The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The Woke War on Homosexuals
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL 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

One of the weirder developments of this decade has been the rapid adaptation in the U.S. of a view previously relegated mostly to some Asian Islamic countries, such as Iran and Malaysia, that male homosexuals are, basically, defective women who should be encouraged by society to transition to a less defective version of womanhood using dresses, chemicals, surgery, and a vast social conspiracy not to notice that they aren’t really women.

(Similarly, lesbians are now seen as defective men who should be placed on testosterone injections and mutilated.)

This is causing problems for men’s fashion magazines traditionally aimed at a readership that was significantly gay male, such as Gentleman’s Quarterly. In the past, GQ could compete for two different readerships: the Eligible Bachelor demographic wanting advice on how to look good for the ladies (for which it competed with Playboy) and the Nature’s Bachelor demographic wanting advice on how to look good for the gentlemen. That was because both groups wanted to look masculine (i.e., in Woke terms, highly binary) to attract either the opposite or the same sex.

If you looked closely in, say, 1980, GQ’s articles on what men should wear this year tended to be fussier and gayer than Playboy’s articles on the same topic, but the differences weren’t stark.

But nowadays, that was all so 2011.

Hence this hilarious Letter From the Editor of Gentleman’s Quarterly:

Introducing GQ’s New Masculinity Issue, Starring Pharrell
GQ editor-in-chief Will Welch says masculinity is changing—and change is good.

BY WILL WELCH
October 15, 2019

Back in September of last year, when I found out that I would be the editor in chief of GQ, most people said stuff like “Amazing!” and “Congrats!” But one particularly perceptive friend reacted in a way that I’ll never forget. “Yikes,” she said. “Hell of a time to be in charge of a men’s magazine.”

It was a hard-core thing to say—which is exactly what real friends are for. She was right, of course. It was and is a precarious moment. Our society had been wearing blinders that shielded a pervasive culture of sexual intimidation and violence and blatant gender inequality. But some exceedingly brave people—many of whom were the victims of that unequal, violent, and discriminatory culture itself—were in the process of showing everyone the plain truth.

So the essential question that the team and I have been confronting during our first year in this new era at GQ is: How do you make a so-called men’s magazine in the thick of what has justifiably become the Shut Up and Listen moment?

It’s an awesome, exciting, long-overdue challenge. And we see every day at GQ as an opportunity to answer that question.

One way we’ve addressed it is by making a magazine that isn’t really trying to be exclusively for or about men at all. In fact, for many years now, one of the key principles at GQ is that if we tell stories that excite our own smart, voracious, politically and socially engaged team, we will connect with a smart, engaged, diverse, and gender-nonspecific audience. Which means GQ isn’t targeting a conventional demographic at all; we’re just doing our own specific GQ thing our own specific GQ way—and we trust that all kinds of people will relate and engage.

This even applies to how we approach the seemingly very gendered topic of men’s fashion. What we’ve been trying to do with our fashion storytelling this year is position it in a way that makes it exciting and relevant to anyone with an interest in menswear culture, rather than creating a guide that applies only to people who wear men’s clothes. It’s a subtle but important shift.

The other approach is our practice of thinking of GQ not as a singular voice but as a community platform—a pulpit that can be widely and freely shared.

Both of these ways of thinking culminate with the issue you are now holding, the New Masculinity Issue, which we have been working on in various stages since January.

The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today. You’ll hear from an activist who is figuring out how to speak to closed-minded men about topics like sexual discrimination in the workplace (Tarana Burke). From a gender-nonbinary actor who is simultaneously advocating for greater inclusivity in Hollywood and acknowledging their own privilege (Asia Kate Dillon). From two very different comedians who are both mining this moment for poignant, provocative laughs (Jaboukie Young-White and Hannah Gadsby). From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis), and an NBA player who is publicly divulging his personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love). And there are many others.

… In other words, you have to have empathy for yourself. And then you can turn that hard-won superpower outward and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

It might seem counterintuitive that the people we need to learn to love first and foremost are ourselves, but I believe it’s true. Toxicity simply cannot thrive in the golden presence of genuine self-love.

With that, I’ll pass the mic. Time, once again, to listen.

Will Welch is GQ’s editor-in-chief.

They are particularly proud of this picture of the male singer Pharrell dressed as if the Queen of the Planet of the Amazon Women were a homeless person who wore a sleeping bag all day.

In general, our society less and less encourages looking sexually attractive to other people and more and more encourages acting out inner fantasies that are unattractive to others to make yourself even more of a victim of society.

 
Hide 234 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Pharrell’s got to be the least masculine brother they could have found without being gay, even within music, and his normal costume is an adaptation of “white video game enthusiast.” I would’ve accepted Jidenna (whose “Classic Man” persona looked like he stepped right out of one of those older GQ fashion prescriptions) or T.I..

    • Replies: @Richard P
    T.I. fits the bill well as he's always carried himself in a classy, sophisticated manner -- and he's one tough SOB who's been around the block.
    , @Danindc
    Another pic from pop culture that makes me physically ill
  2. Is that a black man culturally appropriating Nordic blond hair for the cover?

    I can’t believe they think that is acceptable I’m 2019!

    • Replies: @Sam Coulton
    Blond hair isn't Nordic. The genetic material for blond hair is from central Siberia.



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

    An Afontova Gora 3 female individual dated to c. 14.7 kya, is the earliest known individual with the derived allele of KITLG responsible for blond hair in modern Europeans, and is recorded in Mesolithic Eastern Europe as associated with the EHG lineage.[7]
     
  3. I am hoping this is a parody, but I fear its not.

    • Replies: @Alfa158
    It is not a parody.
    However, getting this feral person to wear the gigantic lampshade was a sly practical joke. I wonder if the editor followed up by asking him to sniff the plastic flower he was wearing in his lapel, and then apologized for the squirt in the face by offering him a fine cigar and lighting it for him.
    Clearly Mr. Welch shares my fondness for slap-stick humor.
    , @Anonymous
    No one reads this drivel anymore.

    The goal is no longer selling ads but indoctrination.
    , @Bard of Bumperstickers
    The tsunami of kookoo currently washing over the West may be attributable to some sort of cloud of subatomic particles, which our galaxy, or perhaps solar system, could be passing through. This theoretical particle could be named the Higgs Bozon, or Clown Particle. Isolating and identifying this proposed phenomenon is being undertaken in the Mainstream Media Article Accelerator.
  4. Modern magazines from GQ to Sports Illustrated toCat Fancy can’t go under soon enough!

    ……salt the earth whence they sat!

    • Replies: @Richard P
    I couldn't agree more. Who actually reads this garbage?
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Modern magazines from GQ to Sports Illustrated to Cat Fancy can’t go under soon enough!
     
    I subscribed to Esquire for a year in high school, over forty years ago. A gas station attendant-- you have to be pretty old to remember these, except in New Jersey and Oregon-- saw me reading it in the back seat and said he had stopped some time before. "It's all advertisements."

    I've come to the conclusion that magazines are the most pernicious of commercial media, because they have to fill their pages every month. TV is second, because people discover in time how boring and unproductive the activity is, and have to be tempted with increasing novelty. What else can explain "reality shows"?
  5. The world’s problems are accelerated when we find sex icky. No wonder the Woke are so angry.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    The world’s problems are accelerated when we find sex icky.
     
    No, the world's problems are accelerated when we embrace degeneracy and Modernism.
    , @Desiderius
    If you want World Peace you’ve got to get the Birth Rate down to the Death Rate somehow. Might as well convince everyone else to be gay and/or that sex is icky.

    That’s the (Jaffe Memo) Plan anyway.
    , @Steve in Greensboro

    The world’s problems are accelerated when we
     
    embrace diversity and equality.

    (This is a fun game. Shouldn't collect all of these and have a vote?)
    , @Lot
    “ The world’s problems are accelerated when we find sex icky.”

    Seems like this is common for Japanese women.
  6. Is that yellow lady the fleet admiral from ‘Coneheads‘?

  7. GQ has given up on the normal man demographic long ago. They’ve become a how-to manual for men who like men.

    • Replies: @TheMediumIsTheMassage
    Not many gays want to look like this, trust me.
  8. @J.Ross
    Pharrell's got to be the least masculine brother they could have found without being gay, even within music, and his normal costume is an adaptation of "white video game enthusiast." I would've accepted Jidenna (whose "Classic Man" persona looked like he stepped right out of one of those older GQ fashion prescriptions) or T.I..

    T.I. fits the bill well as he’s always carried himself in a classy, sophisticated manner — and he’s one tough SOB who’s been around the block.

    • Agree: Autochthon
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    I will add, as (I think) the only regular commenter who appreciates hip hop, that T.I. is probably disqualified from endorsement by The Narrative because he believes in freedom, agency, responsibility, and (most unforgivable at all in the current climate) the need of children for their fathers:

    https://youtu.be/-HYvHGo5ce8
  9. Mr. Young-White has an interesting name.

    • Replies: @petit bourgeois
    Jabouki's brothers' names are "Javaughn and Javeigh." And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the "Millenial" future.

  10. @fish
    Modern magazines from GQ to Sports Illustrated toCat Fancy can't go under soon enough!


    ……salt the earth whence they sat!

    I couldn’t agree more. Who actually reads this garbage?

  11. To paraphrase a certain cliche: Wokeness isn’t about sex, it’s about power.

    • Replies: @Prester John
    That's ALL it's about.
  12. @Redneck farmer
    The world's problems are accelerated when we find sex icky. No wonder the Woke are so angry.

    The world’s problems are accelerated when we find sex icky.

    No, the world’s problems are accelerated when we embrace degeneracy and Modernism.

    • Agree: bruce county
    • Replies: @David
    Let's agree on a mean between extremes.
  13. Pfft. Here is a gown fit for a queen of outer space.

    • Replies: @Laurence Whelk
    “The Indescribable Delights of the Female Planet”

    What a mistake we made in trading space exploration for monetarily appeasing whining blacks and women (and other miscellaneous miscreants) in endless cycles of throwing good money after bad. And what to we have to show for it? Yet more demands.

    And no indescribable delights in sight.

    If only we could have maintained the world portrayed in the first few episodes of Mad Men.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Just tried a search to put it on hold at the library

    No joy :-{
  14. Anonymous[483] • Disclaimer says:

    Steve Sailer:

    “That was because both groups wanted to look masculine (i.e., in Woke terms, highly binary) to attract either the opposite or the same sex.”

    What about the bisexual men? Would they want to look more masculine or feminine? And yes, bisexual men *DO* exist: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiG0pjRrZ_lAhVEDrkGHXzfDrUQFjABegQIARAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpubmed%2F22194088&usg=AOvVaw2ZVTys4FYpjvkForJZJ68Z

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    More masculine. It's an ill-kept secret in the gay world that effeminate men are at the bottom of the sexual hierarchy. "NO FEMS" are a common sight on dating personals.

    Again: this shouldn't really be all that surprising. If someone is attracted to men, they aren't going to be aroused by stereotypically female looks or mannerisms. Men and women do not have the same bodies or sexual organs, this is deeply rooted biological stuff that isn't going to be changed by The Good Men Project or GQ.

  15. “The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today. You’ll hear from an activist who is figuring out how to speak to closed-minded men about topics like sexual discrimination in the workplace (Tarana Burke). From a gender-nonbinary actor who is simultaneously advocating for greater inclusivity in Hollywood and acknowledging their own privilege (Asia Kate Dillon). From two very different comedians who are both mining this moment for poignant, provocative laughs (Jaboukie Young-White and Hannah Gadsby). From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis), and an NBA player who is publicly divulging his personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love). And there are many others.”

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.

    Also, women are oppressed, down with the patriarchy, #believeallwomen

    • Replies: @anon
    From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis),

    Because anthropologists are total experts on the endocrine system and the brain...the anti-science legacy of Franz Boas lives on.
    , @nebulafox
    Big difference between men and women: we don't understand women or what life is like as a woman. But we know that, we don't pretend to, and we're pretty comfortable admitting that we don't have a clue. They don't understand men or what life is like as a man. But they think that they know us better than we know ourselves-and when they realize they aren't just wrong, but they aren't even close, they get bitter.

    Why is this? Is is because being male is the "default" in just about everything you can think of?

    , @a reader

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.
     
    ... and the seventh a queer.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    I'm sure Nora Caplan-Bricker has our best interests at heart and is a guide to follow.

    Btw, is there any US equivalent of FreeBMD which enables you to ascertain the ancestries of the great and good? Are US births, marriages and deaths publicly available?

  16. It reads like they decided to go full gay, but want the remnant of heterosexuals who are still buying the magazine to keep buying it. So instead of “only dicksuckers from now on” they’re announcing that they’re for everybody, and that the best way of doing that is to get as far away from normal heterosexuality as possible.

    Also I have to say I’m having trouble expressing, even in thought, how much I hate this style of writing. This mushy, moist, formless, empty…ugh. The closest I can get to it is that it feels like I’m being forced to inhale yeast-infected vagina fumes. For someone who loves language and the beauty of exactness, this is torture.

    • Replies: @Lot
    “ This mushy, moist, formless, empty…ugh. ”

    I know what you are talking about. I think it comes from insecurely-employed white writers walking on eggshells to avoid offense.

    The one thing they know the SJWs will allow is abject self-denigration of themselves and white conservatives. But anything someone higher in the wokemon scale could find offensive is off limits, so almost anything.

    What’s left is just saying blacks and gays are so brave, so intellectual, so creative.
    , @Laurence Whelk

    It reads like they decided to go full gay...
     
    https://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/861/173/37c.jpg
    , @Swedish Family

    Also I have to say I’m having trouble expressing, even in thought, how much I hate this style of writing. This mushy, moist, formless, empty…ugh. The closest I can get to it is that it feels like I’m being forced to inhale yeast-infected vagina fumes. For someone who loves language and the beauty of exactness, this is torture.
     
    Yes, it's the cramped voice of unfreedom. Eastern-Europeans will spot it a mile away.
  17. @Redneck farmer
    The world's problems are accelerated when we find sex icky. No wonder the Woke are so angry.

    If you want World Peace you’ve got to get the Birth Rate down to the Death Rate somehow. Might as well convince everyone else to be gay and/or that sex is icky.

    That’s the (Jaffe Memo) Plan anyway.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Berlin Club owners now officially participate in rallies pro-open borders. Thing is, that the immigrants on't act up to this concept at all: The women get pregnant as soon as possible quite often.
  18. The cover is so funny it severely tests whatever is the converse of Poe’s Law

  19. …personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love).

    Well, that’s what you get when you grow up with the Beach Boys and end up with the Bitch Boys. He doesn’t even have any tattoos, at least according to GQ in 2015:

    Kevin Love’s New Hair Could Totally Star in a Boyband

    The New Masculinity = Silence a whiny mutt.

  20. Is that OUR Hannah Gadsby,the least funniest comedian of all time?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But Hannah Gadsby has a good golf swing:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bhsj6kFSQiM

    , @Bard of Bumperstickers
    Doesn't funny-looking count? BTW, isn't she revolted by little, dimpled white balls?
  21. @Just Saying
    "The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today. You’ll hear from an activist who is figuring out how to speak to closed-minded men about topics like sexual discrimination in the workplace (Tarana Burke). From a gender-nonbinary actor who is simultaneously advocating for greater inclusivity in Hollywood and acknowledging their own privilege (Asia Kate Dillon). From two very different comedians who are both mining this moment for poignant, provocative laughs (Jaboukie Young-White and Hannah Gadsby). From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis), and an NBA player who is publicly divulging his personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love). And there are many others."

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.

    Also, women are oppressed, down with the patriarchy, #believeallwomen

    From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis),

    Because anthropologists are total experts on the endocrine system and the brain…the anti-science legacy of Franz Boas lives on.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    Imagine all the Marxist economists teaching at Moscow State after the Soviet Union collapsed. Hey, nothing I teach works I’m still getting paid. Might as well keep going. Also, the redheads are great!

    Same mindset for anthropology and sociology departments nationwide.
    , @Ranger Rick
    Liberal Arts (intellectual idiots) are what's wrong with higher education today. Lao Tzu warned about giving serfs too many ideas; but partially educating slaves they will be difficult to govern. Or in the modern parlance, "College has ruined many a good truck driver". The decline of Western Civilization can be traced to the Liberal Arts expansion of the 60s. All those cowards had to avoid the draft some way, and with their useless degrees they managed to end up as teachers for the Boomer Generation.

    And we all know how that turned out.................
  22. “One way we’ve addressed it is by making a magazine that isn’t really trying to be exclusively for or about men at all,” said the EDITOR of GENTLEMAN’S QUARTERLY MAGAZINE!!

    “Hi, I’m Cloe Jeweywitz, Editor in Chief for Better Homes and Gardens!

    Our lead story this month, “Trump is Hitler,” is a painstakingly repurposed graduate thesis from one of our newest, and youngest scribes! When you finished reading, you will legitimately wonder if President Trump is actually Hitler Again. For that, and more, you can subscribe through Apple News! Thank you, and Welcome!”

  23. @truthman
    I am hoping this is a parody, but I fear its not.

    It is not a parody.
    However, getting this feral person to wear the gigantic lampshade was a sly practical joke. I wonder if the editor followed up by asking him to sniff the plastic flower he was wearing in his lapel, and then apologized for the squirt in the face by offering him a fine cigar and lighting it for him.
    Clearly Mr. Welch shares my fondness for slap-stick humor.

    • Replies: @WowJustWow
    The Emperor’s New Masculinity.
  24. DEMOCRATS TO VOTE ON IMPEACHMENT!
    It’s a message from the Central Committee!
    What does it say?
    “We live in dark times. It is always dark now, now that Trump ate the sun. Why just the other nightday I was poetasting an all-arugula cookbook and thinking about how awful Trump–“
    NO, what does it say about impeachment?
    It says —
    Given Trump’s unpopularity and the unbroken consensus on his impeachability,

    DELAY THE VOTE ON IMPEACHMENT!!

  25. Sam Coulton [AKA "S. M. Coulton"] says:
    @Charles II
    Is that a black man culturally appropriating Nordic blond hair for the cover?

    I can’t believe they think that is acceptable I’m 2019!

    Blond hair isn’t Nordic. The genetic material for blond hair is from central Siberia.

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

    An Afontova Gora 3 female individual dated to c. 14.7 kya, is the earliest known individual with the derived allele of KITLG responsible for blond hair in modern Europeans, and is recorded in Mesolithic Eastern Europe as associated with the EHG lineage.[7]

    • Replies: @Liza
    Technically speaking, that's correct. But, come on, everywhere it is pretty much recognized that naturally occurring blond hair = (wicked) white people.
    , @OscarWildeLoveChild
    Do you also correct everyone, "Hey folks, its pronounced NeanderTALL...in it's original German" ?

    Just curious.
  26. The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package

    That sounds more like Playgirl than GQ.

    Nora Caplan- Bricker = Barack, a prince lorn!

    Asia Kate Dillon = A dilation leaks.

    Jaboukie Young-White = Joky about wienie. Ugh!

    Will Welch— Get an IOU first.

    Hannah Gadsby = Bangs hayhand.

  27. Gag me! What Will Welch has proposed sounds POSITIVELY TOXIC. And I say that as a gay man. Let their readership evaporate. We need a Return to Beauty.

  28. I got a subscription to GQ for a while in the 2000s, hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls. But despite having good recommendations, I had to cancel it, because it was so Marxist in its articles and in its pushing of “black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys” aesthetic (blacks were overrepresented in cover photos and photo models and in article subjects).

    It’s not surprising its pushing further left. As fewer people get magazines and newspapers, these folks play to their perceived base. They go extreme left in order to please the base. The NY Times audience has no idea how outside normal they are and how many untruths they are told, and neither do GQ‘s regular readers these days.

    P.S. It’s interesting how much the Left belives Nature can overcome Nurture, and how self-important each Commie thinks he is. “We can change how masculinity is perceived!” screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so. And yet he-men never go out of style.

    • Replies: @anon
    We can change how masculinity is perceived!” screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so

    That's because their ribs are showing.


    https://mikecanex.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/charles-atlas-01.jpg
    , @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls."

    That is not how you pick up girls. Both GQ fashion and PUA 'tude are lying to you. (First of all, "picking up girls" is an illusory goal. What you actually want is not girls, plural, but rather -- one particular girl, one individual girlfriend, someone suited to you, with whom you can go on and work together with, to build a family and a life.)

    Picking up girls is a two step process. It goes as follows:

    Step One: cultivate a formidable skill, through training, practice, and discipline. Then, using it, do something interesting, bold, and skillful, and make sure that girls see you doing it.

    Step Two: actually there is no Step Two. If you have successfully completed Step One, then you don't need to "pick up girls" because you now have a hot girlfiend, because she threw herself at you once you completed Step One.
    , @Richard P

    “black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys”
     
    Blacks have never looked "cool". They look like thugs and are a mirror image of what they perceive themselves to be; thugs. "Pathetic" white men have run circles around and dominated blacks for centuries.
    , @EdwardM

    They go extreme left in order to please the base.
     
    Dunno. As the example of your own readership illustrates, I don't think that this new incarnation is about appealing to the base at all. (If it were, then I could respect that as a profit-maximizing strategy.) It's about pushing an agenda and virtue-signalling, on the part of the staff as well as the owners. They are willing to lose money to do so, as they surely well.

    It's like all of the TV commercials with laughably convoluted "famly" scenarios -- like a black family in a house with a white picket fence, the black-woman-white-man couple (the converse seems to be non-PC these days), homosexuals, etc., etc. -- which I don't think are really trying to sell toothpaste, but rather to push an agenda and, as a plus, get pats on the back from their Madison Ave. colleagues.

    Former capitalists now have enough money to spend (lose) on this garbage. This is practically the definition of societal decadance and degeneracy.

  29. So the new masculinity is just femininity by another name? Trust the female editor of a men’s magazine to be unable to think any other way. You just can’t take the female mindset out of a woman.

  30. @truthman
    I am hoping this is a parody, but I fear its not.

    No one reads this drivel anymore.

    The goal is no longer selling ads but indoctrination.

  31. @truthman
    I am hoping this is a parody, but I fear its not.

    The tsunami of kookoo currently washing over the West may be attributable to some sort of cloud of subatomic particles, which our galaxy, or perhaps solar system, could be passing through. This theoretical particle could be named the Higgs Bozon, or Clown Particle. Isolating and identifying this proposed phenomenon is being undertaken in the Mainstream Media Article Accelerator.

    • Agree: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "The tsunami of kookoo currently washing over the West may be attributable to some sort of cloud of subatomic particles, which our galaxy, or perhaps solar system, could be passing through"

    This was more or less the opinion of the late and great Fred Hoyle regarding viruses and disease outbreaks. Here's a 2010 article by one of his collaborators, Chandra Wickramsinghe. Astrobiology is no longer offered at Cardiff, the UK centre is at Edinburgh. Dr Wickramsinghe is now at the private University of Buckingham.

    http://journalofcosmology.com/Panspermia10.html

    "Ancient Chinese astronomers chronicled numerous episodes where the apparition of comets preceded plague and disaster. Meticulous observations were compiled in 300 BC in a series of books known as the "Mawangdui Silk" (Ling-feng 1976) It details 29 different cometary forms and the various disasters associated with them, dating as far back as 1500 B.C: "Comets are vile stars. Every time they appear in the south, they wipe out the old and establish the new. Fish grow sick, crops fail, Emperors and common people die, and men go to war. The people hate life and don't even want to speak of it." -Li Ch'un Feng, Director, Chinese Imperial Astronomical Bureau, (648, A.D)."

     

  32. Anon[426] • Disclaimer says:

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.

    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    They were the same men.
    Calligraphy, flower arranging and tea ceremony were psychological compensation for being at each moment on call to slaughter some unfortunate peasant, and living permanently on the edge of death, maybe by one's own hand at the request of one's lord.
    , @PiltdownMan

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.
     
    The ideal of the warrior aesthete was a thing in other cultures, too, notably many Islamic societies. Portraits of the Muslim emperors of India depict them daintily holding a flower with one hand, while the other hand rests on their sword's pommel.

    https://i.imgur.com/CSxfWC1.jpg
    , @Alden
    Lots of, in fact most florists are men. Probably because of the physical strength needed. Not arranging flowers of course, but heavy lifting and loading that’s part of the job.
  33. So the G in GQ stands for Gentleman’s? Who’d have thunk it?

  34. My own pet theory-and it is nothing but a pet theory-on the recent shift away from gays to transgenders has to do with disappointed expectations.

    In real life, male homosexuality-or bisexuality-does not necessarily imply effeminacy. (I’ll let someone else talk about lesbians, but I’d be surprised if it wasn’t the same.) Yeah, sure, you have your queens, but that doesn’t make them a majority of gay men. And given the relatively recent titanic shifts-political and cultural-on homosexuality in the USA over the past couple of decades, it isn’t shocking that all of a sudden, we have a lot more homosexuals hanging around. Most of them aren’t very camp. Why? Because in previous decades, with the social stigma being what it was, gay men who were open about their preferences were more likely to be camp enough to either not care or not be able to hide it. Which shouldn’t be shocking to anybody who has, I don’t know, actually talked to an average gay man or has studied a little bit of history. In classical antiquity, homosexuality as a social identity didn’t even exist: it was all about taking the active vs. passive role in sex, with the choice of male vs. female partners being largely seen as a matter of personal preference beyond the emphasis on reproduction.

    That coincides with “gay ghettos” in American cities: which, in a lot of places, have lost much of their social function with the mainstreamizing of homosexuality. Adding to this is that a lot of straight women tend to *love* the idea of male friends who share their interests and aren’t interested in them sexually, but also don’t present sexual or social competition. Naturally, the media caters to that desire. So, I’m guessing that a lot of people take the amount of effeminate gay men to be greater than it is in reality, and that would include the wokesters.

    The ultimate goal of a lot of these people decrying “toxic masculinity” is to attack maleness in general. They don’t care about who is screwing who: they care about men behaving like men. Maybe they were hoping massive acceptance of homosexuality would do it. But it hasn’t. Most gay men still act disappointingly male, with little interest in acting otherwise, and gay rights has made that reality apparent, far from changing it. I don’t think to transgender rights is going to do the trick, either. Gay people are only 1-2% of the populace: even if we account for people in the closet, that’s still not enough people to cause a change of the magnitude that the Usual Suspects want. And I cannot imagine that there are as many transgender people out there as gay people.

