people live.

    , @Hypnotoad666
    @Steve Sailer


    It’s almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country
     
    But he may also end up physically deconstructing it in 2023. RIP Ukraine, 2022-2023. We hardly got to know ye.
  46. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    He may have brought about the action he most feared. Now a bunch of central and Eastern European countries are trying to get them into NATO. Globohomo manipulation? Maybe, maybe they’re afraid Russia will invade them next?

  47. Anonymous[184] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    Right now, it's considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Anonymous

    Really, it’s only a question of time.

    Once big enough diasporas build up, and feet are placed firmly under the table, the whining will start and the magic word ‘racist’ will be bandied about. And then the whole wanky lefty front will jump on the band wagon – there will some serious kudos, not to mention votes to be won.
    As a comparison, it was exceedingly rare to see hijabs, burkhas etc on UK streets before the Rushdie affair broke in 1989.

  48. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Whereismyhandle


    You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.
     
    The next step is to bus the school kids into the theater. I"m not kidding that they haven't already thought of it, and probably not just High School.

    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal "Western" movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by '05, but without their reading there, it's very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @the one they call Desanex

    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.

    Brokeback Mountain was nominated for nine Oscars and received tens of millions of dollars worth of unpaid publicity. The Wikipedia entry for it features the names Larry McMurtry (who co-wrote the screenplay), Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams – all back to back. Those are all big name stars, both then and now (though one is deceased).

    “Bros” has…Billy Eichner. There aren’t more than about ten people in the country who go to a movie because it has Billy Eichner in it. Still, it managed to earn $4.8 million in its first weekend. That’s like $96 million in gay dollars.

    P.S. It’s interesting that the biggest and first gay blockbuster featured a cast of all straight people. I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Wilkey

    I don't keep up with all that Hollywood stuff, and I imagine many others are the same. If I had not red a few things on-line about the gay stuff, I would have had no idea it was a gay movie. I remember this clearly.

    , @Ralph L
    @Wilkey

    I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Rumor has it that was a double beard relationship.

    No one has mentioned poor ol' Rick Santorum.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Wilkey

    I meant to say thanks too, Wilkey, and that should have been "read"m not "red". (I was on the phone with a bureaucracy at the time, so ...)

    , @BB753
    @Wilkey

    I hate to break it to you, but Jake Gyllenhaal is very gay, and was merely "bearding" a very lesbian Taylor Swift. At least, according to the very informed writers here ( who revealed Epstein's Lolita Island far in advance of the media and the FBI):
    https://www.crazydaysandnights.net

  49. I’d like to amend my earlier screed and apologize for calling our Esteemed Judge “Junior”. I should have substituted “Missy”. That said:

    1) It’s perfect the deciding judge is named Karen. This “Why can’t we You Hater?!?” decision is peak Karen.

    2) I love that she quotes that esteemed legal journal the New Yorker. Perhaps as My Lovely 🥰 Mrs. prepares her arguments for her next hearing I can slide her a copy of People and suggest she look for an angle or argument via its pages. 🙄

  50. Anon[130] • Disclaimer says:
    @Woodsie
    I'm concluding that Mr Romano, the legal spouse, didn't live in the apartment. And since he and Mr O'Neil didn't like each other, can we assume the legal marriage was a dead letter? Also, even if the Romano/Anderson union was only "going through a rough patch," it certainly was not a three-way marriage, instead two separate relationships. So this begs the question, how long was Mr O'Neil living with Mr Anderson (did I use the phrase right, Steve?), and does the O'Neil/Anderson relationship meet the standard of a common law marriage or even California's famous Marvin v Marvin palimony case?

    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.

    So, legally, Mr O'Neil doesn't have a leg to stand on without changing the laws written in Albany through "our" democratic process. Maybe our scribe simply omitted any quotes from the article mentioning the property rights of the landlord, but this also begs the question, does the landlord have any rights?

    I have a friend with a rent controlled three-bed, two-bath walk-up in a great neighborhood (upper east side), very successful, that he has been leasing since 1980. He's lived on the west coast for over twenty years but still maintains the apartment, illegally sub-letting to friends and relatives (keeping his name on the doorbell). I love the guy like a brother, but it ain't right.

    Replies: @Anon, @Anonymous

    From (an older edition of):

    beg the question. This phrase has not traditionally meant “to invite an obvious follow-up question,” as some mistakenly believe. The strict meaning of beg the question is “to base a conclusion on an assumption that is as much in need of proof or demonstration as the conclusion itself.” The formal name for this logical fallacy is petitio principii….

    All that having been said, the use of beg the question to mean raise another question is so ubiquitous that the new sense has been recognized by most dictionaries and sanctioned by descriptive observers of language. Still, though it is true that the new sense may be understood by most people, many will consider it slipshod.

    Garner, Bryan. Garner’s Modern American Usage (p. 355). Oxford University Press.

    Novelist David Foster Wallace was a fan of Garner’s usage guide and reviewed it in a notorious Harper’s book review, “Tense Present”:

    https://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-04-0070913.pdf

  51. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Whereismyhandle


    You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.
     
    The next step is to bus the school kids into the theater. I"m not kidding that they haven't already thought of it, and probably not just High School.

    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal "Western" movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by '05, but without their reading there, it's very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @the one they call Desanex

    I saw a good western the other day starring two homos: Frontier Marshal, with Randolph Scott as Wyatt Earp and Cesar Romero as Doc Holliday.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @the one they call Desanex

    Thanks, Desanex. So long as they do their gay thing in the makeup trailer and not on-screen, I'm fine with it.

    , @duncsbaby
    @the one they call Desanex

    Randolph Scott wasn't gay. He was married twice and had two adopted kids. The only evidence for Scott being gay was he shared a house w/Cary Grant when they were both bachelors. No one said he was gay until both Cary and Randolph were dead and couldn't defend themselves from the scurrilous accusation (which was started by gays).
    Now Cesar Romero on the other hand . . .

    Replies: @John Johnson

  52. @stillCARealist
    @Bill Jones

    That's pretty good. I see these flags all around, and they're never the same twice. I think they change every year as there's some new cause that has to be added. Some kind of arms race between the signalers.... Look! I have 12 colors and shapes, and you only have 8!

    In the old days we just flew American flags and that was enough. It meant we love America and Americans. No need to single out this or that group.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Buzz Mohawk

    I see these flags all around, and they’re never the same twice. I think they change every year as there’s some new cause that has to be added. Some kind of arms race between the signalers…. Look! I have 12 colors and shapes, and you only have 8!

    This year during Memorial Day weekend (which of course coincides, unintentionally, with the start of Gay Pride Month) I counted hundreds of Pride flags. There were more Pride flags than American flags. Of the hundreds of yards with Pride flags (which I’m guessing were given out for free by some organization or other) I only counted one American flag along with it.

    I started to feel like some Jewish person in pre-war Germany as he watches the German flag get replaced by Nazi Swastikas. At first the Pride flag was cute, then it was obnoxious. But now it’s downright frightening. We literally have an entire generation of Americans being indoctrinated in the glories of intentional childlessness. Of course we also had that with priestly/monastic celibacy for centuries, but back then we had the birthrates to sustain it.

  53. As wiser people than I have explained, the Christian tradition mandating monogamy ensured that most men would have mates. The further we go away from that tradition, the more uneven will be the distribution of sexual prizes. The harem is not a Western institution, but it may well become one.

  54. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Whereismyhandle


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn’t buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.
     
    This hits at a gnawing insecurity for Alphabet people - they intuit that a large percentage of the population likely representing a majority was coerced into withdrawing their objections to exhibitionist homosexuality in short order and isn't sincere in its "acceptance." Their "rights" and cultural prominence are secured only by a soft terror exacted by the Press, the Academy, and now the "Civil Rights" structure of state and Federal governments. Two men engaging in sexual conduct with one another and even implied sexual conduct still trips the disgust reaction of very many people. People are simply falsifying their preferences as a means of self-defense against the punitive measures arrayed against anyone who would refuse to do so.

    So here, Eichner knows intuitively that lots of people find him personally and his film thoroughly disgusting and some of them even in spite of their professed political beliefs. The failure of his over-promoted "romcom" is evidence that people don't believe what they are required to say that they believe about Alphabet people and will engage in anonymous passive resistance. Eichner really just wants them to truly love Big Brother, and is frustrated that he currently lacks the means to make them do so.

    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?
     
    Brokeback Mountain was prior to Obergefell when Alphabet people had to pretend to be nice and quirky normal people, just with a different preference - although their cruel streak and catty meanness was obvious to anyone really paying attention. They appealed to pathos and sympathy then - they needed gay marriage because they were so weak and pathetic. They would leave your kids out of it! Just two consenting adults, consenting together! How does it harm your marriage? It will actually strengthen your marriage! Maybe you're secretly gay if you object! They want to visit one another in the hospital, that's all.

    This facade was immediately abandoned after Obergefell - as in, the next day. Now you had to accept gay marriage because they were strong and could hurt you. It's an entirely different dynamic in 2022 than what was the case in 2005. Additionally, people knew that Gyllenhaal and Ledger were acting - they didn't really want to sodomize one another so the audience was permitted an escape hatch from suspended disbelief within the film. This film is active homosexuals depicting active homosexuals dating one another - there's no way to conceive of the depicted sodomy within the film as somehow not real.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Achmed E. Newman

    They want to visit one another in the hospital, that’s all.

    That reason for gay marriage always struck me as patently absurd. It made me wonder what hospitals these people were visiting, or whether they had ever actually visited a sick loved one in the hospital at all. I’ve visited loved ones in hospitals and nursing homes literally hundreds of times (not an exaggeration). I have been asked to sign in, but I have never once been asked to prove that I’m a relative or a spouse. Never never never ever.

    • Thanks: Nicholas Stix
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Wilkey



    They want to visit one another in the hospital, that’s all.

     

    That reason for gay marriage always struck me as patently absurd. It made me wonder what hospitals these people were visiting, or whether they had ever actually visited a sick loved one in the hospital at all. I’ve visited loved ones in hospitals and nursing homes literally hundreds of times (not an exaggeration). I have been asked to sign in, but I have never once been asked to prove that I’m a relative or a spouse. Never never never ever.
     
    It wasn't absurd, it was a lie. It was based in dubious accounts of the families of one homosexual excluding his or her partner from visitation in the hospital. But gays could always nominate one another to be their agents under Living Wills and Springing Powers of Attorney and so forth which would overrule the wishes of blood relatives. So in those cases where a "partner" was excluded it would have been little different than a man's family excluding his casual girlfriend from visitation and medical decision-making when he is incapacitated. It's what would still happen today between gays who are dating (and straight couples dating) but not "married" when the blood relatives arrive at such a situation. In all cases, if you didn't care to sign a few papers with a lawyer, or post Obergefell actually get married why should your wishes be paramount to those of the other's mother and father? Could you imagine a situation in which someone you've dated for three months would be given the power to make your medical decisions up through refusing means of life support while your parents are excluded from the room?
  55. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    But a warmongering entity isn’t any more a country than the US military. It is, in fact, a military. In the case of Ukraine military forces, they are an amalgamation of the militaries of the US, UK and several EU countries. Zelensky himself merely represents a political faction which has been provided with arms and training by foreign countries seeking to legitimize their aggression towards the Russian Federation. This use of the territory in a proxy war doesn’t make it a real country!

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Unintended Consequence

    Yet the citizens of Ukraine are real, and will fight to the death for their sovereignty. Do they not have the right to self determination?

  56. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    I was talking to an old man the other day about Ukraine, and, like many old men, he didn’t really give a shit about facts. He felt a certain way and he wasn’t budging. He ultimately said that if the bible is correct, “America will win” because America represents Christian values vs. Russia’s godless values.

    Some things are hopeless.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  57. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    Well, Putin certainly helped make Ukraine more like a real country by sucking the Donbass out of it.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @JimDandy

    Thanks for providing an example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    , @Jack D
    @JimDandy

    Not to mention Crimea. By successively chopping off bits of Ukraine, not only did Putin take those Ukrainian citizens most sympathetic to Russia off of the Ukrainian voter rolls but he made the remaining ones inside of what was left of Ukraine a lot less sympathetic to Russia.

    As of today, a record 83% of Ukrainians wish to join NATO (frankly I'm surprised its not higher, but this is a real poll, not some Russian "referendum" where the pro-Russia side gets 99% - in any real poll or election not even apple pie and motherhood get 99% yes votes).

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/record-83-ukrainians-want-nato-membership-poll-2022-10-03/

    In 2012, before Putin started biting off pieces of their country, support for NATO membership in Ukraine was 28%. Heckuva a job, Puty.

    Replies: @JimDandy

  58. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country

    .

    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Dennis Dale


    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.
     

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!
     
    Most of their weapons are Soviet. HIMARs make a lot of headlines but few (including Putin) seem to realize how large of a military they possessed after the fall of the USSR.

    As for Putin he didn't question the sovereignty of Ukraine when they had a pro-Russian president. Of course no one asked him about the Budapest Memorandum where Russia agree to recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine and that included Crimea. Of course asking such questions in Russia will get a knock on the door or lead to an accidental death involving a window or trip to the sea.

    But keep celebrating the dictator that wears shoe lifts. You know the war is going well when they are telling conscripts to scrounge for tampons and medi-kits:
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/russian-conscripts-tampons-bullet-wounds-ukraine/

    Replies: @puttheforkdown, @Dennis Dale

    , @Jack D
    @Dennis Dale

    The Soviets fought the Nazis with considerable American help. Lend-Lease was enormous - thousands upon thousands of trucks and planes and so on. Does this mean that they were "fake" also?

    BTW, the Ukrainians joke that there is a Russian Lend-Lease now - their largest supplier is not NATO but the Russians who are leaving behind vast troves of equipment and ammo when they flee.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Johann Ricke
    @Dennis Dale


    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!
     
    Russia received large amounts of US aid:

    the United States provided the Soviet Union with more than 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 aircraft, 8,000 tractors and construction vehicles, and 13,000 battle tanks.
     
    The dollar amount was $11.2b at a time when US GDP was $129b, or 8.6% of the US economy. 8.6% of today's $23T economy is ~$2T. Ukraine is resisting Russia with a fraction of the aid we provided the Russians in WWII. And unlike Russia during WWII, Ukraine's government isn't a genocidal regime that had killed tens of millions.
  59. @Bardon Kaldian
    @SFG

    Manospherods know that already ....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzuSsS1IHaE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOgvwlQE_6A

    Replies: @SFG

    Indeed. I was filling everyone else in.

  60. @Steve Sailer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Recently Based, @Jay Fink

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    The “polyandrous” relationships that were promoted in online media a while back seemed to be like this – two to four spindly male nerds likely “on the spectrum” orbiting an overweight nerdy woman. I suppose it makes a certain bit of sense if you presume that any one of the male nerds couldn’t capture the exclusive attention of the overweight nerdy woman, and the overweight nerdy woman doesn’t get enough of an ego boost from any one of the low status nerdy men pursuing her. Within the nerd subcultures nerdy men are abundant, and any sort of woman scarce, so it makes some sort of bare “economic” sense where the men with dubious hygiene get some access to sex and the otherwise generally undesirable woman gets some sort of status elevator by being doted on by multiple men while flouting social conventions. The common language of the nerdy obsession is probably the only thing permitting the building of these relationships with that kind of man.

    I strongly suspect that the attractive cosplay girls who get into that space are at least partially motivated by the prospects or marketing their social media presences for profit – whether instagram followers or gaming channels or even Onlyfans, but a young hot unattached girl hanging around awkward nerdy men without an ulterior motive is rare given the visceral disgust women tend to have towards these men. That disgust tends to be mitigated by having those same men donate to a Patreon account.

  61. @Bardon Kaldian
    Polyamory is a waste of time & energy. Also, manosphere is full of stories from men whose wives, all of a sudden, began to insist on "open marriage", polyamory & similar stuff.

    All those marriages collapsed, sooner or later.

    Perhaps some "progressives" with alternative life-styles want to try this, but they are in the minority, and it all wears off with time.

    Fat, bald, stupid, middle aged... is no way to go through erotic life, man.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @John Johnson

    Perhaps some “progressives” with alternative life-styles want to try this, but they are in the minority, and it all wears off with time.

    Polyamory – When liberal women are completely bored with their unnatural and childless marriage to a gutless man and want to sleep with the guy at the office but without appearing responsible for the resulting divorce.

  62. @Unintended Consequence
    @Steve Sailer

    Ukraine is not a real country!

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Nicholas Stix

    The Ukraine is not a real country! FIFY

    Please get your fake countries straight.

  63. @Wilkey
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.
     
    Brokeback Mountain was nominated for nine Oscars and received tens of millions of dollars worth of unpaid publicity. The Wikipedia entry for it features the names Larry McMurtry (who co-wrote the screenplay), Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams - all back to back. Those are all big name stars, both then and now (though one is deceased).

    “Bros” has…Billy Eichner. There aren’t more than about ten people in the country who go to a movie because it has Billy Eichner in it. Still, it managed to earn $4.8 million in its first weekend. That’s like $96 million in gay dollars.

    P.S. It’s interesting that the biggest and first gay blockbuster featured a cast of all straight people. I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Ralph L, @Achmed E. Newman, @BB753

    I don’t keep up with all that Hollywood stuff, and I imagine many others are the same. If I had not red a few things on-line about the gay stuff, I would have had no idea it was a gay movie. I remember this clearly.

  64. @Wilkey
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)


    They want to visit one another in the hospital, that’s all.
     
    That reason for gay marriage always struck me as patently absurd. It made me wonder what hospitals these people were visiting, or whether they had ever actually visited a sick loved one in the hospital at all. I’ve visited loved ones in hospitals and nursing homes literally hundreds of times (not an exaggeration). I have been asked to sign in, but I have never once been asked to prove that I’m a relative or a spouse. Never never never ever.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    They want to visit one another in the hospital, that’s all.

    That reason for gay marriage always struck me as patently absurd. It made me wonder what hospitals these people were visiting, or whether they had ever actually visited a sick loved one in the hospital at all. I’ve visited loved ones in hospitals and nursing homes literally hundreds of times (not an exaggeration). I have been asked to sign in, but I have never once been asked to prove that I’m a relative or a spouse. Never never never ever.

    It wasn’t absurd, it was a lie. It was based in dubious accounts of the families of one homosexual excluding his or her partner from visitation in the hospital. But gays could always nominate one another to be their agents under Living Wills and Springing Powers of Attorney and so forth which would overrule the wishes of blood relatives. So in those cases where a “partner” was excluded it would have been little different than a man’s family excluding his casual girlfriend from visitation and medical decision-making when he is incapacitated. It’s what would still happen today between gays who are dating (and straight couples dating) but not “married” when the blood relatives arrive at such a situation. In all cases, if you didn’t care to sign a few papers with a lawyer, or post Obergefell actually get married why should your wishes be paramount to those of the other’s mother and father? Could you imagine a situation in which someone you’ve dated for three months would be given the power to make your medical decisions up through refusing means of life support while your parents are excluded from the room?

  65. @Wilkey
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.
     
    Brokeback Mountain was nominated for nine Oscars and received tens of millions of dollars worth of unpaid publicity. The Wikipedia entry for it features the names Larry McMurtry (who co-wrote the screenplay), Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams - all back to back. Those are all big name stars, both then and now (though one is deceased).

    “Bros” has…Billy Eichner. There aren’t more than about ten people in the country who go to a movie because it has Billy Eichner in it. Still, it managed to earn $4.8 million in its first weekend. That’s like $96 million in gay dollars.

    P.S. It’s interesting that the biggest and first gay blockbuster featured a cast of all straight people. I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Ralph L, @Achmed E. Newman, @BB753

    I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Rumor has it that was a double beard relationship.

    No one has mentioned poor ol’ Rick Santorum.

  66. @Wilkey
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.
     
    Brokeback Mountain was nominated for nine Oscars and received tens of millions of dollars worth of unpaid publicity. The Wikipedia entry for it features the names Larry McMurtry (who co-wrote the screenplay), Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams - all back to back. Those are all big name stars, both then and now (though one is deceased).

    “Bros” has…Billy Eichner. There aren’t more than about ten people in the country who go to a movie because it has Billy Eichner in it. Still, it managed to earn $4.8 million in its first weekend. That’s like $96 million in gay dollars.

    P.S. It’s interesting that the biggest and first gay blockbuster featured a cast of all straight people. I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Ralph L, @Achmed E. Newman, @BB753

    I meant to say thanks too, Wilkey, and that should have been “read”m not “red”. (I was on the phone with a bureaucracy at the time, so …)

  67. @Wilkey
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Is it possible it was not clear to everyone that Brokeback Mountain was not your normal “Western” movie? The internet had been around for quite a while by ’05, but without their reading there, it’s very possible some families could have gone to see it not knowing the deal.
     
    Brokeback Mountain was nominated for nine Oscars and received tens of millions of dollars worth of unpaid publicity. The Wikipedia entry for it features the names Larry McMurtry (who co-wrote the screenplay), Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams - all back to back. Those are all big name stars, both then and now (though one is deceased).

    “Bros” has…Billy Eichner. There aren’t more than about ten people in the country who go to a movie because it has Billy Eichner in it. Still, it managed to earn $4.8 million in its first weekend. That’s like $96 million in gay dollars.

    P.S. It’s interesting that the biggest and first gay blockbuster featured a cast of all straight people. I mean Jake Gyllenhaal is so straight he inspired one of Taylor Swift’s biggest hits.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Ralph L, @Achmed E. Newman, @BB753

    I hate to break it to you, but Jake Gyllenhaal is very gay, and was merely “bearding” a very lesbian Taylor Swift. At least, according to the very informed writers here ( who revealed Epstein’s Lolita Island far in advance of the media and the FBI):
    https://www.crazydaysandnights.net

  68. @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    The Ukraineers fatherland wasn’t the fatherland of their fathers, anymore than Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia was. All just slapped together yard sale creations of bolsheviks.

    • Agree: BB753
  69. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    Right now, it’s considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.
     
    I think the freaks who are destroying society don't particularly like the traditional polygamist structure of a powerful man accumulating multiple wives - the "polyamory" move is for the benefit of those freaks themselves and for the usual purpose of epater la bourgeoisie. They'll continue to associate polygamy with exploiting and grooming underage girls even if the participants all came to the arrangement as autonomous adults. They feel it's wrong, because a heterosexual man is happy and that shouldn't be allowed.

    Is “two” a “code word” for monogamy? Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one? Why does the relationship have to be characterized by “exclusivity”? Why is holding each other out to the community as a family a factor? … Why then, except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships?
     
    Why do we have laws? Why do we have Courts? Why does the Judge wear a robe? Why does the Judge get to make the decisions? Why do we even have a Judge in the first place? Who is to say?

    Legal pilpul qua left wing power politics under the guise of "Living Constitutionalism" was nonsense in the hands of very clever 150 IQ Jewish Judges. It's positively ridiculous in the hands of triple affirmative action cases making it on to benches now upon the demands of the fringes for "representation."

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Recently Based

    I think the freaks who are destroying society don’t particularly like the traditional polygamist structure of a powerful man accumulating multiple wives

    What the left doesn’t want is open polygamy for Whites. That is why they haven’t promoted polygamy like gay marriage.

    Mormons aren’t even the main concern.

    They don’t want single White women to have culturally sanctioned polygamy. The left doesn’t trust White women to engage polygamously with all races at equal levels. Which they wouldn’t.

    The left doesn’t want anything that might encourage eugenics in Whites.

  70. I saw a long and well produced TV ad Saturday for an HIV drug, and for several minutes the viewer is treated to shots of good-looking young gay people of various skin complexions flirting, canoodling and eyeing each other with clear intent. A big juicy kiss finally wraps it all up.

    The whole thing was far more overtly erotic than any “hetero” ad I can think of, and it ran mid-afternoon during a college football game, certainly not past the kiddies’ bedtime. (My Penguin and Pirate feeds mercifully skip the ad breaks, but NCAA sportsball is a minefield of multi-racial and pansexual malarkey)

    • Replies: @Kim
    @Known Fact

    They ran the HIV drugs ad during the football bcs only fags watch sports.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    , @Mike_from_SGV
    @Known Fact

    This is a big reason I no longer watch television. I don't want to be made to see and hear moral twistedness, which is now injected everywhere, even sports.

  71. Anonymous[213] • Disclaimer says:
    @Woodsie
    I'm concluding that Mr Romano, the legal spouse, didn't live in the apartment. And since he and Mr O'Neil didn't like each other, can we assume the legal marriage was a dead letter? Also, even if the Romano/Anderson union was only "going through a rough patch," it certainly was not a three-way marriage, instead two separate relationships. So this begs the question, how long was Mr O'Neil living with Mr Anderson (did I use the phrase right, Steve?), and does the O'Neil/Anderson relationship meet the standard of a common law marriage or even California's famous Marvin v Marvin palimony case?

    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.

    So, legally, Mr O'Neil doesn't have a leg to stand on without changing the laws written in Albany through "our" democratic process. Maybe our scribe simply omitted any quotes from the article mentioning the property rights of the landlord, but this also begs the question, does the landlord have any rights?

    I have a friend with a rent controlled three-bed, two-bath walk-up in a great neighborhood (upper east side), very successful, that he has been leasing since 1980. He's lived on the west coast for over twenty years but still maintains the apartment, illegally sub-letting to friends and relatives (keeping his name on the doorbell). I love the guy like a brother, but it ain't right.

    Replies: @Anon, @Anonymous

    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.

    Why is it always “a quick internet search”? Why not a leisurely or desultory internet search? Or a thorough internet search? Or a slow, plodding internet search?

    What the hell is wrong with people?

    • Replies: @Joe S.Walker
    @Anonymous

    An internet search usually is pretty quick if you're looking for something specific.

    , @Woodsie
    @Anonymous

    that's twice in one comment I've been called slipshod!

  72. @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    Hey Stevie, what happened to flattening the curve?

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco, @Achmed E. Newman

    What happened with excess deaths? Steve stopped posting about excess deaths after the vaccines were introduced. He also stopped talking about the efficacy of vaccines when the boosters were given emergency authorization last month…everything was memory holed to avoid admitting mistakes and miscalculations.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @HA
    @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco

    "What happened with excess deaths?"

    Nothing happened to them -- I clearly answered this question in some detail two weeks ago. The answer is still the same. Hey, you hear about that Generalissimo Franco? Here's an update: HE'S STILL DEAD. If you need a personal hot take from Sailer himself about excess deaths, why not just consult the CDC excess death website instead and get it straight from the source?

    Do you people even listen to yourselves? Here's just-a-flu-bros whenever Steve mentions excess death: "Oh, there goes Sailer again trying to panic us with something we should ignore."

    Now, here's the just-a-flu-bros whenever Steve DOESN'T mention excess death: "Oh, look -- Sailer is trying to make us forget about excess death because he miscalculated something. Or something like that."

    Pick a side and stick with it. And anyway, for two years, you yammered pathetically about how you just wanted to live your life without having to hear about COVID all the time. The peaks have finally dwindled, so here's your chance. Fly, little bird.

  73. Dear New York Civil Court Judge Karen May Bacdayan,

    Your decision in West 49th St., LLC v. O’Neill broke important new ground in extending legal recognition to people in non-traditional, more-than-two-person, family-like relationships.

    Thank You! This ruling clearly protects families with three spouse-like people. Like “two,” “three” is just an arbitrary number; you wisely did not privilege it. Thus, the community can be certain that your reasoning applies equally well to four-spouse families.

    Of course, that sets me to wondering about five. Also, a baker’s dozen. Four score and seven, as well.

    Families with 87 husbands, wives, and nonbinary spouses must not have their rights denied, simply because there are relatively few of them at the moment. Please confirm this point at your earliest convenience.

  74. Over the last few years, I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy).

    As I recall, you predicted that the next thing after WWG would be WWP. Nobody saw WWT coming, not even you.

    By the way, in case you’re wondering what the next current things will be, it will be the other WWP (Pederasty) and WWC (Cannibalism). TPTB are already trying to normalize the eating of human flesh, along with bug-eating, as part of the Soylent-Green future. And the “Drag-Queen Story Hour” and “MAP” phenomena are indications that they are trying to normalize pederasty.

  75. @Whereismyhandle
    In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn't buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You'd think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren't that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?


    From a non-white: you don't deserve, anything, Billy: https://youtu.be/fk3svL0GPWI?t=1157

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr. Anon, @Kylie, @Daniel H, @Jim Don Bob

    The primary demo for rom-coms is women, and women don’t want to think about what the fabulously gay friends that Hollywood tells them they should have get up to when they’re being fabulously gay with each other. Disgust -normal, human disgust – is a real thing, whether it be disgust at homosexuality, disgust with men who act like women, disgust at the idea of eating bugs, etc. Of course, the forces of cultural destruction are trying to chip away at those normal human reactions.

  76. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    I’ll sign on to all of this, except fighting it. That battle is lost (even more than the tranny thing).

    Something approaching lifetime monogamous marriage is (tragically) both (1) necessary for a modern Western society in the long-run, and (2) deeply unnatural and therefore exists only with institutional and cultural support. Unless you accept deep religious principles as inherently binding on society, this is the real argument against gay marriage and the sexual revolution more broadly: sooner or later you end up living in Guatemala.

    America — and the West as a whole — surrendered on this issue something like 50 years ago. It’s all just mopping up operations now.

  77. @Steve Sailer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Recently Based, @Jay Fink

    My observation (existing but not extensive) is that the “sci-fi types” who are into it tend to be guys that have a real problem getting laid due to some combination of fatness and social awkwardness and are prepared to accept sharing a (generally pretty heinous-looking) chick to full-on celibacy.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    Good to know you’re like Sheldon Cooper.

    Replies: @Recently Based

  78. @Hypnotoad666

    Here, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Romano, and Mr. O’Neill had a relationship to one another. There was knowledge of all persons about the others and, at least, passive consent, even if they did not all like each other.

     

    WTF. This opinion makes no sense on any level. It used to be "Marriage is Marriage," then it was "Love is Love." But now it also turns out that "Hate is Hate." And they are all just different ways to have a "relationship." And all "relationships" are equivalent to legal marriage, because otherwise the majority would be determining the law, and nothing threatens democracy like majority rule.

    Next up, "indifference" as a form of legally binding "relationship." Why should people you've never met be excluded from getting half your stuff as community property? That's just more majority rule B.S.

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Kim

    It’s much worse than that.

    Many years ago (20?), I read an essay by affirmative action novelist, Samuel Delany. Delany was grieving over lost “relationships.” He was writing of anonymous strangers whom he couldn’t even see clearly, with whom he’d had homosexual sex tens of thousands of times in dark porno theaters in Times Square, which had been demolished during the area’s Disneyfication. (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.) Delany insisted that every sexual act that he and an anonymous, unseeable man had had constituted “a relationship.”

    If Judge Karen May Bacdayan and law professor Eugene Volokh have their way, Delany’s abuse of language will become “the law of the land,” though I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    @Nicholas Stix

    Bacdayan is Filipino-born, as this website proudly ( no pun intended ) proclaims.
    https://www.wowcordillera.com/2022/01/igorota-lawyer-is-judge-for-civil-court.html

    Judge Bacdayan was born in the Philippines and descends from the Igorot Tribe.
    Her family formerly resided in the village of Bangaan in the Municipality of Sagada, Mountain Province, Philippines before moving to the United States.


    I suppose she was Catholic once, but has obviously been completely corrupted by HomoGlobalism.
    Sad.

    Replies: @CMC, @CMC

    , @Hypnotoad666
    @Nicholas Stix


    (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.)
     
    Ha ha. Could have been the same guy 10,000 times.
    , @Prester John
    @Nicholas Stix

    "I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets."

    They won't, and you can take it to the bank. Where the elevated bullshit rationalizations ends is where the real fun begins. Once stuff like this starts involving the transfer of moolah, comes the inevitable equivocation. Whether it's race, sex, immigration etc., in the end (as my wife says) "it's all about-money."

  79. polygamy moderately helps Rs politically, so i don’t think there will be a general campaign. D leadership has thought this thru, like every angle.

    what will probably happen here is that the minor homosexual angle will get squashed, just as homos have gotten squashed by their own party now that trans people are in charge.

    the only possible conflict i see is with third worlders who want to bring polygamy (only for them) into the US. if D intellectual leadership can work out how to swamp the domestic R fertility boost from polygamy, maybe they will do it. lots of people, even average D voters, would be strongly against millions of muslims and africans showing up with their 3 wives, so that would be hard to accomplish politically even for the ascendant D communists.

    even at this advanced stage of the cultural marxist takeover, Ds can’t get away with polygamy for brown people, but not for pale penis persons.

  80. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Steve Sailer


    Right now, it’s considered in poor taste to bring up polygamy among African and Muslim immigrants. But that can switch at some point to celebrating polygamous African and Muslim immigrant families. Love is love.
     
    I think the freaks who are destroying society don't particularly like the traditional polygamist structure of a powerful man accumulating multiple wives - the "polyamory" move is for the benefit of those freaks themselves and for the usual purpose of epater la bourgeoisie. They'll continue to associate polygamy with exploiting and grooming underage girls even if the participants all came to the arrangement as autonomous adults. They feel it's wrong, because a heterosexual man is happy and that shouldn't be allowed.

    Is “two” a “code word” for monogamy? Why does a person have to be committed to one other person in only certain prescribed ways in order to enjoy stability in housing after the departure of a loved one? Why does the relationship have to be characterized by “exclusivity”? Why is holding each other out to the community as a family a factor? … Why then, except for the very real possibility of implicit majoritarian animus, is the limitation of two persons inserted into the definition of a family-like relationship for the purposes of receiving the same protections from eviction accorded to legally formalized or blood relationships?
     
    Why do we have laws? Why do we have Courts? Why does the Judge wear a robe? Why does the Judge get to make the decisions? Why do we even have a Judge in the first place? Who is to say?

    Legal pilpul qua left wing power politics under the guise of "Living Constitutionalism" was nonsense in the hands of very clever 150 IQ Jewish Judges. It's positively ridiculous in the hands of triple affirmative action cases making it on to benches now upon the demands of the fringes for "representation."

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Recently Based

    I think there is tremendous pressure to create poly relationships from multiple angles.

    There certainly is the “I am completely screwed up by my genetics + bad parents, am deeply disturbed and want to work out my psychological issues on a broader canvas” group. (ie, what you are calling freaks).

    But I think the biggest driver of this is bottom-up demand driven by feminism + deregulation of the sexual marketplace. Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.

    It’s not some ironclad rule, but women do tend strongly to be hypergamous, i.e., will rarely date somebody who makes less than they do, etc. when it comes to dating, or way hotter than they are when it comes to hooking up at the foam cannon party in Cancun. As women make about as much money as men and the sexual market has now pretty much fully deregulated and has globalized through apps, most men are unattractive to most women. A small fraction of guys are getting an enormous amount of sex, and a majority of guys are getting very little to no sex. Most women are able to get sex with the hot/rich guys that they want, but mostly can’t get relationships from them since these won’t settle down (why would they, when these are the guys that can keep nailing tons of girls). In other words: de facto polygamy.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    @Recently Based

    Whats weird is the dweeb beta males who talk it up. They will be [are] the biggest losers in terms of sex and actual relationships.

    I'm thinking of a friend here, he's apoplectic at the the thought of the evil white patriarchy infringing on his right to get laid. But he isn't getting laid right now! Vocal support for polywhatever isn't going to improve his position and likely make it worse.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @SFG

    , @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    “Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.“

    No one is buying your Roissian logic, Sheldon. The fact of the matter is that guys are doing quite well dating and mating. The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    Replies: @John Johnson

  81. I read the plot summary of Bros on Wikipedia. It seems to be all about moneyed, precious people whose main concern in life is being fabulous. No doubt if you showed it to an audience of such people, or people who’d like to join the club, it’d go down a storm, but why should anyone normal be expected to go and see it?

  82. Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.

    According to Oxford Languages, the expression admits two senses:

    Definições de Oxford Languages ·
    beg the question
    1.(of a fact or action) raise a question or point that has not been dealt with; invite an obvious question.
    “some definitions of mental illness beg the question of what constitutes normal behavior”
    2.assume the truth of an argument or proposition to be proved, without arguing it.

    The judge in question was using the expression in the first sense, so I suppose you only admit sense number 2 (better explained in the Wikipedia page below) to be correct:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

  83. @Mike Tre
    "Over the last few years, I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy)."

    But did you predict it would be the context of homosexual phony marriages?

    Lower rent and free spousal medical insurance. Those homos would almost be inspirational in their pragmatism is it weren't for all the filth and disease and glitter.

    Replies: @Alan Mercer, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Lower rent and free spousal medical insurance.

    Also, a lucrative new market for divorce lawyers to exploit, too. (Due to the marriage strike, those guys had been hurting badly prior to Obergefell .) Everybody wins!

  84. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Yes:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/04/one-man-many-wives-big-problems/304829/

    When even some liberal outlets like The Atlantic are coming out against a certain form of sexual perversion, it’s bad–very, very bad. Luckily, our Trumpist Supreme Court will probably smack this thing down when it gets there.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    That’s back in 2006, before the Great Awokening. Rauch was an early gay marriage supporter but has come out against woke lately.

  85. Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.

    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn’t exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

    • Thanks: Nicholas Stix
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @kaganovitch



    Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.

     

    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn’t exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

     

    We're about halfway through the first coming of Sonia Sotomayor, and that opinion by Bacdayan would not seem out of place if it had "Sotomayor" appended to it in place of "Bacdayan." In fact, since legal brilliance in the left wing mind is assigned by identity, it would be hailed as "brilliant" because Sotomayor wrote it.
    , @Wilkey
    @kaganovitch


    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn’t exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

     

    Most of the pictures I found of her online feature her carrying a sign at one protest or another. She lacks the two most important qualities required of a judge: impartiality, and deference to the written law.

    Incidentally she earned her law degree at the University of Kentucky, despite lacking any other apparent ties to that state. You can thank affirmative action for that one.

  86. @Spud Boy
    "I’ve been predicting that the Next Big Thing following World War G (gay marriage) and World War T (transgender mania) will be World War P (polygamy)."

    Perhaps, but I think the Next Big Thing will be animal rights. They are coming after your cheeseburger. You are seeing a lot more stories about the many benefits of consuming bugs in order to save the planet.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    You will live in the pod.

    You will eat the bugs.

    You will own nothing.

    You will have no privacy.

    And you’ll be happy.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/shopping-i-cant-really-remember-what-that-is-or-how-differently-well-live-in-2030/

  87. @Dennis Dale
    @Steve Sailer


    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country
     
    .

    Yeah, with other people's money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    Most of their weapons are Soviet. HIMARs make a lot of headlines but few (including Putin) seem to realize how large of a military they possessed after the fall of the USSR.

    As for Putin he didn’t question the sovereignty of Ukraine when they had a pro-Russian president. Of course no one asked him about the Budapest Memorandum where Russia agree to recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine and that included Crimea. Of course asking such questions in Russia will get a knock on the door or lead to an accidental death involving a window or trip to the sea.

    But keep celebrating the dictator that wears shoe lifts. You know the war is going well when they are telling conscripts to scrounge for tampons and medi-kits:
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/russian-conscripts-tampons-bullet-wounds-ukraine/

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @puttheforkdown
    @John Johnson


    But keep celebrating the dictator that wears shoe lifts
     
    Jeez, you're really out of ammo (like Ukraine would be without NATO/US taxpayer funded weaponry) when you resort to insulting a powerful world leader's height.

    I guess when he nukes Zelensky you'll just be fuming about how he's not tall enough to be your boyfriend in public. Who knows.

    , @Dennis Dale
    @John Johnson

    Yeah, 60 billion dollars doesn't go so far these days.

    It's funny how you girls always revert to the "Putin-lover" line. I guess that means you're all "in love" with Zelinski (if you're going to be childish, I should be allowed the "I am rubber you are glue" riposte).

    What do you say we start a scam were people can buy a little piece of one of Zelinski's t-shirts? Sort of like the "piece of the true cross" con. Verified to have been worn by the man himself. You can smell the dried sweat.
    Time to get in on the grift.

    Replies: @HA

  88. As much as the slippery slope logic could have led there with any judge, I’m a bit surprised Steve didn’t go there with regard to the perhaps fascinating background —ethnic, religious, cultural, historical, of this particular judge.

  89. @Nicholas Stix
    @Hypnotoad666

    It’s much worse than that.

    Many years ago (20?), I read an essay by affirmative action novelist, Samuel Delany. Delany was grieving over lost “relationships.” He was writing of anonymous strangers whom he couldn’t even see clearly, with whom he’d had homosexual sex tens of thousands of times in dark porno theaters in Times Square, which had been demolished during the area’s Disneyfication. (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.) Delany insisted that every sexual act that he and an anonymous, unseeable man had had constituted “a relationship.”

    If Judge Karen May Bacdayan and law professor Eugene Volokh have their way, Delany’s abuse of language will become “the law of the land,” though I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John

    Bacdayan is Filipino-born, as this website proudly ( no pun intended ) proclaims.
    https://www.wowcordillera.com/2022/01/igorota-lawyer-is-judge-for-civil-court.html

    Judge Bacdayan was born in the Philippines and descends from the Igorot Tribe.
    Her family formerly resided in the village of Bangaan in the Municipality of Sagada, Mountain Province, Philippines before moving to the United States.

    I suppose she was Catholic once, but has obviously been completely corrupted by HomoGlobalism.
    Sad.

    • Replies: @CMC
    @Verymuchalive


    Catholic
     
    Yeah that’s what I was thinking. But then I looked up Sagada Phillipines and saw a Wikipedia page saying,

    the municipality of Sagada has become the only Philippine town that is predominantly Anglican with almost 95% baptised into the Episcopal Church of the Philippines (ECP).
     
    , @CMC
    @Verymuchalive

    Except


    Sagada has become the only Philippine town that is predominantly Anglican with almost 95% baptised into the Episcopal Church of the Philippines (ECP).
     
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagada
  90. @Arclight
    More common practioners of polygamy like Mormons and Muslims are looked down upon as backwards and oppressive to women, but the progressive left will destroy all societal norms of restraint if it involves any part of the Alphabet People coalition, social cohesion and stability be damned. It even trumps their fealty to race, which is really saying something.

    The obsession with and valorization of extreme outliers in society have been a disaster, and I think a majority of the public would agree with this. However the total incompetence of the Republican party over the last 30 years of focusing on what's supposedly best for business at the expense of the culture and fiscal sanity has set the table for what is likely to be an extremely turbulent several decades whose outcome is by no means assured of going well.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    However the total incompetence of the Republican party over the last 30 years

    The GOP is about as incompetent as the Washington Generals, which is to say not at all. You just have to realize what their true function is.

  91. now reading the case, and Volokh says he doesn’t think this will move up thru the courts much, which is kinda my take as well.

    but it was also a New York court which first forced homosexual lease transferring, in 1989. and i bet nobody thought that would move up thru courts much either. yet 25 years later, this stuff was at the Supreme Court, where they then ruled for the whole enchilada.

    so are we on a 25 year timer for polygamy? but once again note that it’s the not married gay guy who’s driving all this, just as it was before homos could marry at all. changing the rules didn’t make homos happy.

    Fred was married to Ted AND Ned.

    third worlders are into this type of marriage fraud. married to a woman back in the home country, come to America and marry a second woman here. now think about international gay guys getting married in a couple countries and inheriting all these old dead gay guys stuff when they die.

  92. @kaganovitch
    Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.


    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn't exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Wilkey

    Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.

    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn’t exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

    We’re about halfway through the first coming of Sonia Sotomayor, and that opinion by Bacdayan would not seem out of place if it had “Sotomayor” appended to it in place of “Bacdayan.” In fact, since legal brilliance in the left wing mind is assigned by identity, it would be hailed as “brilliant” because Sotomayor wrote it.

  93. @Daniel H
    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It's all connected. You can't be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered... and root for Zelensky/Biden. It's all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can't have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bardon Kaldian, @Anon, @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @John Johnson

    How is, in essence, a border dispute between two groups of Eastern Orthodox Christians now clash of civilizations? Are the series of border disputes among Oriental Orthodox Christians in the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Eritrea) also a clash of civilizations?

  94. Rent control almost certainly meant that families went to extraordinary lengths to avoid death certificates being issued for dead relatives.

    There must be some hilarious untold stories here.

  95. @Whereismyhandle
    In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn't buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You'd think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren't that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?


    From a non-white: you don't deserve, anything, Billy: https://youtu.be/fk3svL0GPWI?t=1157

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr. Anon, @Kylie, @Daniel H, @Jim Don Bob

    “You’d think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not.”

    Lol! I wouldn’t if I knew he was gay.

  96. @John Johnson
    @Dennis Dale


    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.
     

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!
     
    Most of their weapons are Soviet. HIMARs make a lot of headlines but few (including Putin) seem to realize how large of a military they possessed after the fall of the USSR.

    As for Putin he didn't question the sovereignty of Ukraine when they had a pro-Russian president. Of course no one asked him about the Budapest Memorandum where Russia agree to recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine and that included Crimea. Of course asking such questions in Russia will get a knock on the door or lead to an accidental death involving a window or trip to the sea.

    But keep celebrating the dictator that wears shoe lifts. You know the war is going well when they are telling conscripts to scrounge for tampons and medi-kits:
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/russian-conscripts-tampons-bullet-wounds-ukraine/

    Replies: @puttheforkdown, @Dennis Dale

    But keep celebrating the dictator that wears shoe lifts

    Jeez, you’re really out of ammo (like Ukraine would be without NATO/US taxpayer funded weaponry) when you resort to insulting a powerful world leader’s height.

    I guess when he nukes Zelensky you’ll just be fuming about how he’s not tall enough to be your boyfriend in public. Who knows.

  97. Once you accept the lunacy that what sodomites do is sex rather than a particularly nasty form of assault, it goes downhill very quickly.

    In three years this judge will be marrying people to their dogs.

  98. @John Johnson
    @Dennis Dale


    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.
     

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!
     
    Most of their weapons are Soviet. HIMARs make a lot of headlines but few (including Putin) seem to realize how large of a military they possessed after the fall of the USSR.

    As for Putin he didn't question the sovereignty of Ukraine when they had a pro-Russian president. Of course no one asked him about the Budapest Memorandum where Russia agree to recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine and that included Crimea. Of course asking such questions in Russia will get a knock on the door or lead to an accidental death involving a window or trip to the sea.

    But keep celebrating the dictator that wears shoe lifts. You know the war is going well when they are telling conscripts to scrounge for tampons and medi-kits:
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/russian-conscripts-tampons-bullet-wounds-ukraine/

    Replies: @puttheforkdown, @Dennis Dale

    Yeah, 60 billion dollars doesn’t go so far these days.

    It’s funny how you girls always revert to the “Putin-lover” line. I guess that means you’re all “in love” with Zelinski (if you’re going to be childish, I should be allowed the “I am rubber you are glue” riposte).

    What do you say we start a scam were people can buy a little piece of one of Zelinski’s t-shirts? Sort of like the “piece of the true cross” con. Verified to have been worn by the man himself. You can smell the dried sweat.
    Time to get in on the grift.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Dennis Dale

    "It’s funny how you girls always revert to the 'Putin-lover' line. I guess that means you’re all 'in love' with Zelinski...What do you say we start a scam were people can buy a little piece of one of Zelinski’s t-shirts?...You can smell the dried sweat."

    If this is the kind of stuff the fanboys allow to rent space in their brains, they really need to hold off accusing anyone else of caving in to the gay agenda.

  99. @Daniel H
    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It's all connected. You can't be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered... and root for Zelensky/Biden. It's all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can't have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bardon Kaldian, @Anon, @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @John Johnson

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered…

    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.

    No, saving us requires the obvious–nationalism, attacking and defeating minoritarianism, defending borders, stopping the immivasion, restoring a healthy traditional majoritiarian culture– improving fertility, eugenic fertility … work. A lot of work.

    Putin’s obsession with “the Great Rus”, 19th century Russian imperialism. and 1914 style “we’ll give those bastards a lesson” aggression has … uh … um … yeah, that’s right nothing to do with it. The world needs Russian imperialism the same way it needs American or Chinese or anyone else’s imperialism … not at all.

    In fact, not only is Putin’s War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin’s War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.
    and
    B) trashed the opportunity Putin had to aid nationalist-traditionists like Orban, be an alternative peacefully, friendly, well-run nationalist, traditionalist power that served as a counterweight to EU bullying. Demonstrate “better”–by having a secure border, tossing out illegals from the ‘stans, (ideally cutting the Chechens loose/out), working assiduously on Russian “affordable family formation” and fertility turnaround so it’s a not a half muzzie joint (like England and France) in 100 years.

    But … Putin–sadly like a lot of “leaders”–is obsessed with being a big swinging dick and not with making Russia great for Russians.

    But hey … I hear he needs bodies. Go sign up!

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad, like a few people here, knows that the MSM lie through their teeth about what's happening in the US, but takes in everything they say on foreign affairs as gospel.

    You'd think the 'power-mad dictator' stuff would have got old by now, but people's memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Nasser, Sukarno, Khomeini, Noriega, Saddam, Hugo Chavez, Gaddafi and Assad were all compared with Hitler in their time - their time often being just before the US attacked them, whether the attack was economic or military. It's part of the regime change script - you have to prepare the ground at home first.

    It's amazing how many people over here have a deep knowledge of Putin's psychology garnered from press and TV over the years.

    One of the most impressive psyops has been the flip, in only a few years, from "Occupy Wall Street!" to "Black Lives Matter!".

    But another equally impressive one has been the flip of what was the anti-war "left" movement, still pretty huge in 2003, to what's basically a pro-war "left"movement now. If you read the Guardian's commenters on Russia and Ukraine, they all sound just like AnotherDad, convinced that Putin's psychological make up (of which they all have deep knowledge, garnered from many a news item and TV show) impels Russia ever onwards.


    "He must be stopped now, because he won't stop at Ukraine".
     
    In fact the main Russian conservative critique of Putin is of excessive caution and being overly legalistic when the Nuland coup of 2014 happened - that rather than stop at Crimea he should have taken the entire Donbass then, when the Donbass units of the Ukrainian army were in revolt against Kiev and when the non-Donbass units hadn't had seven or eight years of NATO training and integration. At the time pretty much the whole of Donbass was under the control of the pro-Russian forces of the Ukrainian army. But he waited - in vain as it turned out - for Minsk 2 to be implemented and the Donbass to have self-determination. In hindsight a lot fewer Ukrainians would have died had he moved then.

    "He that will not when he may, when he will he shall have nay"

    None of us are "waiting for Russia to save us" - personalising it as "Putin" is another bit of the regime change playbook you've swallowed whole - but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?

    Russia's not my country - I don't want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia's not a defeated and occupied country - it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it's important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Anonymous, @Dube

    , @anonymous
    @AnotherDad

    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.
     Putin is more friendly to Western civilization and nationalism than the current rulers of the Western countries.


    In fact, not only is Putin’s War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin’s War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.
     
    It is America’s War. The war would have been over within weeks if the United States and its stooges in Europe weren’t financing it. Suddenly, the citizens of the most powerful countries in the world have no agency, eh?

    Replies: @John Johnson

  100. @the one they call Desanex
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I saw a good western the other day starring two homos: Frontier Marshal, with Randolph Scott as Wyatt Earp and Cesar Romero as Doc Holliday.
    https://onceuponatimeinawestern.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/PROMO-Randolph-Scott-as-Wyatt-Earp-with-Cesar-Romero-as-Doc-Halliday-in-Frontier-Marshal-1939.jpg

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby

    Thanks, Desanex. So long as they do their gay thing in the makeup trailer and not on-screen, I’m fine with it.

  101. Another Dad:

    You’re right that Putin is not our champion. But the pro-Ukraine frenzy, which has swept up many beyond the War Party, won’t allow indifference to Putin. Because it’s manipulative propaganda.

    People don’t understand the enormity of our blowing up Nordstream. It’s already shattered whatever trust we had with Europe, and as an act of war against Russia it might be a worse blow to Germany.

    The thing is Putin’s Russia is a front, Germany is a front and we “MAGA Republicans” are a front in a global war.

    Our war in Ukraine is a neocon war seeking regime change in Russia.

    The dismantling of the German economy now comes like Morgenthau’s plan to de-industrialize the country going into belated implementation. Competition from German industry drove its increasingly hostile relations with France and the UK that brought us WWI and eventually WWII. This is the third act and the Krauts are expected to die.

    What we did was vote Trump and not go to see that new gay rom-com.

    I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other regarding Putin. But he’s not the bully. We are.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Dennis Dale


    People don’t understand the enormity of our blowing up Nordstream
     
    Oh, I think that they do, but this is a fact not in evidence. You are getting way ahead of yourself. It would also be an enormity if the US assassinated the former Prime Minister of Japan. I could spin all sorts of scenarios about how this would shatter Japanese trust in America and so on.

    But first I would have to show, by clear and convincing evidence and not just a bunch of hand waving, that the US in fact assassinated the Japanese PM. First PROVE (really PROVE) that this was a US action and then we can discuss what follows from that.
  102. @Verymuchalive
    @Nicholas Stix

    Bacdayan is Filipino-born, as this website proudly ( no pun intended ) proclaims.
    https://www.wowcordillera.com/2022/01/igorota-lawyer-is-judge-for-civil-court.html

    Judge Bacdayan was born in the Philippines and descends from the Igorot Tribe.
    Her family formerly resided in the village of Bangaan in the Municipality of Sagada, Mountain Province, Philippines before moving to the United States.


    I suppose she was Catholic once, but has obviously been completely corrupted by HomoGlobalism.
    Sad.

    Replies: @CMC, @CMC

    Catholic

    Yeah that’s what I was thinking. But then I looked up Sagada Phillipines and saw a Wikipedia page saying,

    the municipality of Sagada has become the only Philippine town that is predominantly Anglican with almost 95% baptised into the Episcopal Church of the Philippines (ECP).

    • Thanks: Verymuchalive
  103. @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    Hey Stevie, what happened to flattening the curve?

    Replies: @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco, @Achmed E. Newman

    It got changed to this:

    • LOL: Verymuchalive
  104. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Whereismyhandle


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn’t buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.
     
    This hits at a gnawing insecurity for Alphabet people - they intuit that a large percentage of the population likely representing a majority was coerced into withdrawing their objections to exhibitionist homosexuality in short order and isn't sincere in its "acceptance." Their "rights" and cultural prominence are secured only by a soft terror exacted by the Press, the Academy, and now the "Civil Rights" structure of state and Federal governments. Two men engaging in sexual conduct with one another and even implied sexual conduct still trips the disgust reaction of very many people. People are simply falsifying their preferences as a means of self-defense against the punitive measures arrayed against anyone who would refuse to do so.