    • Replies: @Jesse
    Possibly, but most of it is a deliberate effort to find the kids who will most likely turn out Not Straight, and leave them mutilated, sterile (which is where the "it's genetic!" spiel will leave you) and dying early from heart attacks and cancer from all the cross sex hormones. Which is a breathtakingly cruel way to deal with mental illness - imagine deciding to emasculate and poison all the schizophrenics.

    My suspicion is that the powerful people knew full well what caused the AIDS crisis, and started planning both their prevention and their revenge.
    , @Kronos

    The ultimate goal of a lot of these people decrying “toxic masculinity” is to attack maleness in general. They don’t care about who is screwing who: they care about men behaving like men.
     
    Are we looking at the political zenith of female boomer feminists? They’ve accrued a lot of political power over the years and with lots of time/money but no kids so maybe they’re just bored/angry? Also, decades of antidepressants maybe partially “rewired” their synapses.
  35. If you know where to look, the effort to mutilate and sterilize gays and lesbians is very, real, very deliberate, and has been brewing for a while.

    In “The Wisdom of Whores”, Elizabeth Pisani crowed over the plan to mutilate gay men in Indonesia, even as older gays were horrified, as a way of reducing the AIDS rate. The Powers That Be have been planning this war for decades.

    As unpleasant as they can be (AIDS was entirely the fault of promiscuous gay man), homo- and bisexual people don’t deserve this. Unless we want to take *all* mentally ill people and mutilate them, pump then full of cross sex hormones that are catastrophic for their health, while gaslighting them that it’s what they really want, then we have to acknowledge that this is repugnant.

  36. Global-Homo-Neo-Liberalism=Flexible Labor Markets=Flexible Identities…..

  37. @Anonymous
    Steve Sailer:

    "That was because both groups wanted to look masculine (i.e., in Woke terms, highly binary) to attract either the opposite or the same sex."

    What about the bisexual men? Would they want to look more masculine or feminine? And yes, bisexual men *DO* exist: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiG0pjRrZ_lAhVEDrkGHXzfDrUQFjABegQIARAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpubmed%2F22194088&usg=AOvVaw2ZVTys4FYpjvkForJZJ68Z

    More masculine. It’s an ill-kept secret in the gay world that effeminate men are at the bottom of the sexual hierarchy. “NO FEMS” are a common sight on dating personals.

    Again: this shouldn’t really be all that surprising. If someone is attracted to men, they aren’t going to be aroused by stereotypically female looks or mannerisms. Men and women do not have the same bodies or sexual organs, this is deeply rooted biological stuff that isn’t going to be changed by The Good Men Project or GQ.

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    This was the whole mindset behind the Castro Clones look back in the 1970s/1980s, and the related phenomenon of the Village People ( who were Castro Clones in masculine-looking uniforms) Gays wanted young, rugged, manly looking/acting men who just "happen" to be gay:

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Castro_clone

    It's every gay man's sex fantasy to turn a young, masculine straight guy gay , in the same way it's every straight guy's fantasy to have some barely-legal high school girl fall head-over-heels in love with them and give in to their every sexual desire.
    , @Anonymous
    But if the man is bisexual, he is attracted to both mascculine and feminine characteristics, so maybe to a bisexual man it wouldn't matter if the man is masculine or feminine?
  38. Our society had been wearing blinders that shielded a pervasive culture of sexual intimidation and violence

    *Bill Burr Voice*from you! Not me, not normal people! From people like you in the ‘arts’ and ‘media’. Nobody else had massive, normalised issues with boundaries, sexual promotion or sexual assault. Why are you talking to me like I’m the one doing this?

    The wealthy and powerful men who suffered a few casualties (Everybody hated Weinstein, if they didn’t, maybe he wouldn’t have become a human Lehman Brothers) and then it suddenly stopped for them well short of any reasonable finish line. Even the whole web of grooming and human trafficking surrounding Lesley Wexner and agencies employed by Victoria’s Secret is being seemingly left alone and ignored by the media. (They hired two trans models since Epstein got arrested, for diversity they got one that passes well enough and one that doesn’t pass at all)

    Talk about ‘blinders’.

  39. @nebulafox
    My own pet theory-and it is nothing but a pet theory-on the recent shift away from gays to transgenders has to do with disappointed expectations.

    In real life, male homosexuality-or bisexuality-does not necessarily imply effeminacy. (I'll let someone else talk about lesbians, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't the same.) Yeah, sure, you have your queens, but that doesn't make them a majority of gay men. And given the relatively recent titanic shifts-political and cultural-on homosexuality in the USA over the past couple of decades, it isn't shocking that all of a sudden, we have a lot more homosexuals hanging around. Most of them aren't very camp. Why? Because in previous decades, with the social stigma being what it was, gay men who were open about their preferences were more likely to be camp enough to either not care or not be able to hide it. Which shouldn't be shocking to anybody who has, I don't know, actually talked to an average gay man or has studied a little bit of history. In classical antiquity, homosexuality as a social identity didn't even exist: it was all about taking the active vs. passive role in sex, with the choice of male vs. female partners being largely seen as a matter of personal preference beyond the emphasis on reproduction.

    That coincides with "gay ghettos" in American cities: which, in a lot of places, have lost much of their social function with the mainstreamizing of homosexuality. Adding to this is that a lot of straight women tend to *love* the idea of male friends who share their interests and aren't interested in them sexually, but also don't present sexual or social competition. Naturally, the media caters to that desire. So, I'm guessing that a lot of people take the amount of effeminate gay men to be greater than it is in reality, and that would include the wokesters.

    The ultimate goal of a lot of these people decrying "toxic masculinity" is to attack maleness in general. They don't care about who is screwing who: they care about men behaving like men. Maybe they were hoping massive acceptance of homosexuality would do it. But it hasn't. Most gay men still act disappointingly male, with little interest in acting otherwise, and gay rights has made that reality apparent, far from changing it. I don't think to transgender rights is going to do the trick, either. Gay people are only 1-2% of the populace: even if we account for people in the closet, that's still not enough people to cause a change of the magnitude that the Usual Suspects want. And I cannot imagine that there are as many transgender people out there as gay people.

    Possibly, but most of it is a deliberate effort to find the kids who will most likely turn out Not Straight, and leave them mutilated, sterile (which is where the “it’s genetic!” spiel will leave you) and dying early from heart attacks and cancer from all the cross sex hormones. Which is a breathtakingly cruel way to deal with mental illness – imagine deciding to emasculate and poison all the schizophrenics.

    My suspicion is that the powerful people knew full well what caused the AIDS crisis, and started planning both their prevention and their revenge.

  40. @Alfa158
    It is not a parody.
    However, getting this feral person to wear the gigantic lampshade was a sly practical joke. I wonder if the editor followed up by asking him to sniff the plastic flower he was wearing in his lapel, and then apologized for the squirt in the face by offering him a fine cigar and lighting it for him.
    Clearly Mr. Welch shares my fondness for slap-stick humor.

    The Emperor’s New Masculinity.

  41. And that’s ignoring the violation of women’s privacy it entails when these men start demanding to be let in their private spaces.

    The idea that women have an obligation to soak up the men who make other men uncomfortable is something that the right should be using to black pill normal women, rather than seriously discussing whether they shod be allowed to vote.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Boys are no longer allowed to have their own social spaces (think Boy Scouts and fraternities).

    Now girls are beginning to have their spaces taken (think bathrooms and sports)


    Invade the Genders, Invite the Genders
  42. @Just Saying
    "The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today. You’ll hear from an activist who is figuring out how to speak to closed-minded men about topics like sexual discrimination in the workplace (Tarana Burke). From a gender-nonbinary actor who is simultaneously advocating for greater inclusivity in Hollywood and acknowledging their own privilege (Asia Kate Dillon). From two very different comedians who are both mining this moment for poignant, provocative laughs (Jaboukie Young-White and Hannah Gadsby). From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis), and an NBA player who is publicly divulging his personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love). And there are many others."

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.

    Also, women are oppressed, down with the patriarchy, #believeallwomen

    Big difference between men and women: we don’t understand women or what life is like as a woman. But we know that, we don’t pretend to, and we’re pretty comfortable admitting that we don’t have a clue. They don’t understand men or what life is like as a man. But they think that they know us better than we know ourselves-and when they realize they aren’t just wrong, but they aren’t even close, they get bitter.

    Why is this? Is is because being male is the “default” in just about everything you can think of?

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    As Al Bundy said to his son: "Son, never try to understand women. Women understand other women, and they hate each other."
    , @anonymous
    wwebd said -----

    nebulafox ----- you are talking about hoi polloi.

    I for one will admit that, when I was a child, I did not dream of growing up to be an (actually, "the") accountant for a small family owned chain of used car dealerships in a town a few hundred miles from the ocean. Not at all!

    But I never once dreamed I would ever be one of hoi polloi, so there's that.

    Look, men and women understand each other very very well. The most ridiculously "I live in my mom's basement" dude who votes for the woke candidates every time, and who always tweets and retweets SJW Talking Points, because he squees at the thought of putting pussy on a pedestal every single time is

    A DESCENDANT OF MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF SEXUAL CREATURES WHO SEXUALLY REPRODUCED SUCCESSFULLY

    think about it


    I could be similarly mean about the female equivalents of that little guy in his mom's basement, but we have poor Taylor Swift, who does not yet really know how to be a woman, and poor Ellen DeGeneres, with an even sadder problem, to show us what those equivalents would look like in real life.

    Maleness, Senor Volpe de las Nebulas, is not a human default ----stupidity is.

    and we need to pray for people who are stupid, not mock them. after all, each and every one of them has hope ---- having been descended from millions of generations of sexually successful ancestors

    WE ARE ALL ROYALTY SENOR VOLPE DE LOS NUBES

    I know that, and I want you to know that too.

    Life is amusing when you understand what is going on, and God loves us all .....

    and especially loves those of us who have a special concern for the stupid.

    WE ARE ALL ROYALTY SENOR VOLPE DE LOS NUBES

    some more than others, but that is not important, because ....

    well I will let you figure out why, I am kind that way.

    , @Counterinsurgency

    they get bitter.

    Why is this?
     
    My impression is that women expect to be taken care of so that they can get on with the work of raising the next generation -- plausibly the most important part of human biology.

    But men can't take care of women anymore, and women are told that they have to "take care of themselves" if they want to marry and have children and a family [1]. Essentially, social conformity no longer enables women to do what women consider important (making a family) and forces them to do what men consider important (earn a living to support a family). Bitter is too mild a word for what follows.
    And the women then form into a moral community and act, ah, difficult until the men fix the situation. Since the men who have to live with above-bitter women can't fix the situation, the women just get more difficult, and things deteriorate. Eventually something that the men do works, and the women get less difficult. Alternately, the men never do figure it out and the group dissolves, possibly into another group.

    The present situation is (IMHO) a direct result of economically nonproductive cities impoverishing their hinterlands. The resources needed to have families are gone, and women are acting the way women have always acted in such a situation: they become difficult to live with until (a) men make it possible to have families again, or (b) the group goes extinct. The exact form of being difficult probably doesn't matter that much (even if it makes the actual situation worse -- it always makes the actual situation worse), so the cleverness of convincing women that they need to be men (and the converse) probably doesn't actually destabilize society enough more to matter in the long run. Above-bitter women are always a signal to men that something has to change, and that's all that's needed [2].

    Counterinsurgency


    1] Author S. M. Stirling, informal computer posting, roughly paraphrased: "To be upper middle class, marry a woman with a career. Poverty, thy name is a stay at home housewife." To attract a potentially well off man, women must waste years learning what they regard as useless trivia, and when they are part of a two income family they _still_ can't raise children, at least not successfully. For that matter, I've seen one income families with a single kid destroyed by daycare (ear infection, oppositional defiant disorder) because the mother had no idea of how to care for babies. Feminism teaches that ragging on the men is women's only function in life, to the exclusion of baby and child care.

    2] The original idea comes from anthropology. New Guinea tribes using slash and burn agriculture have to move to new territories periodically. This is dangerous, the new areas are occupied. Nevertheless, move they must and move they do, when the tribe's leaders say they must.
    Only that's not what really happens. In practice, the tribes need protein to move, a diet of meat for long enough to displace the land's current occupants. To do that, the tribes slaughter most of the pigs they raise, eat the meat, and go forth.
    Pigs are raised by the women. According to the study, it is routine for women to nurse piglet's, ah, personally for reasons not mentioned. What really happens is that, as the pig population increases, women complain that raising pigs is taking more time and labor than they have to give. At that point, the chiefs slaughter the pigs, and use the meat to take over another territory. Cycle time from almost all the pigs are slaughtered to "too many pigs again" is just a little shorter than the time needed to exhaust soil in the the "slash and burn" sites. The pigs are a timer, and the women acting "super-bitter" is the driver. The soil exhaustion is apparently regarded as an inconvenience (since clearnign new fields is considerable work) just barely compensated for by the reduction on "too many pigs" complaints from the women, who (to put it bluntly) are always the only force on Earth that can get men as a group to get up off their rear ends and actually do something.
    Funny how things can work.
  43. @nebulafox
    More masculine. It's an ill-kept secret in the gay world that effeminate men are at the bottom of the sexual hierarchy. "NO FEMS" are a common sight on dating personals.

    Again: this shouldn't really be all that surprising. If someone is attracted to men, they aren't going to be aroused by stereotypically female looks or mannerisms. Men and women do not have the same bodies or sexual organs, this is deeply rooted biological stuff that isn't going to be changed by The Good Men Project or GQ.

    This was the whole mindset behind the Castro Clones look back in the 1970s/1980s, and the related phenomenon of the Village People ( who were Castro Clones in masculine-looking uniforms) Gays wanted young, rugged, manly looking/acting men who just “happen” to be gay:

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Castro_clone

    It’s every gay man’s sex fantasy to turn a young, masculine straight guy gay , in the same way it’s every straight guy’s fantasy to have some barely-legal high school girl fall head-over-heels in love with them and give in to their every sexual desire.

  44. @nebulafox
    Big difference between men and women: we don't understand women or what life is like as a woman. But we know that, we don't pretend to, and we're pretty comfortable admitting that we don't have a clue. They don't understand men or what life is like as a man. But they think that they know us better than we know ourselves-and when they realize they aren't just wrong, but they aren't even close, they get bitter.

    Why is this? Is is because being male is the "default" in just about everything you can think of?

    As Al Bundy said to his son: “Son, never try to understand women. Women understand other women, and they hate each other.”

  45. Speaking of WOKE-Folk,

    Charlize Theron in 2019:

    “I obviously am a white person who benefited from my white privilege,” Theron said of her South African upbringing. “I grew up during the Apartheid era, I benefited from it. These children [today] were all born post-Apartheid era. I feel like it’s my duty to not let them forget and to also let them know that there is [unity], that I am with them, that we are all standing together.”

    Charlize Theron Talks ‘White Privilege,’ Growing Up During Apartheid in South Africa, by Nicholas White, Variety, October 13, 2019]

    Vs Charlize Theron in 1996:

    Theron had little time to grieve; with the dismantling of apartheid and the creation of new affirmative action laws, she became convinced “there was no future for a white South African.” One week after turning 16, she accepted an offer from an Italian model scout, and—with her mother’s blessing—headed for Milan. Looking back, she says, “I just ran.”

    That Thing She Does, by Dan Jewel, October 14, 1996]

    Via James Kirkpatrick at VDARE

    https://vdare.com/posts/2019-charlize-theron-denounces-white-privilege-1996-charlize-theron-left-south-africa-because-there-was-no-future-for-a-white-south-african

    • Replies: @Charon
    With her worldwide success, and so much now to lose, she's found the strength within herself finally to be woke.
    , @Antonius
    I help but think of the whore-gene when confronted by the vapid musings of this bint. Surely she cannot be so indifferent to the plight of her co-ethnics in South Africa, unless she has the whore-gene. If she spouted anything approximating the truth the mammon spigot would be terminated by the nose. However of mammon she has plenty why does feel she needs to grovel still only the whore-gene can explain a pathological indifference to any form of empathy for co-ethnics ( kith and kin) suffering the whip hand of the savage.
    , @William Badwhite

    “I grew up during the Apartheid era, I benefited from it.
     
    Silly woman. Everyone in South Africa benefited from Apartheid, including the blacks.
  46. They found someone who claims to have laughed at Hannah Gadsby; HILARIOUS!

  47. The editorial reads like one of those perky editorials in airline inflight magazines. “Flying to London? We’re going to tell you where to get the yummiest fish and chips just around the corner from Buckingham Palace, where you might just run into old Prince Randy Andy late at night!”

    And does anyone even buy magazines any more? I haven’t seen one for years.

    • Replies: @Richard P
    I've quit reading your typical magazine for many of reasons -- they're riddled with ads that promote capitalism, consumerism, and materialism, they support and or promote Globalism, and they primarily cater to people with significant disposable incomes. Outside Magazine falls into this category.

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets -- and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.

    , @Hibernian
    Their market is doctor's offices.
  48. Miss, could get a seat in the exit row?

  49. Here’s gay songwriter Rufus Wainwright singing about men reading GQ magazine when he first noticed it back in the early 2000s:

    The song is track 1 off his record “Want One” and it’s followed by a song called “Cigarettes and Chocolate Milk,” which details how Rufus’s wants are dangerous and normally result in tragedy.

    The Left loves to say, “If it’s not hurting anyone, you should be allowed to do [x].” No one seems to admit how idiotic this moral is, or remember that their own gay poets write songs to remind them of the danger of following such logic. Progressivism can’t get no satisfaction.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Worst paternal prediction ever:


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy_3Q6ctHRA
  50. And does anyone even buy magazines any more?

    In Texas they do! Heck, yeah!

    https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/parts-and-accessories/magazines/

  51. anonymous[546] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox
    Big difference between men and women: we don't understand women or what life is like as a woman. But we know that, we don't pretend to, and we're pretty comfortable admitting that we don't have a clue. They don't understand men or what life is like as a man. But they think that they know us better than we know ourselves-and when they realize they aren't just wrong, but they aren't even close, they get bitter.

    Why is this? Is is because being male is the "default" in just about everything you can think of?

    wwebd said —–

    nebulafox —– you are talking about hoi polloi.

    I for one will admit that, when I was a child, I did not dream of growing up to be an (actually, “the”) accountant for a small family owned chain of used car dealerships in a town a few hundred miles from the ocean. Not at all!

    But I never once dreamed I would ever be one of hoi polloi, so there’s that.

    Look, men and women understand each other very very well. The most ridiculously “I live in my mom’s basement” dude who votes for the woke candidates every time, and who always tweets and retweets SJW Talking Points, because he squees at the thought of putting pussy on a pedestal every single time is

    A DESCENDANT OF MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF SEXUAL CREATURES WHO SEXUALLY REPRODUCED SUCCESSFULLY

    think about it

    I could be similarly mean about the female equivalents of that little guy in his mom’s basement, but we have poor Taylor Swift, who does not yet really know how to be a woman, and poor Ellen DeGeneres, with an even sadder problem, to show us what those equivalents would look like in real life.

    Maleness, Senor Volpe de las Nebulas, is not a human default —-stupidity is.

    and we need to pray for people who are stupid, not mock them. after all, each and every one of them has hope —- having been descended from millions of generations of sexually successful ancestors

    WE ARE ALL ROYALTY SENOR VOLPE DE LOS NUBES

    I know that, and I want you to know that too.

    Life is amusing when you understand what is going on, and God loves us all …..

    and especially loves those of us who have a special concern for the stupid.

    WE ARE ALL ROYALTY SENOR VOLPE DE LOS NUBES

    some more than others, but that is not important, because ….

    well I will let you figure out why, I am kind that way.

  52. @nebulafox
    More masculine. It's an ill-kept secret in the gay world that effeminate men are at the bottom of the sexual hierarchy. "NO FEMS" are a common sight on dating personals.

    Again: this shouldn't really be all that surprising. If someone is attracted to men, they aren't going to be aroused by stereotypically female looks or mannerisms. Men and women do not have the same bodies or sexual organs, this is deeply rooted biological stuff that isn't going to be changed by The Good Men Project or GQ.

    But if the man is bisexual, he is attracted to both mascculine and feminine characteristics, so maybe to a bisexual man it wouldn’t matter if the man is masculine or feminine?

    • Replies: @Jesse
    Possibly, but his sexual partners would be interested in masculine men, so it'd be in his interest to butch up.
  53. @Jonathan Mason
    The editorial reads like one of those perky editorials in airline inflight magazines. "Flying to London? We're going to tell you where to get the yummiest fish and chips just around the corner from Buckingham Palace, where you might just run into old Prince Randy Andy late at night!"

    And does anyone even buy magazines any more? I haven't seen one for years.

    I’ve quit reading your typical magazine for many of reasons — they’re riddled with ads that promote capitalism, consumerism, and materialism, they support and or promote Globalism, and they primarily cater to people with significant disposable incomes. Outside Magazine falls into this category.

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets — and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets — and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.
     
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.
    , @Oo-ee-oo-ah-ah-ting-tang-walla-walla-bing-bang
    I’d love some recommendations! The Steve-o-sphere serves a great function as a go-to for lit/periodical suggestions
  54. Nothing’s fruitier than reading a glossy-mag special issue about Masculinity.

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
    Sneer if you must, but just wait until you see next month's extended package:
    Rupaul's guide for tearing down and rebuilding the engine of a '65 Barracuda.
    , @Buck Ransom
    As a special extra, there will be a guest editorial by 2024 presidential candidate
    Chelsea Clinton in which she pleads for a new government agency to administer
    and fund free-abortion-on-demand for trannies.
  55. @Redneck farmer
    The world's problems are accelerated when we find sex icky. No wonder the Woke are so angry.

    The world’s problems are accelerated when we

    embrace diversity and equality.

    (This is a fun game. Shouldn’t collect all of these and have a vote?)

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    That would make a great post for iSteve!
  56. @nebulafox
    My own pet theory-and it is nothing but a pet theory-on the recent shift away from gays to transgenders has to do with disappointed expectations.

    In real life, male homosexuality-or bisexuality-does not necessarily imply effeminacy. (I'll let someone else talk about lesbians, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't the same.) Yeah, sure, you have your queens, but that doesn't make them a majority of gay men. And given the relatively recent titanic shifts-political and cultural-on homosexuality in the USA over the past couple of decades, it isn't shocking that all of a sudden, we have a lot more homosexuals hanging around. Most of them aren't very camp. Why? Because in previous decades, with the social stigma being what it was, gay men who were open about their preferences were more likely to be camp enough to either not care or not be able to hide it. Which shouldn't be shocking to anybody who has, I don't know, actually talked to an average gay man or has studied a little bit of history. In classical antiquity, homosexuality as a social identity didn't even exist: it was all about taking the active vs. passive role in sex, with the choice of male vs. female partners being largely seen as a matter of personal preference beyond the emphasis on reproduction.

    That coincides with "gay ghettos" in American cities: which, in a lot of places, have lost much of their social function with the mainstreamizing of homosexuality. Adding to this is that a lot of straight women tend to *love* the idea of male friends who share their interests and aren't interested in them sexually, but also don't present sexual or social competition. Naturally, the media caters to that desire. So, I'm guessing that a lot of people take the amount of effeminate gay men to be greater than it is in reality, and that would include the wokesters.

    The ultimate goal of a lot of these people decrying "toxic masculinity" is to attack maleness in general. They don't care about who is screwing who: they care about men behaving like men. Maybe they were hoping massive acceptance of homosexuality would do it. But it hasn't. Most gay men still act disappointingly male, with little interest in acting otherwise, and gay rights has made that reality apparent, far from changing it. I don't think to transgender rights is going to do the trick, either. Gay people are only 1-2% of the populace: even if we account for people in the closet, that's still not enough people to cause a change of the magnitude that the Usual Suspects want. And I cannot imagine that there are as many transgender people out there as gay people.

    The ultimate goal of a lot of these people decrying “toxic masculinity” is to attack maleness in general. They don’t care about who is screwing who: they care about men behaving like men.

    Are we looking at the political zenith of female boomer feminists? They’ve accrued a lot of political power over the years and with lots of time/money but no kids so maybe they’re just bored/angry? Also, decades of antidepressants maybe partially “rewired” their synapses.

  57. “…we will connect with a … gender-nonspecific audience…”

    Doesn’t this suggest, no demand, a name change for the magazine? How about “Genderqueer Quarterly”? It scans like the old name, which is critical for brand maintenance, plus it is very, very mod.

    • Replies: @Charon
    Gentlemen's Quarterly?

    To quote Nelson Muntz regarding"Naked Lunch" as the boys file out from the movie theater:

    "I can think of at least two things wrong with that title."
  58. @Anonymous
    But if the man is bisexual, he is attracted to both mascculine and feminine characteristics, so maybe to a bisexual man it wouldn't matter if the man is masculine or feminine?

    Possibly, but his sexual partners would be interested in masculine men, so it’d be in his interest to butch up.

  59. “How do you make a men’s magazine in the era of Shut Up And Listen?”

    “You don’t. Therefore, I shall shut down this magazine effective noon tomorrow.”

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    Tricky Dick, indeed.
  60. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Richard P
    I've quit reading your typical magazine for many of reasons -- they're riddled with ads that promote capitalism, consumerism, and materialism, they support and or promote Globalism, and they primarily cater to people with significant disposable incomes. Outside Magazine falls into this category.

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets -- and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets — and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.

    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.
     
    https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2019/08/anna-wintour.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=618&h=410&crop=1

    Anna Wintour.

    , @yaqub the mad scientist
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    Gun and outdoors mags are getting fruitier by the year- and a lot outdoors shops, too.
    All this Hollywood hunting and fishing crap- the 300 dollar sunglasses, the Punisher stickers on the trucks, the lowrider colored boats, the photo models, the tricked-out ORV's.

    Seriously, are there any men left who just walk or canoe into the woods with a gun/bow, a thermos, and call of choice? I miss those days, seriously.
    , @Richard P
    No, I wasn't referring to gun publications, and yes, I'm well-aware of their transgression from relevance to becoming a fashion oriented rag.
  61. Steve I do like reading your riffs on these dinosaurs, but some perspective: more people under 40 in a day use Instagram than read all deadtree magazines combined in a year.