    So here, Eichner knows intuitively that lots of people find him personally and his film thoroughly disgusting and some of them even in spite of their professed political beliefs. The failure of his over-promoted "romcom" is evidence that people don't believe what they are required to say that they believe about Alphabet people and will engage in anonymous passive resistance. Eichner really just wants them to truly love Big Brother, and is frustrated that he currently lacks the means to make them do so.

    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?
     
    Brokeback Mountain was prior to Obergefell when Alphabet people had to pretend to be nice and quirky normal people, just with a different preference - although their cruel streak and catty meanness was obvious to anyone really paying attention. They appealed to pathos and sympathy then - they needed gay marriage because they were so weak and pathetic. They would leave your kids out of it! Just two consenting adults, consenting together! How does it harm your marriage? It will actually strengthen your marriage! Maybe you're secretly gay if you object! They want to visit one another in the hospital, that's all.

    This facade was immediately abandoned after Obergefell - as in, the next day. Now you had to accept gay marriage because they were strong and could hurt you. It's an entirely different dynamic in 2022 than what was the case in 2005. Additionally, people knew that Gyllenhaal and Ledger were acting - they didn't really want to sodomize one another so the audience was permitted an escape hatch from suspended disbelief within the film. This film is active homosexuals depicting active homosexuals dating one another - there's no way to conceive of the depicted sodomy within the film as somehow not real.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Achmed E. Newman

    That was a very good comment, but WTH is “Obergefell”?

  105. anonymous[385] • Disclaimer says:

    The whole polygamy movement, in many ways, is driven by white women and jews. White women, put simply, would rather have 10 percent of a wealthy and powerful man, than 100 percent of a man lacking wealth or power. And so, if they must share a powerful man with other women, they’ll bitch and whine and fight for favor against those other women (unless they can somehow magically secure the favor of an even wealthier and more powerful man), but they’ll endure the relationship because it beats going out and having to work for a living. Polygamy is really just a jew assault on the white middle class and its values: if I’m an uber wealthy jew, why not have a dozen escorts – er, wives – who would have otherwise had families with white males? More for me, and less for thee. And women have never had a problem selling themselves to the highest bidder, or the most resourceful one who’ll have them. Look at college and university, guys: the smartest and most obviously gifted and promising young men were always the ones the cheerleaders wanted. And, to a point, I have no problem with this: smart and talented men should have nicer things. But what we are seeing now is really another depopulation endeavor by the dominant elites of our perverted society. Choke off procreative opportunities for the average man, and you choke off the possibility of further demographic growth in ethnic and racial groups you abhor; you get to breed, and they don’t. Make it fashionable and desirable to be one of a bunch of women in a harem, and suddenly those on Wall Street, or the Banksters, can have a hundred females with which to breed, while the average man on the street who actually has to pay taxes to Uncle Schmuel can’t have even a single partner. And so, the same tribe that is giving you the clot shot, courtesy bijuwepharma, is now (in addition to injuring or killing you or sterilizing you with the vaxx) doing its darnedest to take away your ability to have a family of your own through the institutionalization of polygamy. White women think all of this is wonderful, naturally, until the moment when they start losing in the competition for the best men because prettier or more fecund women are out there (Banksters take what they want, no matter how much bleating they hear from the losers). Guys, until you harden your hearts and become more cynical, this world is just going to be a nastier and nastier place for you. I think white women are, personally, every bit as bad as the jews: not as smart, but equally conniving, and equally inimical to your interests. And a growing bunch of them LOVE polygamy.

  106. @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    In Our Democracy, the fact that most people are for something, such as defining a marriage to involve two people, as proof of sinister unconstitutional animus.
     
    This is basically the interpretive rubric of our institutions of legal casuistry for some time now - they propose that "rights are anti-majoritarian;"* therefore, anything that they like that is not popular (viz, upends established society and its mores) is required because it is important to a less than fifty percent segment of society.

    * They're lying about this - each of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights is the product of a majoritarian democratic process. It's just that often rights that are established through a democratic process need to be enforced against the will of a majority and it is only in this sense that rights are "anti-majoritarian." For example, the rights against self-incrimination and to counsel were the product of majoritarian democratic processes, but people often get mad when someone is accused of a notorious and horrible crime and the will of the majority tends towards "locking him up and throwing away the key without a trial."

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    In Our Democracy, the fact that most people are for something, such as defining a marriage to involve two people, as proof of sinister unconstitutional animus.

    Agree. This really is the core of it. Once you give it any thought, you realize that minoritarianism is actually inverse of civilization.

    Whatever norms a particular society needs to hold itself together, function properly and reproduce itself–i.e. what a “civilization” does–are “oppressive” and must be tossed out. Minoritarianism is anti-civilization.

    I do give this judge credit for pretty clearly and directly citing this ideology. “Majoritarian animus”–i.e. how our society does things–is bad and must be tossed out.

    ~~

    I think the two dumbest things Europeans have done:

    1) Bringing blacks to the new world.

    2) Allowing Jews to live among them as a separate, non-integrating tribe.

    Colonization is huge as well, but I think a poor #3 to the damage those two have wrought.

    • Agree: Kim
  107. @Whereismyhandle
    In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn't buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You'd think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren't that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?


    From a non-white: you don't deserve, anything, Billy: https://youtu.be/fk3svL0GPWI?t=1157

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr. Anon, @Kylie, @Daniel H, @Jim Don Bob

    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren’t that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?

    Haven’t seen this new movie, but one reason for the spectacular indifference of the general public is that it is BOTH Gay and Jewish. Too much to bear.

  108. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    Real countries get all of their money and arms from another country halfway around the world.

    Real countries bomb part of their own country where icky people live.

  109. @Dennis Dale
    @Steve Sailer


    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country
     
    .

    Yeah, with other people's money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    The Soviets fought the Nazis with considerable American help. Lend-Lease was enormous – thousands upon thousands of trucks and planes and so on. Does this mean that they were “fake” also?

    BTW, the Ukrainians joke that there is a Russian Lend-Lease now – their largest supplier is not NATO but the Russians who are leaving behind vast troves of equipment and ammo when they flee.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jack D


    The Soviets fought the Nazis with considerable American help. Lend-Lease was enormous – thousands upon thousands of trucks and planes and so on. Does this mean that they were “fake” also?
     
    No, just our neutrality. Which is why we were attacked.
  110. anonymous[195] • Disclaimer says:

    White women love polygamy, and are behind it with almost as much fervor as the jews are. See, a (white) woman would much rather own 10 percent of a powerful and wealthy man, than 100 percent of a man lacking wealth and power. It doesn’t particularly bother an awful lot of white women if they are treated as a vassal or chattel by a man, just as long as the man is mighty and makes a lot of money (make that A LOT of money). I mean, sure you have to fight with other women to climb up the pecking order in a harem, but women do that sort of stuff already. And even if it might seem humiliating to be just one of a bunch charged with spreading your legs for the master, it still beats working for a living. I don’t wish to be graphic or sardonic, but it bears repeating: it is not white males (for the most part) who are advancing this sort of thing. But a growing number of white women in the academia and pseudo-intelligentsia are. So much for human equality or dignity, but gender feminism really isn’t about that stuff, is it?

    What polygamy really does, and is ultimately designed to do, is to destroy not merely the romantic values of the white middle class, but to destroy white, middle-class males: the Bankster gets a harem of 100 women, but the ordinary man on the street who has to actually pay taxes to Uncle Schmuel gets nothing. I procreate, and you cannot procreate. So, in addition to big Juwepharma forcing the clot shot upon you to maim you, sterilize you, and kill you, all with trillions of dollars in government dollars flowing into their coffers, the creatures who slither about at the top of this sick, decadent society also want to institutionalize a family unit framework that makes it exceedingly unlikely that millions of men in just the United States alone will ever have a family of their own. This is another step in the ambitious dreams of GloboShlomoHomo to effectively kill off everyone outside their own in-group. The war against (white) boys, which started at the end of the 1960s (some might argue it began earlier), was all about undermining and marginalizing white males as they were the ones standing between jews and ultimate power in the west. More than 50 years later, that war has been devastating for young white males in our society: look at how many do not go on to tertiary education, or at how many commit suicide. But white women are happy, because it all means a shortcut to power and an easier route to copulate with banksters with lots of cash; if the system hurts the men in their broader community or even in their own family, oh well: no one ever accused a certain type of female of being particularly loyal or supportive to her own. Polygamy is just the next step in the path downward.

  111. @Nicholas Stix
    @Hypnotoad666

    It’s much worse than that.

    Many years ago (20?), I read an essay by affirmative action novelist, Samuel Delany. Delany was grieving over lost “relationships.” He was writing of anonymous strangers whom he couldn’t even see clearly, with whom he’d had homosexual sex tens of thousands of times in dark porno theaters in Times Square, which had been demolished during the area’s Disneyfication. (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.) Delany insisted that every sexual act that he and an anonymous, unseeable man had had constituted “a relationship.”

    If Judge Karen May Bacdayan and law professor Eugene Volokh have their way, Delany’s abuse of language will become “the law of the land,” though I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John

    (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.)

    Ha ha. Could have been the same guy 10,000 times.

  112. @Steve Sailer
    @Unintended Consequence

    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country.

    It's almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country.

    Replies: @SFG, @Unintended Consequence, @JimDandy, @JimDandy, @Dennis Dale, @Mike Tre, @Hypnotoad666

    It’s almost as if Vlad Putin in 2022 has managed to socially construct Ukraine into a real country

    But he may also end up physically deconstructing it in 2023. RIP Ukraine, 2022-2023. We hardly got to know ye.

  113. @Anonymous
    @Woodsie


    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.
     
    Why is it always "a quick internet search"? Why not a leisurely or desultory internet search? Or a thorough internet search? Or a slow, plodding internet search?

    What the hell is wrong with people?

    Replies: @Joe S.Walker, @Woodsie

    An internet search usually is pretty quick if you’re looking for something specific.

  114. @Dennis Dale
    @Steve Sailer


    But Ukraine is fighting like a real country
     
    .

    Yeah, with other people's money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Yeah, with other people’s money, weaponry, electronic intelligence and, now, industrial sabotage.

    Oh that plucky Ukraine!

    Russia received large amounts of US aid:

    the United States provided the Soviet Union with more than 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 aircraft, 8,000 tractors and construction vehicles, and 13,000 battle tanks.

    The dollar amount was $11.2b at a time when US GDP was $129b, or 8.6% of the US economy. 8.6% of today’s $23T economy is ~$2T. Ukraine is resisting Russia with a fraction of the aid we provided the Russians in WWII. And unlike Russia during WWII, Ukraine’s government isn’t a genocidal regime that had killed tens of millions.

  115. @stillCARealist
    @Bill Jones

    That's pretty good. I see these flags all around, and they're never the same twice. I think they change every year as there's some new cause that has to be added. Some kind of arms race between the signalers.... Look! I have 12 colors and shapes, and you only have 8!

    In the old days we just flew American flags and that was enough. It meant we love America and Americans. No need to single out this or that group.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Buzz Mohawk

    A gay couple in my town put out a yard sign like that underneath an upside-down American flag. That was on Labor Day.

    They have since turned the US flag right-side-up. Maybe someone told them that a lot of reactionary conservatives use the upside-down, “distress” flag as a sign of dissatisfaction with what those gay guys’ own force is doing to our once great country.

    The gay yard sign has our town’s name on it, in some kind of faux solidarity. Those signs are here and there, in front of the same properties that once featured Black Lives Matter signs. The gay sign has the word “pride” next to our town’s name.

    I walk by their house a lot on my six-mile exercise (10 km.) Their dogs always bark at me. Recently I tried to wave at one of the gay guys there watering his grass. He acted as if I was invisible, and I felt bad. I don’t know why he acted that way, because gay guys used to like me, I mean really like me.

  116. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @SFG

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Yes:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/04/one-man-many-wives-big-problems/304829/

    When even some liberal outlets like The Atlantic are coming out against a certain form of sexual perversion, it's bad--very, very bad. Luckily, our Trumpist Supreme Court will probably smack this thing down when it gets there.

    Replies: @SFG

    That’s back in 2006, before the Great Awokening. Rauch was an early gay marriage supporter but has come out against woke lately.

  117. @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    NATO/ the US keeps “fighting” for whatever.

    Ukrainians are just cannon fodder. They would run away if they could. It’s like the Nisei in WWII. Know why the Nisei were so decorated? Because they stuck the all-Americans behind them, and they were given a choice of getting shot by Nazis or getting shot by Americans.

    • LOL: BB753
  118. @Anonymous
    @Woodsie


    A quick internet search reveals neither common law marriage nor palimony is recognized in NY State.
     
    Why is it always "a quick internet search"? Why not a leisurely or desultory internet search? Or a thorough internet search? Or a slow, plodding internet search?

    What the hell is wrong with people?

    Replies: @Joe S.Walker, @Woodsie

    that’s twice in one comment I’ve been called slipshod!

  119. @mmack
    Ah, where would America 🇺🇸 be without liberal, activist justices?

    Oh wait, it’s a TRIAL court judge?

    Yeah Junior, you’re too low level to get ideas above your station. Your job is to adjudicate using legal precedent.

    “Legal precedent means that a decision on a certain principle or question of law has already been made by a court of higher authority, such as an appeals or supreme court. Following such a decision, lower courts defer to, or adhere to, that prior decision in similar cases.”

    Has anybody in NY State said Polymory is legal? Has anyone in the US Supreme Court said Polymory is the law of the land? No? Then stop grasping at straws.

    Q for the Oh So Learned Judge here: If “straights” do it, is it legal too? Ponder a husband estranged from his wife who sets up shop with his lil’ blonde or brunette side piece. His wife won’t give him the satisfaction of a divorce. He keels over dead. Does the little chickie get the apartment? Imagine a wife estranged from her husband. He won’t divorce her since he’ll lose half of everything. She sets up shop with a hunky boy toy and after a few years passes away. Does the side piece get the apartment? What if you have an “Odd Couple” like set up where an estranged but not divorced husband gets an apartment and invites a platonic male friend to split the rent? Does the friend get to stay if the estranged husband dies?

    You see judge, that’s why judges like you read and abide by legal precedent. So you Stay In Your Lane.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Has anybody in NY State said Polymory is legal? Has anyone in the US Supreme Court said Polymory is the law of the land? No? Then stop grasping at straws. … You see judge, that’s why judges like you read and abide by legal precedent. So you Stay In Your Lane.

    Yes, of course you are correct … in theory. In Non-Clown World, the next level court would just say, “that’s not the law”, reverse it, and case closed. But we are in Clown World. In Clown World, some case will go to the Supreme Court, if not this one, then another similar one.

    That’s how Obergefell came about. No statute created gay marriage. Gay marriage lost every election in which it was mooted. So instead, a few homos got lawyers and whinged their way up the judicial hierarchy until low-IQ SCROTUS judge Anthony Kennedy gave them a 5-4 New Constitutional Right. And now it is infinite precedent: more unquestionable than anything actually written in the Constitution.

  120. @Unintended Consequence
    @Steve Sailer

    But a warmongering entity isn't any more a country than the US military. It is, in fact, a military. In the case of Ukraine military forces, they are an amalgamation of the militaries of the US, UK and several EU countries. Zelensky himself merely represents a political faction which has been provided with arms and training by foreign countries seeking to legitimize their aggression towards the Russian Federation. This use of the territory in a proxy war doesn't make it a real country!

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Yet the citizens of Ukraine are real, and will fight to the death for their sovereignty. Do they not have the right to self determination?

  121. @JimDandy
    @Steve Sailer

    Well, Putin certainly helped make Ukraine more like a real country by sucking the Donbass out of it.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Jack D

    Thanks for providing an example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    @Corvinus

    You don't know what that means. Your hasbara schooling failed you.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  122. @Recently Based
    @Steve Sailer

    My observation (existing but not extensive) is that the "sci-fi types" who are into it tend to be guys that have a real problem getting laid due to some combination of fatness and social awkwardness and are prepared to accept sharing a (generally pretty heinous-looking) chick to full-on celibacy.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Good to know you’re like Sheldon Cooper.

    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @Corvinus

    I am quite unlike Sheldon Cooper, actually.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  123. Thanks for showing the world you have absolutely no idea what that means. Seriously, thank you. Laughter is an instant vacation.

    Here–this is a place that values high I.Q.s, right?

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/blue-checks-diplomats-bots-go-ballistic-over-elon-musks-proposed-russia-ukraine-peace

    • Replies: @Rob
    @JimDandy

    How about:

    1) Russian troops withdraw to Russia.
    2) Ukraine joins NATO and (maybe) the EU
    3) Putin stands trial in The Hague for war crimes
    4) Ethnic Russians in Ukraine who would like to be citizens of the Russian state get relocation allowances (in roubles) from Russia to move there.
    5) Russian control of Crimea is internationally recognized with an assured water supply.

    I think there’s a good chance Putin will not see justice, so except for point 3, this is a much more realistic post-war outcome. Moving irredentist ethnic Russians out of Ukraine is not ethnic cleansing. I would not force ethnic Russians to leave, but one-people nations are healthier. If some ethnic Russians in Donbas would like to remain, but their neighbors hate them for collaborating, so they are forced out? Well, getting along with one’s neighbors is important. Ethnically cleansing Eastern Europe of Germans is a good precedent, though I would like it to happen peacefully, without much bloodshed.

    Ethnic Russians who are under 18 (or whatever is the age of majority in Ukraine would have x years after their eighteenth birthday to relocate.

    Russia keeping territory from this war? that’s a terrible precedent. Pretty sure we won’t let that happen. We’ve had peace for a long time. War was awful. They take part of Ukraine today, then they're done? Putin’s speech about the unity of the Russian and Ukrainian people at the start of his war was not about ethnic Russians in Ukraine, it was about Ukrainians. Maybe Crimea should have a referendum about re-joining (EU member) Ukraine or staying under Russian control? If you want them in Donbas, it is only fair. Heck, give Russian provinces that border Ukraine the choice to stay Russian or join the winning team.

    I realize I don’t get a vote on this, and no one much cares about my opinion, but I don’t think anyone who does get a vote on this is planning on letting Russia keep any of Ukraine or even leaving Putin in power.

    I wonder if we’re arming guerilla/ethnic mafia in Russia? Or buttering up his bodyguards with, “would you like to lke $50 million and a home in Zurich?” Destabilizing Russia is pretty much what the CIA was created for, so we must have both a hot young MTV-friendly and a corrupt oligarch picked out to be Peesident of Russia?

    Replies: @John Johnson

  124. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    Thanks for the inside dope.

    I know there isn’t a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.)

    One way or another, polygamy will reach the US Supreme Court, if not from this case, then from another one. If the Dems haven’t packed the Court by then, we might hope for something like the following:

    The Justices agree with New York judge Bacdayan that Roberts was correct that inserting the word “two” into Obergefell was arbitrary, and therefore … Obergefell is overturned. But universal polygamy (anyone and everyone can be married to anyone and everyone) would render marriage into amorphous meaninglessness, so Baker v. Nelson (which Obergefell had overturned) becomes controlling precedent once again: states can do what they want.

    Based Black Judge Thomas has already laid the groundwork for this in Dobbs, when he noted that “substantive due process” (upon which almost every leftwing legal revolution was built) is fake law.

    My own preference would be that the Feds just get out of the marriage game entirely, since very time they touch it, they make it worse. So if the Supremes say flatly that marriage is State business, not Federal business, that would be the best case scenario.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Almost Missouri

    Feds out can't happen. Too much interstate activity associated with Marriage.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @SFG
    @Almost Missouri

    Wasn’t the problem that states have to give full faith and credit to the acts of other states?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  125. Polygamy – what’s the big deal. We’ve had it for ages, except it was called promiscuity. Also, serial monogamy is a form of polygamy.

  126. Why not just base it in the “Sweet Mystery of Life” clause of the Constitution?

    • LOL: AnotherDad
  127. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    Lol, uh, thanks?

    Don’t think you need to spend that much time on Reddit to discern the obvious failure modes here though, and potentially the hidden driver of this.

    There’s a guy who comments here sometimes that writes extensive and detailed book reviews, Contemporary Heretic. He’s a bit kooky on some things (MGTOW I think), but I remember one article where he talks about our society’s bizarre elite behavior where the more successful you are the fewer kids you have (not that simple but very weird that more wealth rarely leads too more progeny).

    IIRC he believes this state is due to our ideological fixation on equality, and so the big man getting more pussy makes us really uncomfortable. His big example was everybody freaking out about Slick Willy and a chubby intern. But if polyamory is normalized, we’ll end up with a sizable social blast radius of hopeless unhappy people whose tough lot is worsened by bad advice from society, with a small, quiet minority of men with the means to handle a few households at once doing quite well. Parallels to the trannie situation as described by our host.

  128. @Dennis Dale
    Another Dad:

    You're right that Putin is not our champion. But the pro-Ukraine frenzy, which has swept up many beyond the War Party, won't allow indifference to Putin. Because it's manipulative propaganda.

    People don't understand the enormity of our blowing up Nordstream. It's already shattered whatever trust we had with Europe, and as an act of war against Russia it might be a worse blow to Germany.

    The thing is Putin's Russia is a front, Germany is a front and we "MAGA Republicans" are a front in a global war.

    Our war in Ukraine is a neocon war seeking regime change in Russia.

    The dismantling of the German economy now comes like Morgenthau's plan to de-industrialize the country going into belated implementation. Competition from German industry drove its increasingly hostile relations with France and the UK that brought us WWI and eventually WWII. This is the third act and the Krauts are expected to die.

    What we did was vote Trump and not go to see that new gay rom-com.

    I don't have strong feelings one way or the other regarding Putin. But he's not the bully. We are.

    Replies: @Jack D

    People don’t understand the enormity of our blowing up Nordstream

    Oh, I think that they do, but this is a fact not in evidence. You are getting way ahead of yourself. It would also be an enormity if the US assassinated the former Prime Minister of Japan. I could spin all sorts of scenarios about how this would shatter Japanese trust in America and so on.

    But first I would have to show, by clear and convincing evidence and not just a bunch of hand waving, that the US in fact assassinated the Japanese PM. First PROVE (really PROVE) that this was a US action and then we can discuss what follows from that.

  129. @JimDandy
    @Steve Sailer

    Well, Putin certainly helped make Ukraine more like a real country by sucking the Donbass out of it.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Jack D

    Not to mention Crimea. By successively chopping off bits of Ukraine, not only did Putin take those Ukrainian citizens most sympathetic to Russia off of the Ukrainian voter rolls but he made the remaining ones inside of what was left of Ukraine a lot less sympathetic to Russia.

    As of today, a record 83% of Ukrainians wish to join NATO (frankly I’m surprised its not higher, but this is a real poll, not some Russian “referendum” where the pro-Russia side gets 99% – in any real poll or election not even apple pie and motherhood get 99% yes votes).

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/record-83-ukrainians-want-nato-membership-poll-2022-10-03/

    In 2012, before Putin started biting off pieces of their country, support for NATO membership in Ukraine was 28%. Heckuva a job, Puty.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    @Jack D

    Yes, thanks for mentioning Crimea! Just like Elon!

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/blue-checks-diplomats-bots-go-ballistic-over-elon-musks-proposed-russia-ukraine-peace

  130. @Jack D
    @JimDandy

    Not to mention Crimea. By successively chopping off bits of Ukraine, not only did Putin take those Ukrainian citizens most sympathetic to Russia off of the Ukrainian voter rolls but he made the remaining ones inside of what was left of Ukraine a lot less sympathetic to Russia.

    As of today, a record 83% of Ukrainians wish to join NATO (frankly I'm surprised its not higher, but this is a real poll, not some Russian "referendum" where the pro-Russia side gets 99% - in any real poll or election not even apple pie and motherhood get 99% yes votes).

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/record-83-ukrainians-want-nato-membership-poll-2022-10-03/

    In 2012, before Putin started biting off pieces of their country, support for NATO membership in Ukraine was 28%. Heckuva a job, Puty.

    Replies: @JimDandy

  131. @Daniel H
    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It's all connected. You can't be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered... and root for Zelensky/Biden. It's all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can't have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bardon Kaldian, @Anon, @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @John Johnson

    for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered

    First of all, when Putin says “Christian” he means “Eastern Orthodox” which is a completely different kind of Christian, one that has existed more or less in constant opposition to Western Christianity (on one of the crusades, the Crusaders sacked Byzantium – they did more lasting damage to it than they did to the Moslems) and which has an alien notion of the relationship between church and state, worshipers and the church and so on.

    2nd, Putin is the head of a multi-cultural country – in his annexation speech he was careful to say (lying as usual) that Russia resisted Western colonialism by have ” a strong centralized state in Russia, which developed and strengthened itself on the great moral values ​​of Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism.” So even Putin doesn’t claim to be fighting on behalf of Christianity. Assuming the very best about him, he is fighting for the interest of Russia, not your interests. He wouldn’t hesitate to put a bullet between your ears if he thought that you were standing in the way of RUSSIAN greatness.

    3rd, if you are looking for cultured and ordered, Russia is the LAST place you should be looking. Russia has an alcohol problem that makes our drug problems look like amateur hour by comparison.

    If you think that Putin is your champion you are sorely, sorely mistaken. Go find another champion because Putin ain’t it.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Jack D

    Whatever their other deficits, the Russians have produced more than their fair share of culture. And I don’t think historical hostility between Orthodox Christianity and Catholicism is all that relevant-the Fourth Crusade was a thousand years ago.

    I do agree that Putin is basically only interested in his own power and doesn’t really care about white Americans- the whole thing is just another excuse to foment division in a major geopolitical rival.

    And the Russians are drunk, but we’re fat. So, you know, I’m not going on about the mote in their eye.

    Replies: @Jack D

  132. @Jack D
    @Daniel H


    for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered
     
    First of all, when Putin says "Christian" he means "Eastern Orthodox" which is a completely different kind of Christian, one that has existed more or less in constant opposition to Western Christianity (on one of the crusades, the Crusaders sacked Byzantium - they did more lasting damage to it than they did to the Moslems) and which has an alien notion of the relationship between church and state, worshipers and the church and so on.

    2nd, Putin is the head of a multi-cultural country - in his annexation speech he was careful to say (lying as usual) that Russia resisted Western colonialism by have " a strong centralized state in Russia, which developed and strengthened itself on the great moral values ​​of Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism." So even Putin doesn't claim to be fighting on behalf of Christianity. Assuming the very best about him, he is fighting for the interest of Russia, not your interests. He wouldn't hesitate to put a bullet between your ears if he thought that you were standing in the way of RUSSIAN greatness.

    3rd, if you are looking for cultured and ordered, Russia is the LAST place you should be looking. Russia has an alcohol problem that makes our drug problems look like amateur hour by comparison.


    If you think that Putin is your champion you are sorely, sorely mistaken. Go find another champion because Putin ain't it.

    Replies: @SFG

    Whatever their other deficits, the Russians have produced more than their fair share of culture. And I don’t think historical hostility between Orthodox Christianity and Catholicism is all that relevant-the Fourth Crusade was a thousand years ago.

    I do agree that Putin is basically only interested in his own power and doesn’t really care about white Americans- the whole thing is just another excuse to foment division in a major geopolitical rival.

    And the Russians are drunk, but we’re fat. So, you know, I’m not going on about the mote in their eye.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @SFG

    Russians have produced some great music and literature but they also have produced a lot of damage. At best, you could say that they are no worse than any other people but neither are they really better the way Putin maintains - that they are somehow the light bearers in a world of Satanic darkness. I can (almost) understand Russians buying into this but it mystifies me why any American, even a right-wing type, would buy into this.

    Sure, Putin hates some of the same things that you hate (or at least pretends to) but that's not the complete picture. He views American civilization (even your preferred vision of it) as standing in the way of Russian civilization. His preferred allies are countries like N. Korea and Iran - he is most comfortable in the company of his fellow dictators.

    Replies: @SFG

  133. @Daniel H
    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It's all connected. You can't be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered... and root for Zelensky/Biden. It's all connected. You can have total GloboHomo or a triumphant Russian. You can't have both.

    So, until you get with the program of full-tilt Slava Russia, spare the rest of us your snarky comments on quotidian American bullsh*t. They do no good.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bardon Kaldian, @Anon, @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @John Johnson

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don’t discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin’s weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @John Johnson

    Globohomo loses its fight to tell Russia, China, Iran, etc, how to run their countries. The Eastern economies thrive without Globohomo investment. Globohomo only has the West to dominate. Western nations wisely choose nationalism. They also choose trade and positive relationships with sovereign (not controlled by NATO) nations of the East. Globohomo no longer functions as the middleman between nations and their trade partners/allies. Losing relevance, Globohomo ceases to exist.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    , @Daniel H
    @John Johnson


    Would you describe that as a Christian country?
     
    You don't understand Russia, you don't understand Christianity (Protestantism is not Christianity. It's like Talmudism, just a bunch of egotistical casuistry.). With all that ails her, Russia, today, is more Christian than America has ever been.
    , @Daniel H
    @John Johnson


    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.
     
    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    All you dammed fools. All you can see is $$$$$. You are blinded by GloboHomo bling.

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    , @Carroll price
    @John Johnson

    No form of government is perfect, but with the "freedom" thing working only in all-white, Christian societies, what Putin has to offer beats the hell out of the homo state we have.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    , @Anon
    @John Johnson

    1) Russia is a Christian country, minorities notwithstanding.
    2) Russian government has a great narrative to battle against predominantly LGTB values.
    3) Russia provides balance-of-power against American Empire. It would provide more if, while remaining Christian, it allied with Germany to balance both US & China.

    The world is better off WITHOUT an atheistic-LGTB world hegemon. Right now, that threat comes from USA, unfortunately.

    , @RadicalCenter
    @John Johnson

    Utterly wrong about private gun ownership in Russia. Lying.

    Replies: @John Johnson

  134. @Redneck farmer
    I suspect the judge's spouse won't allow her to take another spouse while still married.

    Replies: @SFG, @RadicalCenter

    Sure she will.

  135. @Hypnotoad666

    Here, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Romano, and Mr. O’Neill had a relationship to one another. There was knowledge of all persons about the others and, at least, passive consent, even if they did not all like each other.

     

    WTF. This opinion makes no sense on any level. It used to be "Marriage is Marriage," then it was "Love is Love." But now it also turns out that "Hate is Hate." And they are all just different ways to have a "relationship." And all "relationships" are equivalent to legal marriage, because otherwise the majority would be determining the law, and nothing threatens democracy like majority rule.

    Next up, "indifference" as a form of legally binding "relationship." Why should people you've never met be excluded from getting half your stuff as community property? That's just more majority rule B.S.

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix, @Kim

    Can’t see much “…and forsake all others” going on here.

  136. @Known Fact
    I saw a long and well produced TV ad Saturday for an HIV drug, and for several minutes the viewer is treated to shots of good-looking young gay people of various skin complexions flirting, canoodling and eyeing each other with clear intent. A big juicy kiss finally wraps it all up.

    The whole thing was far more overtly erotic than any "hetero" ad I can think of, and it ran mid-afternoon during a college football game, certainly not past the kiddies' bedtime. (My Penguin and Pirate feeds mercifully skip the ad breaks, but NCAA sportsball is a minefield of multi-racial and pansexual malarkey)

    Replies: @Kim, @Mike_from_SGV

    They ran the HIV drugs ad during the football bcs only fags watch sports.

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    @Kim

    That's true, I'm basically there for all the hugging and butt-patting. Oh and John Milner rearranging himself after every pitch

  137. @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

    Globohomo loses its fight to tell Russia, China, Iran, etc, how to run their countries. The Eastern economies thrive without Globohomo investment. Globohomo only has the West to dominate. Western nations wisely choose nationalism. They also choose trade and positive relationships with sovereign (not controlled by NATO) nations of the East. Globohomo no longer functions as the middleman between nations and their trade partners/allies. Losing relevance, Globohomo ceases to exist.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Unintended Consequence

    Globohomo loses its fight to tell Russia, China, Iran, etc, how to run their countries.

    It's funny you say that because Ukraine was actually on the globalist sh-tlist for not taking Syrian refugees and tolerating Azov.

    Ukraine, Hungary and Poland in fact were depicted as "Far-right" for not opening their borders.

    Their president was only highlighted as Jewish after the war began.

    If you would like I can dig up MSM articles where they criticize Ukraine for not bowing to globalist ideals on immigration.

    Russia has over 100 ethnic groups and the largest Muslim population in Europe.

    Putin bans the discussion of race and government criticism will get a knock on the door. Abortion is legal and Russian Whites have been in population decline for over a decade. Free association isn't allowed the Big Brother can monitor all your activities.

    How is that not an extreme Slavic version of globalism?

    If Ukraine had lost the battle of Kiev and become another Belarus that wouldn't change what you call Globohomo. Ukrainians would lose their freedom and the Western establishment would be the same.

  138. @Kim
    @Known Fact

    They ran the HIV drugs ad during the football bcs only fags watch sports.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    That’s true, I’m basically there for all the hugging and butt-patting. Oh and John Milner rearranging himself after every pitch

  139. @Jack D
    @Dennis Dale

    The Soviets fought the Nazis with considerable American help. Lend-Lease was enormous - thousands upon thousands of trucks and planes and so on. Does this mean that they were "fake" also?

    BTW, the Ukrainians joke that there is a Russian Lend-Lease now - their largest supplier is not NATO but the Russians who are leaving behind vast troves of equipment and ammo when they flee.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    The Soviets fought the Nazis with considerable American help. Lend-Lease was enormous – thousands upon thousands of trucks and planes and so on. Does this mean that they were “fake” also?

    No, just our neutrality. Which is why we were attacked.

  140. Slippery slope isn’t a fallacy!

    • Replies: @Dutch Boy
    @SOL

    Who says A, must say B.

  141. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    Nice run down SFG.

    But the bottom line here is guys may temporarily put up with nonsense for sex. But there is zero stability there.

    When it comes to the actual function of marriage–raising the next generation–polyamory with two dudes involved doesn’t work at all.

    Polygamy does work all over the world. Women will share a guy … if he’s–relative to other options–a big swinging dick with resources. But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he’s got … or take some from somebody else.

    There’s a reason every actual civilization that accomplishes anything settles into monogamy. That’s how you create a situation where the dudes can trust each other enough to stop fighting and start working … allowing the children to be raised with more resources, and the society to have a surplus allowing it to out compete–and maybe conquer–less productive societies.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    @AnotherDad


    But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he’s got … or take some from somebody else.
     
    Indeed. The math doesn't work. If the average married man has three wives, then 2/3 of the men must have zero wives. So the majority of the male population is always alienated, aggrieved, and potentially violent. Polygamy therefore requires a way to export or exile all these excess men -- possibly by engaging in continuous wars that kill them off.

    But then the society loses the productive labor of all those surplus men, so it has to make the poly-wives do all the work. It's like a lion pride: the one alpha male drives out the other males and the females do all the hunting for him. Nice work if you can get it for the alpha, but not very sustainable as a human model.

    Replies: @SFG, @Anon

  142. There’s a Pilipina judge in New York? What next? Aren’t the Philippines the only country left in the world that doesn’t allow divorce under any circumstances?

    …it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not.

    We went from marriage with one husband to marriages with two. This is a 100% increase. Adding a third would only increase the number by 50%, a fourth by 33.3%

    This is a trivial issue when only one sex is involved. It is very serious if both are. In other words, the “orientations” are not at all equal. Not in any way important to society.

    Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.

    True, but this has always been a clumsy turn of phrase, like “rent-seeking”, which is only marginally connected to rent control. Blame whomever first came up with it.

    It’s a steep gradual learning curve!

  143. @Unintended Consequence
    @John Johnson

    Globohomo loses its fight to tell Russia, China, Iran, etc, how to run their countries. The Eastern economies thrive without Globohomo investment. Globohomo only has the West to dominate. Western nations wisely choose nationalism. They also choose trade and positive relationships with sovereign (not controlled by NATO) nations of the East. Globohomo no longer functions as the middleman between nations and their trade partners/allies. Losing relevance, Globohomo ceases to exist.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    Globohomo loses its fight to tell Russia, China, Iran, etc, how to run their countries.

    It’s funny you say that because Ukraine was actually on the globalist sh-tlist for not taking Syrian refugees and tolerating Azov.

    Ukraine, Hungary and Poland in fact were depicted as “Far-right” for not opening their borders.

    Their president was only highlighted as Jewish after the war began.

    If you would like I can dig up MSM articles where they criticize Ukraine for not bowing to globalist ideals on immigration.

    Russia has over 100 ethnic groups and the largest Muslim population in Europe.

    Putin bans the discussion of race and government criticism will get a knock on the door. Abortion is legal and Russian Whites have been in population decline for over a decade. Free association isn’t allowed the Big Brother can monitor all your activities.

    How is that not an extreme Slavic version of globalism?

    If Ukraine had lost the battle of Kiev and become another Belarus that wouldn’t change what you call Globohomo. Ukrainians would lose their freedom and the Western establishment would be the same.

  144. @Steve Sailer
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Sci-fi types who were born missing the jealousy gene like Heinlein tend to be into it.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Recently Based, @Jay Fink

    I think men who aren’t jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    • Disagree: JimDandy
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Jay Fink

    Heinlein struck most people who knew him in his prime as a superior man.

    , @SFG
    @Jay Fink

    Evolution doesn’t have levels-an organism adapts to its environment. A fish can live underwater, you can’t. The dinosaurs were adapted to their environment, then it changed.

    The cuck is probably more pleasant than the mate guarder, but if the mate guarder leaves more kids (as is likely), there will be more mate guarders around. Evolution makes no moral statements and does not select for pleasantries (unless they are the sort that get you in the pants of the opposite sex). If genes for reckless behavior get you laid, they get passed on-never mind how much long term misery they cause their carriers.

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Jay Fink

    There is no such thing. Heinlein was, from what I know about him, an individualist ready for fresh experience of life & ultimately an extrovert with developed "materialist" imagination.

    He was almost without subconscious, an anti-Freud; his lack of jealousy was the result of his incapability or complete uniterestedness to form "deep" emotional relations (that he was childless seems perfectly natural & reasonable); his low level of introspection was conductive to his type of writing; his was an "engineer's" type of writing, while Lem's was that of "scientist philosopher's" mode of sci fi creation; Heinlein's lack of jealousy is a sign he was not capable of experiencing authentic & deep love that transforms the "soul".

    Astrologically-psychologically speaking, Heinlein was a typical aquarius.

    , @SFG
    @Jay Fink

    As an aside: you seem to have swallowed a lot of the leftist criticisms of masculinity, and indeed sound a lot like me before reading PUA blogs.

    I would argue that the ‘gentlemanly’ method of deferring to women at every step you have been taught, where every erotic thought is evil, is unattractive and ultimately self-destructive. This was taught to you by people who hate you and want you to fail-all the stuff about the ‘male gaze’ and so on was ultimately cooked up by lesbians wishing to castrate their competition on college campuses (largely a complete campaign at this point). I suggest reading the manosphere-Return of Kings is still up. If that’s too much, you can try Bronze Age Mindset, the guy’s writing style is awful but he makes a lot of good points. Ignore the antisemitism and monarchy-these guys are weird politically, what can I say. They’re still right about the matriarchy. Jordan Peterson has more of a Christian framework but is on the right track.

    Say what you have to to survive-perhaps, like me, you are in a hostile environment at the moment. But, nothing more masculine than surviving in a hostile environment. ;) Pretend you are in a spy movie if necessary. Don’t go full Andrew Tate and get yourself in legal trouble. But remember that men hate feminists, and women think they’re weak. Why join a movement that considers you inferior?

    You’ve swallowed a lot of BS, but that’s OK-they’re forcing it down our throats. Exercise, don’t be ashamed of who you are, and never trust a leftist. They see you as a white man, and they hate you for it.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    , @Brutusale
    @Jay Fink

    As long as you define the universe as mate guarders and cucks, you're going to have problems.

    Is there any amount of jealousy you'd consider appropriate?

  145. @AnotherDad
    @SFG

    Nice run down SFG.

    But the bottom line here is guys may temporarily put up with nonsense for sex. But there is zero stability there.

    When it comes to the actual function of marriage--raising the next generation--polyamory with two dudes involved doesn't work at all.

    Polygamy does work all over the world. Women will share a guy ... if he's--relative to other options--a big swinging dick with resources. But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he's got ... or take some from somebody else.

    There's a reason every actual civilization that accomplishes anything settles into monogamy. That's how you create a situation where the dudes can trust each other enough to stop fighting and start working ... allowing the children to be raised with more resources, and the society to have a surplus allowing it to out compete--and maybe conquer--less productive societies.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he’s got … or take some from somebody else.

    Indeed. The math doesn’t work. If the average married man has three wives, then 2/3 of the men must have zero wives. So the majority of the male population is always alienated, aggrieved, and potentially violent. Polygamy therefore requires a way to export or exile all these excess men — possibly by engaging in continuous wars that kill them off.

    But then the society loses the productive labor of all those surplus men, so it has to make the poly-wives do all the work. It’s like a lion pride: the one alpha male drives out the other males and the females do all the hunting for him. Nice work if you can get it for the alpha, but not very sustainable as a human model.

    • Agree: AnotherDad, SFG
    • Replies: @SFG
    @Hypnotoad666

    Well, it’s sustainable, and probably was normal for a lot of the human past. It’s not sustainable as the sort of industrial society most people would like to live in.

    , @Anon
    @Hypnotoad666

    On top of that, polygamy necessarily entails sodomy + prostitution (for 2/3 deprived men).

  146. @Jay Fink
    @Steve Sailer

    I think men who aren't jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @SFG, @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Brutusale

    Heinlein struck most people who knew him in his prime as a superior man.

    • Thanks: Jay Fink
  147. Some dating relationships are open, but marriage normally includes the understanding that it is between two people.

    Dating can be open because there is no long-term commitment. In fact it often serves as the way to try things out so as to eventually find a mate. There can be an amorphous boundary that even changes as the dating relationship changes.

    I always thought it was men who typically want to wander, but I’m reading here about polyamorous women and the associated concerns of insecure men.

    In communication theory there is the idea that humans form dyads, like molecules that can only comprise two atoms. Three people is known as a dyad plus one, and there is always at any given time one person outside whichever dyad is communicating.

    Marriage can only exist between two people, because it is a full-time bond. The third entity is the relationship itself, the molecule if you will.

    But daing in an open relationship can be fun, and usually it is the guy who opens it.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Yes, and he often doesn’t like the results.

    If you’re doing the perma-bachelor lifestyle, sure, go ahead. I get the fear of marriage these days-I have it myself. But I don’t evangelize, because it’s one of these situations where if everyone did it things would collapse. Morally I should probably join a mens rights movement, but that would end my current employment. So I live frugally and hoard. I do not see a good solution.

    , @JimDandy
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I think unipolyamorous relationships--wherein the man can fuck anything that moves, but all the females are monogamous with him--are the most fun.

    Replies: @Corvinus

  148. @Jay Fink
    @Steve Sailer

    I think men who aren't jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @SFG, @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Brutusale

    Evolution doesn’t have levels-an organism adapts to its environment. A fish can live underwater, you can’t. The dinosaurs were adapted to their environment, then it changed.

    The cuck is probably more pleasant than the mate guarder, but if the mate guarder leaves more kids (as is likely), there will be more mate guarders around. Evolution makes no moral statements and does not select for pleasantries (unless they are the sort that get you in the pants of the opposite sex). If genes for reckless behavior get you laid, they get passed on-never mind how much long term misery they cause their carriers.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  149. @Hypnotoad666
    @AnotherDad


    But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he’s got … or take some from somebody else.
     
    Indeed. The math doesn't work. If the average married man has three wives, then 2/3 of the men must have zero wives. So the majority of the male population is always alienated, aggrieved, and potentially violent. Polygamy therefore requires a way to export or exile all these excess men -- possibly by engaging in continuous wars that kill them off.

    But then the society loses the productive labor of all those surplus men, so it has to make the poly-wives do all the work. It's like a lion pride: the one alpha male drives out the other males and the females do all the hunting for him. Nice work if you can get it for the alpha, but not very sustainable as a human model.

    Replies: @SFG, @Anon

    Well, it’s sustainable, and probably was normal for a lot of the human past. It’s not sustainable as the sort of industrial society most people would like to live in.

  150. @Buzz Mohawk
    Some dating relationships are open, but marriage normally includes the understanding that it is between two people.

    Dating can be open because there is no long-term commitment. In fact it often serves as the way to try things out so as to eventually find a mate. There can be an amorphous boundary that even changes as the dating relationship changes.

    I always thought it was men who typically want to wander, but I'm reading here about polyamorous women and the associated concerns of insecure men.

    In communication theory there is the idea that humans form dyads, like molecules that can only comprise two atoms. Three people is known as a dyad plus one, and there is always at any given time one person outside whichever dyad is communicating.

    Marriage can only exist between two people, because it is a full-time bond. The third entity is the relationship itself, the molecule if you will.

    But daing in an open relationship can be fun, and usually it is the guy who opens it.

    Replies: @SFG, @JimDandy

    Yes, and he often doesn’t like the results.

    If you’re doing the perma-bachelor lifestyle, sure, go ahead. I get the fear of marriage these days-I have it myself. But I don’t evangelize, because it’s one of these situations where if everyone did it things would collapse. Morally I should probably join a mens rights movement, but that would end my current employment. So I live frugally and hoard. I do not see a good solution.

  151. @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

    Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    You don’t understand Russia, you don’t understand Christianity (Protestantism is not Christianity. It’s like Talmudism, just a bunch of egotistical casuistry.). With all that ails her, Russia, today, is more Christian than America has ever been.

    • Agree: BB753
  152. @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.

    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    All you dammed fools. All you can see is $$$$$. You are blinded by GloboHomo bling.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Daniel H


    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.
     
    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    That doesn't answer the question.

    You didn't explain how that would change anything for us. Ukraine becomes another puppet state and the status quo is the same for everyone else. Thousands of Whites are dead and everything you disklike about the Western establishment remains.

    What if the left in the US gained a supermajority and ended free speech on the internet and made it illegal to discuss race? Would you be fine with that? If not then why it is acceptable for Russia and Belarus to have government mandated speech laws and a censored internet?

    , @Jack D
    @Daniel H


    Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.
     
    Really? You'd rather live in Minsk than in Paris or London or Rome? I call bullshit.

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

    , @Johann Ricke
    @Daniel H


    Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.
     
    I'm gonna agree with you that Belarus is a superior state, but only relative to North Korea, Zimbabwe or Venezuela.
  153. @Jay Fink
    @Steve Sailer

    I think men who aren't jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @SFG, @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Brutusale

    There is no such thing. Heinlein was, from what I know about him, an individualist ready for fresh experience of life & ultimately an extrovert with developed “materialist” imagination.

    He was almost without subconscious, an anti-Freud; his lack of jealousy was the result of his incapability or complete uniterestedness to form “deep” emotional relations (that he was childless seems perfectly natural & reasonable); his low level of introspection was conductive to his type of writing; his was an “engineer’s” type of writing, while Lem’s was that of “scientist philosopher’s” mode of sci fi creation; Heinlein’s lack of jealousy is a sign he was not capable of experiencing authentic & deep love that transforms the “soul”.

    Astrologically-psychologically speaking, Heinlein was a typical aquarius.

  154. @AnotherDad
    @Daniel H


    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered…
     
    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.

    No, saving us requires the obvious--nationalism, attacking and defeating minoritarianism, defending borders, stopping the immivasion, restoring a healthy traditional majoritiarian culture-- improving fertility, eugenic fertility ... work. A lot of work.

    Putin's obsession with "the Great Rus", 19th century Russian imperialism. and 1914 style "we'll give those bastards a lesson" aggression has ... uh ... um ... yeah, that's right nothing to do with it. The world needs Russian imperialism the same way it needs American or Chinese or anyone else's imperialism ... not at all.

    In fact, not only is Putin's War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin's War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.
    and
    B) trashed the opportunity Putin had to aid nationalist-traditionists like Orban, be an alternative peacefully, friendly, well-run nationalist, traditionalist power that served as a counterweight to EU bullying. Demonstrate "better"--by having a secure border, tossing out illegals from the 'stans, (ideally cutting the Chechens loose/out), working assiduously on Russian "affordable family formation" and fertility turnaround so it's a not a half muzzie joint (like England and France) in 100 years.

    But ... Putin--sadly like a lot of "leaders"--is obsessed with being a big swinging dick and not with making Russia great for Russians.

    But hey ... I hear he needs bodies. Go sign up!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @anonymous

    AnotherDad, like a few people here, knows that the MSM lie through their teeth about what’s happening in the US, but takes in everything they say on foreign affairs as gospel.

    You’d think the ‘power-mad dictator’ stuff would have got old by now, but people’s memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Nasser, Sukarno, Khomeini, Noriega, Saddam, Hugo Chavez, Gaddafi and Assad were all compared with Hitler in their time – their time often being just before the US attacked them, whether the attack was economic or military. It’s part of the regime change script – you have to prepare the ground at home first.

    It’s amazing how many people over here have a deep knowledge of Putin’s psychology garnered from press and TV over the years.

    One of the most impressive psyops has been the flip, in only a few years, from “Occupy Wall Street!” to “Black Lives Matter!”.

    But another equally impressive one has been the flip of what was the anti-war “left” movement, still pretty huge in 2003, to what’s basically a pro-war “left”movement now. If you read the Guardian’s commenters on Russia and Ukraine, they all sound just like AnotherDad, convinced that Putin’s psychological make up (of which they all have deep knowledge, garnered from many a news item and TV show) impels Russia ever onwards.

    “He must be stopped now, because he won’t stop at Ukraine”.

    In fact the main Russian conservative critique of Putin is of excessive caution and being overly legalistic when the Nuland coup of 2014 happened – that rather than stop at Crimea he should have taken the entire Donbass then, when the Donbass units of the Ukrainian army were in revolt against Kiev and when the non-Donbass units hadn’t had seven or eight years of NATO training and integration. At the time pretty much the whole of Donbass was under the control of the pro-Russian forces of the Ukrainian army. But he waited – in vain as it turned out – for Minsk 2 to be implemented and the Donbass to have self-determination. In hindsight a lot fewer Ukrainians would have died had he moved then.

    “He that will not when he may, when he will he shall have nay”

    None of us are “waiting for Russia to save us” – personalising it as “Putin” is another bit of the regime change playbook you’ve swallowed whole – but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?

    Russia’s not my country – I don’t want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia’s not a defeated and occupied country – it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it’s important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @YetAnotherAnon

    "...but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?"

    I wholeheartedly agree that the US is under occupation; the reality of it obscured by the numerous collaborators from the more native citizen population. Sailer is somewhat occupier adjacent as are many whose ancestors immigrated from continental Europe. Putin and Russia rebelling against Western globalist dominion militarily and economically will certainly weaken their influence. The several nations involved in the extensive Eastern economic integration in recent months have already established their political and economic independence from the West. This will be more obvious over the next few years. I am more than a little concerned, however, that we're edging ever closer to WW3.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Anonymous
    @YetAnotherAnon


    Russia’s not my country – I don’t want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia’s not a defeated and occupied country – it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it’s important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.
     
    Excellent concluding comment and excellent overall post. Thank you.
    , @Dube
    @YetAnotherAnon

    You’d think the ‘power-mad dictator’ stuff would have got old by now, but people’s memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Thanks. The deep knowledge of the dictator's psychology analysis is exciting but really just comic book fun. If we see it we can mitigate it. It goes along with taking movie stars too seriously.

  155. When I first heard of “polyamory” I asked the person who told me about, does that mean someone who has sex with a parrot? Maybe the great & eternal truth of Prophet Jo Smith’s original teaching has finally become manifest among the heathen Gentiles. The LDS leadership can now erase the revelation they conveniently received back when they wanted Utah to get the benefits of statehood. Nothing like a bevy of fourteen year old celestial brides and all that. The plural of “spouse” is “spice,” after all. Mitt Romney should be pleased; his ancestor Parley Pratt, one of Jo’s original Twelve, got a fatal case of lead poisoning from the irate nonbeliever whose wife he carried off for another such holy romp.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @Observator


    Parley Pratt, one of Jo’s original Twelve, got a fatal case of lead poisoning from the irate nonbeliever whose wife he carried off for another such holy romp.
     
    Me: Huh, poisoning is kinda intricate. Most dudes would have shot him… oh.
  156. @AnotherDad
    @Daniel H


    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered…
     
    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.

    No, saving us requires the obvious--nationalism, attacking and defeating minoritarianism, defending borders, stopping the immivasion, restoring a healthy traditional majoritiarian culture-- improving fertility, eugenic fertility ... work. A lot of work.

    Putin's obsession with "the Great Rus", 19th century Russian imperialism. and 1914 style "we'll give those bastards a lesson" aggression has ... uh ... um ... yeah, that's right nothing to do with it. The world needs Russian imperialism the same way it needs American or Chinese or anyone else's imperialism ... not at all.

    In fact, not only is Putin's War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin's War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.
    and
    B) trashed the opportunity Putin had to aid nationalist-traditionists like Orban, be an alternative peacefully, friendly, well-run nationalist, traditionalist power that served as a counterweight to EU bullying. Demonstrate "better"--by having a secure border, tossing out illegals from the 'stans, (ideally cutting the Chechens loose/out), working assiduously on Russian "affordable family formation" and fertility turnaround so it's a not a half muzzie joint (like England and France) in 100 years.

    But ... Putin--sadly like a lot of "leaders"--is obsessed with being a big swinging dick and not with making Russia great for Russians.

    But hey ... I hear he needs bodies. Go sign up!

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @anonymous

    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.

    Putin is more friendly to Western civilization and nationalism than the current rulers of the Western countries.

    In fact, not only is Putin’s War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin’s War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.

    It is America’s War. The war would have been over within weeks if the United States and its stooges in Europe weren’t financing it. Suddenly, the citizens of the most powerful countries in the world have no agency, eh?

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @anonymous

    Putin is more friendly to Western civilization and nationalism than the current rulers of the Western countries.

    He isn't as supportive of White guilt. Sure. But he is also fine with killing Whites by the thousands. So not exactly pro-White.

    Even if he isn't guilt ridden like Biden why does that mean you have to support his war against Ukraine? Why does that justify cheerleading someone that shells residential areas and locks away protestors?

    This is like saying you are picking AIDs instead of monkeypox. It's actually possible to oppose both.

    It's illegal in Russia to criticize the government. Why would you support imposing such a totalitarian state onto another country? Because you don't like the Western status quo? Well Ukraine doesn't like the Russian status quo. They don't want to be under the boot of Putin. They want to be able to criticize the government and use websites like this one.

    It is America’s War. The war would have been over within weeks if the United States and its stooges in Europe weren’t financing it.

    That's not true. Putin miscalculated the will of the Ukrainians. Most of the Kiev battles were fought with Soviet weapons. Even if they eventually captured Kiev it would have turned into partisan warfare. That leads to further repression which means executions and torture as the totalitarian state tries to terrorize the population into submitting.