    The woke left is depressingly marching through the institutions, but magazines are worthless territories that surrendered without a fight for good reason.

    Regarding men’s fashion, seems to be mostly a black, gold chainer, and asian thing now. White guys seem to have collectively decided to focus more on working out and repaying student and car loans, and white girls seem to have collectively accepted this. Maybe the gays led the way on this too, as for many years the most common look in gay neighborhoods is buff muscles and a tank top.

    My sample size is pretty small, but all the gays I know have the fashion of your basic slovenly bachelor, and this was already the case when I was in college in the 00s. And all the well dressed men I know are non-white apparent heterosexuals.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    more people under 40 in a day use Instagram than read all deadtree magazines combined in a year.
     
    I personally prefer to read from hard copies -- whether books or documents. Instagram is for the mindless and narcissistic as it enables self-serving behaviors. No self-proclaimed Traditionalist should be supporting Big Tech as they're working diligently to silence us, the Dissident Right.

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present, and unorthodox as they forebod the coming of the Antichrist. You're proving an outside force with the power to dictate your life, and who ever has the power, has the control.

  62. @Richard P

    The world’s problems are accelerated when we find sex icky.
     
    No, the world's problems are accelerated when we embrace degeneracy and Modernism.

    Let’s agree on a mean between extremes.

  63. @Richard P
    I've quit reading your typical magazine for many of reasons -- they're riddled with ads that promote capitalism, consumerism, and materialism, they support and or promote Globalism, and they primarily cater to people with significant disposable incomes. Outside Magazine falls into this category.

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets -- and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.

    I’d love some recommendations! The Steve-o-sphere serves a great function as a go-to for lit/periodical suggestions

  64. In general, our society less and less encourages looking sexually attractive to other people and more and more encourages acting out inner fantasies that are unattractive to others to make yourself even more of a victim of society.

    A related rule is that you cannot comment on a truly attractive woman’s attractiveness, even outside of her presence. But you can endlessly praise an unattractive woman as beautiful, even when it’s obviously not true.

    Note: This does not apply to men.

  65. I wonder why you’re all so interested in talking and talking and talking about homosexuality.

    Just wonderin’.

    • Replies: @anon
    And we wonder why you are wondering. Funny that you chose to comment on this issue.
    , @anon
    http://artofadambetts.com/uriconiswrong/facepalm.jpg
    , @Bard of Bumperstickers
    You're usually deeper than this, if always wrong. But do please let us know when you're done wondering and can articulate a theory. My theory is that we're always "talking and talking and talking" about many subjects here; so, too, this one . . . as you're doing as well, with no apparent sense of irony.
    , @J.Ross
    They attacked us. They talk all the time about attacking us more. You're allowed to discuss active enemies, it doesn't mean that Richard the Lionhearted secretly wanted to convert to Islam. I remember when I thought the bastards were essentially good people. Nowhere near as many people think that now.
  66. I sensed it was all going to hell back when i started seeing guys wearing earrings.

    • Agree: MBlanc46
    • Replies: @Richard P
    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one's body are signs of mutilation and vanity -- they're the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.
    , @gabriel alberton
  67. @Father O'Hara
    Is that OUR Hannah Gadsby,the least funniest comedian of all time?

    But Hannah Gadsby has a good golf swing:

    • Replies: @Bugg
    Without viewing this clip, she has to be better at golf than comedy.
  68. @Redneck farmer
    The world's problems are accelerated when we find sex icky. No wonder the Woke are so angry.

    “ The world’s problems are accelerated when we find sex icky.”

    Seems like this is common for Japanese women.

  69. @Lot
    Steve I do like reading your riffs on these dinosaurs, but some perspective: more people under 40 in a day use Instagram than read all deadtree magazines combined in a year.

    The woke left is depressingly marching through the institutions, but magazines are worthless territories that surrendered without a fight for good reason.

    Regarding men’s fashion, seems to be mostly a black, gold chainer, and asian thing now. White guys seem to have collectively decided to focus more on working out and repaying student and car loans, and white girls seem to have collectively accepted this. Maybe the gays led the way on this too, as for many years the most common look in gay neighborhoods is buff muscles and a tank top.

    My sample size is pretty small, but all the gays I know have the fashion of your basic slovenly bachelor, and this was already the case when I was in college in the 00s. And all the well dressed men I know are non-white apparent heterosexuals.

    more people under 40 in a day use Instagram than read all deadtree magazines combined in a year.

    I personally prefer to read from hard copies — whether books or documents. Instagram is for the mindless and narcissistic as it enables self-serving behaviors. No self-proclaimed Traditionalist should be supporting Big Tech as they’re working diligently to silence us, the Dissident Right.

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present, and unorthodox as they forebod the coming of the Antichrist. You’re proving an outside force with the power to dictate your life, and who ever has the power, has the control.

    • Replies: @Forbes

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present...
     
    "Living in the present" seems to be the problem. Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples' lives.

    You might want to re-think that assertion.
  70. Tell me honestly: Does this sleeping bag make my butt look big?

  71. @kihowi
    It reads like they decided to go full gay, but want the remnant of heterosexuals who are still buying the magazine to keep buying it. So instead of "only dicksuckers from now on" they're announcing that they're for everybody, and that the best way of doing that is to get as far away from normal heterosexuality as possible.

    Also I have to say I'm having trouble expressing, even in thought, how much I hate this style of writing. This mushy, moist, formless, empty...ugh. The closest I can get to it is that it feels like I'm being forced to inhale yeast-infected vagina fumes. For someone who loves language and the beauty of exactness, this is torture.

    “ This mushy, moist, formless, empty…ugh. ”

    I know what you are talking about. I think it comes from insecurely-employed white writers walking on eggshells to avoid offense.

    The one thing they know the SJWs will allow is abject self-denigration of themselves and white conservatives. But anything someone higher in the wokemon scale could find offensive is off limits, so almost anything.

    What’s left is just saying blacks and gays are so brave, so intellectual, so creative.

  72. I will say that this guy has made the next editor’s job ridiculously easy.

    He can do the “GQ lost it’s way, but now we’re getting back to our core mission–providing fashion, and lifestyle advice that meets your needs as a man.”

  73. @AnotherDad
    I sensed it was all going to hell back when i started seeing guys wearing earrings.

    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one’s body are signs of mutilation and vanity — they’re the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one’s body are signs of mutilation and vanity — they’re the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.
     
    I'm not a Bible quoting guy. But nonetheless, i completely agree. Now retired to the beach i see this disfigurement all the time.

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined, but also primitive. As with many things in our culture--ex. sexual behavior--America has degraded toward African norms. This stuff is--fortunately at a lower ebb--like the people with the neck rings or the lip disks. We have people in America now who would only have been found on the pages of National Geographic when i was a kid.
  74. OT: not watching the Dem debate, but the predictit market reaction is Warren bombed. She’s down from 46 to 42 today, nobody else moved up or down more than 2.

    Changes by the minute though.

    https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination

    I think the smart play now is to buy Biden at 20 now to sell when he has a rally to 28-30, neutral on Warren, short everyone else.

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.

    In general the market had a GOP biased mindset. No democrat seriously thinks Hillary could jump in and win, but the prolefeed right wing sites have been flogging this for years, resulting in this being valued at 7 now.

    Same thing for Yang and Tulsi, who have no attraction for actual people who vote in Dem primaries.

    • Replies: @Whiskey
    Warren scares and angers Wall Street and big tech as they know after us kulak they will be next. The New class always needs more money.

    Hillary has a huge potential donor base. And has the party leadership. You don't really think primary voters matter now do you? Smart money is in Hillary.
    , @AnotherDad

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.
     
    This seems reasonable, Lot--though i'd throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring--a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's my family heimat and i have some female relatives--retired teachers--who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I'll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin's corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i'd figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that's certainly Warren's weakness. She's a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden's age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don't care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here--it's a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I'm still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party--no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

  75. The incredible thing is how little all of this matters. We all know women are not going to stop being attracted to confident, successful, well-groomed, assertive, and above all masculine men. That is what women liked before, it is what they like now, it is what they will like after. This is just a giant shit test that people keep choosing to fail over and over. It’s just a way to weed out the guys who are stupid enough to fall for it.

    • Agree: Dtbb
    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    Exactly.
  76. I usually react to these sorts of articles by saying “separate nations”.

    But this one makes me think more along the lines of “quarantine”.

    This society–specific its elites and their political and cultural output–is deeply sick.

    I think we–nationalists, traditionalists–need a way of connecting with normal folks with specifically that messaging and proposals for an alternative, separate and sane civilization and existence.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    I usually react to these sorts of articles by saying “separate nations”.

    But this one makes me think more along the lines of “quarantine”.

    This society–specific its elites and their political and cultural output–is deeply sick.
     
    It's not just a deeply sick society, it's a vicious and very aggressive society. Those elites are determined that no-one anywhere is going to be allowed to have nationalism or any traces of traditionalism. Whether you live in Bolivia or Burundi or in Algeria or Austria or anywhere else you're going to be forced to conform. That's why we call such people globalists.

    Every single country on Earth is going to get Gay Pride Marches and transsexual bathroom rights and homosexual marriage and slut culture. And of course every single country on Earth is going to get crony capitalism, consumerism and mindless hedonism.

    These are not people who are going to permit "separate nations" to survive.
  77. Nietzsche was right in Beyond Good and Evil in noting that feminism was “one of the worst developments of the general uglifying of Europe.” Indeed, it defaces everything it touches. All the subsequent perversions about human sexuality follow from the idiocies of “female enlightenment.” Hideous destruction of the beautiful!

    • Agree: Richard P
    • Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers
    https://antifeministpraxis.com/2017/03/31/feminism-was-never-not-rotten/
    , @Bard of Bumperstickers
    Oops. Duplicate.
  78. This too shall pass. Unfortunately, it can’t happen soon enough.

  79. @Steve Sailer
    But Hannah Gadsby has a good golf swing:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bhsj6kFSQiM

    Without viewing this clip, she has to be better at golf than comedy.

  80. @IHTG
    To paraphrase a certain cliche: Wokeness isn't about sex, it's about power.

    That’s ALL it’s about.

  81. @obwandiyag
    I wonder why you're all so interested in talking and talking and talking about homosexuality.

    Just wonderin'.

    And we wonder why you are wondering. Funny that you chose to comment on this issue.

  82. @Lot
    OT: not watching the Dem debate, but the predictit market reaction is Warren bombed. She’s down from 46 to 42 today, nobody else moved up or down more than 2.

    Changes by the minute though.

    https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination

    I think the smart play now is to buy Biden at 20 now to sell when he has a rally to 28-30, neutral on Warren, short everyone else.

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.

    In general the market had a GOP biased mindset. No democrat seriously thinks Hillary could jump in and win, but the prolefeed right wing sites have been flogging this for years, resulting in this being valued at 7 now.

    Same thing for Yang and Tulsi, who have no attraction for actual people who vote in Dem primaries.

    Warren scares and angers Wall Street and big tech as they know after us kulak they will be next. The New class always needs more money.

    Hillary has a huge potential donor base. And has the party leadership. You don’t really think primary voters matter now do you? Smart money is in Hillary.

  83. @Anon
    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn't totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.

    They were the same men.
    Calligraphy, flower arranging and tea ceremony were psychological compensation for being at each moment on call to slaughter some unfortunate peasant, and living permanently on the edge of death, maybe by one’s own hand at the request of one’s lord.

  84. @Father O'Hara
    Is that OUR Hannah Gadsby,the least funniest comedian of all time?

    Doesn’t funny-looking count? BTW, isn’t she revolted by little, dimpled white balls?

    • Replies: @Forbes
    Just jealous...she wishes she had a pair...
  85. “…Pharrell dressed as if the Queen of the Planet of the Amazon Women were a homeless person who wore a sleeping bag all day.”

    Okay, so is it a Snuggie, a Slanket, a Nuddle or a Blankoat?

    From what I can tell, it’s a Nuddle (distinguished by OPENINGS for your arms, an OUTER HAND POUCH and a FOOT POCKET at the bottom to keep your feet tucked in warm and cozy).

  86. @Joseph A.
    Nietzsche was right in Beyond Good and Evil in noting that feminism was "one of the worst developments of the general uglifying of Europe." Indeed, it defaces everything it touches. All the subsequent perversions about human sexuality follow from the idiocies of "female enlightenment." Hideous destruction of the beautiful!
  87. @Anon
    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn't totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.

    The ideal of the warrior aesthete was a thing in other cultures, too, notably many Islamic societies. Portraits of the Muslim emperors of India depict them daintily holding a flower with one hand, while the other hand rests on their sword’s pommel.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The founder of the Mughal Empire, was himself a great aesthete. He loved gardens and to write. He is sometines even quoted to be the first person in the world to write an autobiography. The quality of his writing is exceptional for a non-Western, and is an Islamic masterpiece . He also loved boys.
    , @nebulafox
    https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-sultan-mehmed-ii-of-turkey-smelling-a-rose-from-the-saray-albums-c-90824381.html

    Mehmed II took and sacked Constantinople when he was all of 21 years old. The Turks, like many conquerors in history, saw no contradiction between being a cultured aesthete patronizing the arts and for being a skilled and ruthless military commander.

    He was also a notorious bisexual. For what it is worth, Turkish men to this day have a repuation within the Islamic World for being ruggedly charming, aggressive Lothario types.

    , @Stebbing Heuer
    There's a scene in Kurosawa's Seven Samurai in which Kyuzo and Kikuchiyo are waiting in the forest to ambush a few of the wicked samurai.

    While Kikuchiyo is up a tree excitedly watching the approach of the wicked samurai, Kurosawa shows Kyuzo, the stone-faced master samurai, sitting on the ground resting against the tree trunk, and wistfully contemplating a flower that he is holding in his fingers.

    On the arrival of the wicked samurai, Kyuzo stands straight up, faces his opponent, looks him in the eye, and slaughters him with a single sword stroke, straight from the scabbard.

    Kurosawa knew what he was doing, this sequence was no accident.

    Apologies, I can't find this scene on Youtube.
    , @Anon
    The concept of masculinity-as-loutishness is a pretty unique 20th-century one and is possibly not unrelated to the popularity of homosexuality as an "orientation" in that era.

    18th-century and 19th-century Englishmen tended to disdain (or pretend to disdain) "frippery" and were very conscious of trying to appear masculine but they had their own conception of high aesthetics that really was admirable in its own way.
  88. @R.G. Camara
    I got a subscription to GQ for a while in the 2000s, hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls. But despite having good recommendations, I had to cancel it, because it was so Marxist in its articles and in its pushing of "black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys" aesthetic (blacks were overrepresented in cover photos and photo models and in article subjects).

    It's not surprising its pushing further left. As fewer people get magazines and newspapers, these folks play to their perceived base. They go extreme left in order to please the base. The NY Times audience has no idea how outside normal they are and how many untruths they are told, and neither do GQ's regular readers these days.

    P.S. It's interesting how much the Left belives Nature can overcome Nurture, and how self-important each Commie thinks he is. "We can change how masculinity is perceived!" screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so. And yet he-men never go out of style.

    We can change how masculinity is perceived!” screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so

    That’s because their ribs are showing.

    • Replies: @Richard P
    I love vintage advertisements as they were real unlike the squirrelly ones that are circulating around in our country plagued by societal decay.
    , @Stebbing Heuer
    'White jockeys sold separately.'
  89. @Joseph A.
    Nietzsche was right in Beyond Good and Evil in noting that feminism was "one of the worst developments of the general uglifying of Europe." Indeed, it defaces everything it touches. All the subsequent perversions about human sexuality follow from the idiocies of "female enlightenment." Hideous destruction of the beautiful!

    Oops. Duplicate.

  90. @obwandiyag
    I wonder why you're all so interested in talking and talking and talking about homosexuality.

    Just wonderin'.

  91. @njguy73
    "How do you make a men's magazine in the era of Shut Up And Listen?"

    "You don't. Therefore, I shall shut down this magazine effective noon tomorrow."

    Tricky Dick, indeed.

  92. @Clifford Brown
    Mr. Young-White has an interesting name.

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

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the “Millenial” future.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.”
     
    I remember a black office worker's online comment about a decade ago that he like others suffered from "unique black name syndrome".

    There is a white version of this, too. In Sweden, a Danny is twice as likely to have been in police custody as a Daniel, a Johnny four times as likely as a Hans, and a Sonny twelve and a Jimmy fifteen times as likely as a Nils:



    The Y-name Syndrome: Prisons and Prejudice - Stockholm School of Economics
    [PDF]

    , @Jonathan Mason

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.
     
    Naming children is largely determined by fashion.

    When I was growing up in England people's first names were always referred to on official forms, etc. as "christian names" even if they were not actually names that had a Christian history.

    So most of my contemporaries had names like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Peter, and Paul, or Old Testament names like David, Jonathan, Adam, Daniel, or Joseph, or saint's names like Michael, Francis, George, Andrew, Anthony, Martin, and Patrick, or names of English kings like Alfred, William, Richard, Charles, and Henry.

    The christian name that no one ever had was Jesus, and it was regarded as a bit of a joke that Jesus was used as a christian name for boys in Spain, as this seemed obviously inappropriate and bordering on blashphemous.

    A name that sound silly to people from one culture, may sound entirely appropriate to people from another. For example the name Dontavious seems to be consistently ridiculed in these columns, but if you see at as a combination of Donald and Octavius, you might think of it as a noble, historic name.

    These names beginning with Ja- may well have religious connotations for the namer, particularly if they are fans of Bob Marley whose Rastafarian religion has strong elements of the back to Africa movement.

    Jaboukie Young-White is of Jamaican descent, so you might want to consider the meaning of those names in a Jamaican context.

    I once had a US white girlfriend whose first name was Yvonne. Her parents called her Von. Had they had a son, they would have called him Vaughn. To them it was all the same. Javaughn is a variant of Javon. Personally I would not use this name as it sounds too similar to the Spanish word "jabon", which means 'soap', but you cannot account for personal decisions made within families.
    , @Anon
    Javeigh --> Yahweh is a pretty gutsy name.
    , @Sue D. Nim
    There was a Louis Theroux program where he was in some shithole American city and he was interviewing some black guy whose brother was shot and killed by the police.

    He was called Sedan and his brother was called Seville (or possibly vice-versa).

    Louis asked him about their unusual names and he says they were named after Cadillacs!

    Cadillac Seville And Cadillac Sedan!
    , @Pericles
    I'm hoping they get a younger sibling Jamoke.
  93. The TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists) are fighting back!

    “TERFs claim that trans women are rapists waiting to happen, that they have mental health issues and that fundamentally they are not women.”

    Hey! Who knew I had so much in common with radical feminists!

    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/04/16/what-is-a-terf-and-why-should-you-be-worried/

    • Replies: @Richard P
    Sometimes alliances are found in the most obscure places.
  94. @anon
    We can change how masculinity is perceived!” screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so

    That's because their ribs are showing.


    https://mikecanex.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/charles-atlas-01.jpg

    I love vintage advertisements as they were real unlike the squirrelly ones that are circulating around in our country plagued by societal decay.

  95. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    The TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists) are fighting back!

    "TERFs claim that trans women are rapists waiting to happen, that they have mental health issues and that fundamentally they are not women."

    Hey! Who knew I had so much in common with radical feminists!

    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/04/16/what-is-a-terf-and-why-should-you-be-worried/

    Sometimes alliances are found in the most obscure places.

  96. @anon
    From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis),

    Because anthropologists are total experts on the endocrine system and the brain...the anti-science legacy of Franz Boas lives on.

    Imagine all the Marxist economists teaching at Moscow State after the Soviet Union collapsed. Hey, nothing I teach works I’m still getting paid. Might as well keep going. Also, the redheads are great!

    Same mindset for anthropology and sociology departments nationwide.

  97. @Lot
    OT: not watching the Dem debate, but the predictit market reaction is Warren bombed. She’s down from 46 to 42 today, nobody else moved up or down more than 2.

    Changes by the minute though.

    https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3633/Who-will-win-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination

    I think the smart play now is to buy Biden at 20 now to sell when he has a rally to 28-30, neutral on Warren, short everyone else.

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.

    In general the market had a GOP biased mindset. No democrat seriously thinks Hillary could jump in and win, but the prolefeed right wing sites have been flogging this for years, resulting in this being valued at 7 now.

    Same thing for Yang and Tulsi, who have no attraction for actual people who vote in Dem primaries.

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.

    This seems reasonable, Lot–though i’d throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring–a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa’s my family heimat and i have some female relatives–retired teachers–who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I’ll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin’s corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i’d figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that’s certainly Warren’s weakness. She’s a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden’s age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don’t care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here–it’s a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I’m still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party–no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

    • Replies: @anon

    I’m still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion.
     
    I think we're seeing the effect of an increasingly undemocratic political process producing increasingly incompetent candidates. A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members. Political candidates in both parties had to move up through a similar process.
    Today's candidates are picked by the donors and only have to read lines in front of a camera. Donors assume if you throw enough money into the campaign you will win (often true) and the candidates haven't a clue - they're just thrilled to be in the spotlight. Idiots do well in this environment.
    , @Houston 1992
    Can you elaborate on how the “Clinton era damaged the Dem party .:” or was it just general economic and cultural trends ?
    , @Houston 1992
    Can you elaborate on how the “Clinton era damaged the Dem party .:” or was it just general economic and cultural trends ?
    Do you think a businessman , say a younger Mike Bloomberg, might enter and win the nomination?
    I agree that the field is weak and old ....inconceivable even ten years ago that Silent generation (1925-1942) members such as Biden and Sanders would be consuming voters bandwidths..:
    , @Lot
    I don’t think Buttman will win. But I am not betting against him at 10-1 odds after looking at his fundraising and debate performances. On these two metrics, he’s number 1. Not ready for a gay? We elected a half Kenyan Muslim with a surname a letter away Osama. If Biden stumbles he’s ready as the moderate. His current ad is “Medicare For All Who Want It” and implicitly saying Warren is too liberal for the general election by wanting to kill all private insurance plans.

    I also was an Early Warren Bull, my best play so far in 2019. Purchased her shares for 8, sold for 49. I think she’s the most likely winner, but at 45-50 she’s fairly valued and not worth buying right now. After selling Warren I got Biden for 23 and will sell half at 30 and maybe ride the rest for a few months.

    On the GOP side, I grabbed some Pence at 8. Trump could resign, not run, or die. More likely there will be a point during impeachment when it looks bad for him and I can sell the Pence shares for 15.

    The low risk play there however is to bet against Nikki Haley at 7 and the other long shots. I don’t see how it could be anyone but Trump or Pence.
    , @Old Palo Altan
    "I’ll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin’s corn is ready for picking."

    And do you actually mean to say that you will then help him pick it?
  98. @obwandiyag
    I wonder why you're all so interested in talking and talking and talking about homosexuality.

    Just wonderin'.

    You’re usually deeper than this, if always wrong. But do please let us know when you’re done wondering and can articulate a theory. My theory is that we’re always “talking and talking and talking” about many subjects here; so, too, this one . . . as you’re doing as well, with no apparent sense of irony.

  99. During my college years during the 2010s, one class day was spent listening to transgender people speak on their experiences. (It was a requisite course.) One was a women who transitioned to a man. Apparently, “he” (who’s using the scare-quotes now?) had a fellow transgender friend to got beat up by a gang of gays. That packs of gays go around San Francisco looking to beat up trannies on a regular basis.

    Maybe this is revenge against all those hateful gays?

  100. I’d really like to be able to say something very witty and iStevey about that piece, but all that comes to mind is, “Jaysus, what a huge pile of hot, steaming equine excrement”.

  101. @Richard P
    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one's body are signs of mutilation and vanity -- they're the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.

    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one’s body are signs of mutilation and vanity — they’re the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.

    I’m not a Bible quoting guy. But nonetheless, i completely agree. Now retired to the beach i see this disfigurement all the time.

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined, but also primitive. As with many things in our culture–ex. sexual behavior–America has degraded toward African norms. This stuff is–fortunately at a lower ebb–like the people with the neck rings or the lip disks. We have people in America now who would only have been found on the pages of National Geographic when i was a kid.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined, but also primitive. As with many things in our culture–ex. sexual behavior–America has degraded toward African norms.
     
    This was an excellent assessment and analogy. I couldn't agree more.
    , @dfordoom

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined
     
    The popularity of piercings and tattoos shows that you can anything fashionable.
  102. Anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @PiltdownMan

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.
     
    The ideal of the warrior aesthete was a thing in other cultures, too, notably many Islamic societies. Portraits of the Muslim emperors of India depict them daintily holding a flower with one hand, while the other hand rests on their sword's pommel.

    https://i.imgur.com/CSxfWC1.jpg

    The founder of the Mughal Empire, was himself a great aesthete. He loved gardens and to write. He is sometines even quoted to be the first person in the world to write an autobiography. The quality of his writing is exceptional for a non-Western, and is an Islamic masterpiece . He also loved boys.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    He also loved boys.
     
    Didn't they all?


    https://d1w7fb2mkkr3kw.cloudfront.net/assets/images/book/lrg/9781/5896/9781589637894.jpg
  103. Bill Welch wrote:

    Toxicity simply cannot thrive in the golden presence of genuine self-love.

    Damn, that’s profound. If we can replicate this finding, then BW is a shoe-in for the next Nobel in Medicine.

    BTW, public acts resulting in the “golden presence of genuine self-love” are not lawful in much of the US.

  104. @Anonymous

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets — and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.
     
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.


    Anna Wintour.

  105. Who is that GQ jamoke up at the top? Richard Gere. Who going by IMDB was on Kojack once and maybe in a Members Only jacket.

  106. “the Shut Up and Listen moment”

    That perfectly encapsulates the Left. The moment will go on for eternity

  107. @kihowi
    It reads like they decided to go full gay, but want the remnant of heterosexuals who are still buying the magazine to keep buying it. So instead of "only dicksuckers from now on" they're announcing that they're for everybody, and that the best way of doing that is to get as far away from normal heterosexuality as possible.