    Replies: @HA

  157. @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    And Americans and Northern Europeans keep bringing into their countries massive amounts of foreigners. By your logic, that must therefore be in the best long-term interests of the natives and their homelands.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Anonymous

    I think the point (which I agree with) is that it’s hard to get excited about Putin as anti-Globohomo crusader when he’s firing missiles at your house. You are projecting domestic American politics into a war of imperialism versus nationalism, which is a pretty common story historically. The ‘based’ Catholic Poles are more afraid of Russia than Rachel Levine.

  158. @the one they call Desanex
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I saw a good western the other day starring two homos: Frontier Marshal, with Randolph Scott as Wyatt Earp and Cesar Romero as Doc Holliday.
    https://onceuponatimeinawestern.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/PROMO-Randolph-Scott-as-Wyatt-Earp-with-Cesar-Romero-as-Doc-Halliday-in-Frontier-Marshal-1939.jpg

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @duncsbaby

    Randolph Scott wasn’t gay. He was married twice and had two adopted kids. The only evidence for Scott being gay was he shared a house w/Cary Grant when they were both bachelors. No one said he was gay until both Cary and Randolph were dead and couldn’t defend themselves from the scurrilous accusation (which was started by gays).
    Now Cesar Romero on the other hand . . .

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @duncsbaby

    Randolph Scott wasn’t gay. He was married twice and had two adopted kids. The only evidence for Scott being gay was he shared a house w/Cary Grant when they were both bachelors.

    So he's just an actor that didn't have any kids of his own and needlessly shared a house with a man.

    Are you listening to yourself?

  159. Randolph Scott wasn’t gay.

  160. @Jay Fink
    @Steve Sailer

    I think men who aren't jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @SFG, @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Brutusale

    As an aside: you seem to have swallowed a lot of the leftist criticisms of masculinity, and indeed sound a lot like me before reading PUA blogs.

    I would argue that the ‘gentlemanly’ method of deferring to women at every step you have been taught, where every erotic thought is evil, is unattractive and ultimately self-destructive. This was taught to you by people who hate you and want you to fail-all the stuff about the ‘male gaze’ and so on was ultimately cooked up by lesbians wishing to castrate their competition on college campuses (largely a complete campaign at this point). I suggest reading the manosphere-Return of Kings is still up. If that’s too much, you can try Bronze Age Mindset, the guy’s writing style is awful but he makes a lot of good points. Ignore the antisemitism and monarchy-these guys are weird politically, what can I say. They’re still right about the matriarchy. Jordan Peterson has more of a Christian framework but is on the right track.

    Say what you have to to survive-perhaps, like me, you are in a hostile environment at the moment. But, nothing more masculine than surviving in a hostile environment. 😉 Pretend you are in a spy movie if necessary. Don’t go full Andrew Tate and get yourself in legal trouble. But remember that men hate feminists, and women think they’re weak. Why join a movement that considers you inferior?

    You’ve swallowed a lot of BS, but that’s OK-they’re forcing it down our throats. Exercise, don’t be ashamed of who you are, and never trust a leftist. They see you as a white man, and they hate you for it.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    @SFG

    Thanks I appreciate your concern but I have already read the PUA perspective and know what they think. Maybe it explains the dynamics behind jealousy but it hasn't changed my mind that jealous men are in a more primitive state. The irony is jealous men are by definition insecure while PUAs promote confidence, although I suppose they favor projecting confidence over having true inner confidence.

    I had a bad experience as a senior in high school that forever turned me against jealous men. I was at a party, mostly single high school kids but a couple attended. Everyone knew the girl and everytime she said hi to one of her male classmates or make innocent small talk the guy went crazy. He demanded the girl stop talking and she immediately shut her mouth on command. He would also give the guy she was talking to a mean look like he was going to kick his ass.

    This seemed so incredibly uncivilized to me. I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn't mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

  161. @Known Fact
    I saw a long and well produced TV ad Saturday for an HIV drug, and for several minutes the viewer is treated to shots of good-looking young gay people of various skin complexions flirting, canoodling and eyeing each other with clear intent. A big juicy kiss finally wraps it all up.

    The whole thing was far more overtly erotic than any "hetero" ad I can think of, and it ran mid-afternoon during a college football game, certainly not past the kiddies' bedtime. (My Penguin and Pirate feeds mercifully skip the ad breaks, but NCAA sportsball is a minefield of multi-racial and pansexual malarkey)

    Replies: @Kim, @Mike_from_SGV

    This is a big reason I no longer watch television. I don’t want to be made to see and hear moral twistedness, which is now injected everywhere, even sports.

    • Agree: Kylie
  162. @Whereismyhandle
    In go woke, go broke news: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/02/movies/bros-smile-box-office.html

    Bros,” the first gay romantic comedy from a major studio, arrived to an estimated $4.8 million in ticket sales in the United States and Canada, about 40 percent less than the low end of prerelease analyst expectations. Universal Pictures booked “Bros” onto 3,350 screens and spent an estimated $30 million to $40 million to promote it. “Bros,” starring Luke Macfarlane and Billy Eichner, who also co-wrote the script, cost roughly $22 million to make. It received mostly positive reviews.
    Yet it was a distant fourth at the weekend box office. “We’ll see where we go from here,” Jim Orr, Universal’s president of domestic distribution, said by phone on Sunday.


    The filmmaker went on a twitter rant and basically said everyone who doesn't buy a ticket to his mediocre movie is an evil homophobe. You see, goyim, you HAVE to see it because rolling stone gave it a good review. lol.

    You'd think a filmmaker would be too embarrassed to try to shame people into watching his movie but I guess not. (To be fair, old heterosexual blockbuster hand Ridley Scott said the kids these days were just too STUPID to buy tickets to his movie The Last Duel. So it was all their fault. Or something.)


    *Btw gay art film Brokeback Mountain made $200m at the box office 20 years ago. There aren't that many theaters in West Hollywood and the Castro, so what gives, Billy Eichner?


    From a non-white: you don't deserve, anything, Billy: https://youtu.be/fk3svL0GPWI?t=1157

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Mr. Anon, @Kylie, @Daniel H, @Jim Don Bob

    One of the commenters somewhere said the movie would have done ok if just 5% of the poofter population had turned out to see it. But it’s all the fault of the Deplorables he hates.

    I have not seen Brokedick Hill and I never will.

  163. @Almost Missouri
    @SFG

    Thanks for the inside dope.


    I know there isn’t a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.)
     
    One way or another, polygamy will reach the US Supreme Court, if not from this case, then from another one. If the Dems haven't packed the Court by then, we might hope for something like the following:

    The Justices agree with New York judge Bacdayan that Roberts was correct that inserting the word "two" into Obergefell was arbitrary, and therefore ... Obergefell is overturned. But universal polygamy (anyone and everyone can be married to anyone and everyone) would render marriage into amorphous meaninglessness, so Baker v. Nelson (which Obergefell had overturned) becomes controlling precedent once again: states can do what they want.

    Based Black Judge Thomas has already laid the groundwork for this in Dobbs, when he noted that "substantive due process" (upon which almost every leftwing legal revolution was built) is fake law.

    My own preference would be that the Feds just get out of the marriage game entirely, since very time they touch it, they make it worse. So if the Supremes say flatly that marriage is State business, not Federal business, that would be the best case scenario.

    Replies: @Bill Jones, @SFG

    Feds out can’t happen. Too much interstate activity associated with Marriage.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Bill Jones


    Feds out can’t happen.
     
    Sure it can. The US was founded without any Federal role in marriage whatsoever.

    Feds out won't happen, though, because Feds have never exited anything they weren't forced from.

    After a general Federal collapse though, the Feds may lose interest in policing the private lives of citizens. Indeed, they may find that even claiming to have citizens is a stretch.
  164. @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer


    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.
     
    And Americans and Northern Europeans keep bringing into their countries massive amounts of foreigners. By your logic, that must therefore be in the best long-term interests of the natives and their homelands.

    Replies: @SFG

    I think the point (which I agree with) is that it’s hard to get excited about Putin as anti-Globohomo crusader when he’s firing missiles at your house. You are projecting domestic American politics into a war of imperialism versus nationalism, which is a pretty common story historically. The ‘based’ Catholic Poles are more afraid of Russia than Rachel Levine.

  165. @Nicholas Stix
    @Hypnotoad666

    It’s much worse than that.

    Many years ago (20?), I read an essay by affirmative action novelist, Samuel Delany. Delany was grieving over lost “relationships.” He was writing of anonymous strangers whom he couldn’t even see clearly, with whom he’d had homosexual sex tens of thousands of times in dark porno theaters in Times Square, which had been demolished during the area’s Disneyfication. (Several times a day, every day, always with someone different, though one wonders how he would even know.) Delany insisted that every sexual act that he and an anonymous, unseeable man had had constituted “a relationship.”

    If Judge Karen May Bacdayan and law professor Eugene Volokh have their way, Delany’s abuse of language will become “the law of the land,” though I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Hypnotoad666, @Prester John

    “I’m not sure if the Samuel Delanys will appreciate every person he had sex with having a claim against his assets.”

    They won’t, and you can take it to the bank. Where the elevated bullshit rationalizations ends is where the real fun begins. Once stuff like this starts involving the transfer of moolah, comes the inevitable equivocation. Whether it’s race, sex, immigration etc., in the end (as my wife says) “it’s all about-money.”

  166. @Jimbo
    @International Jew

    No, the ideal solution would be to abolish New York City.

    Replies: @Prester John, @Carroll price

    Goldwater wanted to saw off Manhattan and let it float out to sea.

  167. @Almost Missouri
    @SFG

    Thanks for the inside dope.


    I know there isn’t a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.)
     
    One way or another, polygamy will reach the US Supreme Court, if not from this case, then from another one. If the Dems haven't packed the Court by then, we might hope for something like the following:

    The Justices agree with New York judge Bacdayan that Roberts was correct that inserting the word "two" into Obergefell was arbitrary, and therefore ... Obergefell is overturned. But universal polygamy (anyone and everyone can be married to anyone and everyone) would render marriage into amorphous meaninglessness, so Baker v. Nelson (which Obergefell had overturned) becomes controlling precedent once again: states can do what they want.

    Based Black Judge Thomas has already laid the groundwork for this in Dobbs, when he noted that "substantive due process" (upon which almost every leftwing legal revolution was built) is fake law.

    My own preference would be that the Feds just get out of the marriage game entirely, since very time they touch it, they make it worse. So if the Supremes say flatly that marriage is State business, not Federal business, that would be the best case scenario.

    Replies: @Bill Jones, @SFG

    Wasn’t the problem that states have to give full faith and credit to the acts of other states?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @SFG

    Yes, pro-homo states like Vermont were effectively exporting their gayness to other states via the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution. Baker v. Nelson, though, provided a defense, since non-gay states could refuse to recognize out-of-state gay "marriages". Obergefell overruled that.

  168. @SOL
    Slippery slope isn't a fallacy!

    Replies: @Dutch Boy

    Who says A, must say B.

  169. @SFG
    @Jack D

    Whatever their other deficits, the Russians have produced more than their fair share of culture. And I don’t think historical hostility between Orthodox Christianity and Catholicism is all that relevant-the Fourth Crusade was a thousand years ago.

    I do agree that Putin is basically only interested in his own power and doesn’t really care about white Americans- the whole thing is just another excuse to foment division in a major geopolitical rival.

    And the Russians are drunk, but we’re fat. So, you know, I’m not going on about the mote in their eye.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Russians have produced some great music and literature but they also have produced a lot of damage. At best, you could say that they are no worse than any other people but neither are they really better the way Putin maintains – that they are somehow the light bearers in a world of Satanic darkness. I can (almost) understand Russians buying into this but it mystifies me why any American, even a right-wing type, would buy into this.

    Sure, Putin hates some of the same things that you hate (or at least pretends to) but that’s not the complete picture. He views American civilization (even your preferred vision of it) as standing in the way of Russian civilization. His preferred allies are countries like N. Korea and Iran – he is most comfortable in the company of his fellow dictators.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Jack D

    I think he’d take whatever allies he can get. China still wants to trade with us sometimes so they’re not all in yet.

  170. @Jack D
    @SFG

    Russians have produced some great music and literature but they also have produced a lot of damage. At best, you could say that they are no worse than any other people but neither are they really better the way Putin maintains - that they are somehow the light bearers in a world of Satanic darkness. I can (almost) understand Russians buying into this but it mystifies me why any American, even a right-wing type, would buy into this.

    Sure, Putin hates some of the same things that you hate (or at least pretends to) but that's not the complete picture. He views American civilization (even your preferred vision of it) as standing in the way of Russian civilization. His preferred allies are countries like N. Korea and Iran - he is most comfortable in the company of his fellow dictators.

    Replies: @SFG

    I think he’d take whatever allies he can get. China still wants to trade with us sometimes so they’re not all in yet.

  171. @anonymous
    @AnotherDad

    Of all the stupid, random, missing-the-boat dead-ends commenters have tossed out, this Putin-will-save-us thing has to be among the absolute dumbest.
     Putin is more friendly to Western civilization and nationalism than the current rulers of the Western countries.


    In fact, not only is Putin’s War not aiding Europe or white people or Christian civilization, Putin’s War has both:
    A) reinforced the grubby deep staters across the West. Faced with some a*hole invading suddenly NATO is relevant and expanding, military spending surging, deep state apparatchiks in high cotton.
     
    It is America’s War. The war would have been over within weeks if the United States and its stooges in Europe weren’t financing it. Suddenly, the citizens of the most powerful countries in the world have no agency, eh?

    Replies: @John Johnson

    Putin is more friendly to Western civilization and nationalism than the current rulers of the Western countries.

    He isn’t as supportive of White guilt. Sure. But he is also fine with killing Whites by the thousands. So not exactly pro-White.

    Even if he isn’t guilt ridden like Biden why does that mean you have to support his war against Ukraine? Why does that justify cheerleading someone that shells residential areas and locks away protestors?

    This is like saying you are picking AIDs instead of monkeypox. It’s actually possible to oppose both.

    It’s illegal in Russia to criticize the government. Why would you support imposing such a totalitarian state onto another country? Because you don’t like the Western status quo? Well Ukraine doesn’t like the Russian status quo. They don’t want to be under the boot of Putin. They want to be able to criticize the government and use websites like this one.

    It is America’s War. The war would have been over within weeks if the United States and its stooges in Europe weren’t financing it.

    That’s not true. Putin miscalculated the will of the Ukrainians. Most of the Kiev battles were fought with Soviet weapons. Even if they eventually captured Kiev it would have turned into partisan warfare. That leads to further repression which means executions and torture as the totalitarian state tries to terrorize the population into submitting.

    • Replies: @HA
    @John Johnson

    "He isn’t as supportive of White guilt."

    I'm not so sure about that -- piling on with respect to white guilt is a longstanding Moscow tradition, though it's specifically limited to American white guilt.

    Check out how Russian state media covered Ferguson.

    Replies: @John Johnson

  172. @Daniel H
    @John Johnson


    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.
     
    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    All you dammed fools. All you can see is $$$$$. You are blinded by GloboHomo bling.

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.

    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    That doesn’t answer the question.

    You didn’t explain how that would change anything for us. Ukraine becomes another puppet state and the status quo is the same for everyone else. Thousands of Whites are dead and everything you disklike about the Western establishment remains.

    What if the left in the US gained a supermajority and ended free speech on the internet and made it illegal to discuss race? Would you be fine with that? If not then why it is acceptable for Russia and Belarus to have government mandated speech laws and a censored internet?

  173. @SFG
    @Jay Fink

    As an aside: you seem to have swallowed a lot of the leftist criticisms of masculinity, and indeed sound a lot like me before reading PUA blogs.

    I would argue that the ‘gentlemanly’ method of deferring to women at every step you have been taught, where every erotic thought is evil, is unattractive and ultimately self-destructive. This was taught to you by people who hate you and want you to fail-all the stuff about the ‘male gaze’ and so on was ultimately cooked up by lesbians wishing to castrate their competition on college campuses (largely a complete campaign at this point). I suggest reading the manosphere-Return of Kings is still up. If that’s too much, you can try Bronze Age Mindset, the guy’s writing style is awful but he makes a lot of good points. Ignore the antisemitism and monarchy-these guys are weird politically, what can I say. They’re still right about the matriarchy. Jordan Peterson has more of a Christian framework but is on the right track.

    Say what you have to to survive-perhaps, like me, you are in a hostile environment at the moment. But, nothing more masculine than surviving in a hostile environment. ;) Pretend you are in a spy movie if necessary. Don’t go full Andrew Tate and get yourself in legal trouble. But remember that men hate feminists, and women think they’re weak. Why join a movement that considers you inferior?

    You’ve swallowed a lot of BS, but that’s OK-they’re forcing it down our throats. Exercise, don’t be ashamed of who you are, and never trust a leftist. They see you as a white man, and they hate you for it.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    Thanks I appreciate your concern but I have already read the PUA perspective and know what they think. Maybe it explains the dynamics behind jealousy but it hasn’t changed my mind that jealous men are in a more primitive state. The irony is jealous men are by definition insecure while PUAs promote confidence, although I suppose they favor projecting confidence over having true inner confidence.

    I had a bad experience as a senior in high school that forever turned me against jealous men. I was at a party, mostly single high school kids but a couple attended. Everyone knew the girl and everytime she said hi to one of her male classmates or make innocent small talk the guy went crazy. He demanded the girl stop talking and she immediately shut her mouth on command. He would also give the guy she was talking to a mean look like he was going to kick his ass.

    This seemed so incredibly uncivilized to me. I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn’t mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jay Fink

    Hello, Jay,
    I agree with you completely about jealous men. They are weak and insecure and are most likely to turn out to be wife beaters, or at least verbal abusers, and in the worst cases murderers, sometimes besides just killing their wife also killing their children because they doubt they are really theirs. Terrible human beings.
    I read a study once that concluded that obsessive mate guarders had very poor quality sperm with limited ability to impregnate, whereas men who did not make much if any effort to mate guard had very high quality sperm that easily impregnated.
    As far as girls mistaking jealous machismo for confidence, I think it is more likely that once in the relationship and having discovered the true nature of the guy, they are afraid of him. A very dangerous time for a woman is when she is trying to break off a bad relationship. That's when she gets beaten to death. Of course, there are some women who are not afraid of their jealous mate, but are contemptuous of him and enjoy upsetting him by flirting with other men. But that's very risky behavior, too. The worm sometimes turns.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @John Johnson

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    @Jay Fink

    " I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn’t mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell."

    I know exactly where you're coming from, being a recovering nice guy myself, but the fact is he'd got her (and the repeating pattern sounds as if it was part of their joint games). In the immortal words of the great Heartiste, "chicks dig jerks".

    https://heartiste.org/2010/01/29/chicks-dig-jerks-a-series-3/

    , @Anonymous
    @Jay Fink

    Well, the guy was afraid you were going to take her. I assume you were bigger or richer than him?

  174. @Daniel H
    @John Johnson


    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.
     
    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    All you dammed fools. All you can see is $$$$$. You are blinded by GloboHomo bling.

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    Really? You’d rather live in Minsk than in Paris or London or Rome? I call bullshit.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @Jack D

    "Really? You’d rather live in Minsk than in Paris or London or Rome?"

    Paris and London no longer exist. A better way to phrase the issue would be, "You'd rather live in Minsk than in Poor Brown Hostile Ungrateful Rapey People Storage Area 17-B?"

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

  175. If you could stay your eviction until the case was resolved… you could remain in the apartment for years before all of the various parties and their attorneys have finally been served and agreed on a trial date.

  176. @Jimbo
    @International Jew

    No, the ideal solution would be to abolish New York City.

    Replies: @Prester John, @Carroll price

    With rumor having it that Putin has dispatched Belgorod to NY Harbor, the solution may be closer than you think.

  177. @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    Good to know you’re like Sheldon Cooper.

    Replies: @Recently Based

    I am quite unlike Sheldon Cooper, actually.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    You definitively fit the description of Sheldon. You’re fooling no one here.

  178. @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

    No form of government is perfect, but with the “freedom” thing working only in all-white, Christian societies, what Putin has to offer beats the hell out of the homo state we have.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Carroll price

    No form of government is perfect, but with the “freedom” thing working only in all-white, Christian societies, what Putin has to offer beats the hell out of the homo state we have.

    So you would trade in being able to vote and criticize the government in exchange for less faggotry? Along with gun and property rights? You would cheer as this website is shut down for the dictator?

    Why not just turn off the TV? Are you afraid that all of America will go gay or something? I live in middle America and we don't have gay parades or tranny politicians. You are focusing too much on pop media from NY and Hollywood where they are always trying to undermine conservatives. Homosexuality isn't contagious. Most women would have gone lesbian by now if that were the case.

    Russia's White population has been in decline since 1991 while the Muslims and Asian populations have been increasing. They also have one of the highest abortion rates.

    Putin isn't an ethno-nationalist and in fact Russia has their own "hate speech" laws.

    Much of what Anglin types idealize about Russia simply isn't true. They're an intellectually vacuous totalitarian state led by a half-pint dictator who would shut down this website and take your guns while keeping abortion legal.

    Replies: @Carroll price

  179. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-mitch-mcconnell-death-wish-insults-wife-elaine-chao-2022-9

    Donald Trump says Mitch McConnell has a 'death wish' and insults his wife, Elaine Chao, after the senator voiced support for the Electoral Count Act reforms

     


    He also insulted McConnell's wife, Elaine Chao, referring to her as the "China loving wife, Coco Chow."

     

    "In any event, either reason is unacceptable," Trump wrote. "He has a DEATH WISH."

    The former president proceeded to insult McConnell's wife, former Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao: "Must immediately seek help and advise from his China loving wife, Coco Chow

     
    "Coco Chow."

    Replies: @Muggles

    “Coco Chow.”

    Great name for a chocolate flavored dog food. Though dogs aren’t supposed to eat chocolate.

    It instead sounds like a cheap Chinese cereal knock off of “Coco Puffs.”

    I suppose that’s what Trump was aiming for.

    Trump is funny this way. He knows he’s not really newsworthy but when he pulls off one of his insult stunts, it sets off the Dogs of Journalism and their howls of racism or whatever.

    Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and well. Probably incurable.

    You know Trump is in the neighborhood when you can hear those dogs barking long and loud.

    Mike Lindell should hire Trump to endorse one of his My Pillow products on TV (Fox News!). The frenzied media would give Lindell a billion dollars worth of free publicity.

    Maybe even a specially designed “Trump My Pillow”, with his face on it. You could rest easily each night with your head on Trump’s grinning visage. And the comrades could use them for punching pillows. Get some of that Anger Management out of their system. Win-Win.

  180. @Corvinus
    @JimDandy

    Thanks for providing an example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    You don’t know what that means. Your hasbara schooling failed you.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @JimDandy

    Unilaterally defining at your whim what is a “real country” is a tell tale sign of that fallacy.

    Replies: @JimDandy

  181. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    Multiple wives?

    Uh, no.

    You’d never get any peace and quiet and soon, no “piece” much either.

    You’d be quickly outvoted on everything.

    Now a better idea is to bring back good old-fashioned brothels. Not that I’ve been to one, but it seems this service solved many problems. A good living for some, a good time for all. Variety without the guilt or commitment problems.

    Also no “social media” Tinder lying or psychos. Just good time tested market behavior.

    Instead of ruining actual marriage, or faking it a la gays, try something that works. Marriage +.

    No, Amazon won’t deliver it to your door, but Uber or Lyft can give you a ride to/fro. Volume discounts!

    The missuses won’t mind. You’ll be out of her hair for a few hours and might pick up some new, uh, tricks of the trade.

    The first one to successfully franchise this, legally, is an instant billionaire.

  182. @Steve Sailer
    @Daniel H

    You need to convince the Ukrainians of your triple bankshot logic. They keep fighting for their fatherland.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Unintended Consequence, @Bill Jones, @obwandiyag, @Anonymous, @Muggles

    Whenever I read some missive here replete with references to “Globohomo” I fear the person who’s writing this is well, insecure about their own masculinity.

    Or really confused about globes.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Muggles


    Whenever I read some missive here replete with references to “Globohomo” I fear the person who’s writing this is well, insecure about their own masculinity.
     
    Globohomo doesn’t mean what you think it does. It means mass immigration, dilution of White nations with non-Whites, equalism, removal of borders, erasure of gender roles among White men and women, race and gender denial, wage arbitrage with the rest of the world. It is a mixing, a leveling—a homogenizing of the planet, or at least a homogenizing of White nations with the rest of the world’s population. “Homo” = same, sameness

    Replies: @Muggles

  183. Anonymous[387] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jay Fink
    @SFG

    Thanks I appreciate your concern but I have already read the PUA perspective and know what they think. Maybe it explains the dynamics behind jealousy but it hasn't changed my mind that jealous men are in a more primitive state. The irony is jealous men are by definition insecure while PUAs promote confidence, although I suppose they favor projecting confidence over having true inner confidence.

    I had a bad experience as a senior in high school that forever turned me against jealous men. I was at a party, mostly single high school kids but a couple attended. Everyone knew the girl and everytime she said hi to one of her male classmates or make innocent small talk the guy went crazy. He demanded the girl stop talking and she immediately shut her mouth on command. He would also give the guy she was talking to a mean look like he was going to kick his ass.

    This seemed so incredibly uncivilized to me. I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn't mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

    Hello, Jay,
    I agree with you completely about jealous men. They are weak and insecure and are most likely to turn out to be wife beaters, or at least verbal abusers, and in the worst cases murderers, sometimes besides just killing their wife also killing their children because they doubt they are really theirs. Terrible human beings.
    I read a study once that concluded that obsessive mate guarders had very poor quality sperm with limited ability to impregnate, whereas men who did not make much if any effort to mate guard had very high quality sperm that easily impregnated.
    As far as girls mistaking jealous machismo for confidence, I think it is more likely that once in the relationship and having discovered the true nature of the guy, they are afraid of him. A very dangerous time for a woman is when she is trying to break off a bad relationship. That’s when she gets beaten to death. Of course, there are some women who are not afraid of their jealous mate, but are contemptuous of him and enjoy upsetting him by flirting with other men. But that’s very risky behavior, too. The worm sometimes turns.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    Two studies:

    "Sperm Competition in Humans: Mate Guarding Behavior Negatively Correlates with Ejaculate Quality"
    We found that men who performed fewer mate guarding behaviors produced higher quality ejaculates, having a greater concentration of sperm, a higher percentage of motile sperm and sperm that swam faster and less erratically.
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0108099

    "Unattractive males show greater mate-guarding effort"
    Males should optimize fitness by adjusting investment according to their attractiveness to females, such that attractive males seek Extra Pair Paternity, and unattractive males guard mates.
    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0682

    , @John Johnson
    @Anonymous

    I agree with you completely about jealous men. They are weak and insecure and are most likely to turn out to be wife beaters, or at least verbal abusers, and in the worst cases murderers, sometimes besides just killing their wife also killing their children because they doubt they are really theirs. Terrible human beings.

    Yes and they probably pass their genes on more often than passive hippie guys that don't care. Evolution really doesn't care either and especially in a modern society where women choose.

    As far as girls mistaking jealous machismo for confidence, I think it is more likely that once in the relationship and having discovered the true nature of the guy, they are afraid of him. A very dangerous time for a woman is when she is trying to break off a bad relationship.

    I've never been convinced of that. It basically assumes women are naive or stupid and the man is entirely to blame. Another convenient narrative where the woman is innocent. Egalitarian/feminist/Christian wishful thinking.

    It's modern denial of female sexuality. They can fall for dark traits and be fully aware of it. They are programmed to take the genes of aggressive males just like other mammals. It isn't something they can just turn off for egalitarian ideals.