    Also I have to say I'm having trouble expressing, even in thought, how much I hate this style of writing. This mushy, moist, formless, empty...ugh. The closest I can get to it is that it feels like I'm being forced to inhale yeast-infected vagina fumes. For someone who loves language and the beauty of exactness, this is torture.

    It reads like they decided to go full gay…

  108. anon[163] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.
     
    This seems reasonable, Lot--though i'd throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring--a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's my family heimat and i have some female relatives--retired teachers--who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I'll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin's corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i'd figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that's certainly Warren's weakness. She's a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden's age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don't care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here--it's a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I'm still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party--no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

    I’m still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion.

    I think we’re seeing the effect of an increasingly undemocratic political process producing increasingly incompetent candidates. A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members. Political candidates in both parties had to move up through a similar process.
    Today’s candidates are picked by the donors and only have to read lines in front of a camera. Donors assume if you throw enough money into the campaign you will win (often true) and the candidates haven’t a clue – they’re just thrilled to be in the spotlight. Idiots do well in this environment.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members.
     
    A Ronald Reagan as well. He'd had two decades of political experience by 1976.
    , @dfordoom

    I think we’re seeing the effect of an increasingly undemocratic political process producing increasingly incompetent candidates. A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members. Political candidates in both parties had to move up through a similar process.
     
    There's a lot of truth in that. Public speaking in front of a live audience in a relatively informal setting where you don't have complete control and you could get asked awkward questions is terrifying but you do learn a lot. At best you learn how to win over an audience. At worst you at least learn to lie convincingly. The depressing thing about modern politicians (of all persuasions) is that they're not even competent liars.
  109. @PiltdownMan

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.
     
    The ideal of the warrior aesthete was a thing in other cultures, too, notably many Islamic societies. Portraits of the Muslim emperors of India depict them daintily holding a flower with one hand, while the other hand rests on their sword's pommel.

    https://i.imgur.com/CSxfWC1.jpg

    https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-sultan-mehmed-ii-of-turkey-smelling-a-rose-from-the-saray-albums-c-90824381.html

    Mehmed II took and sacked Constantinople when he was all of 21 years old. The Turks, like many conquerors in history, saw no contradiction between being a cultured aesthete patronizing the arts and for being a skilled and ruthless military commander.

    He was also a notorious bisexual. For what it is worth, Turkish men to this day have a repuation within the Islamic World for being ruggedly charming, aggressive Lothario types.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The life of Mehmed the Conqueror was fascinating. He not only conquered Constantinople, but also unified Anatolia, conquered Serbia, Romania, Bosnia , Albania, Crimea, etc. Together with Suleiman the Magnificent, they were the best sultans of the Ottoman history. Not enough, he had a complex relationship with the famous Vlad Tepes the Impaler . Vlad and his brother lived in the Ottoman court, together with Mehmet, the three boys had similar ages. Mehmed developed a sexual relationship with Vlad brother. From the contemporary historian Laonikos Chalkokondyles :

    “The sultan1 spent that winter2 in his palace and summoned Vlad, the son of Dracul and ruler of Wallachia,3 as he already had his younger brother4 at the court, keeping him as his lover and maintaining him. It happened that the sultan was almost killed by the boy when he had wanted to have sex with him. This was when he had first gained the throne and was preparing to campaign against Karaman. He was in love with the boy and invited him for conversation, and then as a sign of his respect he invited him for drinks to his bedchamber. The boy did not expect to suffer such a thing from the sultan, and when he saw the sultan approaching him with that intention, he fought him off and refused to consent to intercourse with him. The sultan kissed the unwilling boy, who drew a dagger and struck the sultan on his thigh. He then fled in whatever direction he could find. The doctors were able to treat the sultan’s wound. The boy had climbed up a tree there and was hiding. When the sultan packed up and left, the boy came down from the tree, began his journey, and shortly afterward, arrived at the Porte and became the sultan’s lover. The sultan was used to having relations no less with men who shared his own inclinations. For he was always spending his time in the close company of such people, both day and night, but he did not usually have relations with men who were not of his own race, except for brief periods of time.”
     
    There are people who say that Vlad was obsessed with impalements of Ottomans, because the lost honor of his family , with the “impalements" that Mehmed did on Radu. It's also interesting because Chalkokondyles wrote that Mehmed was inclined towards homosexuality, and preferred other Ottomans, not only subjulgated men from conquered lands. Something like modern homosexuals. His behavior was not because the supposed Islamic fashion or the so called prison homosexuality.
  110. @petit bourgeois
    Jabouki's brothers' names are "Javaughn and Javeigh." And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the "Millenial" future.

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.”

    I remember a black office worker’s online comment about a decade ago that he like others suffered from “unique black name syndrome”.

    There is a white version of this, too. In Sweden, a Danny is twice as likely to have been in police custody as a Daniel, a Johnny four times as likely as a Hans, and a Sonny twelve and a Jimmy fifteen times as likely as a Nils:


    The Y-name Syndrome: Prisons and Prejudice – Stockholm School of Economics
    [PDF]

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.
     
    In Freemasonry, the three bad guys in the blue lodge ritual are Jubelo, Jubela and Jubelum.
    , @ATBOTL
    I can only imagine what kind of trashy people in Sweden would give their kids American nick names as given names. It shows both low intelligence and an attraction to the worst elements of American culture.

    I notice Salvadorans and Hondurans often have these kinds of names too. In the local media, we are always reading about Central Americans with names like "Johnny" who are wanted for murder, attempted murder, rape, car jacking etc.
  111. @AnotherDad

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.
     
    This seems reasonable, Lot--though i'd throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring--a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's my family heimat and i have some female relatives--retired teachers--who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I'll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin's corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i'd figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that's certainly Warren's weakness. She's a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden's age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don't care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here--it's a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I'm still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party--no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

    Can you elaborate on how the “Clinton era damaged the Dem party .:” or was it just general economic and cultural trends ?

  112. I’ve bought a couple of GQ magazines for the fashion advice because I wanted to improve my wardrobe with classic yet modern and form-fitting outfits that will make me look masculine and sexy to other men that I can also wear in everyday environments. Those editions had classically handsome men dressed in khakis and wool sweaters on the cover. If I had seen this space age drag queen on a budget mess of a cover photo I would have never picked it up. GQ are going to go the way of Teen Vogue.

    • LOL: Clyde
    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    Fill in the blanks:

    'Get _ _ _ _ , go _ _ _ _ _ .'
  113. @AnotherDad

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.
     
    This seems reasonable, Lot--though i'd throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring--a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's my family heimat and i have some female relatives--retired teachers--who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I'll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin's corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i'd figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that's certainly Warren's weakness. She's a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden's age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don't care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here--it's a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I'm still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party--no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

    Can you elaborate on how the “Clinton era damaged the Dem party .:” or was it just general economic and cultural trends ?
    Do you think a businessman , say a younger Mike Bloomberg, might enter and win the nomination?
    I agree that the field is weak and old ….inconceivable even ten years ago that Silent generation (1925-1942) members such as Biden and Sanders would be consuming voters bandwidths..:

  114. @Thea
    GQ has given up on the normal man demographic long ago. They’ve become a how-to manual for men who like men.

    Not many gays want to look like this, trust me.

  115. @Reg Cæsar

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.”
     
    I remember a black office worker's online comment about a decade ago that he like others suffered from "unique black name syndrome".

    There is a white version of this, too. In Sweden, a Danny is twice as likely to have been in police custody as a Daniel, a Johnny four times as likely as a Hans, and a Sonny twelve and a Jimmy fifteen times as likely as a Nils:



    The Y-name Syndrome: Prisons and Prejudice - Stockholm School of Economics
    [PDF]

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    In Freemasonry, the three bad guys in the blue lodge ritual are Jubelo, Jubela and Jubelum.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    And their last name is Smullett.
  116. @J.Ross
    Pharrell's got to be the least masculine brother they could have found without being gay, even within music, and his normal costume is an adaptation of "white video game enthusiast." I would've accepted Jidenna (whose "Classic Man" persona looked like he stepped right out of one of those older GQ fashion prescriptions) or T.I..

    Another pic from pop culture that makes me physically ill

  117. I finally got around to watching This Film Is Not Yet Rated, a much inferior and unrelated counterpart to Dear Mr Censor. It combines homosexual media activism with Michael Moore style pseudo-guerilla tricks, and has some interesting interviews. It is interesting though how dated it already is. This is one of those proprietarily gay community statement movies like the Life and Times of Harvey Milk, and to accommodate its anti-censorship position it has to go libertarian (which back when it came out was much more normal). At one point a co-founder of October films describes the MPAA rating system as fascism and then goes on to make clear that he means statism.

  118. @obwandiyag
    I wonder why you're all so interested in talking and talking and talking about homosexuality.

    Just wonderin'.

    They attacked us. They talk all the time about attacking us more. You’re allowed to discuss active enemies, it doesn’t mean that Richard the Lionhearted secretly wanted to convert to Islam. I remember when I thought the bastards were essentially good people. Nowhere near as many people think that now.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
    Yeah, OK. I believe you. It couldn't be that other reason. And, funny, you know what that other reason is! Full well! Isn't that smart of you! Oh, teehee.
  119. @AnotherDad

    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one’s body are signs of mutilation and vanity — they’re the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.
     
    I'm not a Bible quoting guy. But nonetheless, i completely agree. Now retired to the beach i see this disfigurement all the time.

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined, but also primitive. As with many things in our culture--ex. sexual behavior--America has degraded toward African norms. This stuff is--fortunately at a lower ebb--like the people with the neck rings or the lip disks. We have people in America now who would only have been found on the pages of National Geographic when i was a kid.

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined, but also primitive. As with many things in our culture–ex. sexual behavior–America has degraded toward African norms.

    This was an excellent assessment and analogy. I couldn’t agree more.

  120. @Mycale
    The incredible thing is how little all of this matters. We all know women are not going to stop being attracted to confident, successful, well-groomed, assertive, and above all masculine men. That is what women liked before, it is what they like now, it is what they will like after. This is just a giant shit test that people keep choosing to fail over and over. It’s just a way to weed out the guys who are stupid enough to fall for it.

    Exactly.

  121. @PiltdownMan

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.
     
    The ideal of the warrior aesthete was a thing in other cultures, too, notably many Islamic societies. Portraits of the Muslim emperors of India depict them daintily holding a flower with one hand, while the other hand rests on their sword's pommel.

    https://i.imgur.com/CSxfWC1.jpg

    There’s a scene in Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai in which Kyuzo and Kikuchiyo are waiting in the forest to ambush a few of the wicked samurai.

    While Kikuchiyo is up a tree excitedly watching the approach of the wicked samurai, Kurosawa shows Kyuzo, the stone-faced master samurai, sitting on the ground resting against the tree trunk, and wistfully contemplating a flower that he is holding in his fingers.

    On the arrival of the wicked samurai, Kyuzo stands straight up, faces his opponent, looks him in the eye, and slaughters him with a single sword stroke, straight from the scabbard.

    Kurosawa knew what he was doing, this sequence was no accident.

    Apologies, I can’t find this scene on Youtube.

  122. @anon
    We can change how masculinity is perceived!” screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so

    That's because their ribs are showing.


    https://mikecanex.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/charles-atlas-01.jpg

    ‘White jockeys sold separately.’

  123. @anon
    Pfft. Here is a gown fit for a queen of outer space.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EKxpR7Rkv8

    “The Indescribable Delights of the Female Planet”

    What a mistake we made in trading space exploration for monetarily appeasing whining blacks and women (and other miscellaneous miscreants) in endless cycles of throwing good money after bad. And what to we have to show for it? Yet more demands.

    And no indescribable delights in sight.

    If only we could have maintained the world portrayed in the first few episodes of Mad Men.

  124. Late stage imperial decline is a hell of a ride.

    Ultimately this is coastal lefties trying to impress other coastal lefties and goodwhytes. They’re at the huffing each others farts stage, claiming how good the farts smell, smacking their lips as they rave about the flavor.

    Meanwhile everyone else not in the cult is avoiding the fart huffing. I imagine GQ will go the way of Teen Vogue soon.

    • Replies: @danand

    “Meanwhile everyone else not in the cult is avoiding the fart huffing. I imagine GQ will go the way of Teen Vogue soon.”
     
    Jack, unfortunately looks like GQ won’t be folding anytime soon:

    Title, Circulation

    GQ GENTLEMEN'S QUARTERLY, 946,726
    GOLF MAGAZINE, 1,417,816

    A couple of the magazine worlds “Biggest Cahoonas” (and no doubt popular amongst many/us UNZ commenters):

    GAME INFORMER, 6,353,075
    AARP THE MAGAZINE, 23,144,225
  125. @TheMediumIsTheMassage
    I've bought a couple of GQ magazines for the fashion advice because I wanted to improve my wardrobe with classic yet modern and form-fitting outfits that will make me look masculine and sexy to other men that I can also wear in everyday environments. Those editions had classically handsome men dressed in khakis and wool sweaters on the cover. If I had seen this space age drag queen on a budget mess of a cover photo I would have never picked it up. GQ are going to go the way of Teen Vogue.

    Fill in the blanks:

    ‘Get _ _ _ _ , go _ _ _ _ _ .’

  126. @anon
    From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis),

    Because anthropologists are total experts on the endocrine system and the brain...the anti-science legacy of Franz Boas lives on.

    Liberal Arts (intellectual idiots) are what’s wrong with higher education today. Lao Tzu warned about giving serfs too many ideas; but partially educating slaves they will be difficult to govern. Or in the modern parlance, “College has ruined many a good truck driver”. The decline of Western Civilization can be traced to the Liberal Arts expansion of the 60s. All those cowards had to avoid the draft some way, and with their useless degrees they managed to end up as teachers for the Boomer Generation.

    And we all know how that turned out……………..

    • Agree: Dtbb
  127. @Just Saying
    "The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today. You’ll hear from an activist who is figuring out how to speak to closed-minded men about topics like sexual discrimination in the workplace (Tarana Burke). From a gender-nonbinary actor who is simultaneously advocating for greater inclusivity in Hollywood and acknowledging their own privilege (Asia Kate Dillon). From two very different comedians who are both mining this moment for poignant, provocative laughs (Jaboukie Young-White and Hannah Gadsby). From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis), and an NBA player who is publicly divulging his personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love). And there are many others."

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.

    Also, women are oppressed, down with the patriarchy, #believeallwomen

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.

    … and the seventh a queer.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    "He is of Jamaican descent, as well as of Chinese-Jamaican ancestry."

    A "jink"?

    From a Kingston Triad?
  128. @Steve in Greensboro

    The world’s problems are accelerated when we
     
    embrace diversity and equality.

    (This is a fun game. Shouldn't collect all of these and have a vote?)

    That would make a great post for iSteve!

  129. @anon

    I’m still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion.
     
    I think we're seeing the effect of an increasingly undemocratic political process producing increasingly incompetent candidates. A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members. Political candidates in both parties had to move up through a similar process.
    Today's candidates are picked by the donors and only have to read lines in front of a camera. Donors assume if you throw enough money into the campaign you will win (often true) and the candidates haven't a clue - they're just thrilled to be in the spotlight. Idiots do well in this environment.

    A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members.

    A Ronald Reagan as well. He’d had two decades of political experience by 1976.

  130. @AnotherDad
    I usually react to these sorts of articles by saying "separate nations".

    But this one makes me think more along the lines of "quarantine".

    This society--specific its elites and their political and cultural output--is deeply sick.

    I think we--nationalists, traditionalists--need a way of connecting with normal folks with specifically that messaging and proposals for an alternative, separate and sane civilization and existence.

    I usually react to these sorts of articles by saying “separate nations”.

    But this one makes me think more along the lines of “quarantine”.

    This society–specific its elites and their political and cultural output–is deeply sick.

    It’s not just a deeply sick society, it’s a vicious and very aggressive society. Those elites are determined that no-one anywhere is going to be allowed to have nationalism or any traces of traditionalism. Whether you live in Bolivia or Burundi or in Algeria or Austria or anywhere else you’re going to be forced to conform. That’s why we call such people globalists.

    Every single country on Earth is going to get Gay Pride Marches and transsexual bathroom rights and homosexual marriage and slut culture. And of course every single country on Earth is going to get crony capitalism, consumerism and mindless hedonism.

    These are not people who are going to permit “separate nations” to survive.

    • Replies: @Richard P
    It will only happen if there's no opposition -- and there's plenty across the globe from Central Europe to Russia. There's even a glimmer of hope is Western Europe. Cultural Marxists will not win the long war; they never have.
    , @FPD72
    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.
  131. @Anonymous
    The founder of the Mughal Empire, was himself a great aesthete. He loved gardens and to write. He is sometines even quoted to be the first person in the world to write an autobiography. The quality of his writing is exceptional for a non-Western, and is an Islamic masterpiece . He also loved boys.

    He also loved boys.

    Didn’t they all?

  132. @a reader

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.
     
    ... and the seventh a queer.

    “He is of Jamaican descent, as well as of Chinese-Jamaican ancestry.”

    A “jink”?

    From a Kingston Triad?

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    “He is of Jamaican descent, as well as of Chinese-Jamaican ancestry.”

    A “jink”?

    From a Kingston Triad?

     

    The local Caribbean term is Chigroe. I've heard it used in Jamaica, as well as Trinidad. Ian Fleming used the term in the James Bond book, The Man with the Golden Gun.

    A number of the prominent record producers and promoters in the early days of reggae music were Chinese-Jamaicans.

  133. @AnotherDad

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.
     
    This seems reasonable, Lot--though i'd throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring--a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's my family heimat and i have some female relatives--retired teachers--who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I'll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin's corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i'd figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that's certainly Warren's weakness. She's a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden's age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don't care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here--it's a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I'm still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party--no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

    I don’t think Buttman will win. But I am not betting against him at 10-1 odds after looking at his fundraising and debate performances. On these two metrics, he’s number 1. Not ready for a gay? We elected a half Kenyan Muslim with a surname a letter away Osama. If Biden stumbles he’s ready as the moderate. His current ad is “Medicare For All Who Want It” and implicitly saying Warren is too liberal for the general election by wanting to kill all private insurance plans.

    I also was an Early Warren Bull, my best play so far in 2019. Purchased her shares for 8, sold for 49. I think she’s the most likely winner, but at 45-50 she’s fairly valued and not worth buying right now. After selling Warren I got Biden for 23 and will sell half at 30 and maybe ride the rest for a few months.

    On the GOP side, I grabbed some Pence at 8. Trump could resign, not run, or die. More likely there will be a point during impeachment when it looks bad for him and I can sell the Pence shares for 15.

    The low risk play there however is to bet against Nikki Haley at 7 and the other long shots. I don’t see how it could be anyone but Trump or Pence.

    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    I think Buttigiege was a sacrifice fly. He showed "courage", but it doesn't look good, aggressively countering a female vet telling the truth, even if you're from the gay caste. Don't expect the price to rise on Pete.
  134. @dfordoom

    I usually react to these sorts of articles by saying “separate nations”.

    But this one makes me think more along the lines of “quarantine”.

    This society–specific its elites and their political and cultural output–is deeply sick.
     
    It's not just a deeply sick society, it's a vicious and very aggressive society. Those elites are determined that no-one anywhere is going to be allowed to have nationalism or any traces of traditionalism. Whether you live in Bolivia or Burundi or in Algeria or Austria or anywhere else you're going to be forced to conform. That's why we call such people globalists.

    Every single country on Earth is going to get Gay Pride Marches and transsexual bathroom rights and homosexual marriage and slut culture. And of course every single country on Earth is going to get crony capitalism, consumerism and mindless hedonism.

    These are not people who are going to permit "separate nations" to survive.

    It will only happen if there’s no opposition — and there’s plenty across the globe from Central Europe to Russia. There’s even a glimmer of hope is Western Europe. Cultural Marxists will not win the long war; they never have.

  135. @Desiderius
    If you want World Peace you’ve got to get the Birth Rate down to the Death Rate somehow. Might as well convince everyone else to be gay and/or that sex is icky.

    That’s the (Jaffe Memo) Plan anyway.

    Berlin Club owners now officially participate in rallies pro-open borders. Thing is, that the immigrants on’t act up to this concept at all: The women get pregnant as soon as possible quite often.

  136. @AnotherDad

    Indeed. And women with unnatural piercings and tattoos. The aforementioned marks to one’s body are signs of mutilation and vanity — they’re the markings of evil and degeneracy. Our flesh is the flesh of God and not ours to mark. Perhaps more people should become familiar with Leviticus 19:28.
     
    I'm not a Bible quoting guy. But nonetheless, i completely agree. Now retired to the beach i see this disfigurement all the time.

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined, but also primitive. As with many things in our culture--ex. sexual behavior--America has degraded toward African norms. This stuff is--fortunately at a lower ebb--like the people with the neck rings or the lip disks. We have people in America now who would only have been found on the pages of National Geographic when i was a kid.

    It is unnatural and ill-disciplined

    The popularity of piercings and tattoos shows that you can anything fashionable.

  137. @anon

    I’m still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion.
     
    I think we're seeing the effect of an increasingly undemocratic political process producing increasingly incompetent candidates. A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members. Political candidates in both parties had to move up through a similar process.
    Today's candidates are picked by the donors and only have to read lines in front of a camera. Donors assume if you throw enough money into the campaign you will win (often true) and the candidates haven't a clue - they're just thrilled to be in the spotlight. Idiots do well in this environment.

    I think we’re seeing the effect of an increasingly undemocratic political process producing increasingly incompetent candidates. A Jimmy Hoffa rising through the ranks at the union hall had to know how to give a good speech, organize a staff, talk one-on-one with the members. Political candidates in both parties had to move up through a similar process.

    There’s a lot of truth in that. Public speaking in front of a live audience in a relatively informal setting where you don’t have complete control and you could get asked awkward questions is terrifying but you do learn a lot. At best you learn how to win over an audience. At worst you at least learn to lie convincingly. The depressing thing about modern politicians (of all persuasions) is that they’re not even competent liars.

  138. @Anonymous

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.
     
    In Freemasonry, the three bad guys in the blue lodge ritual are Jubelo, Jubela and Jubelum.

    And their last name is Smullett.

    • Replies: @anon
    And their last name is Smullett.

    They are French?
  139. Convincing gays to pretend to be the other gender by castrating themselves, instead of being invisible should they choose to do so?

    Convincing unstable whores to show their true form by being fat and with blue hair, instead of pretending to be normal and fit until they marry you?

    This is almost like some Q Anon thing where in the end it will turn out this was all a 14-D chess game to get certain people out of the gene pool over the course of a couple of generations, while “love bombing” them all the way to extinction.

    “Gay Anon”?
    “Whore Anon”?

    In hindsight it makes perfect sense. First you make gays “proud and visible” so that they no longer pretend to be normal through *maskirovka*, then you legalize them marrying each other so they stop passing on their genes while fantasizing about boys in bed atop the phoney wife, and in the end you literaly start castrating them en masse, but they’re convinced they’re doing it of their own free will in order to show courage and authenticity.

    This, this…this is brilliant. This is IQ 400 multi-generational planning.

    Either that, or a perfect example of the inherently self-defeating core of modern (((social justice movements))).

    If the borders are closed that is. It’ll play out within a certain civilization and clean its gene pool, with the homos and whores disappearing within like 50 years of total “proud” visibility and voluntary self castration and voluntary self-writing out of the marriage market through “child free wine aunt lifestyle” promotion.

    If the borders are open tho… That’s another matter.

    • Replies: @Sean

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/giant-study-links-dna-variants-same-sex-behavior

    THE abstract for Ganna’s talk referenced another provocative result: Heterosexual people who possess these same four genetic variants tend to have more sexual partners"
     
    So no you are not going to get it out the gene pool. From the ones who are writing about their lives like Diana Tourjée on Vice very many transexuals have not been castrated, they just take hormones and wear women's clothes and hairstyle. Their primary reason for wanting to be fully accepted as women by general society seems to be so they can date straighter men.
  140. @AnotherDad
    I sensed it was all going to hell back when i started seeing guys wearing earrings.

    I sensed it was all going to hell back when i started seeing guys wearing earrings.

    You must be quite olde.

    Also:

    As with many things in our culture–ex. sexual behavior–America has degraded toward African norms.

    Isn’t it going more towards Japanese norms? Didn’t the aftermath of the sexual liberation coincide with Americans having less sex than they’ve ever had?

    • Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian
    Well, there was this AIDS thing going around, so that might have been a bit of a buzzkill.
  141. @Bard of Bumperstickers
    The tsunami of kookoo currently washing over the West may be attributable to some sort of cloud of subatomic particles, which our galaxy, or perhaps solar system, could be passing through. This theoretical particle could be named the Higgs Bozon, or Clown Particle. Isolating and identifying this proposed phenomenon is being undertaken in the Mainstream Media Article Accelerator.

    “The tsunami of kookoo currently washing over the West may be attributable to some sort of cloud of subatomic particles, which our galaxy, or perhaps solar system, could be passing through”

    This was more or less the opinion of the late and great Fred Hoyle regarding viruses and disease outbreaks. Here’s a 2010 article by one of his collaborators, Chandra Wickramsinghe. Astrobiology is no longer offered at Cardiff, the UK centre is at Edinburgh. Dr Wickramsinghe is now at the private University of Buckingham.

    http://journalofcosmology.com/Panspermia10.html

    “Ancient Chinese astronomers chronicled numerous episodes where the apparition of comets preceded plague and disaster. Meticulous observations were compiled in 300 BC in a series of books known as the “Mawangdui Silk” (Ling-feng 1976) It details 29 different cometary forms and the various disasters associated with them, dating as far back as 1500 B.C: “Comets are vile stars. Every time they appear in the south, they wipe out the old and establish the new. Fish grow sick, crops fail, Emperors and common people die, and men go to war. The people hate life and don’t even want to speak of it.” -Li Ch’un Feng, Director, Chinese Imperial Astronomical Bureau, (648, A.D).”

  142. @Rahan
    Convincing gays to pretend to be the other gender by castrating themselves, instead of being invisible should they choose to do so?

    Convincing unstable whores to show their true form by being fat and with blue hair, instead of pretending to be normal and fit until they marry you?

    This is almost like some Q Anon thing where in the end it will turn out this was all a 14-D chess game to get certain people out of the gene pool over the course of a couple of generations, while “love bombing” them all the way to extinction.

    “Gay Anon”?
    "Whore Anon"?

    In hindsight it makes perfect sense. First you make gays "proud and visible" so that they no longer pretend to be normal through *maskirovka*, then you legalize them marrying each other so they stop passing on their genes while fantasizing about boys in bed atop the phoney wife, and in the end you literaly start castrating them en masse, but they're convinced they're doing it of their own free will in order to show courage and authenticity.

    This, this...this is brilliant. This is IQ 400 multi-generational planning.

    Either that, or a perfect example of the inherently self-defeating core of modern (((social justice movements))).

    If the borders are closed that is. It'll play out within a certain civilization and clean its gene pool, with the homos and whores disappearing within like 50 years of total "proud" visibility and voluntary self castration and voluntary self-writing out of the marriage market through "child free wine aunt lifestyle" promotion.

    If the borders are open tho... That's another matter.

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/giant-study-links-dna-variants-same-sex-behavior

    THE abstract for Ganna’s talk referenced another provocative result: Heterosexual people who possess these same four genetic variants tend to have more sexual partners”

    So no you are not going to get it out the gene pool. From the ones who are writing about their lives like Diana Tourjée on Vice very many transexuals have not been castrated, they just take hormones and wear women’s clothes and hairstyle. Their primary reason for wanting to be fully accepted as women by general society seems to be so they can date straighter men.

  143. @R.G. Camara
    I got a subscription to GQ for a while in the 2000s, hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls. But despite having good recommendations, I had to cancel it, because it was so Marxist in its articles and in its pushing of "black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys" aesthetic (blacks were overrepresented in cover photos and photo models and in article subjects).

    It's not surprising its pushing further left. As fewer people get magazines and newspapers, these folks play to their perceived base. They go extreme left in order to please the base. The NY Times audience has no idea how outside normal they are and how many untruths they are told, and neither do GQ's regular readers these days.

    P.S. It's interesting how much the Left belives Nature can overcome Nurture, and how self-important each Commie thinks he is. "We can change how masculinity is perceived!" screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so. And yet he-men never go out of style.

    “hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls.”

    That is not how you pick up girls. Both GQ fashion and PUA ‘tude are lying to you. (First of all, “picking up girls” is an illusory goal. What you actually want is not girls, plural, but rather — one particular girl, one individual girlfriend, someone suited to you, with whom you can go on and work together with, to build a family and a life.)

    Picking up girls is a two step process. It goes as follows:

    Step One: cultivate a formidable skill, through training, practice, and discipline. Then, using it, do something interesting, bold, and skillful, and make sure that girls see you doing it.

    Step Two: actually there is no Step Two. If you have successfully completed Step One, then you don’t need to “pick up girls” because you now have a hot girlfiend, because she threw herself at you once you completed Step One.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    Just don't look/smell like a slob, and don't be physically weak. Seriously. That's all you need in the looks department if you are a man. Men's challenges lie elsewhere: behavior (boys, don't listen to what you are being told-act like a man if you want women), socioeconomic prospects, etc. It's fundamentally different due to deeply rooted biological reasons that no amount of policy or social engineering is ever going to override.

    Being tall helps, being classically good-looking helps. I'm not suggesting that it doesn't. But it will not override problems like a lack of confidence or being unemployed in attracting most women, just as for women, being a skilled, high-paid programmer will not override obesity in attracting most men. Sure, most men would prefer to have a wife with economic prospects than one who doesn't in the 21st Century, but it still isn't THE overriding, imperative factor in social value like it is for men.

    (Yeah, you have your weirdos-I'm one of them. Contour integrals make my heart flutter in a way that most women have never managed, and chances are I'd be deeply attracted to a woman who felt similarly irrespective of looks. But let's be real, we're called "weirdos" for a reason-because numerically speaking, we're exceptions.)

  144. @Just Saying
    "The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today. You’ll hear from an activist who is figuring out how to speak to closed-minded men about topics like sexual discrimination in the workplace (Tarana Burke). From a gender-nonbinary actor who is simultaneously advocating for greater inclusivity in Hollywood and acknowledging their own privilege (Asia Kate Dillon). From two very different comedians who are both mining this moment for poignant, provocative laughs (Jaboukie Young-White and Hannah Gadsby). From an anthropologist who is debunking the idea that testosterone determines male behavior (Katrina Karkazis), and an NBA player who is publicly divulging his personal struggles with depression and anxiety in a league that has traditionally favored the invulnerable (Kevin Love). And there are many others."

    In other words, the centerpiece of a package around masculinity consists of seven writers, six of whom are women.

    Also, women are oppressed, down with the patriarchy, #believeallwomen

    I’m sure Nora Caplan-Bricker has our best interests at heart and is a guide to follow.

    Btw, is there any US equivalent of FreeBMD which enables you to ascertain the ancestries of the great and good? Are US births, marriages and deaths publicly available?

  145. @Jonathan Mason
    The editorial reads like one of those perky editorials in airline inflight magazines. "Flying to London? We're going to tell you where to get the yummiest fish and chips just around the corner from Buckingham Palace, where you might just run into old Prince Randy Andy late at night!"

    And does anyone even buy magazines any more? I haven't seen one for years.

    Their market is doctor’s offices.

  146. @syonredux
    Speaking of WOKE-Folk,


    Charlize Theron in 2019:

    “I obviously am a white person who benefited from my white privilege,” Theron said of her South African upbringing. “I grew up during the Apartheid era, I benefited from it. These children [today] were all born post-Apartheid era. I feel like it’s my duty to not let them forget and to also let them know that there is [unity], that I am with them, that we are all standing together.”
     
    Charlize Theron Talks ‘White Privilege,’ Growing Up During Apartheid in South Africa, by Nicholas White, Variety, October 13, 2019]


    Vs Charlize Theron in 1996:

    Theron had little time to grieve; with the dismantling of apartheid and the creation of new affirmative action laws, she became convinced “there was no future for a white South African.” One week after turning 16, she accepted an offer from an Italian model scout, and—with her mother’s blessing—headed for Milan. Looking back, she says, “I just ran.”
     
    That Thing She Does, by Dan Jewel, October 14, 1996]


    Via James Kirkpatrick at VDARE

    https://vdare.com/posts/2019-charlize-theron-denounces-white-privilege-1996-charlize-theron-left-south-africa-because-there-was-no-future-for-a-white-south-african

    With her worldwide success, and so much now to lose, she’s found the strength within herself finally to be woke.

  147. @Steve in Greensboro

    "...we will connect with a ... gender-nonspecific audience..."
     
    Doesn't this suggest, no demand, a name change for the magazine? How about "Genderqueer Quarterly"? It scans like the old name, which is critical for brand maintenance, plus it is very, very mod.

    Gentlemen’s Quarterly?

    To quote Nelson Muntz regarding”Naked Lunch” as the boys file out from the movie theater:

    “I can think of at least two things wrong with that title.”

  148. @syonredux
    Speaking of WOKE-Folk,


    Charlize Theron in 2019:

    “I obviously am a white person who benefited from my white privilege,” Theron said of her South African upbringing. “I grew up during the Apartheid era, I benefited from it. These children [today] were all born post-Apartheid era. I feel like it’s my duty to not let them forget and to also let them know that there is [unity], that I am with them, that we are all standing together.”
     
    Charlize Theron Talks ‘White Privilege,’ Growing Up During Apartheid in South Africa, by Nicholas White, Variety, October 13, 2019]


    Vs Charlize Theron in 1996:

    Theron had little time to grieve; with the dismantling of apartheid and the creation of new affirmative action laws, she became convinced “there was no future for a white South African.” One week after turning 16, she accepted an offer from an Italian model scout, and—with her mother’s blessing—headed for Milan. Looking back, she says, “I just ran.”
     
    That Thing She Does, by Dan Jewel, October 14, 1996]


    Via James Kirkpatrick at VDARE

    https://vdare.com/posts/2019-charlize-theron-denounces-white-privilege-1996-charlize-theron-left-south-africa-because-there-was-no-future-for-a-white-south-african

    I help but think of the whore-gene when confronted by the vapid musings of this bint. Surely she cannot be so indifferent to the plight of her co-ethnics in South Africa, unless she has the whore-gene. If she spouted anything approximating the truth the mammon spigot would be terminated by the nose. However of mammon she has plenty why does feel she needs to grovel still only the whore-gene can explain a pathological indifference to any form of empathy for co-ethnics ( kith and kin) suffering the whip hand of the savage.

  149. @petit bourgeois
    Jabouki's brothers' names are "Javaughn and Javeigh." And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the "Millenial" future.

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    Naming children is largely determined by fashion.

    When I was growing up in England people’s first names were always referred to on official forms, etc. as “christian names” even if they were not actually names that had a Christian history.

    So most of my contemporaries had names like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Peter, and Paul, or Old Testament names like David, Jonathan, Adam, Daniel, or Joseph, or saint’s names like Michael, Francis, George, Andrew, Anthony, Martin, and Patrick, or names of English kings like Alfred, William, Richard, Charles, and Henry.

    The christian name that no one ever had was Jesus, and it was regarded as a bit of a joke that Jesus was used as a christian name for boys in Spain, as this seemed obviously inappropriate and bordering on blashphemous.

    A name that sound silly to people from one culture, may sound entirely appropriate to people from another. For example the name Dontavious seems to be consistently ridiculed in these columns, but if you see at as a combination of Donald and Octavius, you might think of it as a noble, historic name.

    These names beginning with Ja- may well have religious connotations for the namer, particularly if they are fans of Bob Marley whose Rastafarian religion has strong elements of the back to Africa movement.

    Jaboukie Young-White is of Jamaican descent, so you might want to consider the meaning of those names in a Jamaican context.

    I once had a US white girlfriend whose first name was Yvonne. Her parents called her Von. Had they had a son, they would have called him Vaughn. To them it was all the same. Javaughn is a variant of Javon. Personally I would not use this name as it sounds too similar to the Spanish word “jabon”, which means ‘soap’, but you cannot account for personal decisions made within families.

    • Replies: @petit bourgeois

    Naming children is largely determined by fashion.
     
    No, it is not. In "our" culture, naming children is mostly based on family, e.g. my brother is a "III", and my nephew is a "IV", meaning there were generations before them. Certain names trend over the years, but "Jaboukie" is not one of them.

    The christian name that no one ever had was Jesus
     
    Where I live, an outpost of Mexico in Alta California/Aztlan, everyone is named Jesus. It is very common.

    particularly if they are fans of Bob Marley whose Rastafarian religion has strong elements of the back to Africa movement.
     
    I played reggae professionally in Los Angeles for four years with Jamaicans. They are the biggest con artists on the planet. Anything beginning with "ja" does not connote any religion or Pan Africanism/Garveyism. Jaboukie's parents made sure people will laugh at him and his brothers.

    Jaboukie Young-White is of Jamaican descent, so you might want to consider the meaning of those names in a Jamaican context.
     
    Jamaicans are nothing like African-Americans when it comes to naming children. Most Jamaicans use traditional English names like Horace, Errol and Clive. There is no Jamaican "context" to see here.

    Javaughn is a variant of Javon.
     
    No, it is not. It is entirely made up by schvartzes who have too much time on their hands, making up names that never existed. It makes them look foolish to the rest of us normal people.
  150. Unconsciously, (((they))) are recreating the place the feel more comfortable -rejecting a homogenous Christian nation with Christian values and transforming it into an decadent Islamic caliphate, complete with a eunuch class, a polygot of downtrodden peoples (beggar’s democracy), chaos, anti-beauty and filth and destruction of ‘blasphemous’ graven images – e.g. western beauty in art…
    Empires need a eunuch class, homogeneous republics don’t.

  151. Anon[930] • Disclaimer says:
    @PiltdownMan

    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn’t totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.
     
    The ideal of the warrior aesthete was a thing in other cultures, too, notably many Islamic societies. Portraits of the Muslim emperors of India depict them daintily holding a flower with one hand, while the other hand rests on their sword's pommel.

    https://i.imgur.com/CSxfWC1.jpg

    The concept of masculinity-as-loutishness is a pretty unique 20th-century one and is possibly not unrelated to the popularity of homosexuality as an “orientation” in that era.

    18th-century and 19th-century Englishmen tended to disdain (or pretend to disdain) “frippery” and were very conscious of trying to appear masculine but they had their own conception of high aesthetics that really was admirable in its own way.

  152. @petit bourgeois
    Jabouki's brothers' names are "Javaughn and Javeigh." And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the "Millenial" future.

    Javeigh –> Yahweh is a pretty gutsy name.

  153. “… In other words, you have to have empathy for yourself. And then you can turn that hard-won superpower outward …”

    Sick of seeing “empathy” incorrectly used as a synonym for “sympathy.” Since “empathy” actually means “feeling the emotions if another,” I can’t even make a joke about the mental contortions required to feel empathy for oneself. Superpowers indeed. I can’t even, until I get more coffee.

  154. @Anonymous

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets — and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.
     
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    Gun and outdoors mags are getting fruitier by the year- and a lot outdoors shops, too.
    All this Hollywood hunting and fishing crap- the 300 dollar sunglasses, the Punisher stickers on the trucks, the lowrider colored boats, the photo models, the tricked-out ORV’s.

    Seriously, are there any men left who just walk or canoe into the woods with a gun/bow, a thermos, and call of choice? I miss those days, seriously.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    Disposable income-consumerism will do that to any commercial enterprise. And in a world where sensation and flamboyance sells--extreme conduct (as you point out) will be a response.
    , @Richard P

    Gun and outdoors mags are getting fruitier by the year- and a lot outdoors shops, too.
    All this Hollywood hunting and fishing crap- the 300 dollar sunglasses, the Punisher stickers on the trucks, the lowrider colored boats, the photo models, the tricked-out ORV’s.

    Seriously, are there any men left who just walk or canoe into the woods with a gun/bow, a thermos, and call of choice? I miss those days, seriously.
     
    Your observations and grievances are well-founded. The entire industry has become diluted, politicized, and commercialized. The industry no longer caters -- or respects -- the rugged outdoorsman who exemplifies grit. Rather, the industry has shifted its focus to the feminized "Mountain Hipster" and weekend warriors’ crowd -- who are more often than not, the SJW type.

    The entire industry has become a breeding ground for left-leaning politics, especially when it comes to environmentalism and the climate “crisis” . A good example would be the liberal politics surrounding the Outdoor Retailer Show being uprooted from Salt Lake City and moved to a more "environmentally progressive location" as Denver.

    I laugh at all of this as I grew up deer hunting in the mountains of the Northeast, and my clothes for first day of Buck Season included a pair of Wranglers, long john underwear, a wool flannel jacket, and a pair of Sorrel boots. My hunting hear was a far cry from the multi-thousand dollar technical clothing wardrobes that many of today’s hunters are wearing – or encouraged to wear by the “celebrity” promoters within the Hollywood crowd.
  155. @Jesse
    And that's ignoring the violation of women's privacy it entails when these men start demanding to be let in their private spaces.

    The idea that women have an obligation to soak up the men who make other men uncomfortable is something that the right should be using to black pill normal women, rather than seriously discussing whether they shod be allowed to vote.

    Boys are no longer allowed to have their own social spaces (think Boy Scouts and fraternities).

    Now girls are beginning to have their spaces taken (think bathrooms and sports)

    Invade the Genders, Invite the Genders

  156. I’m not going to read any of the essays in GQ, but I have to wonder if any of them have grappled with Camille Paglia’s argument in this talk:

    Her argument (starting at about 4:20) is that, based on a number of historical examples, these are signs of cultural decline and that there are barbarians waiting in the wings to take over, and of course those barbarians have no interest in the culture these writers are promoting. In fact, all those who promote this new masculinity actually want more of these barbarians to come into our civilization instead of being stuck outside of our borders. I just want to hear these people explain in detail why they think this will turn out well for them. Who exactly is going to keep the barbarians from slaughtering them?

  157. So, GQ = Gay Quarterly

  158. Anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox
    https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-sultan-mehmed-ii-of-turkey-smelling-a-rose-from-the-saray-albums-c-90824381.html

    Mehmed II took and sacked Constantinople when he was all of 21 years old. The Turks, like many conquerors in history, saw no contradiction between being a cultured aesthete patronizing the arts and for being a skilled and ruthless military commander.

    He was also a notorious bisexual. For what it is worth, Turkish men to this day have a repuation within the Islamic World for being ruggedly charming, aggressive Lothario types.

    The life of Mehmed the Conqueror was fascinating. He not only conquered Constantinople, but also unified Anatolia, conquered Serbia, Romania, Bosnia , Albania, Crimea, etc. Together with Suleiman the Magnificent, they were the best sultans of the Ottoman history. Not enough, he had a complex relationship with the famous Vlad Tepes the Impaler . Vlad and his brother lived in the Ottoman court, together with Mehmet, the three boys had similar ages. Mehmed developed a sexual relationship with Vlad brother. From the contemporary historian Laonikos Chalkokondyles :

    “The sultan1 spent that winter2 in his palace and summoned Vlad, the son of Dracul and ruler of Wallachia,3 as he already had his younger brother4 at the court, keeping him as his lover and maintaining him. It happened that the sultan was almost killed by the boy when he had wanted to have sex with him. This was when he had first gained the throne and was preparing to campaign against Karaman. He was in love with the boy and invited him for conversation, and then as a sign of his respect he invited him for drinks to his bedchamber. The boy did not expect to suffer such a thing from the sultan, and when he saw the sultan approaching him with that intention, he fought him off and refused to consent to intercourse with him. The sultan kissed the unwilling boy, who drew a dagger and struck the sultan on his thigh. He then fled in whatever direction he could find. The doctors were able to treat the sultan’s wound. The boy had climbed up a tree there and was hiding. When the sultan packed up and left, the boy came down from the tree, began his journey, and shortly afterward, arrived at the Porte and became the sultan’s lover. The sultan was used to having relations no less with men who shared his own inclinations. For he was always spending his time in the close company of such people, both day and night, but he did not usually have relations with men who were not of his own race, except for brief periods of time.”

    There are people who say that Vlad was obsessed with impalements of Ottomans, because the lost honor of his family , with the “impalements” that Mehmed did on Radu. It’s also interesting because Chalkokondyles wrote that Mehmed was inclined towards homosexuality, and preferred other Ottomans, not only subjulgated men from conquered lands. Something like modern homosexuals. His behavior was not because the supposed Islamic fashion or the so called prison homosexuality.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    I don't think there was anything especially Islamic about it: I think it was a holdover from how Arab society treated homosexuality at the time that the religion was born. Mehmed's sexuality would be entirely familiar to anyone who knows about, say, Alexander's or Trajan's. These societies just didn't think about sexuality in the same way.

    (Hadrian would definitely be "gay" by our standards: he had no interest in women whatsoever and didn't bother to hide it, which was considered shocking by the permissive but prudish Romans. By contrast, whatever Mehmed's real sexuality, it was never exclusive enough to prevent him from doing his societal duty and popping out some heirs.)

    My impression was that Arab society around the time of Muhammad still treated homosexuality much like the Greeks and Romans did in classical antiquity: homosexuality as a psycho-social "identity" just wasn't a thing at a time. It was considered perfectly normal for an adult, free man of standing to have male and female partners, and as long as it didn't interfere with the all-important procreation of the next generation, the choice between the two was a matter of personal taste and nothing deeper. Within this prism, if someone like Mehmed preferred men, it wasn't considered especially noteworthy unless it got to the point where he didn't do his duty and pop out a new sultan.

    But that was strictly predicated on said man being the dominant, active partner. To take the passive role was considered deeply shameful. At best, if the passive partner was a freeborn younger youth, it was considered a transitory stage that would be handled with strict discretion and was to cease when he was old enough to assume the dominant role himself, take a wife, become a paterfamlias generally. In stark contrast to "prison" sexuality, which it is often compared to, the passive partner in this scenario was still emphatically male: to have dressed him up like a girl or treated him like one would have been considered demeaning and unworthy of the dominant partner, who was supposed to be mentoring him and encouraging him in his manhood. But at worst, if the passive partner was a slave or a eunuch or something, it was a sign that beyond being property, he wasn't and could not ever be a man-something more reminiscent of prison sexuality. It doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility that the Arabs transferred this attitude to the people they ended up converting, including the Turks.


    (My impression is also that female sexuality was considered so unworthy of attention outside of getting pregnant by the right man-aka, her husband or master-that nobody bothered to talk about lesbianism.)

  159. @Reg Cæsar
    "He is of Jamaican descent, as well as of Chinese-Jamaican ancestry."

    A "jink"?

    From a Kingston Triad?

    “He is of Jamaican descent, as well as of Chinese-Jamaican ancestry.”

    A “jink”?

    From a Kingston Triad?

    The local Caribbean term is Chigroe. I’ve heard it used in Jamaica, as well as Trinidad. Ian Fleming used the term in the James Bond book, The Man with the Golden Gun.

    A number of the prominent record producers and promoters in the early days of reggae music were Chinese-Jamaicans.

  160. @J.Ross
    And their last name is Smullett.

    And their last name is Smullett.

    They are French?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    If you go back to the lynching that didn't happen (not that one, the other one) all the kids' names were these bizarre made-up constructions starting with "j."
  161. @kihowi
    It reads like they decided to go full gay, but want the remnant of heterosexuals who are still buying the magazine to keep buying it. So instead of "only dicksuckers from now on" they're announcing that they're for everybody, and that the best way of doing that is to get as far away from normal heterosexuality as possible.

    Also I have to say I'm having trouble expressing, even in thought, how much I hate this style of writing. This mushy, moist, formless, empty...ugh. The closest I can get to it is that it feels like I'm being forced to inhale yeast-infected vagina fumes. For someone who loves language and the beauty of exactness, this is torture.

    Also I have to say I’m having trouble expressing, even in thought, how much I hate this style of writing. This mushy, moist, formless, empty…ugh. The closest I can get to it is that it feels like I’m being forced to inhale yeast-infected vagina fumes. For someone who loves language and the beauty of exactness, this is torture.

    Yes, it’s the cramped voice of unfreedom. Eastern-Europeans will spot it a mile away.

  162. @Reg Cæsar

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.”
     
    I remember a black office worker's online comment about a decade ago that he like others suffered from "unique black name syndrome".

    There is a white version of this, too. In Sweden, a Danny is twice as likely to have been in police custody as a Daniel, a Johnny four times as likely as a Hans, and a Sonny twelve and a Jimmy fifteen times as likely as a Nils:



    The Y-name Syndrome: Prisons and Prejudice - Stockholm School of Economics
    [PDF]

    I can only imagine what kind of trashy people in Sweden would give their kids American nick names as given names. It shows both low intelligence and an attraction to the worst elements of American culture.

    I notice Salvadorans and Hondurans often have these kinds of names too. In the local media, we are always reading about Central Americans with names like “Johnny” who are wanted for murder, attempted murder, rape, car jacking etc.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I notice Salvadorans and Hondurans often have these kinds of names too.
     
    They go in the opposite direction, too. More so in Brazil-- three of their most world-famous sportsmen were named Edson, Emerson, and Ayrton.

    I knew a Dane named Conny who told me she didn't speak English. Fine lady, but that alone suggested a somewhat humble upbringing.
  163. @fish
    Modern magazines from GQ to Sports Illustrated toCat Fancy can't go under soon enough!


    ……salt the earth whence they sat!

    Modern magazines from GQ to Sports Illustrated to Cat Fancy can’t go under soon enough!

    I subscribed to Esquire for a year in high school, over forty years ago. A gas station attendant– you have to be pretty old to remember these, except in New Jersey and Oregon– saw me reading it in the back seat and said he had stopped some time before. “It’s all advertisements.”

    I’ve come to the conclusion that magazines are the most pernicious of commercial media, because they have to fill their pages every month. TV is second, because people discover in time how boring and unproductive the activity is, and have to be tempted with increasing novelty. What else can explain “reality shows”?

  164. “The centerpiece of the issue is an extended package, captained by the journalist Nora Caplan-Bricker, called “Voices of the New Masculinity.” In it we hear directly from people who are actively engaging with the complex and shape-shifting inquiry around what masculinity means today.”

    ^ Nora Caplan-Bricker, who lives in Boston “with another journalist, a brilliant dog, and a very bossy cat.”

  165. @petit bourgeois
    Jabouki's brothers' names are "Javaughn and Javeigh." And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the "Millenial" future.

    There was a Louis Theroux program where he was in some shithole American city and he was interviewing some black guy whose brother was shot and killed by the police.

    He was called Sedan and his brother was called Seville (or possibly vice-versa).

    Louis asked him about their unusual names and he says they were named after Cadillacs!

    Cadillac Seville And Cadillac Sedan!

  166. A number of the prominent record producers and promoters in the early days of reggae music were Chinese-Jamaicans.

    According to Wikipedia Naomi Campbell is of Jamaican descent, as well as of Chinese-Jamaican ancestry through her paternal grandmother, who carried the family name “Ming”.

    When I lived in Bermuda, there were quite a few Mings, although the usual explanation there was that they were a branch of the TriMINGham family in Bermuda, which is all white.

    http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20150626/ISLAND15/150629793

  167. @Sam Coulton
    Blond hair isn't Nordic. The genetic material for blond hair is from central Siberia.



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

    An Afontova Gora 3 female individual dated to c. 14.7 kya, is the earliest known individual with the derived allele of KITLG responsible for blond hair in modern Europeans, and is recorded in Mesolithic Eastern Europe as associated with the EHG lineage.[7]
     

    Technically speaking, that’s correct. But, come on, everywhere it is pretty much recognized that naturally occurring blond hair = (wicked) white people.

  168. @Jack Henson
    Late stage imperial decline is a hell of a ride.

    Ultimately this is coastal lefties trying to impress other coastal lefties and goodwhytes. They're at the huffing each others farts stage, claiming how good the farts smell, smacking their lips as they rave about the flavor.

    Meanwhile everyone else not in the cult is avoiding the fart huffing. I imagine GQ will go the way of Teen Vogue soon.

    “Meanwhile everyone else not in the cult is avoiding the fart huffing. I imagine GQ will go the way of Teen Vogue soon.”