    Eventually the DNA will be unraveled and all this egalitarian wishful thinking will come to an end. Future Whites will look back and snicker at all this race and gender denial.

  184. Doesn’t it actually beg the question, if they didn’t even like each other, why should anyone assume that they were in a relationship, rather than just sharing an apartment to save money on rent?

  185. @Jay Fink
    @SFG

    Thanks I appreciate your concern but I have already read the PUA perspective and know what they think. Maybe it explains the dynamics behind jealousy but it hasn't changed my mind that jealous men are in a more primitive state. The irony is jealous men are by definition insecure while PUAs promote confidence, although I suppose they favor projecting confidence over having true inner confidence.

    I had a bad experience as a senior in high school that forever turned me against jealous men. I was at a party, mostly single high school kids but a couple attended. Everyone knew the girl and everytime she said hi to one of her male classmates or make innocent small talk the guy went crazy. He demanded the girl stop talking and she immediately shut her mouth on command. He would also give the guy she was talking to a mean look like he was going to kick his ass.

    This seemed so incredibly uncivilized to me. I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn't mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

    ” I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn’t mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell.”

    I know exactly where you’re coming from, being a recovering nice guy myself, but the fact is he’d got her (and the repeating pattern sounds as if it was part of their joint games). In the immortal words of the great Heartiste, “chicks dig jerks”.

    https://heartiste.org/2010/01/29/chicks-dig-jerks-a-series-3/

  186. Anonymous[387] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    @Jay Fink

    Hello, Jay,
    I agree with you completely about jealous men. They are weak and insecure and are most likely to turn out to be wife beaters, or at least verbal abusers, and in the worst cases murderers, sometimes besides just killing their wife also killing their children because they doubt they are really theirs. Terrible human beings.
    I read a study once that concluded that obsessive mate guarders had very poor quality sperm with limited ability to impregnate, whereas men who did not make much if any effort to mate guard had very high quality sperm that easily impregnated.
    As far as girls mistaking jealous machismo for confidence, I think it is more likely that once in the relationship and having discovered the true nature of the guy, they are afraid of him. A very dangerous time for a woman is when she is trying to break off a bad relationship. That's when she gets beaten to death. Of course, there are some women who are not afraid of their jealous mate, but are contemptuous of him and enjoy upsetting him by flirting with other men. But that's very risky behavior, too. The worm sometimes turns.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @John Johnson

    Two studies:

    “Sperm Competition in Humans: Mate Guarding Behavior Negatively Correlates with Ejaculate Quality”
    We found that men who performed fewer mate guarding behaviors produced higher quality ejaculates, having a greater concentration of sperm, a higher percentage of motile sperm and sperm that swam faster and less erratically.
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0108099

    “Unattractive males show greater mate-guarding effort”
    Males should optimize fitness by adjusting investment according to their attractiveness to females, such that attractive males seek Extra Pair Paternity, and unattractive males guard mates.
    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0682

    • LOL: mc23
  187. @Buzz Mohawk
    Some dating relationships are open, but marriage normally includes the understanding that it is between two people.

    Dating can be open because there is no long-term commitment. In fact it often serves as the way to try things out so as to eventually find a mate. There can be an amorphous boundary that even changes as the dating relationship changes.

    I always thought it was men who typically want to wander, but I'm reading here about polyamorous women and the associated concerns of insecure men.

    In communication theory there is the idea that humans form dyads, like molecules that can only comprise two atoms. Three people is known as a dyad plus one, and there is always at any given time one person outside whichever dyad is communicating.

    Marriage can only exist between two people, because it is a full-time bond. The third entity is the relationship itself, the molecule if you will.

    But daing in an open relationship can be fun, and usually it is the guy who opens it.

    Replies: @SFG, @JimDandy

    I think unipolyamorous relationships–wherein the man can fuck anything that moves, but all the females are monogamous with him–are the most fun.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @JimDandy

    That’s why your “fun” is a civilization killer.

  188. He ultimately said that if the bible is correct, “America will win” because America represents Christian values vs. Russia’s godless values.

    Just the other day Putin made the same “argument” for Russian victory.

    “God is on our Side!” has been used for millennia.

  189. @Daniel H
    @John Johnson


    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don’t like about the Western establishment.
     
    Better a puppet of mother Russia than of GloboHomo. Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    All you dammed fools. All you can see is $$$$$. You are blinded by GloboHomo bling.

    Replies: @John Johnson, @Jack D, @Johann Ricke

    Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.

    I’m gonna agree with you that Belarus is a superior state, but only relative to North Korea, Zimbabwe or Venezuela.

  190. @Jack D
    @Daniel H


    Belarus is a superior state to any in Western Europe.
     
    Really? You'd rather live in Minsk than in Paris or London or Rome? I call bullshit.

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

    “Really? You’d rather live in Minsk than in Paris or London or Rome?”

    Paris and London no longer exist. A better way to phrase the issue would be, “You’d rather live in Minsk than in Poor Brown Hostile Ungrateful Rapey People Storage Area 17-B?”

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    If you are one of the global rich, you can still live a good life in London. Some UCL students (the uni is in Bloomsbury) get million-pound apartments nearby, others have to live out in the danger zones.

    A HK Chinese girl studying here had her folks buy her a flat right in the centre of a UK city. Only problem was the homeless alkies/druggies just outside (there was a day shelter nearby) with frequent ODs/fights/ambulance visits, plus a fair bit of vibrancy - not at all the place for a tiny girl to be walking alone after dark. Daytime was bad enough.

    So her parents bought her another one, up by the university. Money helps you avoid a lot of unpleasant things that ordinary folk have to deal with.

  191. Anon[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

    1) Russia is a Christian country, minorities notwithstanding.
    2) Russian government has a great narrative to battle against predominantly LGTB values.
    3) Russia provides balance-of-power against American Empire. It would provide more if, while remaining Christian, it allied with Germany to balance both US & China.

    The world is better off WITHOUT an atheistic-LGTB world hegemon. Right now, that threat comes from USA, unfortunately.

  192. @Hypnotoad666
    @AnotherDad


    But it results in crappy violent culture, where every guy is mate guarding and head bashing to keep the women he’s got … or take some from somebody else.
     
    Indeed. The math doesn't work. If the average married man has three wives, then 2/3 of the men must have zero wives. So the majority of the male population is always alienated, aggrieved, and potentially violent. Polygamy therefore requires a way to export or exile all these excess men -- possibly by engaging in continuous wars that kill them off.

    But then the society loses the productive labor of all those surplus men, so it has to make the poly-wives do all the work. It's like a lion pride: the one alpha male drives out the other males and the females do all the hunting for him. Nice work if you can get it for the alpha, but not very sustainable as a human model.

    Replies: @SFG, @Anon

    On top of that, polygamy necessarily entails sodomy + prostitution (for 2/3 deprived men).

  193. @Carroll price
    @John Johnson

    No form of government is perfect, but with the "freedom" thing working only in all-white, Christian societies, what Putin has to offer beats the hell out of the homo state we have.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    No form of government is perfect, but with the “freedom” thing working only in all-white, Christian societies, what Putin has to offer beats the hell out of the homo state we have.

    So you would trade in being able to vote and criticize the government in exchange for less faggotry? Along with gun and property rights? You would cheer as this website is shut down for the dictator?

    Why not just turn off the TV? Are you afraid that all of America will go gay or something? I live in middle America and we don’t have gay parades or tranny politicians. You are focusing too much on pop media from NY and Hollywood where they are always trying to undermine conservatives. Homosexuality isn’t contagious. Most women would have gone lesbian by now if that were the case.

    Russia’s White population has been in decline since 1991 while the Muslims and Asian populations have been increasing. They also have one of the highest abortion rates.

    Putin isn’t an ethno-nationalist and in fact Russia has their own “hate speech” laws.

    Much of what Anglin types idealize about Russia simply isn’t true. They’re an intellectually vacuous totalitarian state led by a half-pint dictator who would shut down this website and take your guns while keeping abortion legal.

    • Replies: @Carroll price
    @John Johnson

    First of all, preaching to the choir is not free speech. Try posting an Unz type comment on Twitter, U tube, Facebook, or your local newspaper and see how far it goes or how long you keep your job if it gets posted.

    As to voting, it's obviously a joke since Biden who supposedly got a record-breaking number of votes (8.2 million) after not being able to raise a crowd over 25 people.

    Property rights? It's a joke since the property you think you own actually belongs to the State who issues you (the fictional owner) a Deed (permission to occupy and use the property) with the State retaining Title to the property proving ownership.
    If you think you own a piece of property, stop paying property tax on it and see how long it's yours.

    As to taking your guns, both parties are bent on taking them, with the number of staged mass shootings required, only a matter of time until it happens, with full approval of your frightened, mind-numbed neighbors.

    I have never watched TV.

    Replies: @John Johnson

  194. @Anonymous
    @Jay Fink

    Hello, Jay,
    I agree with you completely about jealous men. They are weak and insecure and are most likely to turn out to be wife beaters, or at least verbal abusers, and in the worst cases murderers, sometimes besides just killing their wife also killing their children because they doubt they are really theirs. Terrible human beings.
    I read a study once that concluded that obsessive mate guarders had very poor quality sperm with limited ability to impregnate, whereas men who did not make much if any effort to mate guard had very high quality sperm that easily impregnated.
    As far as girls mistaking jealous machismo for confidence, I think it is more likely that once in the relationship and having discovered the true nature of the guy, they are afraid of him. A very dangerous time for a woman is when she is trying to break off a bad relationship. That's when she gets beaten to death. Of course, there are some women who are not afraid of their jealous mate, but are contemptuous of him and enjoy upsetting him by flirting with other men. But that's very risky behavior, too. The worm sometimes turns.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @John Johnson

    I agree with you completely about jealous men. They are weak and insecure and are most likely to turn out to be wife beaters, or at least verbal abusers, and in the worst cases murderers, sometimes besides just killing their wife also killing their children because they doubt they are really theirs. Terrible human beings.

    Yes and they probably pass their genes on more often than passive hippie guys that don’t care. Evolution really doesn’t care either and especially in a modern society where women choose.

    As far as girls mistaking jealous machismo for confidence, I think it is more likely that once in the relationship and having discovered the true nature of the guy, they are afraid of him. A very dangerous time for a woman is when she is trying to break off a bad relationship.

    I’ve never been convinced of that. It basically assumes women are naive or stupid and the man is entirely to blame. Another convenient narrative where the woman is innocent. Egalitarian/feminist/Christian wishful thinking.

    It’s modern denial of female sexuality. They can fall for dark traits and be fully aware of it. They are programmed to take the genes of aggressive males just like other mammals. It isn’t something they can just turn off for egalitarian ideals.

    Eventually the DNA will be unraveled and all this egalitarian wishful thinking will come to an end. Future Whites will look back and snicker at all this race and gender denial.

  195. When the Republican party was founded it pledged to fight the “twin relics of barbarism”, slavery and polygamy.

    It would be nice to see a party that would fight for the relics of traditional marriage and affordable family formation

  196. A few years ago when I said to some friends that the proscriptions against pedophilia, incest, and bestiality would soon fall they called me an alarmist. It’s beginning to look like I wasn’t just whistling Dixie.

  197. @John Johnson
    @Carroll price

    No form of government is perfect, but with the “freedom” thing working only in all-white, Christian societies, what Putin has to offer beats the hell out of the homo state we have.

    So you would trade in being able to vote and criticize the government in exchange for less faggotry? Along with gun and property rights? You would cheer as this website is shut down for the dictator?

    Why not just turn off the TV? Are you afraid that all of America will go gay or something? I live in middle America and we don't have gay parades or tranny politicians. You are focusing too much on pop media from NY and Hollywood where they are always trying to undermine conservatives. Homosexuality isn't contagious. Most women would have gone lesbian by now if that were the case.

    Russia's White population has been in decline since 1991 while the Muslims and Asian populations have been increasing. They also have one of the highest abortion rates.

    Putin isn't an ethno-nationalist and in fact Russia has their own "hate speech" laws.

    Much of what Anglin types idealize about Russia simply isn't true. They're an intellectually vacuous totalitarian state led by a half-pint dictator who would shut down this website and take your guns while keeping abortion legal.

    Replies: @Carroll price

    First of all, preaching to the choir is not free speech. Try posting an Unz type comment on Twitter, U tube, Facebook, or your local newspaper and see how far it goes or how long you keep your job if it gets posted.

    As to voting, it’s obviously a joke since Biden who supposedly got a record-breaking number of votes (8.2 million) after not being able to raise a crowd over 25 people.

    Property rights? It’s a joke since the property you think you own actually belongs to the State who issues you (the fictional owner) a Deed (permission to occupy and use the property) with the State retaining Title to the property proving ownership.
    If you think you own a piece of property, stop paying property tax on it and see how long it’s yours.

    As to taking your guns, both parties are bent on taking them, with the number of staged mass shootings required, only a matter of time until it happens, with full approval of your frightened, mind-numbed neighbors.

    I have never watched TV.

    • Agree: Kim
    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Carroll price

    First of all, preaching to the choir is not free speech. Try posting an Unz type comment on Twitter, U tube, Facebook, or your local newspaper and see how far it goes or how long you keep your job if it gets posted.

    You can criticize the government on all of those platforms.

    Can't do that in Russia.

    If it is a subject that FB won't let you discuss like race or vaccines then you can start your own website like this one.

    Can't do that in Russia.

    You can start your own newspaper or hold your own protest.

    Can't do that in Russia.

    Property rights? It’s a joke since the property you think you own actually belongs to the State who issues you (the fictional owner) a Deed (permission to occupy and use the property)

    I can take any property related case to court. In Russia they can simply take your property or business and there is no recourse.

    As to taking your guns, both parties are bent on taking them

    Biden wants to take AR-15s and doesn't have the votes. So wrong again.

    In America you can go buy a scoped rifle and walk away with it the same day provided you don't have a criminal background. Try doing that in Russia. Dictators like Putin don't support gun rights because they are afraid of getting shot. If a half-pint dictator tried ending elections in the US then Americans would vote from the rooftops.

    Just because you resent the Western status quo doesn't mean you have to defend some half-pint dictator and his totalitarian state where merely calling it a war can get you time in prison.

    You are on the wrong side of history if you think Russia is the model. Russians under 30 want nothing to do with Putin and his control tactics. Putin's main support comes from emotional boomers that don't use the internet and watch PutinNews all day.

  198. Anonymous[161] • Disclaimer says:
    @Muggles
    @Steve Sailer

    Whenever I read some missive here replete with references to "Globohomo" I fear the person who's writing this is well, insecure about their own masculinity.

    Or really confused about globes.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Whenever I read some missive here replete with references to “Globohomo” I fear the person who’s writing this is well, insecure about their own masculinity.

    Globohomo doesn’t mean what you think it does. It means mass immigration, dilution of White nations with non-Whites, equalism, removal of borders, erasure of gender roles among White men and women, race and gender denial, wage arbitrage with the rest of the world. It is a mixing, a leveling—a homogenizing of the planet, or at least a homogenizing of White nations with the rest of the world’s population. “Homo” = same, sameness

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Anonymous

    Thanks to Anon [161] here I am now enlightened.

    Although your explanation makes sense, technically, it seems at odds with more obvious interpretations.

    Using "homo" in that sense, also in a disparaging context, is going to mislead a lot of readers.

    What you are driving at is opposition to the "homogeneous World" idea, which while popular today with TV commercial producers and "migrant" advocates, isn't a very widely held idea.

    Instead thanks to the Comrades, every small difference among populations is magnified and one group (guess who?) is demonized for the failings of all others. Of course the "bad" group does vary some, along with the "good" ones.

    When I see the "globohomo" label I assumed that this was about the current worship of the Alphabet City group of "genders" and identities (LBGQT+). And the accompanying demand that heterosexual males be punished in some manner. Avoiding the oddwads is a "sin" of discrimination, though of course "they" don't want you barging into their bars and dance clubs.

    To me, the Current Period intellectual error isn't the old fashioned "we are all the same" thinking. That's 1960s stuff. Now it is Harry Styles wearing skirts and forcing you to "admire it" somehow. Or blaming all problems on testosterone.

    "Everyone should be like RuPaul! Or become RuPaulina!"

    I guess I was wrong about "globohomo" though I suspect most reading that are (maybe I haven't been on Unz long enough...)

    I worry more about the Inner Party mantra of "Hate Straight [White] Men" more than "We are all the same" old fashioned Kennedy liberalism.

    Oddly, those who use "globohomo" are often disparaging Jews. They don't seem to qualify in my mind as leading the "we are all the same, so let's move in to your country" charge. They certainly don't practice that in Israel.

    Time to retire the G-H designation...

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  199. @Dennis Dale
    @John Johnson

    Yeah, 60 billion dollars doesn't go so far these days.

    It's funny how you girls always revert to the "Putin-lover" line. I guess that means you're all "in love" with Zelinski (if you're going to be childish, I should be allowed the "I am rubber you are glue" riposte).

    What do you say we start a scam were people can buy a little piece of one of Zelinski's t-shirts? Sort of like the "piece of the true cross" con. Verified to have been worn by the man himself. You can smell the dried sweat.
    Time to get in on the grift.

    Replies: @HA

    “It’s funny how you girls always revert to the ‘Putin-lover’ line. I guess that means you’re all ‘in love’ with Zelinski…What do you say we start a scam were people can buy a little piece of one of Zelinski’s t-shirts?…You can smell the dried sweat.”

    If this is the kind of stuff the fanboys allow to rent space in their brains, they really need to hold off accusing anyone else of caving in to the gay agenda.

  200. @SFG
    This one's been stewing in progressive circles as 'polyamory' for a while. ('Polygamy' is that evil patriarchal fundamentalist thing Mormons do. and besides they can't get married yet.) It was also pretty popular among computer geeks, for the obvious reason that there aren't enough female nerds to go around. Back when those circles started to fuse (this was in the 2000s maybe?), I think you saw this gain some steam. There were somewhat fawning articles in the NYT, and people are already writing in about their polyamorous relationship troubles in Slate (where, again, the commenters give better advice than the columnists). There are triads where all three people are in a relationship with each other, V's where there are two people in a relationship with a third person (the 'hinge' who are not in a relationship with each other), quads with four people (often two couples), and more exotic configurations the geeks will label as N's, V's, W's, X's, and so on.

    I read 'The Polyamorists Next Door', by Elizabeth Sheff, that studies a bunch of these. (The source text for the movement is apparently 'The Ethical Slut', by a different pair of authors, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, lesbians, that came out back in 1997.) It's sympathetic, of course, though she says she only talked to liberal polyamorists--there's the 'swinger' culture that's considerably more conservative and doesn't overlap much. (There's quite a bit of overlap with the kink/BDSM community, though.) She does admit that the relationships are less stable ('they all underwent change' was the phrasing she used), and given that female bisexuality is encouraged but male bisexuality is still looked down on (the reason for this is not given but I suspect fear of HIV and other STDs), not to mention the feminist liberal milieu, women have a lot higher status (basically, they have an organized pressure group to protect their interests but men don't). There's also the fact that it's a lot easier to find outside partners for a woman than a man if you 'open up your relationship' due to the higher male demand for casual sex. Guys might think it's hot to watch your girlfriends make out, but they're just as likely to run off with each other (and/or another guy) and leave you hanging.

    Of course, reality reasserts itself--women are usually more willing to share with a male partner, leading the OPP ('one penis policy') that is much disliked. From what I can tell from reading the polyamory subreddit, the MFM (woman with two boyfriends) configuration is the most common, followed by the MFF (woman with a boyfriend and a girlfriend) and triads with two women and one man. (Again, the disdain for male bisexuality means that a configuration with two women might turn into a triad but one with two men will remain a V.)

    A bunch of my dorky friends from high school got into it back in the late 90's. They were going off to college so it broke up anyway, but there was apparently quite a bit of drama I wasn't privy to. I'm convinced it's one of these things the professional class, computer nerds, and SJWs can get away with (though the SJWs will create the obligatory drama and find a way to blame white men) but once it hits the working class you'll have more violence as the two guys in the MFM relationship fight over the women. Basically high-status people of both sexes will start collecting admirers and lower-status people will find someone willing to settle for them (which is what the computer nerd thing was if you think about it). And there will be fights.

    I know there isn't a great win-loss record, but conservatives probably should fight this one as well. (Suggestions for strategy welcome.) Some of the dudes might think they'll get a harem, and that's not going to pan out that way. (The incels have already figured it out, though they are blaming hypergamy, which is part of it too--but of course they are doing the same thing complaining very attractive women won't go out with them.) Even in polygamous societies without feminism (Africa and the Middle East) you wind up with a surplus of men who then wind up fighting all the time. (You actually see some variety of this in fundamentalist Mormon circles where they're always driving off younger men so the older guys can have multiple wives.)

    This is going to be really, really, bad.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Almost Missouri, @Gabe Ruth, @AnotherDad, @Muggles, @Cato

    Thanks for this. Your post is what ethnography of social media would look like.

    A few observations:

    Sexual jealousy is a big problem with “polyamory”. No male would readily tolerate another male diddling his woman, and no female would readily tolerate her man falling in love with another female.

    Polygyny occurs in most societies, though most marriages — even in societies that allow polygyny — are monogamous.

    The few ethnographically observed example of polyandry (Tibet and South India) take the form of brothers sharing a wife, because of poverty. Not at all relevant in our country.

    Implications:

    Polygamy needs to be legalized in the US, now that same-sex marriage is legal, because it actually should have been legalized first. It will overwhelmingly take on the form of polygyny because that is what we see cross-culturally. And this will be beneficial in some segments of societies, such as among underclass blacks, because more children will now have Dads, and they will learn what a responsible father looks like.

  201. @John Johnson
    @anonymous

    Putin is more friendly to Western civilization and nationalism than the current rulers of the Western countries.

    He isn't as supportive of White guilt. Sure. But he is also fine with killing Whites by the thousands. So not exactly pro-White.

    Even if he isn't guilt ridden like Biden why does that mean you have to support his war against Ukraine? Why does that justify cheerleading someone that shells residential areas and locks away protestors?

    This is like saying you are picking AIDs instead of monkeypox. It's actually possible to oppose both.

    It's illegal in Russia to criticize the government. Why would you support imposing such a totalitarian state onto another country? Because you don't like the Western status quo? Well Ukraine doesn't like the Russian status quo. They don't want to be under the boot of Putin. They want to be able to criticize the government and use websites like this one.

    It is America’s War. The war would have been over within weeks if the United States and its stooges in Europe weren’t financing it.

    That's not true. Putin miscalculated the will of the Ukrainians. Most of the Kiev battles were fought with Soviet weapons. Even if they eventually captured Kiev it would have turned into partisan warfare. That leads to further repression which means executions and torture as the totalitarian state tries to terrorize the population into submitting.

    Replies: @HA

    “He isn’t as supportive of White guilt.”

    I’m not so sure about that — piling on with respect to white guilt is a longstanding Moscow tradition, though it’s specifically limited to American white guilt.

    Check out how Russian state media covered Ferguson.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @HA


    “He isn’t as supportive of White guilt.”
     
    I’m not so sure about that — piling on with respect to white guilt is a longstanding Moscow tradition, though it’s specifically limited to American white guilt.

    That is actually a good point. Both the Russians and Chinese support liberal narratives that defame and shame Anglos. They really like selling their people stories about Anglos holding down the Bantu. Sure the Americans live well but just look at what assholes they are to their minorities!

    Western European media actually used to be similar until they started developing their own diversity enhanced areas. Then they realized it wasn't as simple as American Whites being jerks and backed off a bit.

    In fact I knew some Europeans that were arrogant snobs about "gun crime" until they got a taste of diversity.

    But yes you are correct that Putin supports White guilt in the Anglosphere. He would like Anglos taken down a notch by any means necessary. That is also why he opposes racial research. He wants to maintain liberal guilt in Anglos while ruling his own multi-racial empire that depends on the race taboo. He doesn't want Russians to be guilt ridden or corrupted by liberalism but cheers any denigration of Anglos.

  202. @Observator
    When I first heard of “polyamory” I asked the person who told me about, does that mean someone who has sex with a parrot? Maybe the great & eternal truth of Prophet Jo Smith’s original teaching has finally become manifest among the heathen Gentiles. The LDS leadership can now erase the revelation they conveniently received back when they wanted Utah to get the benefits of statehood. Nothing like a bevy of fourteen year old celestial brides and all that. The plural of “spouse” is “spice,” after all. Mitt Romney should be pleased; his ancestor Parley Pratt, one of Jo’s original Twelve, got a fatal case of lead poisoning from the irate nonbeliever whose wife he carried off for another such holy romp.

    Replies: @Rob

    Parley Pratt, one of Jo’s original Twelve, got a fatal case of lead poisoning from the irate nonbeliever whose wife he carried off for another such holy romp.

    Me: Huh, poisoning is kinda intricate. Most dudes would have shot him… oh.

  203. @Carroll price
    @John Johnson

    First of all, preaching to the choir is not free speech. Try posting an Unz type comment on Twitter, U tube, Facebook, or your local newspaper and see how far it goes or how long you keep your job if it gets posted.

    As to voting, it's obviously a joke since Biden who supposedly got a record-breaking number of votes (8.2 million) after not being able to raise a crowd over 25 people.

    Property rights? It's a joke since the property you think you own actually belongs to the State who issues you (the fictional owner) a Deed (permission to occupy and use the property) with the State retaining Title to the property proving ownership.
    If you think you own a piece of property, stop paying property tax on it and see how long it's yours.

    As to taking your guns, both parties are bent on taking them, with the number of staged mass shootings required, only a matter of time until it happens, with full approval of your frightened, mind-numbed neighbors.

    I have never watched TV.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    First of all, preaching to the choir is not free speech. Try posting an Unz type comment on Twitter, U tube, Facebook, or your local newspaper and see how far it goes or how long you keep your job if it gets posted.

    You can criticize the government on all of those platforms.

    Can’t do that in Russia.

    If it is a subject that FB won’t let you discuss like race or vaccines then you can start your own website like this one.

    Can’t do that in Russia.

    You can start your own newspaper or hold your own protest.

    Can’t do that in Russia.

    Property rights? It’s a joke since the property you think you own actually belongs to the State who issues you (the fictional owner) a Deed (permission to occupy and use the property)

    I can take any property related case to court. In Russia they can simply take your property or business and there is no recourse.

    As to taking your guns, both parties are bent on taking them

    Biden wants to take AR-15s and doesn’t have the votes. So wrong again.

    In America you can go buy a scoped rifle and walk away with it the same day provided you don’t have a criminal background. Try doing that in Russia. Dictators like Putin don’t support gun rights because they are afraid of getting shot. If a half-pint dictator tried ending elections in the US then Americans would vote from the rooftops.

    Just because you resent the Western status quo doesn’t mean you have to defend some half-pint dictator and his totalitarian state where merely calling it a war can get you time in prison.

    You are on the wrong side of history if you think Russia is the model. Russians under 30 want nothing to do with Putin and his control tactics. Putin’s main support comes from emotional boomers that don’t use the internet and watch PutinNews all day.

  204. @HA
    @John Johnson

    "He isn’t as supportive of White guilt."

    I'm not so sure about that -- piling on with respect to white guilt is a longstanding Moscow tradition, though it's specifically limited to American white guilt.

    Check out how Russian state media covered Ferguson.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    “He isn’t as supportive of White guilt.”

    I’m not so sure about that — piling on with respect to white guilt is a longstanding Moscow tradition, though it’s specifically limited to American white guilt.

    That is actually a good point. Both the Russians and Chinese support liberal narratives that defame and shame Anglos. They really like selling their people stories about Anglos holding down the Bantu. Sure the Americans live well but just look at what assholes they are to their minorities!