    Jack, unfortunately looks like GQ won’t be folding anytime soon:

    Title, Circulation

    GQ GENTLEMEN’S QUARTERLY, 946,726
    GOLF MAGAZINE, 1,417,816

    A couple of the magazine worlds “Biggest Cahoonas” (and no doubt popular amongst many/us UNZ commenters):

    GAME INFORMER, 6,353,075
    AARP THE MAGAZINE, 23,144,225

  169. @dfordoom

    I usually react to these sorts of articles by saying “separate nations”.

    But this one makes me think more along the lines of “quarantine”.

    This society–specific its elites and their political and cultural output–is deeply sick.
     
    It's not just a deeply sick society, it's a vicious and very aggressive society. Those elites are determined that no-one anywhere is going to be allowed to have nationalism or any traces of traditionalism. Whether you live in Bolivia or Burundi or in Algeria or Austria or anywhere else you're going to be forced to conform. That's why we call such people globalists.

    Every single country on Earth is going to get Gay Pride Marches and transsexual bathroom rights and homosexual marriage and slut culture. And of course every single country on Earth is going to get crony capitalism, consumerism and mindless hedonism.

    These are not people who are going to permit "separate nations" to survive.

    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.
     
    It's actually Woke Capital that is using Brave New World as an instruction manual.

    Which would not have surprised Huxley. He was just as concerned about capitalism as he was about communism. In fact he was warning of the dangers of consumerism, mass media, the worship of hedonism, large-scale capitalism, empty materialism and nihilism. After all he was writing about a future society that worshipped Henry Ford, not Marx. Things like modern celebrity worship, social media and the cult of 57 different genders would have dismayed Huxley but they would not have surprised him.

    As for Orwell, it's always necessary to remember that he never lost his faith in socialism. In fact he was so far to the left that he was for all practical purposes a communist. His argument with the communists was over means, not ends. He had a rather touching belief in democracy. Orwell also despised what he called the Pansy Left.

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell's predictions were mostly wrong.
  170. @Bard of Bumperstickers
    Doesn't funny-looking count? BTW, isn't she revolted by little, dimpled white balls?

    Just jealous…she wishes she had a pair…

  171. @anon
    Pfft. Here is a gown fit for a queen of outer space.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EKxpR7Rkv8

    Just tried a search to put it on hold at the library

    No joy :-{

    • Replies: @anon
    Just tried a search to put it on hold at the library

    Library? Try Amazon or Netflix.

    Or YouTube:
    https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=queen+of+outer+space+
  172. @Richard P

    more people under 40 in a day use Instagram than read all deadtree magazines combined in a year.
     
    I personally prefer to read from hard copies -- whether books or documents. Instagram is for the mindless and narcissistic as it enables self-serving behaviors. No self-proclaimed Traditionalist should be supporting Big Tech as they're working diligently to silence us, the Dissident Right.

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present, and unorthodox as they forebod the coming of the Antichrist. You're proving an outside force with the power to dictate your life, and who ever has the power, has the control.

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present

    “Living in the present” seems to be the problem. Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples’ lives.

    You might want to re-think that assertion.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples’ lives.
     
    These are valid points and I agree with their context. Nonetheless, what I mean by living in the present is being conscious of one's surrounds and practicing situational awareness from a non-tactical perspective. When I'm patronizing an establishment that's a hybrid between a coffee shop and a restaurant in a touristy area of the Rocky Mountains, and following a quick scan of the dining area, I notice that many groups of people are electronically sharing their recent experiences on social media rather than verbally discussing their experiences with those at the table.

    One can't be present if they're constantly glued to their electronic devices -- especially in the company of their peers.
    , @Richard P

    Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples’ lives.
     
    These are valid points and I agree with their context. Nonetheless, what I mean by living in the present is being conscious of one's surroundings and practicing situational awareness from a non-tactical perspective. When I'm patronizing an establishment that's a hybrid between a coffee shop and a restaurant in a touristy area of the Rocky Mountains, and following a quick scan of the dining area, I notice that many groups of people are electronically sharing their recent experiences on social media rather than verbally discussing their experiences with those at the table.

    One can't be present if they're constantly glued to their electronic devices -- especially in the company of their peers.
  173. @syonredux
    Speaking of WOKE-Folk,


    Charlize Theron in 2019:

    “I obviously am a white person who benefited from my white privilege,” Theron said of her South African upbringing. “I grew up during the Apartheid era, I benefited from it. These children [today] were all born post-Apartheid era. I feel like it’s my duty to not let them forget and to also let them know that there is [unity], that I am with them, that we are all standing together.”
     
    Charlize Theron Talks ‘White Privilege,’ Growing Up During Apartheid in South Africa, by Nicholas White, Variety, October 13, 2019]


    Vs Charlize Theron in 1996:

    Theron had little time to grieve; with the dismantling of apartheid and the creation of new affirmative action laws, she became convinced “there was no future for a white South African.” One week after turning 16, she accepted an offer from an Italian model scout, and—with her mother’s blessing—headed for Milan. Looking back, she says, “I just ran.”
     
    That Thing She Does, by Dan Jewel, October 14, 1996]


    Via James Kirkpatrick at VDARE

    https://vdare.com/posts/2019-charlize-theron-denounces-white-privilege-1996-charlize-theron-left-south-africa-because-there-was-no-future-for-a-white-south-african

    “I grew up during the Apartheid era, I benefited from it.

    Silly woman. Everyone in South Africa benefited from Apartheid, including the blacks.

  174. @yaqub the mad scientist
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    Gun and outdoors mags are getting fruitier by the year- and a lot outdoors shops, too.
    All this Hollywood hunting and fishing crap- the 300 dollar sunglasses, the Punisher stickers on the trucks, the lowrider colored boats, the photo models, the tricked-out ORV's.

    Seriously, are there any men left who just walk or canoe into the woods with a gun/bow, a thermos, and call of choice? I miss those days, seriously.

    Disposable income-consumerism will do that to any commercial enterprise. And in a world where sensation and flamboyance sells–extreme conduct (as you point out) will be a response.

  175. @AnotherDad

    The easy and low risk play is to stay neutral on Butt/Biden/Poca and short Hillary, Yang, Bernie, Bloomberg, Booker and Tulsi. They are collectively around 34, which is absurd. After fees that’s a 25% return in less than a year.
     
    This seems reasonable, Lot--though i'd throw in Butt onto your loser list as well.

    I finally gave this some thought and predicted Warren back in the spring--a multitude of reasons, but significantly including that i thought she was the kind of person who could, and would, win the Iowa caucuses. Iowa's my family heimat and i have some female relatives--retired teachers--who are Democrats and would be plausible Warren voters. (I'll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin's corn is ready for picking.)

    The intervening six months have merely confirmed what i'd figured out and Warren has moved to the top of the pack. The only other plausible winner is Biden due to the black vote. And that's certainly Warren's weakness. She's a white woman progressive politician with all the hectoring church lady unpleasantness that implies. (Though i believe she is fundamentally less unpleasant than Hillary.) But adding to Biden's age and incompetence we now have his corruption. Blacks don't care. But Warren should be able to see him off.

    The bottom line here--it's a pathetically weak field. Warren is the only semi-plausible candidate in it and even she is too old. I'm still a bit surprised that no better candidates have stepped up. Usually there are have dozen senators who think they deserve a promotion. The Clinton era really has damaged the party--no doubt about that. But on top of that, perhaps the feminization? Or the sheer level of crazy?

    “I’ll be back there in a few weeks when my cousin’s corn is ready for picking.”

    And do you actually mean to say that you will then help him pick it?

  176. “In general, our society less and less encourages looking sexually attractive to other people and more and more encourages acting out inner fantasies that are unattractive to others to make yourself even more of a victim of society.”

    Nonsense.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dating-and-mating/201809/4-stealth-factors-spark-female-sexual-attraction

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/universal-desire-men-and-women-respond-identically-to-erotic-images/

    https://www.today.com/health/men-sex-relationships-therapist-shares-surprising-truths-about-desire-t149064

  177. Well, the UK has escalated its forthcoming collapse into an Iron Age by further succumbing to this form of degeneracy as it’s now a “Hate Crime” to verbally speak out against transgenderism. Western society isn’t anti-Christian; it’s post-Christian.

    Now trans and gay hate crime will mean SIX months in jail after judges are ordered to crack down with harsher sentences than those that are given for domestic burglaries

    “Judges have been ordered to hand out tough jail terms in a crackdown on transgender and homophobic hate crimes.

    Offenders found guilty of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexuality should get at least six months in prison, new sentencing guidelines state.

    And there should be a six-year jail sentence for those convicted of the worst cases of intolerance against gay or transgender people.

    The instructions, released yesterday by the judge-led Sentencing Council – the statutory body that recommends punishment levels – mean transgender hate offences will receive harsher sentences than domestic burglaries.

    It comes after police figures revealed reports of hate crimes soared last year, with transgender hate crimes up 37 per cent on the year before.

    Mr Justice Julian Goose, of the Council, said the guidelines would help the courts take a ‘consistent approach’ to sentencing the offences, adding: ‘Public order is essential for the safe-functioning of society and the law seeks to protect the public from behaviour which undermines this.’

    The instructions, which will come into effect on January 1, follow a series of cases in which police have been accused of launching heavy-handed investigations into transgender hate crime allegations.”

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7577477/Now-trans-gay-hate-crime-mean-SIX-months-jail-judges-ordered-crack-down.html

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Well, the UK has escalated its forthcoming collapse into an Iron Age by further succumbing to this form of degeneracy as it’s now a “Hate Crime” to verbally speak out against transgenderism.
     
    I'm really looking forward to seeing the UK go right down the toilet. Obviously the British are really looking forward to it as well.

    Brexit is going to be awesome. With the supply of cheap labour from eastern Europe cut off the globalist capitalists will flood the place with Third World immigrants. It's going to be so much fun to watch.
  178. “(for which it competed with Playboy) ”

    Playboy has gone full homosexual. They had a pictorial of a gay man in bunny ears. The tag line used to be “entertainment for men” and has since been changed to “entertainment for everyone”

    Well you can count me out of that one……AND I told them so.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    They had a pictorial of a gay man in bunny ears.
     
    That's disgusting and further illustrates the war against men and Traditionalism.
  179. @interesting
    "(for which it competed with Playboy) "

    Playboy has gone full homosexual. They had a pictorial of a gay man in bunny ears. The tag line used to be "entertainment for men" and has since been changed to "entertainment for everyone"

    Well you can count me out of that one......AND I told them so.

    They had a pictorial of a gay man in bunny ears.

    That’s disgusting and further illustrates the war against men and Traditionalism.

    • Replies: @Anon
    I guess the "Traditionalists" in the Catholic Legion of Decency finally lost control of Playboy magazine.
  180. @petit bourgeois
    Jabouki's brothers' names are "Javaughn and Javeigh." And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.

    He is one of the most vile anti-white-racist-leftist-quadroon Jamaicans on TV, outside of Kamala Harris.

    That is the gay face of the "Millenial" future.

    I’m hoping they get a younger sibling Jamoke.

  181. @Anonymous

    The only magazines that I still read are smaller, localized periodicals that cater to niche markets — and in my liking, those markets would include outdoor recreation.
     
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    No, I wasn’t referring to gun publications, and yes, I’m well-aware of their transgression from relevance to becoming a fashion oriented rag.

  182. @Jonathan Mason

    Jabouki’s brothers’ names are “Javaughn and Javeigh.” And they have no self-awareness about how stupid their parents are for those types of names and how that sets them up for society.
     
    Naming children is largely determined by fashion.

    When I was growing up in England people's first names were always referred to on official forms, etc. as "christian names" even if they were not actually names that had a Christian history.

    So most of my contemporaries had names like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Peter, and Paul, or Old Testament names like David, Jonathan, Adam, Daniel, or Joseph, or saint's names like Michael, Francis, George, Andrew, Anthony, Martin, and Patrick, or names of English kings like Alfred, William, Richard, Charles, and Henry.

    The christian name that no one ever had was Jesus, and it was regarded as a bit of a joke that Jesus was used as a christian name for boys in Spain, as this seemed obviously inappropriate and bordering on blashphemous.

    A name that sound silly to people from one culture, may sound entirely appropriate to people from another. For example the name Dontavious seems to be consistently ridiculed in these columns, but if you see at as a combination of Donald and Octavius, you might think of it as a noble, historic name.

    These names beginning with Ja- may well have religious connotations for the namer, particularly if they are fans of Bob Marley whose Rastafarian religion has strong elements of the back to Africa movement.

    Jaboukie Young-White is of Jamaican descent, so you might want to consider the meaning of those names in a Jamaican context.

    I once had a US white girlfriend whose first name was Yvonne. Her parents called her Von. Had they had a son, they would have called him Vaughn. To them it was all the same. Javaughn is a variant of Javon. Personally I would not use this name as it sounds too similar to the Spanish word "jabon", which means 'soap', but you cannot account for personal decisions made within families.

    Naming children is largely determined by fashion.

    No, it is not. In “our” culture, naming children is mostly based on family, e.g. my brother is a “III”, and my nephew is a “IV”, meaning there were generations before them. Certain names trend over the years, but “Jaboukie” is not one of them.

    The christian name that no one ever had was Jesus

    Where I live, an outpost of Mexico in Alta California/Aztlan, everyone is named Jesus. It is very common.

    particularly if they are fans of Bob Marley whose Rastafarian religion has strong elements of the back to Africa movement.

    I played reggae professionally in Los Angeles for four years with Jamaicans. They are the biggest con artists on the planet. Anything beginning with “ja” does not connote any religion or Pan Africanism/Garveyism. Jaboukie’s parents made sure people will laugh at him and his brothers.

    Jaboukie Young-White is of Jamaican descent, so you might want to consider the meaning of those names in a Jamaican context.

    Jamaicans are nothing like African-Americans when it comes to naming children. Most Jamaicans use traditional English names like Horace, Errol and Clive. There is no Jamaican “context” to see here.

    Javaughn is a variant of Javon.

    No, it is not. It is entirely made up by schvartzes who have too much time on their hands, making up names that never existed. It makes them look foolish to the rest of us normal people.

  183. @yaqub the mad scientist
    If you are referring to gun publications, they are as fashion oriented as anything edited by that woman with the penis head hairdo in New York.

    Gun and outdoors mags are getting fruitier by the year- and a lot outdoors shops, too.
    All this Hollywood hunting and fishing crap- the 300 dollar sunglasses, the Punisher stickers on the trucks, the lowrider colored boats, the photo models, the tricked-out ORV's.

    Seriously, are there any men left who just walk or canoe into the woods with a gun/bow, a thermos, and call of choice? I miss those days, seriously.

    Gun and outdoors mags are getting fruitier by the year- and a lot outdoors shops, too.
    All this Hollywood hunting and fishing crap- the 300 dollar sunglasses, the Punisher stickers on the trucks, the lowrider colored boats, the photo models, the tricked-out ORV’s.

    Seriously, are there any men left who just walk or canoe into the woods with a gun/bow, a thermos, and call of choice? I miss those days, seriously.

    Your observations and grievances are well-founded. The entire industry has become diluted, politicized, and commercialized. The industry no longer caters — or respects — the rugged outdoorsman who exemplifies grit. Rather, the industry has shifted its focus to the feminized “Mountain Hipster” and weekend warriors’ crowd — who are more often than not, the SJW type.

    The entire industry has become a breeding ground for left-leaning politics, especially when it comes to environmentalism and the climate “crisis” . A good example would be the liberal politics surrounding the Outdoor Retailer Show being uprooted from Salt Lake City and moved to a more “environmentally progressive location” as Denver.

    I laugh at all of this as I grew up deer hunting in the mountains of the Northeast, and my clothes for first day of Buck Season included a pair of Wranglers, long john underwear, a wool flannel jacket, and a pair of Sorrel boots. My hunting hear was a far cry from the multi-thousand dollar technical clothing wardrobes that many of today’s hunters are wearing – or encouraged to wear by the “celebrity” promoters within the Hollywood crowd.

  184. @Forbes

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present...
     
    "Living in the present" seems to be the problem. Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples' lives.

    You might want to re-think that assertion.

    Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples’ lives.

    These are valid points and I agree with their context. Nonetheless, what I mean by living in the present is being conscious of one’s surrounds and practicing situational awareness from a non-tactical perspective. When I’m patronizing an establishment that’s a hybrid between a coffee shop and a restaurant in a touristy area of the Rocky Mountains, and following a quick scan of the dining area, I notice that many groups of people are electronically sharing their recent experiences on social media rather than verbally discussing their experiences with those at the table.

    One can’t be present if they’re constantly glued to their electronic devices — especially in the company of their peers.

  185. @Forbes

    Furthermore, social media outlets, just like smartphones, are intrusive, unhealthy, keep us from living in the present...
     
    "Living in the present" seems to be the problem. Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples' lives.

    You might want to re-think that assertion.

    Lack of impulse control and lack of future-time orientation are two behavioral characteristics of living in the present that devastate peoples’ lives.

    These are valid points and I agree with their context. Nonetheless, what I mean by living in the present is being conscious of one’s surroundings and practicing situational awareness from a non-tactical perspective. When I’m patronizing an establishment that’s a hybrid between a coffee shop and a restaurant in a touristy area of the Rocky Mountains, and following a quick scan of the dining area, I notice that many groups of people are electronically sharing their recent experiences on social media rather than verbally discussing their experiences with those at the table.

    One can’t be present if they’re constantly glued to their electronic devices — especially in the company of their peers.

  186. @FPD72
    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.

    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.

    It’s actually Woke Capital that is using Brave New World as an instruction manual.

    Which would not have surprised Huxley. He was just as concerned about capitalism as he was about communism. In fact he was warning of the dangers of consumerism, mass media, the worship of hedonism, large-scale capitalism, empty materialism and nihilism. After all he was writing about a future society that worshipped Henry Ford, not Marx. Things like modern celebrity worship, social media and the cult of 57 different genders would have dismayed Huxley but they would not have surprised him.

    As for Orwell, it’s always necessary to remember that he never lost his faith in socialism. In fact he was so far to the left that he was for all practical purposes a communist. His argument with the communists was over means, not ends. He had a rather touching belief in democracy. Orwell also despised what he called the Pansy Left.

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.
     
    Orwell wasn't predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.
    , @Anon
    www.unz.com/akarlin/open-thread-40/#comment-2292705

    www.unz.com/akarlin/open-thread-40/#comment-2293617

    www.unz.com/akarlin/open-thread-40/#comment-2293641
  187. @Richard P
    Well, the UK has escalated its forthcoming collapse into an Iron Age by further succumbing to this form of degeneracy as it's now a "Hate Crime" to verbally speak out against transgenderism. Western society isn't anti-Christian; it's post-Christian.

    Now trans and gay hate crime will mean SIX months in jail after judges are ordered to crack down with harsher sentences than those that are given for domestic burglaries

    "Judges have been ordered to hand out tough jail terms in a crackdown on transgender and homophobic hate crimes.

    Offenders found guilty of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexuality should get at least six months in prison, new sentencing guidelines state.

    And there should be a six-year jail sentence for those convicted of the worst cases of intolerance against gay or transgender people.

    The instructions, released yesterday by the judge-led Sentencing Council – the statutory body that recommends punishment levels – mean transgender hate offences will receive harsher sentences than domestic burglaries.

    It comes after police figures revealed reports of hate crimes soared last year, with transgender hate crimes up 37 per cent on the year before.

    Mr Justice Julian Goose, of the Council, said the guidelines would help the courts take a ‘consistent approach’ to sentencing the offences, adding: ‘Public order is essential for the safe-functioning of society and the law seeks to protect the public from behaviour which undermines this.’

    The instructions, which will come into effect on January 1, follow a series of cases in which police have been accused of launching heavy-handed investigations into transgender hate crime allegations."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7577477/Now-trans-gay-hate-crime-mean-SIX-months-jail-judges-ordered-crack-down.html
     

    Well, the UK has escalated its forthcoming collapse into an Iron Age by further succumbing to this form of degeneracy as it’s now a “Hate Crime” to verbally speak out against transgenderism.

    I’m really looking forward to seeing the UK go right down the toilet. Obviously the British are really looking forward to it as well.

    Brexit is going to be awesome. With the supply of cheap labour from eastern Europe cut off the globalist capitalists will flood the place with Third World immigrants. It’s going to be so much fun to watch.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    I’m really looking forward to seeing the UK go right down the toilet.
     
    Likewise. It's perplexing on how quickly the UK has gone from one of the most respected nations in the world to one of the greatest circuses known to man. Only in a clown world.
  188. @dfordoom

    Well, the UK has escalated its forthcoming collapse into an Iron Age by further succumbing to this form of degeneracy as it’s now a “Hate Crime” to verbally speak out against transgenderism.
     
    I'm really looking forward to seeing the UK go right down the toilet. Obviously the British are really looking forward to it as well.

    Brexit is going to be awesome. With the supply of cheap labour from eastern Europe cut off the globalist capitalists will flood the place with Third World immigrants. It's going to be so much fun to watch.

    I’m really looking forward to seeing the UK go right down the toilet.

    Likewise. It’s perplexing on how quickly the UK has gone from one of the most respected nations in the world to one of the greatest circuses known to man. Only in a clown world.

  189. Vulture has a profile of the trans writer Andrea Long Chu, whose POV seems to bolster Bailey’s theory about autogynephiles vs the “always a little girl on the inside” narrative:
    https://www.vulture.com/2019/10/andrea-long-chu-on-her-debut-book-females.html

  190. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.

    He was right about the political use of language to prevent discourse, about the surveillance society, and about the use of manufactured entertainment to keep the proles amused.

    • Replies: @dfordoom


    Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.
     
    He was right about the political use of language to prevent discourse, about the surveillance society, and about the use of manufactured entertainment to keep the proles amused.
     
    His ideas on the control of language (and the control of history) were definitely very insightful and very prophetic.

    As for the surveillance society, all he really did was to take what was already happening in a number of totalitarian societies and add a technological dimension to it. And the use of manufactured entertainment to keep the proles amused was already widespread.

    His big error was in thinking that totalitarianism would always be the kind of hard totalitarianism that Hitler and Stalin represented. Huxley on the other hand predicted the rise of soft totalitarianism, the kind of totalitarianism that would not require terror to maintain it. Huxley's prediction in that respect was much more insightful.

    Orwell was also wrong in predicting that totalitarianism would be sexually puritanical. Huxley correctly predicted that sexual liberation would be used as a tool of social control. Huxley was also more correct in predicting the complete destruction of the family.

    Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking Orwell. I just think that Huxley deserves more credit than Orwell, for being a much more insightful and more profound social prophet. You can't truthfully say that we live in 1984, but you can definitely argue that we now live in Brave New World.
  191. @anon
    And their last name is Smullett.

    They are French?

    If you go back to the lynching that didn’t happen (not that one, the other one) all the kids’ names were these bizarre made-up constructions starting with “j.”

  192. @Noah
    Here's gay songwriter Rufus Wainwright singing about men reading GQ magazine when he first noticed it back in the early 2000s:

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

    The song is track 1 off his record "Want One" and it's followed by a song called "Cigarettes and Chocolate Milk," which details how Rufus's wants are dangerous and normally result in tragedy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6N0sNMKFO4

    The Left loves to say, "If it's not hurting anyone, you should be allowed to do [x]." No one seems to admit how idiotic this moral is, or remember that their own gay poets write songs to remind them of the danger of following such logic. Progressivism can't get no satisfaction.

    Worst paternal prediction ever:

    • Replies: @Noah
    Haha!

    Thanks for sharing. To be honest, I'm not familiar with Loudon Wainwright's music, except from friends saying Rufus just copied his dad. Any one record you'd recommend?
  193. @dfordoom

    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.
     
    It's actually Woke Capital that is using Brave New World as an instruction manual.

    Which would not have surprised Huxley. He was just as concerned about capitalism as he was about communism. In fact he was warning of the dangers of consumerism, mass media, the worship of hedonism, large-scale capitalism, empty materialism and nihilism. After all he was writing about a future society that worshipped Henry Ford, not Marx. Things like modern celebrity worship, social media and the cult of 57 different genders would have dismayed Huxley but they would not have surprised him.

    As for Orwell, it's always necessary to remember that he never lost his faith in socialism. In fact he was so far to the left that he was for all practical purposes a communist. His argument with the communists was over means, not ends. He had a rather touching belief in democracy. Orwell also despised what he called the Pansy Left.

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell's predictions were mostly wrong.

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.

    Orwell wasn’t predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.

    • Replies: @dfordoom


    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.
     
    Orwell wasn’t predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.
     
    Yeah, that's probably a fair comment. Huxley was definitely predicting the future, which is a more difficult task, and he was uncannily accurate.
    , @Jonathan Mason

    Orwell wasn’t predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.
     
    I think this is true. Obviously true in the case of Animal Farm, and also when you take Nineteen Eighty-Four in the context of his journalistic writings and columns. Also note that Eighty-Four is Forty-Eight backwards, reflecting the time when the book was written.

    Some parts of the book were also based on his experience of working for the BBC World Service during World War II creating propaganda broadcasts aimed at India (which he believed hardly anyone heard.)

    Orwell might have been a Brexiteer.

    Many of Huxley's predictions did indeed come true, and remain relevant today.

    Huxley was hired as a schoolmaster at Eton College in 1917, where one of his pupils was 14-year-old Eric Blair, better known under his pen name of George Orwell. Who knows what they might have talked about?

    In 1949 Huxley wrote a letter to Orwell, upon the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four in which he gave the new book good marks, but points out some areas where he disagrees. Apparently Orwell had asked his publishers to send a copy to his former teacher.

    Wrightwood. California.
    21 October, 1949
     

    Dear Mr. Orwell,

    It was very kind of you to tell your publishers to send me a copy of your book.

    It arrived as I was in the midst of a piece of work that required much reading and consulting of references; and since poor sight makes it necessary for me to ration my reading, I had to wait a long time before being able to embark on Nineteen Eighty-Four.

    Agreeing with all that the critics have written of it, I need not tell you, yet once more, how fine and how profoundly important the book is.

    May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution?

    The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology — are to be found in the Marquis de Sade, who regarded himself as the continuator, the consummator, of Robespierre and Babeuf.

    The philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is a sadism which has been carried to its logical conclusion by going beyond sex and denying it.

    Whether in actual fact the policy of the boot-on-the-face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful.

    My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.

    I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.