    Western European media actually used to be similar until they started developing their own diversity enhanced areas. Then they realized it wasn’t as simple as American Whites being jerks and backed off a bit.

    In fact I knew some Europeans that were arrogant snobs about “gun crime” until they got a taste of diversity.

    But yes you are correct that Putin supports White guilt in the Anglosphere. He would like Anglos taken down a notch by any means necessary. That is also why he opposes racial research. He wants to maintain liberal guilt in Anglos while ruling his own multi-racial empire that depends on the race taboo. He doesn’t want Russians to be guilt ridden or corrupted by liberalism but cheers any denigration of Anglos.

  205. @JimDandy
    Thanks for showing the world you have absolutely no idea what that means. Seriously, thank you. Laughter is an instant vacation.

    Here--this is a place that values high I.Q.s, right?

    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/blue-checks-diplomats-bots-go-ballistic-over-elon-musks-proposed-russia-ukraine-peace

    Replies: @Rob

    How about:

    1) Russian troops withdraw to Russia.
    2) Ukraine joins NATO and (maybe) the EU
    3) Putin stands trial in The Hague for war crimes
    4) Ethnic Russians in Ukraine who would like to be citizens of the Russian state get relocation allowances (in roubles) from Russia to move there.
    5) Russian control of Crimea is internationally recognized with an assured water supply.

    I think there’s a good chance Putin will not see justice, so except for point 3, this is a much more realistic post-war outcome. Moving irredentist ethnic Russians out of Ukraine is not ethnic cleansing. I would not force ethnic Russians to leave, but one-people nations are healthier. If some ethnic Russians in Donbas would like to remain, but their neighbors hate them for collaborating, so they are forced out? Well, getting along with one’s neighbors is important. Ethnically cleansing Eastern Europe of Germans is a good precedent, though I would like it to happen peacefully, without much bloodshed.

    Ethnic Russians who are under 18 (or whatever is the age of majority in Ukraine would have x years after their eighteenth birthday to relocate.

    Russia keeping territory from this war? that’s a terrible precedent. Pretty sure we won’t let that happen. We’ve had peace for a long time. War was awful. They take part of Ukraine today, then they’re done? Putin’s speech about the unity of the Russian and Ukrainian people at the start of his war was not about ethnic Russians in Ukraine, it was about Ukrainians. Maybe Crimea should have a referendum about re-joining (EU member) Ukraine or staying under Russian control? If you want them in Donbas, it is only fair. Heck, give Russian provinces that border Ukraine the choice to stay Russian or join the winning team.

    I realize I don’t get a vote on this, and no one much cares about my opinion, but I don’t think anyone who does get a vote on this is planning on letting Russia keep any of Ukraine or even leaving Putin in power.

    I wonder if we’re arming guerilla/ethnic mafia in Russia? Or buttering up his bodyguards with, “would you like to lke $50 million and a home in Zurich?” Destabilizing Russia is pretty much what the CIA was created for, so we must have both a hot young MTV-friendly and a corrupt oligarch picked out to be Peesident of Russia?

    • LOL: JimDandy
    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Rob

    If some ethnic Russians in Donbas would like to remain, but their neighbors hate them for collaborating, so they are forced out?

    They can always move to Russia if they want to be Russian.

    I think there’s a good chance Putin will not see justice

    He sees justice all the time.

    Putin has Parkinson's and has to watch his back every minute.

    It's like the mob boss that knows his underlings aren't happy. Every creak in his mansion is a potential assassin.

    Not need to throw him in a cell. Putin lives under the sword of Damocles.

    Russia keeping territory from this war? that’s a terrible precedent. Pretty sure we won’t let that happen.

    Even if it happens it will go back eventually. Future generations will apologize for this war.

  206. @Recently Based
    @Corvinus

    I am quite unlike Sheldon Cooper, actually.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    You definitively fit the description of Sheldon. You’re fooling no one here.

    • Troll: JimDandy
  207. @Rob
    @JimDandy

    How about:

    1) Russian troops withdraw to Russia.
    2) Ukraine joins NATO and (maybe) the EU
    3) Putin stands trial in The Hague for war crimes
    4) Ethnic Russians in Ukraine who would like to be citizens of the Russian state get relocation allowances (in roubles) from Russia to move there.
    5) Russian control of Crimea is internationally recognized with an assured water supply.

    I think there’s a good chance Putin will not see justice, so except for point 3, this is a much more realistic post-war outcome. Moving irredentist ethnic Russians out of Ukraine is not ethnic cleansing. I would not force ethnic Russians to leave, but one-people nations are healthier. If some ethnic Russians in Donbas would like to remain, but their neighbors hate them for collaborating, so they are forced out? Well, getting along with one’s neighbors is important. Ethnically cleansing Eastern Europe of Germans is a good precedent, though I would like it to happen peacefully, without much bloodshed.

    Ethnic Russians who are under 18 (or whatever is the age of majority in Ukraine would have x years after their eighteenth birthday to relocate.

    Russia keeping territory from this war? that’s a terrible precedent. Pretty sure we won’t let that happen. We’ve had peace for a long time. War was awful. They take part of Ukraine today, then they're done? Putin’s speech about the unity of the Russian and Ukrainian people at the start of his war was not about ethnic Russians in Ukraine, it was about Ukrainians. Maybe Crimea should have a referendum about re-joining (EU member) Ukraine or staying under Russian control? If you want them in Donbas, it is only fair. Heck, give Russian provinces that border Ukraine the choice to stay Russian or join the winning team.

    I realize I don’t get a vote on this, and no one much cares about my opinion, but I don’t think anyone who does get a vote on this is planning on letting Russia keep any of Ukraine or even leaving Putin in power.

    I wonder if we’re arming guerilla/ethnic mafia in Russia? Or buttering up his bodyguards with, “would you like to lke $50 million and a home in Zurich?” Destabilizing Russia is pretty much what the CIA was created for, so we must have both a hot young MTV-friendly and a corrupt oligarch picked out to be Peesident of Russia?

    Replies: @John Johnson

    If some ethnic Russians in Donbas would like to remain, but their neighbors hate them for collaborating, so they are forced out?

    They can always move to Russia if they want to be Russian.

    I think there’s a good chance Putin will not see justice

    He sees justice all the time.

    Putin has Parkinson’s and has to watch his back every minute.

    It’s like the mob boss that knows his underlings aren’t happy. Every creak in his mansion is a potential assassin.

    Not need to throw him in a cell. Putin lives under the sword of Damocles.

    Russia keeping territory from this war? that’s a terrible precedent. Pretty sure we won’t let that happen.

    Even if it happens it will go back eventually. Future generations will apologize for this war.

  208. @JimDandy
    @Corvinus

    You don't know what that means. Your hasbara schooling failed you.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Unilaterally defining at your whim what is a “real country” is a tell tale sign of that fallacy.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    @Corvinus

    You just keep digging yourself deeper and deeper. You're embarrassing yourself. So, please, keep going. And while you're at it, hasbara, look up "Strawman"...

  209. @Corvinus
    @JimDandy

    Unilaterally defining at your whim what is a “real country” is a tell tale sign of that fallacy.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    You just keep digging yourself deeper and deeper. You’re embarrassing yourself. So, please, keep going. And while you’re at it, hasbara, look up “Strawman”…

  210. If marriage is a right, then how can it be limited by number? You can’t marry someone you love, because you (or he or she or they) are married to someone else? Huh?

    Obviously, then, marriage is not a right. This is quite a concession on their part.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Reg Cæsar


    If marriage is a right, then ...

    Obviously, then, marriage is not a right. This is quite a concession on their part.
     

    Yes, this is the big trick that almost everyone misses. Marriage isn't really a right. It is more of a set of obligations: a set of semi-contractual binding commitments that the spouses undertake. Or at least it used to be. The no-fault unilateral-divorce-at-will revolution upended that status quo (most especially in the Anglosphere) to where marriage is now in a broken, amorphous state. And like all broken, amorphous things, the predatory forces abroad in the land seize it and infuse it with their poisonous will. Part of their poisonous will is dressing marriage up as a "right" and then parading it through the "Civil Rights" kabuki theater of demanding stuff for your preferred groups.

    Probably this won't end until it has run its course and marriage is totally discredited and despised as an institution: "marriage" is just something for homos and polygamists (and homo-polygamists) and scammers.

    If anyone wants to salvage marriage, probably the way to start is by rebuilding it as a form of contract law, unromantic as that sounds. Indeed, this is already happening with high-net worth marriages, where the union does not take place without a massive penumbra of prenups, agreements, trusts, separate accounting, etc. Divorce is still expensive for these people, but it is not necessarily life-ruining as it can be for middle class schlubs who rely on the "protections" of now-non-existent "traditional" marriage.

    Eventually, these kinds of stick-built marriage contracts should filter down the socio-economic scale (as traditional marriage once did from royalty to the peasantry), but Federal law that effectively forces the core of marriage to be a Kafkaesque contract enforceable only on one party stands in the way of this natural restoration.

    Replies: @Kim

  211. @SFG
    @Almost Missouri

    Wasn’t the problem that states have to give full faith and credit to the acts of other states?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Yes, pro-homo states like Vermont were effectively exporting their gayness to other states via the “full faith and credit” clause of the Constitution. Baker v. Nelson, though, provided a defense, since non-gay states could refuse to recognize out-of-state gay “marriages”. Obergefell overruled that.

  212. @Reg Cæsar
    If marriage is a right, then how can it be limited by number? You can't marry someone you love, because you (or he or she or they) are married to someone else? Huh?

    Obviously, then, marriage is not a right. This is quite a concession on their part.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    If marriage is a right, then …

    Obviously, then, marriage is not a right. This is quite a concession on their part.

    Yes, this is the big trick that almost everyone misses. Marriage isn’t really a right. It is more of a set of obligations: a set of semi-contractual binding commitments that the spouses undertake. Or at least it used to be. The no-fault unilateral-divorce-at-will revolution upended that status quo (most especially in the Anglosphere) to where marriage is now in a broken, amorphous state. And like all broken, amorphous things, the predatory forces abroad in the land seize it and infuse it with their poisonous will. Part of their poisonous will is dressing marriage up as a “right” and then parading it through the “Civil Rights” kabuki theater of demanding stuff for your preferred groups.

    Probably this won’t end until it has run its course and marriage is totally discredited and despised as an institution: “marriage” is just something for homos and polygamists (and homo-polygamists) and scammers.

    If anyone wants to salvage marriage, probably the way to start is by rebuilding it as a form of contract law, unromantic as that sounds. Indeed, this is already happening with high-net worth marriages, where the union does not take place without a massive penumbra of prenups, agreements, trusts, separate accounting, etc. Divorce is still expensive for these people, but it is not necessarily life-ruining as it can be for middle class schlubs who rely on the “protections” of now-non-existent “traditional” marriage.

    Eventually, these kinds of stick-built marriage contracts should filter down the socio-economic scale (as traditional marriage once did from royalty to the peasantry), but Federal law that effectively forces the core of marriage to be a Kafkaesque contract enforceable only on one party stands in the way of this natural restoration.

    • Replies: @Kim
    @Almost Missouri

    The only possible repair is to recriminalize adultery, with prison terms and civil damages against anyone who insinuates him or herself into a marriage and induces a breach of contract.

    After all, it is hardly right that someone can have a role in blowing up a marriage and then walk away with a smirk, without having to bear some of the very heavy costs of the resultant damage.

    And fault must return to divorce proceedings.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  213. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @Jack D

    "Really? You’d rather live in Minsk than in Paris or London or Rome?"

    Paris and London no longer exist. A better way to phrase the issue would be, "You'd rather live in Minsk than in Poor Brown Hostile Ungrateful Rapey People Storage Area 17-B?"

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    If you are one of the global rich, you can still live a good life in London. Some UCL students (the uni is in Bloomsbury) get million-pound apartments nearby, others have to live out in the danger zones.

    A HK Chinese girl studying here had her folks buy her a flat right in the centre of a UK city. Only problem was the homeless alkies/druggies just outside (there was a day shelter nearby) with frequent ODs/fights/ambulance visits, plus a fair bit of vibrancy – not at all the place for a tiny girl to be walking alone after dark. Daytime was bad enough.

    So her parents bought her another one, up by the university. Money helps you avoid a lot of unpleasant things that ordinary folk have to deal with.

  214. @Bill Jones
    @Almost Missouri

    Feds out can't happen. Too much interstate activity associated with Marriage.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Feds out can’t happen.

    Sure it can. The US was founded without any Federal role in marriage whatsoever.

    Feds out won’t happen, though, because Feds have never exited anything they weren’t forced from.

    After a general Federal collapse though, the Feds may lose interest in policing the private lives of citizens. Indeed, they may find that even claiming to have citizens is a stretch.

  215. @John Johnson
    @Daniel H

    Steve, the only way to end this nonsense, and all similar nonsense, is for Russia to deliver a crushing defeat to GloboHomo and its military adventure in Ukraine. It’s all connected. You can’t be for restoration of the good, natural, Christian, cultured, ordered… and root for Zelensky/Biden.

    Russia has:
    1. Largest Muslim population in Europe
    2. Largest atheist population in Europe
    3. One of the highest abortion rates in the world
    4. Declining White population while Asian/Muslim populations increase
    5. No private gun ownership, free speech or free political parties

    Can provide sources if you would like. Would you describe that as a Christian country?

    Pro-Putin bloggers like Putin and Whitney don't discuss those unwanted details. Instead they use imagery like crosses or Anglin's weird Aryanized Putin drawings.

    Do explain why we should be rooting for this loser dictator and his needless war.

    Also explain how killing over 100k Whites and turning Ukraine into a puppet state like Belarus would change what we don't like about the Western establishment. Explain exactly what would change for us.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Daniel H, @Daniel H, @Carroll price, @Anon, @RadicalCenter

    Utterly wrong about private gun ownership in Russia. Lying.

    • Thanks: JimDandy
    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @RadicalCenter

    Utterly wrong about private gun ownership in Russia. Lying.

    You can't just buy a gun in Russia like in the US.

    They have Euro nanny state laws where you have to show that you are a hunter or target shooter.

    Any type of political flag in your file from posting online and forget about it.

    You can only own a smoothbore shotgun for the first 5 years and then you can try applying to nanny state for a rifle.

    So basically the dream of US liberals. Limited access to hunters and forget about handguns or semi-auto rifles. Smoothbore shotguns significantly limit range aka voting from rooftops.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  216. @Recently Based
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    I think there is tremendous pressure to create poly relationships from multiple angles.

    There certainly is the "I am completely screwed up by my genetics + bad parents, am deeply disturbed and want to work out my psychological issues on a broader canvas" group. (ie, what you are calling freaks).

    But I think the biggest driver of this is bottom-up demand driven by feminism + deregulation of the sexual marketplace. Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.

    It's not some ironclad rule, but women do tend strongly to be hypergamous, i.e., will rarely date somebody who makes less than they do, etc. when it comes to dating, or way hotter than they are when it comes to hooking up at the foam cannon party in Cancun. As women make about as much money as men and the sexual market has now pretty much fully deregulated and has globalized through apps, most men are unattractive to most women. A small fraction of guys are getting an enormous amount of sex, and a majority of guys are getting very little to no sex. Most women are able to get sex with the hot/rich guys that they want, but mostly can't get relationships from them since these won't settle down (why would they, when these are the guys that can keep nailing tons of girls). In other words: de facto polygamy.

    Replies: @Lurker, @Corvinus

    Whats weird is the dweeb beta males who talk it up. They will be [are] the biggest losers in terms of sex and actual relationships.

    I’m thinking of a friend here, he’s apoplectic at the the thought of the evil white patriarchy infringing on his right to get laid. But he isn’t getting laid right now! Vocal support for polywhatever isn’t going to improve his position and likely make it worse.

    • Agree: Kim
    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @Lurker

    They are in a bad situation, and are not helping themselves.

    I guess they figure it can mean they at least get some action, even if it's by sharing some fairly ugly woman, which is the reality of most poly relationships for dweebs -- three guys who have trouble getting laid sharing one 185 lb girl with tattoos.

    The funny thing, all these guys have to do is get to the gym, turn some of their smarts into money and take a shower once in a while, and they could be golden.

    , @SFG
    @Lurker

    Well, the question for the guy at the 20th percentile is his position now, not what his position would have been in 1950. It’s entirely possible polyamory might improve his situation by getting him 1/3 of some nerd porker, rather than nobody at all. He doesn’t really have a path that includes forcing alphas to stick to one woman by resurrecting forced monogamy-that’s more if a collective action problem.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence

  217. @Almost Missouri
    @Reg Cæsar


    If marriage is a right, then ...

    Obviously, then, marriage is not a right. This is quite a concession on their part.
     

    Yes, this is the big trick that almost everyone misses. Marriage isn't really a right. It is more of a set of obligations: a set of semi-contractual binding commitments that the spouses undertake. Or at least it used to be. The no-fault unilateral-divorce-at-will revolution upended that status quo (most especially in the Anglosphere) to where marriage is now in a broken, amorphous state. And like all broken, amorphous things, the predatory forces abroad in the land seize it and infuse it with their poisonous will. Part of their poisonous will is dressing marriage up as a "right" and then parading it through the "Civil Rights" kabuki theater of demanding stuff for your preferred groups.

    Probably this won't end until it has run its course and marriage is totally discredited and despised as an institution: "marriage" is just something for homos and polygamists (and homo-polygamists) and scammers.

    If anyone wants to salvage marriage, probably the way to start is by rebuilding it as a form of contract law, unromantic as that sounds. Indeed, this is already happening with high-net worth marriages, where the union does not take place without a massive penumbra of prenups, agreements, trusts, separate accounting, etc. Divorce is still expensive for these people, but it is not necessarily life-ruining as it can be for middle class schlubs who rely on the "protections" of now-non-existent "traditional" marriage.

    Eventually, these kinds of stick-built marriage contracts should filter down the socio-economic scale (as traditional marriage once did from royalty to the peasantry), but Federal law that effectively forces the core of marriage to be a Kafkaesque contract enforceable only on one party stands in the way of this natural restoration.

    Replies: @Kim

    The only possible repair is to recriminalize adultery, with prison terms and civil damages against anyone who insinuates him or herself into a marriage and induces a breach of contract.

    After all, it is hardly right that someone can have a role in blowing up a marriage and then walk away with a smirk, without having to bear some of the very heavy costs of the resultant damage.

    And fault must return to divorce proceedings.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Kim


    repair is to recriminalize adultery ... fault must return to divorce proceedings
     
    Yes, this is part of it. At a bare minimum, the marriage contract shouldn't be excluded from uncontroversial contract law, as it is now.

    But dubiously Constitutional Federal "no-fault" laws currently prohibit any state from taking this step. That is why the Feds must get out of marriage.
  218. @Jay Fink
    @SFG

    Thanks I appreciate your concern but I have already read the PUA perspective and know what they think. Maybe it explains the dynamics behind jealousy but it hasn't changed my mind that jealous men are in a more primitive state. The irony is jealous men are by definition insecure while PUAs promote confidence, although I suppose they favor projecting confidence over having true inner confidence.

    I had a bad experience as a senior in high school that forever turned me against jealous men. I was at a party, mostly single high school kids but a couple attended. Everyone knew the girl and everytime she said hi to one of her male classmates or make innocent small talk the guy went crazy. He demanded the girl stop talking and she immediately shut her mouth on command. He would also give the guy she was talking to a mean look like he was going to kick his ass.

    This seemed so incredibly uncivilized to me. I hated this guy so much, I still think of him decades later. I also resented the girl for being so submissive to his demands (although she would talk to another guy minutes later and the whole pattern would repeat). Yes he won the girl. That doesn't mean there is anything good or natural about it. It means there is something screwy with the culture where girls mistake jealous machismo with confidence when in fact the opposite is the case, these guys are insecure as hell.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @YetAnotherAnon, @Anonymous

    Well, the guy was afraid you were going to take her. I assume you were bigger or richer than him?

  219. @duncsbaby
    @the one they call Desanex

    Randolph Scott wasn't gay. He was married twice and had two adopted kids. The only evidence for Scott being gay was he shared a house w/Cary Grant when they were both bachelors. No one said he was gay until both Cary and Randolph were dead and couldn't defend themselves from the scurrilous accusation (which was started by gays).
    Now Cesar Romero on the other hand . . .

    Replies: @John Johnson

    Randolph Scott wasn’t gay. He was married twice and had two adopted kids. The only evidence for Scott being gay was he shared a house w/Cary Grant when they were both bachelors.

    So he’s just an actor that didn’t have any kids of his own and needlessly shared a house with a man.

    Are you listening to yourself?

  220. @RadicalCenter
    @John Johnson

    Utterly wrong about private gun ownership in Russia. Lying.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    Utterly wrong about private gun ownership in Russia. Lying.

    You can’t just buy a gun in Russia like in the US.

    They have Euro nanny state laws where you have to show that you are a hunter or target shooter.

    Any type of political flag in your file from posting online and forget about it.

    You can only own a smoothbore shotgun for the first 5 years and then you can try applying to nanny state for a rifle.

    So basically the dream of US liberals. Limited access to hunters and forget about handguns or semi-auto rifles. Smoothbore shotguns significantly limit range aka voting from rooftops.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @John Johnson

    With all the drunkenness in Russia I'm not sure widespread gun ownership would be a good idea.

    Guns, democracy and free speech are things that only a few nations can "do" successfully. Everywhere else they result in chaos.

    For these things to work, you need an intelligent, conscientious, self-restrained, civic-minded population. The US is such a nation (for now). But Russia?

  221. @YetAnotherAnon
    @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad, like a few people here, knows that the MSM lie through their teeth about what's happening in the US, but takes in everything they say on foreign affairs as gospel.

    You'd think the 'power-mad dictator' stuff would have got old by now, but people's memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Nasser, Sukarno, Khomeini, Noriega, Saddam, Hugo Chavez, Gaddafi and Assad were all compared with Hitler in their time - their time often being just before the US attacked them, whether the attack was economic or military. It's part of the regime change script - you have to prepare the ground at home first.

    It's amazing how many people over here have a deep knowledge of Putin's psychology garnered from press and TV over the years.

    One of the most impressive psyops has been the flip, in only a few years, from "Occupy Wall Street!" to "Black Lives Matter!".

    But another equally impressive one has been the flip of what was the anti-war "left" movement, still pretty huge in 2003, to what's basically a pro-war "left"movement now. If you read the Guardian's commenters on Russia and Ukraine, they all sound just like AnotherDad, convinced that Putin's psychological make up (of which they all have deep knowledge, garnered from many a news item and TV show) impels Russia ever onwards.


    "He must be stopped now, because he won't stop at Ukraine".
     
    In fact the main Russian conservative critique of Putin is of excessive caution and being overly legalistic when the Nuland coup of 2014 happened - that rather than stop at Crimea he should have taken the entire Donbass then, when the Donbass units of the Ukrainian army were in revolt against Kiev and when the non-Donbass units hadn't had seven or eight years of NATO training and integration. At the time pretty much the whole of Donbass was under the control of the pro-Russian forces of the Ukrainian army. But he waited - in vain as it turned out - for Minsk 2 to be implemented and the Donbass to have self-determination. In hindsight a lot fewer Ukrainians would have died had he moved then.

    "He that will not when he may, when he will he shall have nay"

    None of us are "waiting for Russia to save us" - personalising it as "Putin" is another bit of the regime change playbook you've swallowed whole - but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?

    Russia's not my country - I don't want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia's not a defeated and occupied country - it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it's important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Anonymous, @Dube

    “…but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?”

    I wholeheartedly agree that the US is under occupation; the reality of it obscured by the numerous collaborators from the more native citizen population. Sailer is somewhat occupier adjacent as are many whose ancestors immigrated from continental Europe. Putin and Russia rebelling against Western globalist dominion militarily and economically will certainly weaken their influence. The several nations involved in the extensive Eastern economic integration in recent months have already established their political and economic independence from the West. This will be more obvious over the next few years. I am more than a little concerned, however, that we’re edging ever closer to WW3.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Unintended Consequence

    “Putin and Russia rebelling against Western globalist dominion militarily“

    They’re not. It’s a false narrative and you and others are falling for it hook, line, and sinker.

    “I am more than a little concerned, however, that we’re edging ever closer to WW3.“

    We’re not. Relax.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence

  222. “kill your unborn clump of cells”

    “End world children hunger”

    Yeah….

  223. @Anonymous
    @Muggles


    Whenever I read some missive here replete with references to “Globohomo” I fear the person who’s writing this is well, insecure about their own masculinity.
     
    Globohomo doesn’t mean what you think it does. It means mass immigration, dilution of White nations with non-Whites, equalism, removal of borders, erasure of gender roles among White men and women, race and gender denial, wage arbitrage with the rest of the world. It is a mixing, a leveling—a homogenizing of the planet, or at least a homogenizing of White nations with the rest of the world’s population. “Homo” = same, sameness

    Replies: @Muggles

    Thanks to Anon [161] here I am now enlightened.

    Although your explanation makes sense, technically, it seems at odds with more obvious interpretations.

    Using “homo” in that sense, also in a disparaging context, is going to mislead a lot of readers.

    What you are driving at is opposition to the “homogeneous World” idea, which while popular today with TV commercial producers and “migrant” advocates, isn’t a very widely held idea.

    Instead thanks to the Comrades, every small difference among populations is magnified and one group (guess who?) is demonized for the failings of all others. Of course the “bad” group does vary some, along with the “good” ones.

    When I see the “globohomo” label I assumed that this was about the current worship of the Alphabet City group of “genders” and identities (LBGQT+). And the accompanying demand that heterosexual males be punished in some manner. Avoiding the oddwads is a “sin” of discrimination, though of course “they” don’t want you barging into their bars and dance clubs.

    To me, the Current Period intellectual error isn’t the old fashioned “we are all the same” thinking. That’s 1960s stuff. Now it is Harry Styles wearing skirts and forcing you to “admire it” somehow. Or blaming all problems on testosterone.

    “Everyone should be like RuPaul! Or become RuPaulina!”

    I guess I was wrong about “globohomo” though I suspect most reading that are (maybe I haven’t been on Unz long enough…)

    I worry more about the Inner Party mantra of “Hate Straight [White] Men” more than “We are all the same” old fashioned Kennedy liberalism.

    Oddly, those who use “globohomo” are often disparaging Jews. They don’t seem to qualify in my mind as leading the “we are all the same, so let’s move in to your country” charge. They certainly don’t practice that in Israel.

    Time to retire the G-H designation…

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Muggles

    Perhaps it could be truncated to gloho. If anyone asks, just inform him that it's short for "global(ist) homogenization". This gets around the connotations of "homo", whether as prefix or as fag end.


    https://preview.redd.it/3rpf30j2ywf11.jpg?auto=webp&s=8f49584d53b87e088c23fb11bfd170421279dec8

    Replies: @Muggles

  224. @Muggles
    @Anonymous

    Thanks to Anon [161] here I am now enlightened.

    Although your explanation makes sense, technically, it seems at odds with more obvious interpretations.

    Using "homo" in that sense, also in a disparaging context, is going to mislead a lot of readers.

    What you are driving at is opposition to the "homogeneous World" idea, which while popular today with TV commercial producers and "migrant" advocates, isn't a very widely held idea.

    Instead thanks to the Comrades, every small difference among populations is magnified and one group (guess who?) is demonized for the failings of all others. Of course the "bad" group does vary some, along with the "good" ones.

    When I see the "globohomo" label I assumed that this was about the current worship of the Alphabet City group of "genders" and identities (LBGQT+). And the accompanying demand that heterosexual males be punished in some manner. Avoiding the oddwads is a "sin" of discrimination, though of course "they" don't want you barging into their bars and dance clubs.

    To me, the Current Period intellectual error isn't the old fashioned "we are all the same" thinking. That's 1960s stuff. Now it is Harry Styles wearing skirts and forcing you to "admire it" somehow. Or blaming all problems on testosterone.

    "Everyone should be like RuPaul! Or become RuPaulina!"

    I guess I was wrong about "globohomo" though I suspect most reading that are (maybe I haven't been on Unz long enough...)

    I worry more about the Inner Party mantra of "Hate Straight [White] Men" more than "We are all the same" old fashioned Kennedy liberalism.

    Oddly, those who use "globohomo" are often disparaging Jews. They don't seem to qualify in my mind as leading the "we are all the same, so let's move in to your country" charge. They certainly don't practice that in Israel.

    Time to retire the G-H designation...

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Perhaps it could be truncated to gloho. If anyone asks, just inform him that it’s short for “global(ist) homogenization”. This gets around the connotations of “homo”, whether as prefix or as fag end.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Reg Cæsar


    Perhaps it could be truncated to gloho. If anyone asks, just inform him that it’s short for “global(ist) homogenization”. This gets around the connotations of “homo”, whether as prefix or as fag end.
     
    "Gloho"? Well, maybe.

    Still has some questionable connotations (i.e. "glory hole", no don't ask...)

    How about "woho", as in "world homogenization"?

    Though that hardly seems much better. You lose the queers but add the whores. Mmmm., not great.

    I think in Our Present Era we should just leave "homo" for the scientists and maybe, milk cartons.

    Like the formerly Leprechaun-centric "pot at the end of..." the rainbow symbol has now been culturally appropriated from Irish folklore and now used to let everyone formerly banned from your restroom, inside.

    *Sigh*

    Do gays even drink "homo" milk? Probably not, low-fat only. But that joke will get you banned from hosting the Academy Awards for life. So there is an upside.... Chris Rock, please take note.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  225. Anonymous[280] • Disclaimer says:
    @YetAnotherAnon
    @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad, like a few people here, knows that the MSM lie through their teeth about what's happening in the US, but takes in everything they say on foreign affairs as gospel.

    You'd think the 'power-mad dictator' stuff would have got old by now, but people's memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Nasser, Sukarno, Khomeini, Noriega, Saddam, Hugo Chavez, Gaddafi and Assad were all compared with Hitler in their time - their time often being just before the US attacked them, whether the attack was economic or military. It's part of the regime change script - you have to prepare the ground at home first.

    It's amazing how many people over here have a deep knowledge of Putin's psychology garnered from press and TV over the years.

    One of the most impressive psyops has been the flip, in only a few years, from "Occupy Wall Street!" to "Black Lives Matter!".

    But another equally impressive one has been the flip of what was the anti-war "left" movement, still pretty huge in 2003, to what's basically a pro-war "left"movement now. If you read the Guardian's commenters on Russia and Ukraine, they all sound just like AnotherDad, convinced that Putin's psychological make up (of which they all have deep knowledge, garnered from many a news item and TV show) impels Russia ever onwards.


    "He must be stopped now, because he won't stop at Ukraine".
     
    In fact the main Russian conservative critique of Putin is of excessive caution and being overly legalistic when the Nuland coup of 2014 happened - that rather than stop at Crimea he should have taken the entire Donbass then, when the Donbass units of the Ukrainian army were in revolt against Kiev and when the non-Donbass units hadn't had seven or eight years of NATO training and integration. At the time pretty much the whole of Donbass was under the control of the pro-Russian forces of the Ukrainian army. But he waited - in vain as it turned out - for Minsk 2 to be implemented and the Donbass to have self-determination. In hindsight a lot fewer Ukrainians would have died had he moved then.

    "He that will not when he may, when he will he shall have nay"

    None of us are "waiting for Russia to save us" - personalising it as "Putin" is another bit of the regime change playbook you've swallowed whole - but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?

    Russia's not my country - I don't want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia's not a defeated and occupied country - it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it's important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Anonymous, @Dube

    Russia’s not my country – I don’t want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia’s not a defeated and occupied country – it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it’s important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.

    Excellent concluding comment and excellent overall post. Thank you.

  226. @Verymuchalive
    @Nicholas Stix

    Bacdayan is Filipino-born, as this website proudly ( no pun intended ) proclaims.
    https://www.wowcordillera.com/2022/01/igorota-lawyer-is-judge-for-civil-court.html

    Judge Bacdayan was born in the Philippines and descends from the Igorot Tribe.
    Her family formerly resided in the village of Bangaan in the Municipality of Sagada, Mountain Province, Philippines before moving to the United States.


    I suppose she was Catholic once, but has obviously been completely corrupted by HomoGlobalism.
    Sad.

    Replies: @CMC, @CMC

    Except

    Sagada has become the only Philippine town that is predominantly Anglican with almost 95% baptised into the Episcopal Church of the Philippines (ECP).

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagada

  227. @Hernan Pizzaro del Blanco
    @Anonymous

    What happened with excess deaths? Steve stopped posting about excess deaths after the vaccines were introduced. He also stopped talking about the efficacy of vaccines when the boosters were given emergency authorization last month...everything was memory holed to avoid admitting mistakes and miscalculations.

    Replies: @HA

    “What happened with excess deaths?”

    Nothing happened to them — I clearly answered this question in some detail two weeks ago. The answer is still the same. Hey, you hear about that Generalissimo Franco? Here’s an update: HE’S STILL DEAD. If you need a personal hot take from Sailer himself about excess deaths, why not just consult the CDC excess death website instead and get it straight from the source?

    Do you people even listen to yourselves? Here’s just-a-flu-bros whenever Steve mentions excess death: “Oh, there goes Sailer again trying to panic us with something we should ignore.”

    Now, here’s the just-a-flu-bros whenever Steve DOESN’T mention excess death: “Oh, look — Sailer is trying to make us forget about excess death because he miscalculated something. Or something like that.”

    Pick a side and stick with it. And anyway, for two years, you yammered pathetically about how you just wanted to live your life without having to hear about COVID all the time. The peaks have finally dwindled, so here’s your chance. Fly, little bird.

    • Thanks: Muggles
  228. @Kim
    @Almost Missouri

    The only possible repair is to recriminalize adultery, with prison terms and civil damages against anyone who insinuates him or herself into a marriage and induces a breach of contract.

    After all, it is hardly right that someone can have a role in blowing up a marriage and then walk away with a smirk, without having to bear some of the very heavy costs of the resultant damage.

    And fault must return to divorce proceedings.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    repair is to recriminalize adultery … fault must return to divorce proceedings

    Yes, this is part of it. At a bare minimum, the marriage contract shouldn’t be excluded from uncontroversial contract law, as it is now.

    But dubiously Constitutional Federal “no-fault” laws currently prohibit any state from taking this step. That is why the Feds must get out of marriage.

  229. @YetAnotherAnon
    @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad, like a few people here, knows that the MSM lie through their teeth about what's happening in the US, but takes in everything they say on foreign affairs as gospel.

    You'd think the 'power-mad dictator' stuff would have got old by now, but people's memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Nasser, Sukarno, Khomeini, Noriega, Saddam, Hugo Chavez, Gaddafi and Assad were all compared with Hitler in their time - their time often being just before the US attacked them, whether the attack was economic or military. It's part of the regime change script - you have to prepare the ground at home first.

    It's amazing how many people over here have a deep knowledge of Putin's psychology garnered from press and TV over the years.

    One of the most impressive psyops has been the flip, in only a few years, from "Occupy Wall Street!" to "Black Lives Matter!".

    But another equally impressive one has been the flip of what was the anti-war "left" movement, still pretty huge in 2003, to what's basically a pro-war "left"movement now. If you read the Guardian's commenters on Russia and Ukraine, they all sound just like AnotherDad, convinced that Putin's psychological make up (of which they all have deep knowledge, garnered from many a news item and TV show) impels Russia ever onwards.


    "He must be stopped now, because he won't stop at Ukraine".
     
    In fact the main Russian conservative critique of Putin is of excessive caution and being overly legalistic when the Nuland coup of 2014 happened - that rather than stop at Crimea he should have taken the entire Donbass then, when the Donbass units of the Ukrainian army were in revolt against Kiev and when the non-Donbass units hadn't had seven or eight years of NATO training and integration. At the time pretty much the whole of Donbass was under the control of the pro-Russian forces of the Ukrainian army. But he waited - in vain as it turned out - for Minsk 2 to be implemented and the Donbass to have self-determination. In hindsight a lot fewer Ukrainians would have died had he moved then.

    "He that will not when he may, when he will he shall have nay"

    None of us are "waiting for Russia to save us" - personalising it as "Putin" is another bit of the regime change playbook you've swallowed whole - but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?

    Russia's not my country - I don't want to live there (or Ukraine). But Russia's not a defeated and occupied country - it was around 1995, but was pulled back from the brink. It may fall again, but meanwhile I wish them well, simply because it's important that the number of countries and peoples NOT defeated and occupied be maximised.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @Anonymous, @Dube

    You’d think the ‘power-mad dictator’ stuff would have got old by now, but people’s memories are increasingly short in the digital age.

    Thanks. The deep knowledge of the dictator’s psychology analysis is exciting but really just comic book fun. If we see it we can mitigate it. It goes along with taking movie stars too seriously.

  230. @Jay Fink
    @Steve Sailer

    I think men who aren't jealous are evolved at a higher level. Jealousy, especially in men, seems like a primitive caveman type emotion. If anything a cuck would be a lot more pleasant to hang out with than a mate guarder.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @SFG, @Bardon Kaldian, @SFG, @Brutusale

    As long as you define the universe as mate guarders and cucks, you’re going to have problems.

    Is there any amount of jealousy you’d consider appropriate?

  231. @Reg Cæsar
    @Muggles

    Perhaps it could be truncated to gloho. If anyone asks, just inform him that it's short for "global(ist) homogenization". This gets around the connotations of "homo", whether as prefix or as fag end.


    https://preview.redd.it/3rpf30j2ywf11.jpg?auto=webp&s=8f49584d53b87e088c23fb11bfd170421279dec8

    Replies: @Muggles

    Perhaps it could be truncated to gloho. If anyone asks, just inform him that it’s short for “global(ist) homogenization”. This gets around the connotations of “homo”, whether as prefix or as fag end.

    “Gloho”? Well, maybe.

    Still has some questionable connotations (i.e. “glory hole”, no don’t ask…)

    How about “woho”, as in “world homogenization”?

    Though that hardly seems much better. You lose the queers but add the whores. Mmmm., not great.

    I think in Our Present Era we should just leave “homo” for the scientists and maybe, milk cartons.

    Like the formerly Leprechaun-centric “pot at the end of…” the rainbow symbol has now been culturally appropriated from Irish folklore and now used to let everyone formerly banned from your restroom, inside.

    *Sigh*

    Do gays even drink “homo” milk? Probably not, low-fat only. But that joke will get you banned from hosting the Academy Awards for life. So there is an upside…. Chris Rock, please take note.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Muggles


    Do gays even drink “homo” milk? Probably not, low-fat only.
     
    It's a Canadian thing-- and in bags, an Ontarian thing. Loblaws had stores in upstate New York in the 1970s, and that probably explains my vague memories of such cartons.

    I once met an Englishman, from the north, transferring at my airport to visit his daughter in Vancouver. He asked me where he could go to have a fag. I told him, then advised that he avoid using that term on this side of the ocean. Likely his first time across. He had no idea.
  232. @Lurker
    @Recently Based

    Whats weird is the dweeb beta males who talk it up. They will be [are] the biggest losers in terms of sex and actual relationships.

    I'm thinking of a friend here, he's apoplectic at the the thought of the evil white patriarchy infringing on his right to get laid. But he isn't getting laid right now! Vocal support for polywhatever isn't going to improve his position and likely make it worse.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @SFG

    They are in a bad situation, and are not helping themselves.

    I guess they figure it can mean they at least get some action, even if it’s by sharing some fairly ugly woman, which is the reality of most poly relationships for dweebs — three guys who have trouble getting laid sharing one 185 lb girl with tattoos.

    The funny thing, all these guys have to do is get to the gym, turn some of their smarts into money and take a shower once in a while, and they could be golden.

  233. @Lurker
    @Recently Based

    Whats weird is the dweeb beta males who talk it up. They will be [are] the biggest losers in terms of sex and actual relationships.

    I'm thinking of a friend here, he's apoplectic at the the thought of the evil white patriarchy infringing on his right to get laid. But he isn't getting laid right now! Vocal support for polywhatever isn't going to improve his position and likely make it worse.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @SFG

    Well, the question for the guy at the 20th percentile is his position now, not what his position would have been in 1950. It’s entirely possible polyamory might improve his situation by getting him 1/3 of some nerd porker, rather than nobody at all. He doesn’t really have a path that includes forcing alphas to stick to one woman by resurrecting forced monogamy-that’s more if a collective action problem.

    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @SFG

    Actually, if one of the guys would lay claim to the woman, he could have her all to himself. Chicks dig assertiveness.

    Replies: @SFG

  234. @Recently Based
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    I think there is tremendous pressure to create poly relationships from multiple angles.

    There certainly is the "I am completely screwed up by my genetics + bad parents, am deeply disturbed and want to work out my psychological issues on a broader canvas" group. (ie, what you are calling freaks).

    But I think the biggest driver of this is bottom-up demand driven by feminism + deregulation of the sexual marketplace. Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.

    It's not some ironclad rule, but women do tend strongly to be hypergamous, i.e., will rarely date somebody who makes less than they do, etc. when it comes to dating, or way hotter than they are when it comes to hooking up at the foam cannon party in Cancun. As women make about as much money as men and the sexual market has now pretty much fully deregulated and has globalized through apps, most men are unattractive to most women. A small fraction of guys are getting an enormous amount of sex, and a majority of guys are getting very little to no sex. Most women are able to get sex with the hot/rich guys that they want, but mostly can't get relationships from them since these won't settle down (why would they, when these are the guys that can keep nailing tons of girls). In other words: de facto polygamy.

    Replies: @Lurker, @Corvinus

    “Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.“

    No one is buying your Roissian logic, Sheldon. The fact of the matter is that guys are doing quite well dating and mating. The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    @Corvinus

    The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    There is certainly a gap and it isn't good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn't between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married. I go to the bars on occasion and I don't see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.

    I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I've seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It's basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Corvinus

  235. @Unintended Consequence
    @YetAnotherAnon

    "...but we both live in defeated and occupied countries, whether we all realise it or not. Does Steve realise it?"

    I wholeheartedly agree that the US is under occupation; the reality of it obscured by the numerous collaborators from the more native citizen population. Sailer is somewhat occupier adjacent as are many whose ancestors immigrated from continental Europe. Putin and Russia rebelling against Western globalist dominion militarily and economically will certainly weaken their influence. The several nations involved in the extensive Eastern economic integration in recent months have already established their political and economic independence from the West. This will be more obvious over the next few years. I am more than a little concerned, however, that we're edging ever closer to WW3.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    “Putin and Russia rebelling against Western globalist dominion militarily“

    They’re not. It’s a false narrative and you and others are falling for it hook, line, and sinker.

    “I am more than a little concerned, however, that we’re edging ever closer to WW3.“

    We’re not. Relax.

    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @Corvinus

    Am I the only person who hasn't blocked you? I assume "we" is your preferred pronoun because you have no friends here.

    Btw, what makes you think that I'm not the one responsible for creating the narrative?

    Replies: @Corvinus

  236. @Muggles
    @Reg Cæsar


    Perhaps it could be truncated to gloho. If anyone asks, just inform him that it’s short for “global(ist) homogenization”. This gets around the connotations of “homo”, whether as prefix or as fag end.
     
    "Gloho"? Well, maybe.

    Still has some questionable connotations (i.e. "glory hole", no don't ask...)

    How about "woho", as in "world homogenization"?

    Though that hardly seems much better. You lose the queers but add the whores. Mmmm., not great.

    I think in Our Present Era we should just leave "homo" for the scientists and maybe, milk cartons.

    Like the formerly Leprechaun-centric "pot at the end of..." the rainbow symbol has now been culturally appropriated from Irish folklore and now used to let everyone formerly banned from your restroom, inside.

    *Sigh*

    Do gays even drink "homo" milk? Probably not, low-fat only. But that joke will get you banned from hosting the Academy Awards for life. So there is an upside.... Chris Rock, please take note.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Do gays even drink “homo” milk? Probably not, low-fat only.

    It’s a Canadian thing– and in bags, an Ontarian thing. Loblaws had stores in upstate New York in the 1970s, and that probably explains my vague memories of such cartons.

    I once met an Englishman, from the north, transferring at my airport to visit his daughter in Vancouver. He asked me where he could go to have a fag. I told him, then advised that he avoid using that term on this side of the ocean. Likely his first time across. He had no idea.

  237. The traditional legal definition of “marriage” includes the words, “a man and a woman,” implying two persons, a couple with an essential function, as I recall from a page I inspected years ago. But allowing “same-sex” marriages does seem to lift the two-member limit, because that number is no longer implicit in gendered terms.

    Is that a problem? It was futile to raise this point in arguments of course. Back then I wasn’t thinking of rental code problems, but rather of insurance coverage, and wondering whether a proliferation of large groups united in ceremonies recorded in public records might not require a precising response from the insurance industry, and I wondered how they’d put it, especially for the purpose of allaying fraud.

    I guess if you show up for the ceremony, you’re in? Is that all?

  238. @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    “Unless you are under about 35 and in the dating marketplace, you may not realize how widespread de facto polygamy is now.“

    No one is buying your Roissian logic, Sheldon. The fact of the matter is that guys are doing quite well dating and mating. The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    Replies: @John Johnson

    The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    There is certainly a gap and it isn’t good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn’t between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married. I go to the bars on occasion and I don’t see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.

    I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I’ve seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It’s basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.

    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @John Johnson

    Yes on the fat women (and men BTW) point.

    The average weight of an American woman is 171 lbs (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm).

    171 pounds. So a '5' weighs 170. Jeebus.

    And it's up about about 20% since the 1970s.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    , @Corvinus
    @John Johnson

    There is certainly a gap and it isn’t good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn’t between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married.

    “ I go to the bars on occasion and I don’t see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.”

    We go to different places then. A lot of action taking place between single men and women. There’s also dating apps young men and women are frequently using.

    “I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I’ve seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It’s basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.”

    Men and women, yes.

    Replies: @Brutusale

  239. @kaganovitch
    Even judges don’t know what “begs the question” means anymore.


    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn't exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Wilkey

    Fwiw, Bacdayan spent 25 years at Legal Services b4 being appointed to Bronx Housing Court 4 years ago. She isn’t exactly the second coming of Oliver Wendell Holmes or Learned Hand.

    Most of the pictures I found of her online feature her carrying a sign at one protest or another. She lacks the two most important qualities required of a judge: impartiality, and deference to the written law.

    Incidentally she earned her law degree at the University of Kentucky, despite lacking any other apparent ties to that state. You can thank affirmative action for that one.

  240. @John Johnson
    @Corvinus

    The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    There is certainly a gap and it isn't good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn't between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married. I go to the bars on occasion and I don't see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.

    I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I've seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It's basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Corvinus

    Yes on the fat women (and men BTW) point.

    The average weight of an American woman is 171 lbs (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm).

    171 pounds. So a ‘5’ weighs 170. Jeebus.

    And it’s up about about 20% since the 1970s.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    So is the average weight of men. Too many carbs. Yet that hasn’t stopped young men and women today from dating and mating.

    Remember, the PUA crowd led by Roissy and Roosh—both childless-whom you seem to tacitly endorse had advocated the pump and dump lifestyle, which is a direct affront to Western Civilization.

    Replies: @Recently Based

  241. @SFG
    @Lurker

    Well, the question for the guy at the 20th percentile is his position now, not what his position would have been in 1950. It’s entirely possible polyamory might improve his situation by getting him 1/3 of some nerd porker, rather than nobody at all. He doesn’t really have a path that includes forcing alphas to stick to one woman by resurrecting forced monogamy-that’s more if a collective action problem.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence

    Actually, if one of the guys would lay claim to the woman, he could have her all to himself. Chicks dig assertiveness.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Unintended Consequence

    I mean, yes, but (a) if he had that he wouldn’t be at the 20th percentile and (b) from an unattractive guy it’s creepy. The situation is rarely that easy (though improvement is likely possible in most cases).

    Replies: @Recently Based

  242. @Corvinus
    @Unintended Consequence

    “Putin and Russia rebelling against Western globalist dominion militarily“

    They’re not. It’s a false narrative and you and others are falling for it hook, line, and sinker.

    “I am more than a little concerned, however, that we’re edging ever closer to WW3.“

    We’re not. Relax.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence

    Am I the only person who hasn’t blocked you? I assume “we” is your preferred pronoun because you have no friends here.

    Btw, what makes you think that I’m not the one responsible for creating the narrative?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Unintended Consequence

    I’m not the one hyperventilating about WW3 and impending doom. Besides, some posters here would relish a global reboot.

  243. @Unintended Consequence
    @SFG

    Actually, if one of the guys would lay claim to the woman, he could have her all to himself. Chicks dig assertiveness.

    Replies: @SFG

    I mean, yes, but (a) if he had that he wouldn’t be at the 20th percentile and (b) from an unattractive guy it’s creepy. The situation is rarely that easy (though improvement is likely possible in most cases).

    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @SFG

    SFG, I agree with your analysis of the situation.

    What the guy at the 20th percentile needs to do in the actual world we live in is pretty clear -- move up the percentile ranks. It's not rocket science: get to the gym, work harder and make some money, take a shower once in a while.

    At some point, it becomes a philosophical question about free will -- basically, does who I am prevent me from getting off my ass and doing those things?

  244. @Recently Based
    @John Johnson

    Yes on the fat women (and men BTW) point.

    The average weight of an American woman is 171 lbs (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm).

    171 pounds. So a '5' weighs 170. Jeebus.

    And it's up about about 20% since the 1970s.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    So is the average weight of men. Too many carbs. Yet that hasn’t stopped young men and women today from dating and mating.

    Remember, the PUA crowd led by Roissy and Roosh—both childless-whom you seem to tacitly endorse had advocated the pump and dump lifestyle, which is a direct affront to Western Civilization.

    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @Corvinus

    "So is the average weight of men."

    Hence my statement "and men BTW."

  245. @Unintended Consequence
    @Corvinus

    Am I the only person who hasn't blocked you? I assume "we" is your preferred pronoun because you have no friends here.

    Btw, what makes you think that I'm not the one responsible for creating the narrative?

    Replies: @Corvinus

    I’m not the one hyperventilating about WW3 and impending doom. Besides, some posters here would relish a global reboot.

  246. @John Johnson
    @Corvinus

    The problem is that the chads like yourself keep harping on this sexual social hierarchy and the “proper” place of certain guys, and hype up this alleged sex gap between the haves and have nots.

    There is certainly a gap and it isn't good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn't between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married. I go to the bars on occasion and I don't see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.

    I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I've seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It's basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.

    Replies: @Recently Based, @Corvinus

    There is certainly a gap and it isn’t good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn’t between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married.

    “ I go to the bars on occasion and I don’t see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.”

    We go to different places then. A lot of action taking place between single men and women. There’s also dating apps young men and women are frequently using.

    “I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I’ve seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It’s basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.”

    Men and women, yes.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @Corvinus

    Men more so than women in the overweight and obese tranches. Strangely, women are just a little less than double the percentage of men in the severely obese category.

  247. @Corvinus
    @John Johnson

    There is certainly a gap and it isn’t good for society. Too many single guys can lead to extremism. A pretty consistent lesson from history.

    The gap isn’t between men with a lot of women and all the single guys thumbing through apps. The real gap is between married guys and single guys that would like to be married.

    “ I go to the bars on occasion and I don’t see a minority of men cleaning up and taking home a different woman every weekend. I see single guys and established couples.”

    We go to different places then. A lot of action taking place between single men and women. There’s also dating apps young men and women are frequently using.

    “I swear the women here in middle America are getting fatter. I’ve seen a lot of 250/300 pounders lately. I think $2 cheeseburgers are a much bigger problem than hypergamy. It screws up the dating market. It’s basically safe for women to be 200 pounds if everyone else is. It creates a sliding scale..and it is only going one direction.”

    Men and women, yes.

    Replies: @Brutusale

    Men more so than women in the overweight and obese tranches. Strangely, women are just a little less than double the percentage of men in the severely obese category.

  248. @Verymuchalive
    Now a judge in yet another one of these New York City rental lawsuits

    Mr Steve, surely you mean one of these lawsuits involving a New York City rental judge.
    You pays your money and you gets your judgement. Seems obvious to me.

    Replies: @Ted Kennedy

    They won’t stop until fucking barnyard animals and your grandmothers dead corpse become legally protected actions of their affection.

  249. Anonymous[147] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson
    @RadicalCenter

    Utterly wrong about private gun ownership in Russia. Lying.

    You can't just buy a gun in Russia like in the US.

    They have Euro nanny state laws where you have to show that you are a hunter or target shooter.

    Any type of political flag in your file from posting online and forget about it.

    You can only own a smoothbore shotgun for the first 5 years and then you can try applying to nanny state for a rifle.

    So basically the dream of US liberals. Limited access to hunters and forget about handguns or semi-auto rifles. Smoothbore shotguns significantly limit range aka voting from rooftops.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    With all the drunkenness in Russia I’m not sure widespread gun ownership would be a good idea.

    Guns, democracy and free speech are things that only a few nations can “do” successfully. Everywhere else they result in chaos.

    For these things to work, you need an intelligent, conscientious, self-restrained, civic-minded population. The US is such a nation (for now). But Russia?

    • Troll: Corvinus
  250. Give these promiscuous, wandering-eye Lotharios whatever “recognition” they want.

    Hell, buy them three place settings of china from their Polyamorous Wedding Registry.

    But make sure everyone in the “relationship” chips in equally to the MARKET VALUE rent.

    It never ceases to amaze me how judges can scoff at Big Government telling grown adults (gays) how they must conduct their private lives by way of marriage, while seeing nothing wrong with Big Government telling grown adults (property owners) how they must conduct their financial lives by way of rent control.

  251. @Corvinus
    @Recently Based

    So is the average weight of men. Too many carbs. Yet that hasn’t stopped young men and women today from dating and mating.

    Remember, the PUA crowd led by Roissy and Roosh—both childless-whom you seem to tacitly endorse had advocated the pump and dump lifestyle, which is a direct affront to Western Civilization.

    Replies: @Recently Based

    “So is the average weight of men.”

    Hence my statement “and men BTW.”

  252. @SFG
    @Unintended Consequence

    I mean, yes, but (a) if he had that he wouldn’t be at the 20th percentile and (b) from an unattractive guy it’s creepy. The situation is rarely that easy (though improvement is likely possible in most cases).

    Replies: @Recently Based

    SFG, I agree with your analysis of the situation.

    What the guy at the 20th percentile needs to do in the actual world we live in is pretty clear — move up the percentile ranks. It’s not rocket science: get to the gym, work harder and make some money, take a shower once in a while.

    At some point, it becomes a philosophical question about free will — basically, does who I am prevent me from getting off my ass and doing those things?

  253. @JimDandy
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I think unipolyamorous relationships--wherein the man can fuck anything that moves, but all the females are monogamous with him--are the most fun.

    Replies: @Corvinus

    That’s why your “fun” is a civilization killer.

    • Thanks: JimDandy

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World