    Partly because of the prevailing materialism and partly because of prevailing respectability, nineteenth-century philosophers
    and men of science were not willing to investigate the odder facts of psychology for practical men, such as politicians, soldiers and policemen, to apply in the field of government.

    Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations.

    Another lucky accident was Freud's inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism.

    This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years.

    But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.

    Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.

    In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.

    The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.

    Meanwhile, of course, there may be a large scale biological and atomic war — in which case we shall have nightmares of other and scarcely imaginable kinds.

    Thank you once again for the book.

    Yours sincerely,

    Aldous Huxley
     
  194. @Sam Coulton
    Blond hair isn't Nordic. The genetic material for blond hair is from central Siberia.



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

    An Afontova Gora 3 female individual dated to c. 14.7 kya, is the earliest known individual with the derived allele of KITLG responsible for blond hair in modern Europeans, and is recorded in Mesolithic Eastern Europe as associated with the EHG lineage.[7]
     

    Do you also correct everyone, “Hey folks, its pronounced NeanderTALL…in it’s original German” ?

    Just curious.

  195. @dfordoom

    Many times on this board I’ve read remarks to the effect that the left understands 1984 to be an instruction manual. Maybe Huxley’s Brave New World is their template, or maybe a fusion of the worst elements of each.
     
    It's actually Woke Capital that is using Brave New World as an instruction manual.

    Which would not have surprised Huxley. He was just as concerned about capitalism as he was about communism. In fact he was warning of the dangers of consumerism, mass media, the worship of hedonism, large-scale capitalism, empty materialism and nihilism. After all he was writing about a future society that worshipped Henry Ford, not Marx. Things like modern celebrity worship, social media and the cult of 57 different genders would have dismayed Huxley but they would not have surprised him.

    As for Orwell, it's always necessary to remember that he never lost his faith in socialism. In fact he was so far to the left that he was for all practical purposes a communist. His argument with the communists was over means, not ends. He had a rather touching belief in democracy. Orwell also despised what he called the Pansy Left.

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell's predictions were mostly wrong.
  196. @Richard P

    They had a pictorial of a gay man in bunny ears.
     
    That's disgusting and further illustrates the war against men and Traditionalism.

    I guess the “Traditionalists” in the Catholic Legion of Decency finally lost control of Playboy magazine.

  197. Anonymous[344] • Disclaimer says:

    I would say there’s been a parallel war on heterosexual women, or at least their concepts of beauty. I don’t quite know how to describe it other than the drag-queenification of feminine beauty.

    About 5-7 years ago I’d say that beauty standards were broadly going in the right direction:long hair was in vogue, tanning wasn’t, young women weren’t wearing huge amounts of makeup(or at least they rather skillfully made it look that way) and an increasing number of black women were wearing their hair naturally(which World War H jokes aside is the best way for a black woman to wear her hair).

    Nowadays a large number of young women seem intent on making themselves up like gargoyles. Lipstick(or more) to give themselves permanent duck lips, unnatural colours on their precision-machined eyebrows, bizarre cheek makeup that looks like it’s been airbrushed on and distorts the cheekbones into some funhouse-mirror version.

    It all reminds me very much of drag queens, who when you get right down to it, are deeply masculine(and I’m not talking about what’s between their legs). Rather their approach to femininity itself is masculine, especially the recent monstrosities currently appearing at your public library. They dress and do their makeup as if they’re in aggressive competition with one another, kind of like teenage boys playing sports, always trying to one-up each other and establish their alpha status. Feminine beauty has traditionally been about subtlety, but these guys go in the opposite direction, probably because they know it would be impossible. Instead they take the approach of a comedic impersonator(which is what they are anyway). They focus on a few attributes of their character, and exaggerate those to extremes.

    Now millions of young women have been told that they should take these comedic impersonators seriously and that they’re better people if they do so.

    Also, black women seem to have gone back to straightening their hair and buying ever-more bizarre weaves. Could there be a tranny-Korean axis at work here?

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    I would say there’s been a parallel war on heterosexual women, or at least their concepts of beauty. I don’t quite know how to describe it other than the drag-queenification of feminine beauty.
     
    Yes, very much so.

    Women are being encouraged to look like drag queens, and to behave like homosexual men. This is real actual out-and-out misogyny. If you want to find a genuine War on Women this is it.

    As has been pointed out by others women's fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women's fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.
  198. @ATBOTL
    I can only imagine what kind of trashy people in Sweden would give their kids American nick names as given names. It shows both low intelligence and an attraction to the worst elements of American culture.

    I notice Salvadorans and Hondurans often have these kinds of names too. In the local media, we are always reading about Central Americans with names like "Johnny" who are wanted for murder, attempted murder, rape, car jacking etc.

    I notice Salvadorans and Hondurans often have these kinds of names too.

    They go in the opposite direction, too. More so in Brazil– three of their most world-famous sportsmen were named Edson, Emerson, and Ayrton.

    I knew a Dane named Conny who told me she didn’t speak English. Fine lady, but that alone suggested a somewhat humble upbringing.

  199. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Nothing's fruitier than reading a glossy-mag special issue about Masculinity.

    Sneer if you must, but just wait until you see next month’s extended package:
    Rupaul’s guide for tearing down and rebuilding the engine of a ’65 Barracuda.

  200. @Ghost of Bull Moose
    Nothing's fruitier than reading a glossy-mag special issue about Masculinity.

    As a special extra, there will be a guest editorial by 2024 presidential candidate
    Chelsea Clinton in which she pleads for a new government agency to administer
    and fund free-abortion-on-demand for trannies.

    • Replies: @Richard P

    a new government agency to administer and fund free-abortion-on-demand for trannies.
     
    Sadly, I wouldn't be surprised as the Western governments have become Godless and Marxist. We're experiencing societal decay like never seen before.
  201. @Lot
    I don’t think Buttman will win. But I am not betting against him at 10-1 odds after looking at his fundraising and debate performances. On these two metrics, he’s number 1. Not ready for a gay? We elected a half Kenyan Muslim with a surname a letter away Osama. If Biden stumbles he’s ready as the moderate. His current ad is “Medicare For All Who Want It” and implicitly saying Warren is too liberal for the general election by wanting to kill all private insurance plans.

    I also was an Early Warren Bull, my best play so far in 2019. Purchased her shares for 8, sold for 49. I think she’s the most likely winner, but at 45-50 she’s fairly valued and not worth buying right now. After selling Warren I got Biden for 23 and will sell half at 30 and maybe ride the rest for a few months.

    On the GOP side, I grabbed some Pence at 8. Trump could resign, not run, or die. More likely there will be a point during impeachment when it looks bad for him and I can sell the Pence shares for 15.

    The low risk play there however is to bet against Nikki Haley at 7 and the other long shots. I don’t see how it could be anyone but Trump or Pence.

    I think Buttigiege was a sacrifice fly. He showed “courage”, but it doesn’t look good, aggressively countering a female vet telling the truth, even if you’re from the gay caste. Don’t expect the price to rise on Pete.

  202. @Buck Ransom
    As a special extra, there will be a guest editorial by 2024 presidential candidate
    Chelsea Clinton in which she pleads for a new government agency to administer
    and fund free-abortion-on-demand for trannies.

    a new government agency to administer and fund free-abortion-on-demand for trannies.

    Sadly, I wouldn’t be surprised as the Western governments have become Godless and Marxist. We’re experiencing societal decay like never seen before.

  203. @J.Ross
    They attacked us. They talk all the time about attacking us more. You're allowed to discuss active enemies, it doesn't mean that Richard the Lionhearted secretly wanted to convert to Islam. I remember when I thought the bastards were essentially good people. Nowhere near as many people think that now.

    Yeah, OK. I believe you. It couldn’t be that other reason. And, funny, you know what that other reason is! Full well! Isn’t that smart of you! Oh, teehee.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    If you knew anything about homosexuals (specifically their capacity for vicious, pointless infighting) you would see what a weak allegation that is: homosexuals more than anyone else have to worry about dealing with homosexual activism.
  204. @R.G. Camara
    I got a subscription to GQ for a while in the 2000s, hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls. But despite having good recommendations, I had to cancel it, because it was so Marxist in its articles and in its pushing of "black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys" aesthetic (blacks were overrepresented in cover photos and photo models and in article subjects).

    It's not surprising its pushing further left. As fewer people get magazines and newspapers, these folks play to their perceived base. They go extreme left in order to please the base. The NY Times audience has no idea how outside normal they are and how many untruths they are told, and neither do GQ's regular readers these days.

    P.S. It's interesting how much the Left belives Nature can overcome Nurture, and how self-important each Commie thinks he is. "We can change how masculinity is perceived!" screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so. And yet he-men never go out of style.

    “black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys”

    Blacks have never looked “cool”. They look like thugs and are a mirror image of what they perceive themselves to be; thugs. “Pathetic” white men have run circles around and dominated blacks for centuries.

  205. @Jonathan Mason

    Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.
     
    He was right about the political use of language to prevent discourse, about the surveillance society, and about the use of manufactured entertainment to keep the proles amused.

    Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.

    He was right about the political use of language to prevent discourse, about the surveillance society, and about the use of manufactured entertainment to keep the proles amused.

    His ideas on the control of language (and the control of history) were definitely very insightful and very prophetic.

    As for the surveillance society, all he really did was to take what was already happening in a number of totalitarian societies and add a technological dimension to it. And the use of manufactured entertainment to keep the proles amused was already widespread.

    His big error was in thinking that totalitarianism would always be the kind of hard totalitarianism that Hitler and Stalin represented. Huxley on the other hand predicted the rise of soft totalitarianism, the kind of totalitarianism that would not require terror to maintain it. Huxley’s prediction in that respect was much more insightful.

    Orwell was also wrong in predicting that totalitarianism would be sexually puritanical. Huxley correctly predicted that sexual liberation would be used as a tool of social control. Huxley was also more correct in predicting the complete destruction of the family.

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m not knocking Orwell. I just think that Huxley deserves more credit than Orwell, for being a much more insightful and more profound social prophet. You can’t truthfully say that we live in 1984, but you can definitely argue that we now live in Brave New World.

  206. @Reg Cæsar

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.
     
    Orwell wasn't predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.

    Orwell wasn’t predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.

    Yeah, that’s probably a fair comment. Huxley was definitely predicting the future, which is a more difficult task, and he was uncannily accurate.

  207. @Anonymous
    I would say there's been a parallel war on heterosexual women, or at least their concepts of beauty. I don't quite know how to describe it other than the drag-queenification of feminine beauty.

    About 5-7 years ago I'd say that beauty standards were broadly going in the right direction:long hair was in vogue, tanning wasn't, young women weren't wearing huge amounts of makeup(or at least they rather skillfully made it look that way) and an increasing number of black women were wearing their hair naturally(which World War H jokes aside is the best way for a black woman to wear her hair).

    Nowadays a large number of young women seem intent on making themselves up like gargoyles. Lipstick(or more) to give themselves permanent duck lips, unnatural colours on their precision-machined eyebrows, bizarre cheek makeup that looks like it's been airbrushed on and distorts the cheekbones into some funhouse-mirror version.

    It all reminds me very much of drag queens, who when you get right down to it, are deeply masculine(and I'm not talking about what's between their legs). Rather their approach to femininity itself is masculine, especially the recent monstrosities currently appearing at your public library. They dress and do their makeup as if they're in aggressive competition with one another, kind of like teenage boys playing sports, always trying to one-up each other and establish their alpha status. Feminine beauty has traditionally been about subtlety, but these guys go in the opposite direction, probably because they know it would be impossible. Instead they take the approach of a comedic impersonator(which is what they are anyway). They focus on a few attributes of their character, and exaggerate those to extremes.

    Now millions of young women have been told that they should take these comedic impersonators seriously and that they're better people if they do so.

    Also, black women seem to have gone back to straightening their hair and buying ever-more bizarre weaves. Could there be a tranny-Korean axis at work here?

    I would say there’s been a parallel war on heterosexual women, or at least their concepts of beauty. I don’t quite know how to describe it other than the drag-queenification of feminine beauty.

    Yes, very much so.

    Women are being encouraged to look like drag queens, and to behave like homosexual men. This is real actual out-and-out misogyny. If you want to find a genuine War on Women this is it.

    As has been pointed out by others women’s fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women’s fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    As has been pointed out by others women’s fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women’s fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.

    How true is this? I don't know much about the history of fashion, but the only pre-1970s woman designer I can think of is Coco Chanel. Most of the other big names like Charles James, Balenciaga, and Christian Dior were gay men.

  208. @dfordoom

    I would say there’s been a parallel war on heterosexual women, or at least their concepts of beauty. I don’t quite know how to describe it other than the drag-queenification of feminine beauty.
     
    Yes, very much so.

    Women are being encouraged to look like drag queens, and to behave like homosexual men. This is real actual out-and-out misogyny. If you want to find a genuine War on Women this is it.

    As has been pointed out by others women's fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women's fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.

    As has been pointed out by others women’s fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women’s fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.

    How true is this? I don’t know much about the history of fashion, but the only pre-1970s woman designer I can think of is Coco Chanel. Most of the other big names like Charles James, Balenciaga, and Christian Dior were gay men.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    How true is this? I don’t know much about the history of fashion, but the only pre-1970s woman designer I can think of is Coco Chanel. Most of the other big names like Charles James, Balenciaga, and Christian Dior were gay men.
     
    A valid point. But the women's fashion magazines were entirely edited and in most cases entirely controlled by women. So it was women who decided which fashions were going to be promoted. So women's fashion largely reflected the tastes of actual women. If Balenciaga designed a dress that made a woman look like a drag queen or a clown his career as a dress designer would have been over. So those gay men designed dresses that women wanted to wear.

    In the past few decades women's fashion magazines seem to have fallen under the influence of feminists (who by definition hate being women and hate women who enjoy being women) or highly politicised gays.
    , @Alden
    It started with 1850’s Charles Worth. But most of the big fashion houses were run by women.

    Maybe it was the change from the small dressmakers to factories. Like boarding houses and small hotels to big chain hotels. Maybe it’s gay networking.

    According to a man who works in the men’s department at Saks 5th Av, gay men spend so much more on clothes than hetero men. Sooo
    the industry caters to gay men.

    I see covers of GQ. It’s almost like a black gay hookers website, clothed of course.
  209. Anonymous[316] • Disclaimer says:

    A (straight) older brother used to subscribe to GQ, in his long-ago bachelor days, and I would often inherit his discarded issues. Looking back now, I can see that it changed irrevocably in early 2003 when Conde Nast’s elderly owner, S.I. Newhouse, fired longtime editor Art Cooper — who’d shaped the magazine as much as Hugh Hefner shaped Playboy — and installed an openly gay lefty who turned the magazine into a full-time advocate for homosexuality, metrosexuality, hip-hop culture, and progressive politics (while continuing to fill it with plugs for $600 sneakers and $2500 sweaters). The new editor is solidly hetero, but clearly he’s been working at GQ too long.

    The magazine may claim upwards of 900,000 readers, but most of them are on cut-rate $5 subscriptions. Its frequency has been reduced from monthly to 10 issues a year, and it’s increasingly dependent on its free “online presence.” That’s not a healthy prognosis.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Wait, so Gentlemen's Quarterly is published ten times annually? That makes no damn sense.
  210. @Steve Sailer
    As has been pointed out by others women’s fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women’s fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.

    How true is this? I don't know much about the history of fashion, but the only pre-1970s woman designer I can think of is Coco Chanel. Most of the other big names like Charles James, Balenciaga, and Christian Dior were gay men.

    How true is this? I don’t know much about the history of fashion, but the only pre-1970s woman designer I can think of is Coco Chanel. Most of the other big names like Charles James, Balenciaga, and Christian Dior were gay men.

    A valid point. But the women’s fashion magazines were entirely edited and in most cases entirely controlled by women. So it was women who decided which fashions were going to be promoted. So women’s fashion largely reflected the tastes of actual women. If Balenciaga designed a dress that made a woman look like a drag queen or a clown his career as a dress designer would have been over. So those gay men designed dresses that women wanted to wear.

    In the past few decades women’s fashion magazines seem to have fallen under the influence of feminists (who by definition hate being women and hate women who enjoy being women) or highly politicised gays.

  211. @obwandiyag
    Yeah, OK. I believe you. It couldn't be that other reason. And, funny, you know what that other reason is! Full well! Isn't that smart of you! Oh, teehee.

    If you knew anything about homosexuals (specifically their capacity for vicious, pointless infighting) you would see what a weak allegation that is: homosexuals more than anyone else have to worry about dealing with homosexual activism.

  212. @nebulafox
    Big difference between men and women: we don't understand women or what life is like as a woman. But we know that, we don't pretend to, and we're pretty comfortable admitting that we don't have a clue. They don't understand men or what life is like as a man. But they think that they know us better than we know ourselves-and when they realize they aren't just wrong, but they aren't even close, they get bitter.

    Why is this? Is is because being male is the "default" in just about everything you can think of?

    they get bitter.

    Why is this?

    My impression is that women expect to be taken care of so that they can get on with the work of raising the next generation — plausibly the most important part of human biology.

    But men can’t take care of women anymore, and women are told that they have to “take care of themselves” if they want to marry and have children and a family [1]. Essentially, social conformity no longer enables women to do what women consider important (making a family) and forces them to do what men consider important (earn a living to support a family). Bitter is too mild a word for what follows.
    And the women then form into a moral community and act, ah, difficult until the men fix the situation. Since the men who have to live with above-bitter women can’t fix the situation, the women just get more difficult, and things deteriorate. Eventually something that the men do works, and the women get less difficult. Alternately, the men never do figure it out and the group dissolves, possibly into another group.

    [MORE]

    The present situation is (IMHO) a direct result of economically nonproductive cities impoverishing their hinterlands. The resources needed to have families are gone, and women are acting the way women have always acted in such a situation: they become difficult to live with until (a) men make it possible to have families again, or (b) the group goes extinct. The exact form of being difficult probably doesn’t matter that much (even if it makes the actual situation worse — it always makes the actual situation worse), so the cleverness of convincing women that they need to be men (and the converse) probably doesn’t actually destabilize society enough more to matter in the long run. Above-bitter women are always a signal to men that something has to change, and that’s all that’s needed [2].

    Counterinsurgency

    1] Author S. M. Stirling, informal computer posting, roughly paraphrased: “To be upper middle class, marry a woman with a career. Poverty, thy name is a stay at home housewife.” To attract a potentially well off man, women must waste years learning what they regard as useless trivia, and when they are part of a two income family they _still_ can’t raise children, at least not successfully. For that matter, I’ve seen one income families with a single kid destroyed by daycare (ear infection, oppositional defiant disorder) because the mother had no idea of how to care for babies. Feminism teaches that ragging on the men is women’s only function in life, to the exclusion of baby and child care.

    2] The original idea comes from anthropology. New Guinea tribes using slash and burn agriculture have to move to new territories periodically. This is dangerous, the new areas are occupied. Nevertheless, move they must and move they do, when the tribe’s leaders say they must.
    Only that’s not what really happens. In practice, the tribes need protein to move, a diet of meat for long enough to displace the land’s current occupants. To do that, the tribes slaughter most of the pigs they raise, eat the meat, and go forth.
    Pigs are raised by the women. According to the study, it is routine for women to nurse piglet’s, ah, personally for reasons not mentioned. What really happens is that, as the pig population increases, women complain that raising pigs is taking more time and labor than they have to give. At that point, the chiefs slaughter the pigs, and use the meat to take over another territory. Cycle time from almost all the pigs are slaughtered to “too many pigs again” is just a little shorter than the time needed to exhaust soil in the the “slash and burn” sites. The pigs are a timer, and the women acting “super-bitter” is the driver. The soil exhaustion is apparently regarded as an inconvenience (since clearnign new fields is considerable work) just barely compensated for by the reduction on “too many pigs” complaints from the women, who (to put it bluntly) are always the only force on Earth that can get men as a group to get up off their rear ends and actually do something.
    Funny how things can work.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    in high school, I was crowned (those were wittier days) as
    not "most likely to succeed"
    and certainly not as "homecoming king"
    or "Mr Congeniality"

    but as

    "the senior most likely to be shot at by a jealous husband"

    That was a long time ago, and I have been kind over the years, and LITERALLY DOZENS OF WOMEN HAVE THROWN THEMSELVES AT ME
    well, at least 20, if that is not dozens, sorry dude, I am not a math major ....

    and I have to say

    you know whereof you speak
    , @Alden
    Can’t you find a blog for unhappy divorced men or something? UNZ is turning into a Lifetime channel for men.
  213. @Reg Cæsar

    Huxley correctly predicted our modern world in almost every detail. Orwell’s predictions were mostly wrong.
     
    Orwell wasn't predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.

    Orwell wasn’t predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.

    I think this is true. Obviously true in the case of Animal Farm, and also when you take Nineteen Eighty-Four in the context of his journalistic writings and columns. Also note that Eighty-Four is Forty-Eight backwards, reflecting the time when the book was written.

    Some parts of the book were also based on his experience of working for the BBC World Service during World War II creating propaganda broadcasts aimed at India (which he believed hardly anyone heard.)

    Orwell might have been a Brexiteer.

    Many of Huxley’s predictions did indeed come true, and remain relevant today.

    Huxley was hired as a schoolmaster at Eton College in 1917, where one of his pupils was 14-year-old Eric Blair, better known under his pen name of George Orwell. Who knows what they might have talked about?

    In 1949 Huxley wrote a letter to Orwell, upon the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four in which he gave the new book good marks, but points out some areas where he disagrees. Apparently Orwell had asked his publishers to send a copy to his former teacher.

    Wrightwood. California.
    21 October, 1949

    Dear Mr. Orwell,

    It was very kind of you to tell your publishers to send me a copy of your book.

    It arrived as I was in the midst of a piece of work that required much reading and consulting of references; and since poor sight makes it necessary for me to ration my reading, I had to wait a long time before being able to embark on Nineteen Eighty-Four.

    Agreeing with all that the critics have written of it, I need not tell you, yet once more, how fine and how profoundly important the book is.

    May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution?

    The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual’s psychology and physiology — are to be found in the Marquis de Sade, who regarded himself as the continuator, the consummator, of Robespierre and Babeuf.

    The philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is a sadism which has been carried to its logical conclusion by going beyond sex and denying it.

    Whether in actual fact the policy of the boot-on-the-face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful.

    My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.

    I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.

    Partly because of the prevailing materialism and partly because of prevailing respectability, nineteenth-century philosophers
    and men of science were not willing to investigate the odder facts of psychology for practical men, such as politicians, soldiers and policemen, to apply in the field of government.

    Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations.

    Another lucky accident was Freud’s inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism.

    This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years.

    But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.

    Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.

    In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.

    The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.

    Meanwhile, of course, there may be a large scale biological and atomic war — in which case we shall have nightmares of other and scarcely imaginable kinds.

    Thank you once again for the book.

    Yours sincerely,

    Aldous Huxley

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.
     
    Scott Adams writes in Win Bigly that it was easy to predict Trump's victory even before the primaries began, just with what he had learned as a hypnosis student and practitioner three decades earlier.
  214. @Anonymous
    A (straight) older brother used to subscribe to GQ, in his long-ago bachelor days, and I would often inherit his discarded issues. Looking back now, I can see that it changed irrevocably in early 2003 when Conde Nast's elderly owner, S.I. Newhouse, fired longtime editor Art Cooper -- who'd shaped the magazine as much as Hugh Hefner shaped Playboy -- and installed an openly gay lefty who turned the magazine into a full-time advocate for homosexuality, metrosexuality, hip-hop culture, and progressive politics (while continuing to fill it with plugs for $600 sneakers and $2500 sweaters). The new editor is solidly hetero, but clearly he's been working at GQ too long.

    The magazine may claim upwards of 900,000 readers, but most of them are on cut-rate $5 subscriptions. Its frequency has been reduced from monthly to 10 issues a year, and it's increasingly dependent on its free "online presence." That's not a healthy prognosis.

    Wait, so Gentlemen’s Quarterly is published ten times annually? That makes no damn sense.

  215. @Anonymous
    The life of Mehmed the Conqueror was fascinating. He not only conquered Constantinople, but also unified Anatolia, conquered Serbia, Romania, Bosnia , Albania, Crimea, etc. Together with Suleiman the Magnificent, they were the best sultans of the Ottoman history. Not enough, he had a complex relationship with the famous Vlad Tepes the Impaler . Vlad and his brother lived in the Ottoman court, together with Mehmet, the three boys had similar ages. Mehmed developed a sexual relationship with Vlad brother. From the contemporary historian Laonikos Chalkokondyles :

    “The sultan1 spent that winter2 in his palace and summoned Vlad, the son of Dracul and ruler of Wallachia,3 as he already had his younger brother4 at the court, keeping him as his lover and maintaining him. It happened that the sultan was almost killed by the boy when he had wanted to have sex with him. This was when he had first gained the throne and was preparing to campaign against Karaman. He was in love with the boy and invited him for conversation, and then as a sign of his respect he invited him for drinks to his bedchamber. The boy did not expect to suffer such a thing from the sultan, and when he saw the sultan approaching him with that intention, he fought him off and refused to consent to intercourse with him. The sultan kissed the unwilling boy, who drew a dagger and struck the sultan on his thigh. He then fled in whatever direction he could find. The doctors were able to treat the sultan’s wound. The boy had climbed up a tree there and was hiding. When the sultan packed up and left, the boy came down from the tree, began his journey, and shortly afterward, arrived at the Porte and became the sultan’s lover. The sultan was used to having relations no less with men who shared his own inclinations. For he was always spending his time in the close company of such people, both day and night, but he did not usually have relations with men who were not of his own race, except for brief periods of time.”
     
    There are people who say that Vlad was obsessed with impalements of Ottomans, because the lost honor of his family , with the “impalements" that Mehmed did on Radu. It's also interesting because Chalkokondyles wrote that Mehmed was inclined towards homosexuality, and preferred other Ottomans, not only subjulgated men from conquered lands. Something like modern homosexuals. His behavior was not because the supposed Islamic fashion or the so called prison homosexuality.

    I don’t think there was anything especially Islamic about it: I think it was a holdover from how Arab society treated homosexuality at the time that the religion was born. Mehmed’s sexuality would be entirely familiar to anyone who knows about, say, Alexander’s or Trajan’s. These societies just didn’t think about sexuality in the same way.

    (Hadrian would definitely be “gay” by our standards: he had no interest in women whatsoever and didn’t bother to hide it, which was considered shocking by the permissive but prudish Romans. By contrast, whatever Mehmed’s real sexuality, it was never exclusive enough to prevent him from doing his societal duty and popping out some heirs.)

    My impression was that Arab society around the time of Muhammad still treated homosexuality much like the Greeks and Romans did in classical antiquity: homosexuality as a psycho-social “identity” just wasn’t a thing at a time. It was considered perfectly normal for an adult, free man of standing to have male and female partners, and as long as it didn’t interfere with the all-important procreation of the next generation, the choice between the two was a matter of personal taste and nothing deeper. Within this prism, if someone like Mehmed preferred men, it wasn’t considered especially noteworthy unless it got to the point where he didn’t do his duty and pop out a new sultan.

    But that was strictly predicated on said man being the dominant, active partner. To take the passive role was considered deeply shameful. At best, if the passive partner was a freeborn younger youth, it was considered a transitory stage that would be handled with strict discretion and was to cease when he was old enough to assume the dominant role himself, take a wife, become a paterfamlias generally. In stark contrast to “prison” sexuality, which it is often compared to, the passive partner in this scenario was still emphatically male: to have dressed him up like a girl or treated him like one would have been considered demeaning and unworthy of the dominant partner, who was supposed to be mentoring him and encouraging him in his manhood. But at worst, if the passive partner was a slave or a eunuch or something, it was a sign that beyond being property, he wasn’t and could not ever be a man-something more reminiscent of prison sexuality. It doesn’t seem beyond the realm of possibility that the Arabs transferred this attitude to the people they ended up converting, including the Turks.

    (My impression is also that female sexuality was considered so unworthy of attention outside of getting pregnant by the right man-aka, her husband or master-that nobody bothered to talk about lesbianism.)

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    When I wrote that Mehmed was inclined towards homosexuality, like modern homosexual men I wanted to say that the inner feelings of Mehmed, was similar to modern men that are attracted to their own sex. Those can be seen in Chalkokondyles account about Mehmed homosexuality. The culture changes, but the instincts rooted in biology, no. The same can be said about heterosexual relationships. It changed a lot, but heterosexual men and women continue to have the same instincts, like in the past.
  216. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls."

    That is not how you pick up girls. Both GQ fashion and PUA 'tude are lying to you. (First of all, "picking up girls" is an illusory goal. What you actually want is not girls, plural, but rather -- one particular girl, one individual girlfriend, someone suited to you, with whom you can go on and work together with, to build a family and a life.)

    Picking up girls is a two step process. It goes as follows:

    Step One: cultivate a formidable skill, through training, practice, and discipline. Then, using it, do something interesting, bold, and skillful, and make sure that girls see you doing it.

    Step Two: actually there is no Step Two. If you have successfully completed Step One, then you don't need to "pick up girls" because you now have a hot girlfiend, because she threw herself at you once you completed Step One.

    Just don’t look/smell like a slob, and don’t be physically weak. Seriously. That’s all you need in the looks department if you are a man. Men’s challenges lie elsewhere: behavior (boys, don’t listen to what you are being told-act like a man if you want women), socioeconomic prospects, etc. It’s fundamentally different due to deeply rooted biological reasons that no amount of policy or social engineering is ever going to override.

    Being tall helps, being classically good-looking helps. I’m not suggesting that it doesn’t. But it will not override problems like a lack of confidence or being unemployed in attracting most women, just as for women, being a skilled, high-paid programmer will not override obesity in attracting most men. Sure, most men would prefer to have a wife with economic prospects than one who doesn’t in the 21st Century, but it still isn’t THE overriding, imperative factor in social value like it is for men.

    (Yeah, you have your weirdos-I’m one of them. Contour integrals make my heart flutter in a way that most women have never managed, and chances are I’d be deeply attracted to a woman who felt similarly irrespective of looks. But let’s be real, we’re called “weirdos” for a reason-because numerically speaking, we’re exceptions.)

    • Replies: @anonymous
    wwebd said ----- Great comment.

    Except -

    trust me I have met women who could do to contour integrals what a jackal does to every piece of garbage worth eating over hundreds of acres of desert

    and seriously, it does not matter how smart a woman is, if she can't put in the effort to look nice in skimpy outfits,

    she ain't gonna make anybody's heart flutter.

    Sad but true.

    Been there done that!

    On the bright side, it is a lot easier for an unattractive woman to become attractive than for an unattractive guy to perform the same feat. Happens all the times with women, happens once in a hundred years or so with men....

    That being said, it is safe to say, when we consider the psychology of the individual, that it is Usually Never Gonna Happen, and even when it does happen, ten or fifteen years down the road - if you are some random dude who thought you won the pussy lottery by getting a hot wife ---- your hot wife is sort of fat, and she puts on her makeup in some random way that indicates that she knows she is not really attractive ----- or if you are some woman who thought you got a better husband than any of your high school girlfriends,--- ten or fifteen years later your cool husband is sort of a loser, in his little SUV with his chubby face and that stupid look of stupidity he has when he talks about what a great guy he is because ..... well because he scored a hot chick to marry him 20 years ago and life has been gravy ever since then !!!!

    Life is like that.
    God loves us all, anyway, physical beauty at its best is just a temporary reward, this world belongs to people who care about other people ---- this world belongs to those people who know what it means

    to be exactly who God wants us to be.

    This is your world if you understand that.
    , @RandoSockPuppet
    I don't know what world you're living in, but in this one if you couldn't be mistaken for a male model your opportunities with women are very limited.

    With the sexual revolution and later wide spread adoption of online dating came an increase in soft polygamy.

    The young women are either obese or rotating among the most attractive few men at the top.

    I'm completely shut out of the market and it's certainly not because I'm "economically unattractive." Many young men are finding themselves in the same situation.
  217. @Jonathan Mason

    Orwell wasn’t predicting anything. He was satirizing what had already taken place.
     
    I think this is true. Obviously true in the case of Animal Farm, and also when you take Nineteen Eighty-Four in the context of his journalistic writings and columns. Also note that Eighty-Four is Forty-Eight backwards, reflecting the time when the book was written.

    Some parts of the book were also based on his experience of working for the BBC World Service during World War II creating propaganda broadcasts aimed at India (which he believed hardly anyone heard.)

    Orwell might have been a Brexiteer.

    Many of Huxley's predictions did indeed come true, and remain relevant today.

    Huxley was hired as a schoolmaster at Eton College in 1917, where one of his pupils was 14-year-old Eric Blair, better known under his pen name of George Orwell. Who knows what they might have talked about?

    In 1949 Huxley wrote a letter to Orwell, upon the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four in which he gave the new book good marks, but points out some areas where he disagrees. Apparently Orwell had asked his publishers to send a copy to his former teacher.

    Wrightwood. California.
    21 October, 1949
     

    Dear Mr. Orwell,

    It was very kind of you to tell your publishers to send me a copy of your book.

    It arrived as I was in the midst of a piece of work that required much reading and consulting of references; and since poor sight makes it necessary for me to ration my reading, I had to wait a long time before being able to embark on Nineteen Eighty-Four.

    Agreeing with all that the critics have written of it, I need not tell you, yet once more, how fine and how profoundly important the book is.

    May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution?

    The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology — are to be found in the Marquis de Sade, who regarded himself as the continuator, the consummator, of Robespierre and Babeuf.

    The philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is a sadism which has been carried to its logical conclusion by going beyond sex and denying it.

    Whether in actual fact the policy of the boot-on-the-face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful.

    My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.

    I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.

    Partly because of the prevailing materialism and partly because of prevailing respectability, nineteenth-century philosophers
    and men of science were not willing to investigate the odder facts of psychology for practical men, such as politicians, soldiers and policemen, to apply in the field of government.

    Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations.

    Another lucky accident was Freud's inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism.

    This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years.

    But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.

    Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.

    In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.

    The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.

    Meanwhile, of course, there may be a large scale biological and atomic war — in which case we shall have nightmares of other and scarcely imaginable kinds.

    Thank you once again for the book.

    Yours sincerely,

    Aldous Huxley
     

    I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.

    Scott Adams writes in Win Bigly that it was easy to predict Trump’s victory even before the primaries began, just with what he had learned as a hypnosis student and practitioner three decades earlier.

  218. Anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox
    I don't think there was anything especially Islamic about it: I think it was a holdover from how Arab society treated homosexuality at the time that the religion was born. Mehmed's sexuality would be entirely familiar to anyone who knows about, say, Alexander's or Trajan's. These societies just didn't think about sexuality in the same way.

    (Hadrian would definitely be "gay" by our standards: he had no interest in women whatsoever and didn't bother to hide it, which was considered shocking by the permissive but prudish Romans. By contrast, whatever Mehmed's real sexuality, it was never exclusive enough to prevent him from doing his societal duty and popping out some heirs.)

    My impression was that Arab society around the time of Muhammad still treated homosexuality much like the Greeks and Romans did in classical antiquity: homosexuality as a psycho-social "identity" just wasn't a thing at a time. It was considered perfectly normal for an adult, free man of standing to have male and female partners, and as long as it didn't interfere with the all-important procreation of the next generation, the choice between the two was a matter of personal taste and nothing deeper. Within this prism, if someone like Mehmed preferred men, it wasn't considered especially noteworthy unless it got to the point where he didn't do his duty and pop out a new sultan.

    But that was strictly predicated on said man being the dominant, active partner. To take the passive role was considered deeply shameful. At best, if the passive partner was a freeborn younger youth, it was considered a transitory stage that would be handled with strict discretion and was to cease when he was old enough to assume the dominant role himself, take a wife, become a paterfamlias generally. In stark contrast to "prison" sexuality, which it is often compared to, the passive partner in this scenario was still emphatically male: to have dressed him up like a girl or treated him like one would have been considered demeaning and unworthy of the dominant partner, who was supposed to be mentoring him and encouraging him in his manhood. But at worst, if the passive partner was a slave or a eunuch or something, it was a sign that beyond being property, he wasn't and could not ever be a man-something more reminiscent of prison sexuality. It doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility that the Arabs transferred this attitude to the people they ended up converting, including the Turks.


    (My impression is also that female sexuality was considered so unworthy of attention outside of getting pregnant by the right man-aka, her husband or master-that nobody bothered to talk about lesbianism.)

    When I wrote that Mehmed was inclined towards homosexuality, like modern homosexual men I wanted to say that the inner feelings of Mehmed, was similar to modern men that are attracted to their own sex. Those can be seen in Chalkokondyles account about Mehmed homosexuality. The culture changes, but the instincts rooted in biology, no. The same can be said about heterosexual relationships. It changed a lot, but heterosexual men and women continue to have the same instincts, like in the past.

  219. Wait, so Gentlemen’s Quarterly is published ten times annually? That makes no damn sense.

    And it never cost a quarter, either.

    Oddly, it cost more in the 1930s than in the 1970s:


  220. anonymous[532] • Disclaimer says:
    @Counterinsurgency

    they get bitter.

    Why is this?
     
    My impression is that women expect to be taken care of so that they can get on with the work of raising the next generation -- plausibly the most important part of human biology.

    But men can't take care of women anymore, and women are told that they have to "take care of themselves" if they want to marry and have children and a family [1]. Essentially, social conformity no longer enables women to do what women consider important (making a family) and forces them to do what men consider important (earn a living to support a family). Bitter is too mild a word for what follows.
    And the women then form into a moral community and act, ah, difficult until the men fix the situation. Since the men who have to live with above-bitter women can't fix the situation, the women just get more difficult, and things deteriorate. Eventually something that the men do works, and the women get less difficult. Alternately, the men never do figure it out and the group dissolves, possibly into another group.

    The present situation is (IMHO) a direct result of economically nonproductive cities impoverishing their hinterlands. The resources needed to have families are gone, and women are acting the way women have always acted in such a situation: they become difficult to live with until (a) men make it possible to have families again, or (b) the group goes extinct. The exact form of being difficult probably doesn't matter that much (even if it makes the actual situation worse -- it always makes the actual situation worse), so the cleverness of convincing women that they need to be men (and the converse) probably doesn't actually destabilize society enough more to matter in the long run. Above-bitter women are always a signal to men that something has to change, and that's all that's needed [2].

    Counterinsurgency


    1] Author S. M. Stirling, informal computer posting, roughly paraphrased: "To be upper middle class, marry a woman with a career. Poverty, thy name is a stay at home housewife." To attract a potentially well off man, women must waste years learning what they regard as useless trivia, and when they are part of a two income family they _still_ can't raise children, at least not successfully. For that matter, I've seen one income families with a single kid destroyed by daycare (ear infection, oppositional defiant disorder) because the mother had no idea of how to care for babies. Feminism teaches that ragging on the men is women's only function in life, to the exclusion of baby and child care.

    2] The original idea comes from anthropology. New Guinea tribes using slash and burn agriculture have to move to new territories periodically. This is dangerous, the new areas are occupied. Nevertheless, move they must and move they do, when the tribe's leaders say they must.
    Only that's not what really happens. In practice, the tribes need protein to move, a diet of meat for long enough to displace the land's current occupants. To do that, the tribes slaughter most of the pigs they raise, eat the meat, and go forth.
    Pigs are raised by the women. According to the study, it is routine for women to nurse piglet's, ah, personally for reasons not mentioned. What really happens is that, as the pig population increases, women complain that raising pigs is taking more time and labor than they have to give. At that point, the chiefs slaughter the pigs, and use the meat to take over another territory. Cycle time from almost all the pigs are slaughtered to "too many pigs again" is just a little shorter than the time needed to exhaust soil in the the "slash and burn" sites. The pigs are a timer, and the women acting "super-bitter" is the driver. The soil exhaustion is apparently regarded as an inconvenience (since clearnign new fields is considerable work) just barely compensated for by the reduction on "too many pigs" complaints from the women, who (to put it bluntly) are always the only force on Earth that can get men as a group to get up off their rear ends and actually do something.
    Funny how things can work.

    in high school, I was crowned (those were wittier days) as
    not “most likely to succeed”
    and certainly not as “homecoming king”
    or “Mr Congeniality”

    but as

    “the senior most likely to be shot at by a jealous husband”

    That was a long time ago, and I have been kind over the years, and LITERALLY DOZENS OF WOMEN HAVE THROWN THEMSELVES AT ME
    well, at least 20, if that is not dozens, sorry dude, I am not a math major ….

    and I have to say

    you know whereof you speak

  221. Nora Caplan-Bricker wants a New Masculinity.

    What I thought was a war against men is really a battle within a bigger war against white people. … What a let down to realize that there isn’t a crusade against men as much as white people.

    – RooshV
    http://www.rooshv.com/kill-whitey

  222. anonymous[546] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox
    Just don't look/smell like a slob, and don't be physically weak. Seriously. That's all you need in the looks department if you are a man. Men's challenges lie elsewhere: behavior (boys, don't listen to what you are being told-act like a man if you want women), socioeconomic prospects, etc. It's fundamentally different due to deeply rooted biological reasons that no amount of policy or social engineering is ever going to override.

    Being tall helps, being classically good-looking helps. I'm not suggesting that it doesn't. But it will not override problems like a lack of confidence or being unemployed in attracting most women, just as for women, being a skilled, high-paid programmer will not override obesity in attracting most men. Sure, most men would prefer to have a wife with economic prospects than one who doesn't in the 21st Century, but it still isn't THE overriding, imperative factor in social value like it is for men.

    (Yeah, you have your weirdos-I'm one of them. Contour integrals make my heart flutter in a way that most women have never managed, and chances are I'd be deeply attracted to a woman who felt similarly irrespective of looks. But let's be real, we're called "weirdos" for a reason-because numerically speaking, we're exceptions.)

    wwebd said —– Great comment.

    Except –

    trust me I have met women who could do to contour integrals what a jackal does to every piece of garbage worth eating over hundreds of acres of desert

    and seriously, it does not matter how smart a woman is, if she can’t put in the effort to look nice in skimpy outfits,

    she ain’t gonna make anybody’s heart flutter.

    Sad but true.

    Been there done that!

    On the bright side, it is a lot easier for an unattractive woman to become attractive than for an unattractive guy to perform the same feat. Happens all the times with women, happens once in a hundred years or so with men….

    That being said, it is safe to say, when we consider the psychology of the individual, that it is Usually Never Gonna Happen, and even when it does happen, ten or fifteen years down the road – if you are some random dude who thought you won the pussy lottery by getting a hot wife —- your hot wife is sort of fat, and she puts on her makeup in some random way that indicates that she knows she is not really attractive —– or if you are some woman who thought you got a better husband than any of your high school girlfriends,— ten or fifteen years later your cool husband is sort of a loser, in his little SUV with his chubby face and that stupid look of stupidity he has when he talks about what a great guy he is because ….. well because he scored a hot chick to marry him 20 years ago and life has been gravy ever since then !!!!

    Life is like that.
    God loves us all, anyway, physical beauty at its best is just a temporary reward, this world belongs to people who care about other people —- this world belongs to those people who know what it means

    to be exactly who God wants us to be.

    This is your world if you understand that.

  223. @Richard P
    T.I. fits the bill well as he's always carried himself in a classy, sophisticated manner -- and he's one tough SOB who's been around the block.

    I will add, as (I think) the only regular commenter who appreciates hip hop, that T.I. is probably disqualified from endorsement by The Narrative because he believes in freedom, agency, responsibility, and (most unforgivable at all in the current climate) the need of children for their fathers:

  224. @Achmed E. Newman
    Just tried a search to put it on hold at the library

    No joy :-{

    Just tried a search to put it on hold at the library

    Library? Try Amazon or Netflix.

    Or YouTube:
    https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=queen+of+outer+space+

  225. @Anon
    Well, at one point, Japanese men wore dresses, studied flower-arranging, held tea parties, believed in being utter subservient to authority, and bowed and apologized a lot. Then again, some of them could take your head off with one blow of a sword, so the Japanese couldn't totally feminize the male personality, although they sure tried. Feudal Japan was the first experiment in trying to feminize a male culture completely.

    Lots of, in fact most florists are men. Probably because of the physical strength needed. Not arranging flowers of course, but heavy lifting and loading that’s part of the job.

  226. @Steve Sailer
    As has been pointed out by others women’s fashion used to be pretty much under the control of women. From the 1970s women’s fashion has been more and more controlled by homosexual men and they use it to express their contempt for women.

    How true is this? I don't know much about the history of fashion, but the only pre-1970s woman designer I can think of is Coco Chanel. Most of the other big names like Charles James, Balenciaga, and Christian Dior were gay men.

    It started with 1850’s Charles Worth. But most of the big fashion houses were run by women.

    Maybe it was the change from the small dressmakers to factories. Like boarding houses and small hotels to big chain hotels. Maybe it’s gay networking.

    According to a man who works in the men’s department at Saks 5th Av, gay men spend so much more on clothes than hetero men. Sooo
    the industry caters to gay men.

    I see covers of GQ. It’s almost like a black gay hookers website, clothed of course.

  227. @Counterinsurgency

    they get bitter.

    Why is this?
     
    My impression is that women expect to be taken care of so that they can get on with the work of raising the next generation -- plausibly the most important part of human biology.

    But men can't take care of women anymore, and women are told that they have to "take care of themselves" if they want to marry and have children and a family [1]. Essentially, social conformity no longer enables women to do what women consider important (making a family) and forces them to do what men consider important (earn a living to support a family). Bitter is too mild a word for what follows.
    And the women then form into a moral community and act, ah, difficult until the men fix the situation. Since the men who have to live with above-bitter women can't fix the situation, the women just get more difficult, and things deteriorate. Eventually something that the men do works, and the women get less difficult. Alternately, the men never do figure it out and the group dissolves, possibly into another group.

    The present situation is (IMHO) a direct result of economically nonproductive cities impoverishing their hinterlands. The resources needed to have families are gone, and women are acting the way women have always acted in such a situation: they become difficult to live with until (a) men make it possible to have families again, or (b) the group goes extinct. The exact form of being difficult probably doesn't matter that much (even if it makes the actual situation worse -- it always makes the actual situation worse), so the cleverness of convincing women that they need to be men (and the converse) probably doesn't actually destabilize society enough more to matter in the long run. Above-bitter women are always a signal to men that something has to change, and that's all that's needed [2].

    Counterinsurgency


    1] Author S. M. Stirling, informal computer posting, roughly paraphrased: "To be upper middle class, marry a woman with a career. Poverty, thy name is a stay at home housewife." To attract a potentially well off man, women must waste years learning what they regard as useless trivia, and when they are part of a two income family they _still_ can't raise children, at least not successfully. For that matter, I've seen one income families with a single kid destroyed by daycare (ear infection, oppositional defiant disorder) because the mother had no idea of how to care for babies. Feminism teaches that ragging on the men is women's only function in life, to the exclusion of baby and child care.

    2] The original idea comes from anthropology. New Guinea tribes using slash and burn agriculture have to move to new territories periodically. This is dangerous, the new areas are occupied. Nevertheless, move they must and move they do, when the tribe's leaders say they must.
    Only that's not what really happens. In practice, the tribes need protein to move, a diet of meat for long enough to displace the land's current occupants. To do that, the tribes slaughter most of the pigs they raise, eat the meat, and go forth.
    Pigs are raised by the women. According to the study, it is routine for women to nurse piglet's, ah, personally for reasons not mentioned. What really happens is that, as the pig population increases, women complain that raising pigs is taking more time and labor than they have to give. At that point, the chiefs slaughter the pigs, and use the meat to take over another territory. Cycle time from almost all the pigs are slaughtered to "too many pigs again" is just a little shorter than the time needed to exhaust soil in the the "slash and burn" sites. The pigs are a timer, and the women acting "super-bitter" is the driver. The soil exhaustion is apparently regarded as an inconvenience (since clearnign new fields is considerable work) just barely compensated for by the reduction on "too many pigs" complaints from the women, who (to put it bluntly) are always the only force on Earth that can get men as a group to get up off their rear ends and actually do something.
    Funny how things can work.

    Can’t you find a blog for unhappy divorced men or something? UNZ is turning into a Lifetime channel for men.

  228. @Reg Cæsar
    Worst paternal prediction ever:


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy_3Q6ctHRA

    Haha!

    Thanks for sharing. To be honest, I’m not familiar with Loudon Wainwright’s music, except from friends saying Rufus just copied his dad. Any one record you’d recommend?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Dead Skunk" is his most famous single.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-CyTBuESvk
  229. @Noah
    Haha!

    Thanks for sharing. To be honest, I'm not familiar with Loudon Wainwright's music, except from friends saying Rufus just copied his dad. Any one record you'd recommend?

    “Dead Skunk” is his most famous single.

    • Replies: @Noah
    Interesting. Rufus seems to have the chops over his dad in songwriting, although maybe Loudon made more at it? Rufus (probably like his dad) has wasted a lot of his money and talent on drugs. I think he went temporarily blind at some point.
  230. @Anonymous
    "Dead Skunk" is his most famous single.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-CyTBuESvk

    Interesting. Rufus seems to have the chops over his dad in songwriting, although maybe Loudon made more at it? Rufus (probably like his dad) has wasted a lot of his money and talent on drugs. I think he went temporarily blind at some point.

  231. @nebulafox
    Just don't look/smell like a slob, and don't be physically weak. Seriously. That's all you need in the looks department if you are a man. Men's challenges lie elsewhere: behavior (boys, don't listen to what you are being told-act like a man if you want women), socioeconomic prospects, etc. It's fundamentally different due to deeply rooted biological reasons that no amount of policy or social engineering is ever going to override.

    Being tall helps, being classically good-looking helps. I'm not suggesting that it doesn't. But it will not override problems like a lack of confidence or being unemployed in attracting most women, just as for women, being a skilled, high-paid programmer will not override obesity in attracting most men. Sure, most men would prefer to have a wife with economic prospects than one who doesn't in the 21st Century, but it still isn't THE overriding, imperative factor in social value like it is for men.

    (Yeah, you have your weirdos-I'm one of them. Contour integrals make my heart flutter in a way that most women have never managed, and chances are I'd be deeply attracted to a woman who felt similarly irrespective of looks. But let's be real, we're called "weirdos" for a reason-because numerically speaking, we're exceptions.)

    I don’t know what world you’re living in, but in this one if you couldn’t be mistaken for a male model your opportunities with women are very limited.

    With the sexual revolution and later wide spread adoption of online dating came an increase in soft polygamy.

    The young women are either obese or rotating among the most attractive few men at the top.

    I’m completely shut out of the market and it’s certainly not because I’m “economically unattractive.” Many young men are finding themselves in the same situation.

  232. @R.G. Camara
    I got a subscription to GQ for a while in the 2000s, hoping for style/fashion advice so as to pick up girls. But despite having good recommendations, I had to cancel it, because it was so Marxist in its articles and in its pushing of "black guys look cool and are more masculine than pathetic white guys" aesthetic (blacks were overrepresented in cover photos and photo models and in article subjects).

    It's not surprising its pushing further left. As fewer people get magazines and newspapers, these folks play to their perceived base. They go extreme left in order to please the base. The NY Times audience has no idea how outside normal they are and how many untruths they are told, and neither do GQ's regular readers these days.

    P.S. It's interesting how much the Left belives Nature can overcome Nurture, and how self-important each Commie thinks he is. "We can change how masculinity is perceived!" screams a leftist rag/person every six mpnths or so. And yet he-men never go out of style.

    They go extreme left in order to please the base.

    Dunno. As the example of your own readership illustrates, I don’t think that this new incarnation is about appealing to the base at all. (If it were, then I could respect that as a profit-maximizing strategy.) It’s about pushing an agenda and virtue-signalling, on the part of the staff as well as the owners. They are willing to lose money to do so, as they surely well.

    It’s like all of the TV commercials with laughably convoluted “famly” scenarios — like a black family in a house with a white picket fence, the black-woman-white-man couple (the converse seems to be non-PC these days), homosexuals, etc., etc. — which I don’t think are really trying to sell toothpaste, but rather to push an agenda and, as a plus, get pats on the back from their Madison Ave. colleagues.

    Former capitalists now have enough money to spend (lose) on this garbage. This is practically the definition of societal decadance and degeneracy.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS