The Red Pill

red_pill_poster

IronCrossIronCrossIronCrossgood

I’m truly thrilled that The Red Pill, the documentary from Cassie Jaye about her “journey” from being a feminist to not being a feminist via the Men’s Rights movement, has received an 8.7 on IMDB and a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. Honestly, I am. It means people are opening their eyes and starting to listen to something other than the mainstream, “women is so oppressed” narrative.

But let’s be honest here; unless you’re an anorexic, nerdy sissy boy, who only hung out with kinda cute, glasses wearing hipster gurlz, the ones that LOVED being your friend, but made you wonder why YOU’RE always being friend-zoned in favor of guys with a fraction of your intelligence, and THEN made you feel GUILTY for complaining about it, there is nothing particularly groundbreaking about The Red Pill. The movie treats feminism as if it’s the main problem in our society, rather than one of the many weapons used by the cultural Marxist and globalist beast to try to destroy Western civilization; in fact, the notion that it could even BE a left/right, or rather globalist/anti-globalist issue, isn’t even touched upon. I’ve never considered myself a Men’s Rights activist. Many of the figureheads in the men’s movement don’t even see it as a left/right issue. I’ve actually known many “anti-feminist” men who don’t realize that feminism IS a form of leftism, and that supporting anyone on the left IS supporting the very ideology they say they’re against. Or to put it more succinctly, A Voice for Men editor Dean Esmay’s support for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump in the 2016 election is tantamount to a civil rights leader in the 1960s supporting George Wallace.

There is a segment that lasts all of one minute – among 120 of them – that addresses how, in the 60s, the equality warriors switched their target from capitalism to patriarchy, but it’s so dinky, that one wonders why Jaye even bothered putting it in the movie in the first place.

But if we’re going to REALLY be addressing the elephants in the room, and if above all else, film is a visual medium, where the images are intended to elicit a reaction, it’s actually kind of infuriating watching shots of the cutie Cassie Jaye, who resembles a plumper, rounder Christina Applegate – don’t worry, Cassie, I wouldn’t make you lose 15 lbs. to have a seat on MY casting couch – interviewing pathetic looking, depressing old men, as they tell their stories about losing everything to a system that’s stacked against them.  I mean, JUST THE FACT that she’s IN the frame with them getting all misty eyed, listening to them talk about how they got royally screwed, while not addressing how incredibly privileged she is in our society by being blessed with hotness, struck me as painfully disingenuous. I mean, sheeyit, lady, you may be a narcissist, but do you have to make it that obvious? But who knows? Maybe this will lead to other women joining in an anti-feminist insurrection.

In The Red Pill, Jaye interviews key figures in the Men’s Rights movement; honestly the only ones I recognized were Paul Elam, Dean Esmay and Karen Straughan; I’m too lazy to look up the rest of ’em. One of them was a 60s male feminist, but changed tracks when he realized all that “freedom” women achieved by tossing off the “shackles” of their normal, middle class lives in favor of becoming spinsters and cat ladies didn’t provide the satisfaction they once imagined it would. But basically, we learn about all of the typical men’s rights talking points; women who trick men by not taking their birth control and enslaving them to a life of child support payments; men who see their coffers depleted in custody battles only to get to see their kids a couple hours a week; female on male spousal abuse not being taken seriously; male rape not being taken seriously; lighter prison sentences for women for the same crimes men committed; men working life threatening jobs to provide for their families only to be told they’re oppressing women; the male/female wage gap myth; and of course there’s a bit of male circumcision thrown in at the end for all the mondo fans. Don’t tell the Jews, though; they may get this movie shut down in your town (psst, I’m allowed to say that because I am one)!!!

We’re also given the counterpoints to these arguments from some harpy at Ms. magazine, some gay Jewish guy and of course the loud, shrill and obnoxious Big Red, who kinda resembles my former friend Sarah.

But another thing that bothered me about the movie is that it didn’t really address how feminism negatively affects women. Maybe Cassie Jaye hasn’t learned about hypergamy yet or that the only things feminism really accomplished was making it easier for men to get laid since it made women sluttier, while boosting the sales for antidepressants and keeping pet store owners in business. At VERY least, Jaye addresses that getting catcalled and having to look pretty (aww, poor baby) don’t really seem to be that big of problems in comparison with getting crushed to death in a coal mine avalanche, getting blown to bits on a battle field or having your life savings drained. And hey, in about 20 years, once the flesh starts to sag and wrinkles start to show, she won’t even HAVE to worry about getting catcalled.

A decade ago, when I was at Grand Valley State University, I picked up a book from the women’s center called Transforming a Rape Culture. At the time, I thought it was the stupidest thing I’d ever seen, and most people balked at the suggestion that all men are rapists or predisposed to commit rape. Also, apparently it wasn’t considered “oppressive” to refer to slutty women as sluts; it was just honest. In fact, I LOVE sluts! They put out the quickest, and thanks to all that female empowerment, they’re not just damaged women with daddy issues! All of this was before Obama was even President. A lot has changed since then. Men can now put on dresses and call themselves women; women who get gang-banged by twenty dudes are considered “empowered”; men who ask women on dates can be accused of sexual assault; man, has society progressed! Thank you Cassie Jaye for setting the clock back about ten years.

What’s the Deal with Cop Hating Libertarians?

hot_female_copOccupying a bizarre, yet fascinating – well, fascinating to me, at least – spot in the modern zeitgeist is the cop-hating libertarian. Now, I’ve always considered myself to be a libertarian and have been called one by people on the both the left and the right, but one thing that I’ve always had trouble understanding is the libertarian who has a vehement hatred for the police.

I understand where it COMES from. When I was a young, obnoxious teenager, I too hated anybody who wore a suit or a uniform of any type. I thought ALL of these people were assholes who take your freedoms away and stop you from having fun, while filling their coffers and enslaving people through bureaucracy. The first band I ever listened to was Metallica. In “…And Justice for All”, they sing about a corrupt politician, who uses money to subvert the justice system; in “The Shortest Straw”, they sing about how you’re put on trial Kafka-style for something you didn’t do, and no matter what you do, you’re always guilty; in “Eye of the Beholder”, they preach against censorship; in “Leper Messiah”, they attack manipulative people, who sell religion to rubes that don’t know any better; in “Fight Fire with Fire” and “Blackened”, they express their fear of imminent nuclear annihilation at the hands of the two big political powers at the time; and in “Disposable Heroes” and “One”, they condemn war since like war totally sucks. Ironically then, they go on to express the necessity for war in SOME instances in “Don’t Tread on Me.”

But THEN, when my radar moved into the amateurish, under-produced and less musically skilled world of hardcore punk, the bands had an entirely new target for their resentment. In “Police Story”, Black Flag sing about a war on the street between the cops and kids; in “Police Truck”, the Dead Kennedys shout down police brutality; In “Cop Cars”, the Exploited express their paranoia whenever they hear a police siren; in “Fascist Pig”, Suicidal Tendencies call cops “fascist pigs” (or rather, they ironically claim that “I wanna be a fascist pig!”); in “The Badge”, Poison Idea claim anyone who becomes a police officer does so because he has a thirst for power; in “Cop Killer” by Body Count (ain’t it a hoot how Ice-T plays a cop on Law and Order now?), “Kill the Police” by GG Allin and “Cops for Fertilizer” by the Crucifucks, the respective bands advocate KILLING the police; and in “No More Cops”, a band CALLED Millions of Dead Cops says the world would be a much more peaceful place, and that people would just get along all nicey-nice if we just got rid of all cops (no need to kill ’em). Hell, even Motörhead have a song called “Lawman” that attacks narco-cops (actually being a narc is pretty lame). By the end of the 80s, Gangsta rappers N.W.A. added a racial element to the anti-cop sentiment with “Fuk da Police.”

The basic message from punk, rap and some metal is that, if you enjoy freedom or, if you’re a freak or outcast of any type, the police are NOT your friends.

As people grow older, their views tend to get more nuanced, and they stop taking the messages in songs at face value. This is why they realize that it’s contradictory for a leftist punk rock band like the Dead Kennedys to sing a song called “Government Flu”, while advocating for MORE government. They realize that, when the Dead Kennedys bash Christianity in “Religious Vomit” or when Motörhead do the same in “(Don’t Need) Religion” or when Crass sing that there are no gods or masters, that it’s hypocritical to not bash Islam with equal fervor. They also realize that it’s pretty silly to say that people in the United States are oppressed, while completely acting as though the oppression in Islamic countries is no big deal or even worse, advocating Socialism or Communism as if we don’t already have models for the failure of both ideologies.

In other words, they realize that the left is the problem, that they’re the real advocates for authoritarianism, censorship and taking away whatever freedoms we have.

Yet they still hate cops.

Hatred for the police on the left is pretty simple to understand. Leftists just think that cops are racist, unfairly targeting minorities for harassment, abuse and murder. Without doing any further research into the cases of Rodney King, Michael Brown or Philando Castile, they figure, “the cops are white, the people they beat or shoot are black, so therefore, the police must be beating and shooting black people because they hate them.” When you point out that cops kill more white people than black people, that black people kill more black people than either white or black cops or that the reason that possibly blacks have more run-ins with cops than other groups of people is because they commit most of the crime, you’re accused of peddling “hate speech”; then they do as many mental gymnastics as it takes to find the parity between the drive by shootings in black communities and, say, instances of domestic violence or other non-gang related crimes in suburban communities. That way they can claim that all communities have equal distribution when it comes to crime. One girl I know even said that he was raped in the all-white Texas town where she’s from. Bad as that is, I don’t see how she can compare that directly to gang violence such as drive-by shootings, but hey, people need their “equality.” As stated many times elsewhere, blacks make up 13% of the population, yet are responsible for more than 50% of the violent crime. With the left, none of these other factors are ever considered, and based upon this ignorance, idiotic, left-wing movements like Black Lives Matter are allowed to fester and grow.

But, for libertarians, specifically cop hating libertarians, the story is a bit more complicated. My guess is that, in general, they feel that cops are part of the state apparatus, and that they have too much authority, which they can exert onto people at will. Unlike leftists, they don’t see a racial problem; they see a problem with nutsoid cops, who will attack anyone and everyone just because they’re having a bad day or someone just doesn’t look quite right to them. In their view, cops will occasionally discriminate upon the basis of race, but not to the same degree that leftist SJW’s or Black Lives Matter activists think they do. They see THEMSELVES as just as much a part of the anti-cop struggle as leftists and BLM activists, but they feel that the SJW’s and BLM activists need to worry less about racial discrimination and realize that ALL civilians are targets for the police.

Of course, all of this is silly and idiotic. I’ve heard individual stories of people claiming that cops harassed them when they were 100% innocent, and I believe they’re probably telling the truth; but as someone who was stopped by the police for drunk driving and attempted to drive away, when I was surrounded by the police, I stepped out of my car, put my hands in the air as the officers requested, and I was safe of any threats to my life. Do officers overstep their bounds? Sure. Is there an epidemic of officers overstepping their bounds and using the power of the badge to harass, beat and murder people? Now, you’re going to have to give me a WHOLE heckuva lot of evidence to prove that, kiddo.

And God forbid the mainstream media gets a hold of a story which involves a cop and a citizen because, if the right factors are involved – white cop/black “victim” – they’ll spin a wonderful yarn that excludes key details; I bet you didn’t know that Rodney King was high on PCP, and that he had two passengers in his car that both complied with the police when they were stopped. And please don’t get me started with that gentle giant Michael Brown, who robbed a liquor store and tried to grab the officers gun, before he was rightfully shot.

On one hand, cop hating libertarians fully advocate for conceal and carry because it supports the 2nd amendment, but I’m curious how they feel about the Trayvon Marton/George Zimmerman scenario. After all Zimmerman wasn’t a cop. He was just a citizen acting within Florida’s stand your ground law; he was being beat down, defended himself and was found not guilty of murder. On the other hand, they find pro-active, stop and frisk policing, which lead to a severe drop in violent crime in New York during the 90s, to be completely reprehensible; nothing short of an attempt to steamroll over the 4th amendment.

Of course this too is nonsense since the Supreme Court officially ruled that there is nothing unconstitutional about the stop and frisk method of policing, and many have seen how it’s lead to a sharp fall in crime and rise in the standard of living for people living in low income communities.

My question to these cop-hating libertarians is if they honestly equate working class men and women, who decide to become police officers of some local jurisdiction because they have no other training, to federal agents who work with the FBI or the CIA and attempt to spy on them using drones or if they feel that local and even state police are really part of the globalist machine. Because, if these allegations are true, and the cop that stopped me the night I drove drunk and said “cool shirt!” when he saw my Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! t-shirt, works for the state apparatus, then I’ve got way bigger things to worry about than getting back my driver’s license!

We Did This for Your Own Good, Liberals

liberty_meme_muslimIt amuses me to hear leftist call me or anyone on my “side of the isle” – since, after all, as my lovely podcast co-host Ann Sterzinger said, there are 55 different genders and only two political positions you can choose from – paranoid when their collective fear of an America under President Trump is so irrational that they have put their blinders up to the absurd reactions of all of the people who  are crying in the street and being let out of their college courses to mourn that Donald Trump is now the 45th President.

According to angry leftists, Donald Trump isn’t just a Presidential candidate with a different point of view; his election is plainly and simply the triumph of EVIL.  In their warped view, the United States has a healthy population of angry, straight, white men, who are fed up with all of the progress that has been made by blacks… er, I mean persons of color, women, gays, Muslims, Jews, trans people and anyone who isn’t straight, white and male, and now it’s open season on them.

“Oh no, Trump is going to make it legal to kill gay people!”

“Donald Trump is going to do away with sexual harassment laws and cause a rapid rise in workplace ass pinching!”

“With Trump as President, it will now be mandatory to show Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will in high school classes across America!”

“Donald Trump is going to organize mobs to burn copies of the Koran and the Torah in largely Muslims and Jewish communities!”

The sad thing is the left are now so lacking in self-awareness that they will take these hyperbolic statements at face value.  “Hey mom, we just watched Birth of a Nation in history class.  I want to be a hero like those guys in the white hoods!”  Of course, as usual, the left’s logic crumbles under the most basic scrutiny.

In fact leftists have their heads so far up their asses that they will never realize how much good we did for them by sending S.S. America off the course of the Clinton ice berg.

Women – we won’t be importing 100,000 Syrian refugees into the United States.  Isn’t that great?  The U.S. won’t end up like Sweden, the rape capital of the world, now that we chose a candidate who has zero intention of importing immigrants who adhere to a belief system that says it’s perfectly okay to rape and molest women who don’t follow their oppressive holy book.  I KNOW; Trump said, “grab them by the pussy” ten years ago and called Rosie O’Donnell a fat pig, but I assume – and I guess I’m right since Trump won – that most people don’t give two shits about what someone said on a decade old video when, ya know, the other candidate wants to start World War III.  Oh, and Rosie O’Donnell IS a fat pig, so shouldn’t Trump be applauded for his honesty?

(Note: I know someone is going to mention the abortion issue.  My thoughts on it are as follows.  Women shouldn’t be HAVING abortions in the first place. If I have to explain the contradiction that a person would get charged with a double homicide when killing a pregnant woman, yet abortion is somehow NOT murder, well, ya know… HOWEVER, as far as Roe vs. Wade goes, it’s not going anywhere under Trump even if he does choose a conservative judge.  Regardless of comments he might have made saying he’s against abortion, considering his flip flopping, I doubt Trump has much of a stance on the issue one way or the other.)

Gays – See above.  Only replace “rape” and “molest” with “kill”  and “throw off of rooftops.”  Also see the Orlando night club shooting for further evidence that Trump is on the side of the gays.

Blacks – I don’t think Trump even explicitly mentioned blacks other than saying that the inner city communities could use some work.  If law and order are concepts that freak you out, you may want to examine how you live your lives because the national crime statistics aren’t exactly in your favor.  Of course, it’s no skin off my back because I don’t live in an inner city community around a lot of black people, but I do feel a little bad when I hear about that little girl that was gunned down in a drive by shooting.  Don’t yell at me if people don’t take you seriously when you shout black lives matter in their faces after another police officer shoots one of your own for trying to grab his gun, your city erupts in a riot and all of those nice businesses move out when they collect their insurance money.

Jews – Again, he’s not letting Muslims into the country, so you should be relieved about that since they hate you and want to kill you; maybe if they had not allowed them into France, the Charlie Hebdo massacre wouldn’t have happened.  Also, Trump’s daughter is married to one.

Muslims – I think your religion is garbage, but, if you’re in this country, I don’t see what Donald Trump can do to you or why you’re so scared.  You might want to police your people better, not play the victim when one of your own blows something up and not call everyone who criticizes your backwards way of life a “racist.” Also:

islam_religion_of_peace

If ANY one of your people comes after me for this, you’ve further proved Trump’s point.

Mexicans – And what are you so scared of?  Did Donald Trump ever say he plans on having a program of mass deportation for American citizens that hailed from Mexico?  Did he ever say he’s going to open Mexican death camps?  I’m just dumbfounded by what exactly leftists are so worried about.  Where do the majority of the illegal immigrants come from?  Mexico.  Do many of them rape, murder and sell drugs?  Yes.  Do we want to eliminate one source of rape, murder and the selling of drugs?  Yes.  Is it ethical to copulate just to have your kid be born on American soil so you can use him or her to make you into a citizen?  No.  I think that pretty much covers that.

Pacifists – remember, in 2003, when you yelled at George W. Bush for invading Iraq because of all of the American and Iraqi blood that was spilled over the alleged purpose of “democratizing” a group of people that refused to be democratized?  Yeah?  Well, now it’s 2016, Clinton wants to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria to further attempt to “democratize” a group of people that refuses to be democratized.  Only, you’re not yelling anymore.  And why is Clinton so hellbent on starting shit with Russia?  I didn’t realize spilling innocent blood was a progressive value, but I suppose it is if it’s done by a woman.  Well, don’t worry; we saved your fathers, brothers, sons, uncles and male cousins from having to get blown up on foreign soil.  Actually, with this new “equality” mandate that women have to sign up for the military, we saved your mothers, sisters, daughters, aunts and female cousins as well.  You are welcome.

Gun owners – this may seem like a strange group to identify because most gun owners are Trump supporters, but this one is from personal experience.  I know a supposedly anti-big government libertarian type who collects guns.  Yet, when I mentioned that I was voting for Donald Trump, his head nearly exploded.  I was a bit confused by this because I was voting or the candidate that was not going to regulate firearms out of existence.  His aversion to Trump was pretty much the same as everyone else’s; he’s racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic and not fit to be in the White House.  Well, thanks to us voting for a racist, sexist, homophobic Islamophobe, who is not fit to be in the White House, you’ll be able to continue to collect your firearms.  Can we get a thank you?

Fathers – this may seem like another strange group to single out, but I have at least two friends who are fathers.  I asked one of them what he would do if his son ever became an “Otherkin.”  For those who don’t know, “Otherkins” feel they were born in the body of the wrong species.  Naturally, as any sane person would, he told me that, if his son was involved in this online community, he would have a long talk with him and possibly cut off his internet access.  Yet he voted for Clinton against that “great evil” Donald Trump.  He will never realize what a foolish mistake this would have been if Clinton had won.  In a society where a man can put on a dress, claim to be a woman, demand access to the bathroom of the opposite sex and have an online community as a support group for his mental disorder, having a yelling harpy in the White House would only further force the media into an anti-male frenzy – similar to the current anti-white frenzy fostered by eight years under the Obama administration – and would make the world a confusing hell hole for the next generation of young men.  Thanks to us, your sons will now be able to ask you normal dating questions like, “what’s the best way to get a girl’s number?”, rather than, “am I a bigot if I prefer the girl I’m dating to have been born a girl?”  You are SO welcome.

I know a lot of reasonable liberals, leftists, Clinton supporters and other forms of anti-Trumpsters who have accepted defeat and are ready to give Donald Trump a chance.  These people understand that Donald Trump isn’t the second coming of Hitler.  He’s just a man with a different view from theirs.  Unfortunately there are those who are in denial, who have attempted to petition the electoral college to simply vote against the people because they don’t like the outcome of the election, who are in the streets crying and moaning or who are being let out of their university classes to have grieving sessions as if someone in their family died.  They don’t realize FOR A SECOND how fucking stupid they look, and that we’re laughing at them.

As far as I’m concerned, they’re impotent.  They can deface all the cars they want, call people every name in the book, gang up on people in online forums, beat people up, attempt to humiliate people and perform all other manner of bullying, but they’re toast.  Sorry left; you lost.  We don’t care about your feelings anymore.  We don’t give a flying hoot if you think we’re racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic bigots.  And remember; we did this for your own good.

Science Of Sex Differences

thinking_girl

Special guest post by Jessie Nagy

Duplicating points is an important strategy because in the “sea of noise” things are read in segments.

You don’t need to make hour long recordings to analyze this fake thing called feminism per se. That’s only important to an extent. It’s often better to just leave it at the fact that it is just some fake thing. What’s much more important is discovering female nature, as well as male nature.
I take notes on this harder science becuase I’m also in the processing of refining my skill in that field, which is why I have been using a rote method of noting. The psychology & the philosophy is a bit different.

Biology/nature precedes culture. Any cultural shifting of that nature is dependent of that nature.
There is no rat culture, & that’s why it is valid to employ scientific research based on zoology without the distractions of the cultural acts.
This type of science is much too important to review innaccurately because there is an even larger amount of cultural info. inconsistent & lazy to realism, partly because it’s much faster & easier to make interpretations based on short-sight then it is to actually prepare all of the requirements of science. For instance: I’ve even recieved from the new-age community of the concept of the “right brain being feminine” & “left brain being masculine”. Some such people of the latter simplification have even held lectures. You can’t simplify something like neuroscience just like that. You don’t do cultural interpretations first & then try to apply it to science. You have to do it the other way around; you seek science first, then derive other analysis from that science. That’s why a precise reporting is needed.
There are sub-categories of sex differences factoring of hormonal levels, which is translated to gender, i.e., a male can still be highly effeminate – homosexual, bisexual, or still a heterosexual with very low testosterone. However, even though testosterone is a major factor of “masculinizing” the brain, to what degree it affects gender is still not completely certain. Gender can also be more of a feeling. The concept of gender, however, is not applied in the same way that biological scientists would by people with anti-realist agendas. Gender is strategically misappropriated, with no understanding of biological probabilism, by feminists & the like to try to evade the entire reality of sex differences as a means of steering the narrative away from critiques of female nature – you-can’t-criticize-a-woman. They don’t even care for the science of gender itself, but is merely used as a spanning tactic to pause appositional debating. There are sometimes some males who can still be biologically highly masculine & still act feminine – showmanship/”cartoon-characters”/metrosexuals, etc., these are usally just some trendy phases, which is often what feminists & the like use because they’re still stuck on the level of mainstream iconography. You can not attribute psychological condition for gender, but that is essentially the cultural – non-scientific – interpretations; a male who has had some horrible experience; seeing horrors in a war, then becoming depressed, then the culture making lose associations – “effeminate” due to passive depression. It doesn’t work like that. There is seriously stuff regarding sex differences, & it’s other derivative – gender – on that level of interpretation.
Sexual distinctions of the male & female brain is caused by activity of sex hormones in early postnatal & fetal life, although current evidence of genes on either the X or Y chromosome suggests probable contribution to it. Scientists have found statistically and biologically significant differences between the brains of men and women that are similar to sex differences found in experimental animals. These include differences in the size and shape of brain structures in the hypothalamus and the arrangement of neurons in the cortex and hippocampus. Sex differences go well beyond sexual behavior and reproduction and affect many brain regions and functions, ranging from mechanisms for perceiving pain and dealing with stress to strategies for solving cognitive problems.
During development, many biological events eventualizes that distinctly modifys females & males. Particularly, sex definitive genes that are caused by the sex-chromosome complex installs augmentation that formalizes a morphon’s sex, adding to conduction of the dissimilitude of phsyiology in sex-categorical forms. Such processes serves to numerous particular sex distinctions, among even susceptibility to some diseases. Albeit it prevailed that sex hormones exclusievly demarcated the body & brain, there’s more fact-finding transpiring that genes are also a direct factor. Upon further reading, there is a review with also a report on the use of a unique mouse model that divides the results of gonadal hormones & sex chromosomes. Excogitation of mental & physical health can be applied to advancement when understanding of male & female, & how the roles that hormones and genes play in sex differences, evolve with genetic technology.
The information of sexes is a quarrelsome one. Ignoring them can cause taxing discordance. Pointedly, there’s various organic shifts which specifically modifys the sexes, exempli gratia, the lack or occupancy of the Y-chromosome & the staging of gonadal hormones, even prior to birth into culture. During life, continual situations will eventualize which are seperate to each sex. Ergo, health related issues are segmented by female & male distinctive experiences.
Of selective concern for this review are sex distinctions of the brain credited to genetics. Even though in the past greater neurochemical & neuranatomical contrast were imputed to gonadal hormones, that is, estrogens & androgens, emerging data refers categorical genetic consequences on sex distinctions of the brain even earlier to the extention of gonadal hormones.
In most species, distinguishable differences of the sexes are readily discernable due to ammased physical formation & the characteristically gaudy, such as vivid feathers, etc.. Also, distinctions of size of brain features & waist-to-hip comparisons. There’s much more than just observable anatomy, such as cognition & sexuality.
From general physiological details, typical characteristics are developed: The sexes considerably differ on their consolidating of carnality, males being significantly more interested in organic, vital, & plasmic sex, as well as visual stimuli – graphic erotica, film, physical models, etc. – & variations of females, although females do indulge in their own version of pornography, more often literature, & there’s also been a study stating that Asiatic females tend to view male/visual based erotica more so than any other type of female. Female sexuality is a bit different than male sexuality; as males emphasize more visual enhancement & body parts, females are interested in more politicized sex, hence why it is more commonly found in the dramatic art of writing. According to the reports, females place more importance on foreplay & are more interested after sex. Makes sense with females stating “I’m dumping him becuase he doesn’t know what to do”. Females’ conceptional volition is very limited to materialism & sex & things directly related to it. This source excluded other factors, such as male psychological factors – rational fear/cause-&-effect thinking of future terms in conjunction to female nature, etc., & the other societal factor of the practice of male genital mutilation takeing away stronger passion. Females’ sexual desires & interests often shifts in accordance to their menstrual cycle.
Some argue differences are due to environmental factors versus innate. To smaller degrees, that’s true, but the external units are only versions of the innate. Therefore, females & males being receptive to “carving” means innate predispositions. Cross-cultural & multinational studies have found significant distinctions in sexual attitudes & behaviours. Sex differences were found regarding sociosexuality bounding 53 nations. Several twin studies have also found differences of sexuality are more influenced by biology rather than environment, & some genetic studies proposed candidate genes for sexual behaviour. The biology is the predominating factor, then the cultural aspects does some of its part. Most of all, genetic & cross national analysis of sex differences of context to sociosexuality concludes biological basis, as well as cognitive abilities & more.
Controlling nature & strategising with more options is an aspect of male cognition which drastically differentiates our biology from the female. We can either chose to strive to the latter in utilizing our different set of cognition, or we can conform ourselves to the traditional selection set from females’ primal cognition & biology which was more appropriately suited for hundreds to thousands of years ago. It’s not “emasculation”, etc., to be analytical & form new strategies by that. I’m not defending from insecurity. It’s an issue of realizing that that shaming language is a feminine-bourn trend which quite litterally has it’s roots in barbaric times that allowed females to take advantage to their usuary of masculinity. Scientists are willing to state, with their elaborate conductions, that male & female biological psychology is different, but their not willing to tell you that male cognition is excelling because those scientists are still persuaded & domesticated by feelings, particularly gynocentric, on some level, & that is a detached, scientific fact.
Even more controversial than sex differences of context to sociosexuality are sex differences in cognitivition & mental processes. A variety of distinctions on each sexes’ ability on how they perform on cognitive abilities have been proven. Two reoccurring reports of sex differences are in mental rotation task – involving spatial & mathematical processing – generally masculine – & verbal fluency – generally feminine. Tone, pronounciation is a major concern for females. It accounts for their tendency of causing reversals with their syndrome of illogical assesment of plain approaches as “creepy”, bad, poor, etc., while unnoticing of bad traits of others if they have authority presented stylishly. It’s their tendency to notice topical things which actually makes them neglectful of noticing the expansive, largely also due to the fact that females are wired for communion of baby-reading. Silent “awkwardness” is inflated because of the fact that females just don’t know how to turn it off. I believe it was Einstein who once stated: If you can’t simplify it in a formula, then you probably don’t understand it well enough. (Which is how I’ve condensed the science given from an entire book into a summary.) It’s theoretically possible that females’ tendency for disorganized, rumor level communication is due to the fact that, by history, males were vulnerable to making quick decisions – lazy & incompleletely reported as: “males as the bane of wars”, etc., doing the actual hard work, females cultivated commentary & manipulation, then narratives of females having more “emotional intelligence”, etc., manifested. J.K. Rowling, your stories are amusing, but you didn’t ultimately create that. Males created the factories & also the distribution methods, you just decorated. (Which, as a side note, the latter type of inflated female are much more masculine women. )
It’s well-known that of the rudimentary model of primates, who, due to less complex systems, don’t have “rigid gender roles,” choice for toys and activities parallel studies of human children – male monkeys chosing toy trucks. On humans, researchers found that sex distinctions of visuo-spatial faculties were natural even when those nations were more liberal of gender roles. Magnetic resonance imaging research have confirmed sex differences of cerebral blood flow patterns with cognitive tasks – results similar to studies on monkeys.
Research continues on the biological realities of cogntition & behaviour of sex differences. Factors are affected by interaction of culture & biological factors – both nature & nurture, however, biology is & was rudimentary, therefore, science is the standard to answer to how behaviour manifests in a given culture. How organisms recieves or accustoms itself to situations confirms propensity. With the aid of science & logic, we can answer how it is that females are more prone to tending, influencing, & manipulation – a large influence of the sektor of the “nurturing” cultural aspect, who tries to impinge, like children, on realism with a-logical inducement of entertainment, inflated opinions, into bureaucratic services, & give appeasement & distractions, therefore, a natural process. They want to impinge slogans of raise-your-daughter-to-be-a-warrior, etc., becuase that bombardment of communal expansiveness is itself a natural occurrance. By science, we can also confirm the various representations of male organization & assertiveness, not just crude charicatures, etc., of the cultural interpretations.
The general public believes that sex is purely based on external genitalia. There’s actually seven biological parameters that defines sex:
1. Sex chromosomes – involved in concluding the sex of an organism. Of humans, consisting of the Y- & X-chromosome.
2. Sex-determining genes- involved in development of female-typical & male-typical phenotypes – Wnt-4, Sox9, & Sry.
3. Gonads: – Organs producing gametes – overies & testes.
4. Gonadal hormones – Produced by ovaries & testes, sex steroids, estrogen & androgen, involved in first & secondary sex characteristics
5. Internal reprodcutive structures – system of connected organs involved in reproduction, such as, Mullerian ducts & wilffian ducts.
6. External reproductive structures – genitals.
7. Brain sex – The presence of sex-specific neuroanatomical parameters that are often the result of circulating gonadal hormones. Brain Sex can also define a masculine or effeminate mind, e.g., a woman can sometimes have a more masculine mind than a male.
Two significant occurences of embryogenesis advances the creation of sex-specific phenotypes. The first one is sex certainty as the undetermined gonads become either ovaries or testes. Human gonad maturing happens ~eight weeks post concieving, even though the certainty of how the gonads will mature happens during conception, that is, whether the zygote paternally recieved an x or y-chromosome. Secondly, it is sex differentiation & it is of the process of internal & external procreative networks. If an embryo creates testes, then it will start to create 3 significant biomolecules: insulin-like peptide 3, anti-mullerian hormone, & testosterone. Testosterone will cause the process of of male-typical internal reproductive tract, such as, seminal vesicles, epididymis, & vas deferens, & external reproductive matter – genitals. Mullerian-inhibiting substance, a.k.a.: Anti-Mullerian Hormone, will deconstruct what would have created the internal reproductive tract for a female. Previously termed relaxin-like factor, Insulin-like 3 causes the lowering of the testes from abdomen to scrotum. Contrastingly, if an embryo creates ovaries, it will negate those 3 biomolecules. Absence of testosterone makes decomposition of the male-specific internal reproductive tract & the external reproductive matter will manifest the labia & clitoris. Lack of Anti-Mullerian hormone causes female-typical interior procreative tract to operate, such as, upper portion of vagina & fallopian tubes. Lack of insulin peptice 3 will keep developing ovaries within abdoman.
 Radical interuptions to the process of sex determination will cause novel variations.
The classical understanding of sex distinctions, via from decades of research demonstrating the effects of gonadal hormones of vertabrates, is, historically, thought that gonads – namely testes – were the total factors of creating whole somatic sexual dimorphisms of mammals. Gonadal hormones have 2 main effects: Regulatory effects, which are irreversible & permanent during development that structures into female-typical or male-typical arrangements. The other is: activational effects. They are short term changes happening as particular hormones are present in body & frequently reliant on prior structural effects. Other than the pre-typed alterations to the reproductive structure, it was beleived that testosterone was the sole “masculinizer” of the fetus’s brain. When embryogenesis occurs, testosterone produced by the testes goes to brain during important phases of the earliest of ontogenesis where it is transfmormed to estradiol by the enzyme aromatase. The estradiol then operates on the estrogen receptor, which masculinizes particular brain zones, exempli gratia, the hypothalamus. Adding, estradiol strongly boosts the elaboration of male-typical neurocircuitry & restrains elaboration of female-typical neurocircuitry. Even though ovaries make estrogens midst female elaboration, estradiol in female fetuses is restricted from accessing the brain by a compound termed alpha-fetoprotein. Still, research on the aromatization factor of testosterone in masculinizing the brain have only been [reported: 2010] done on zoological models. Thus, it’s less assured what if any role estradiol does in making the huma brain masculine.
Comprehensively, the classical understanding on gonadal hormones translates numerous of the sex distinctions in the elaboration of the reproductive tract and the brain. However, proceeding studies has discovered that sex differences are not limited to gonadal hormones.
Proceeding research of the later half of the 20th century challeneged the once dominating classical understanding on sex differences. One case: some studies were that male rat embryos were heavier tha female ones before sex definition. Others discovered scrotal convexity of the tammar wallaby prior to sex definition.
 By 1991, it was reported that sex distinctions of the brain could be discerned before the process of sex differentiation. From mesencephalic & diencephalic cell cultures of rat embryos two weeks after conception – before surge of gonadal hormones. In these in vitro cultures, sectional distinctions were studied of the definition of tyrosine hydroxylase-immunoreactive cells where females had more neurons than males, inferring that the distinction of dopaminergic neurons was independent of the ecistence of gonadal hormones. Studies on zebra finches furthered ideas of factors other than gonadal hormones as factors that could be in conjunction to development of sex distinctions. Female zebra finches do not sing a unique courtship song that males do, which is due to brain regions significantly larger of male ones. Although it was reckoned that such distinctions were present because of gonadal hormones, neither by trial.
Although it was believed that such differences existed because of gonadal hormones, neither experimentally managing hormones, such as, conducting female zebra finches with estradiol to bring “masculinization” of brain, nor making productions of cross-sex gonads, such as bringing production of ovaries in a male, chiefly modified song actions…. Further, the dissection of a gynadromorphic zebra finch – phenotypically & genotypically female on one side of body, & phenotypically & genotypically male on other side of body – indicated that only one brain hemisphere was masculinized even though both hemispheres would’ve been involved with same flowing gonadal hormones. A similar study was reported in three lateral gynandromorph chickens.
As many derived to believe that the sex-chromosome counterpart with the cell was involved in a role in sex differences, the task then became studying causative involvement. The specific challenge was separating the consequences by the sex-chromosome complement from those by gonadal sex.
A modern 2 x 2 mouse model termed: four-core genotypes mouse model, has been invented to sort the consequences of the sex chromosomes from the consequences of gonadal hormones. To use this model, scientists wield the absence or presence of the Sry gene in XY & XX mice. Sry is occupied on the Y-chromosome, & it helps testes elaborating. The mouse will cultivate testes , if Sry is infused into an XX mouse’s genome (symbolized XXSry), however, XXSry mouse are unfertile for there are particular genes on the Y-chromosome required for sperm creation. If Sry is deleted from an XY mouse (symbolized as XY-), then it won’t develop testes, instead processing as a fertile female. If Sry is eliminated from the Y-chromosome of an XY mouse & then reinserted into one of its autosomes (symbolized XY – Sry), due to presence of the Y-chromosome, the mouse will still develop as a completely fertile male.
Some investigations have employed the FCG model to analyze the direct result of gonadal hormones & sex chromosomes on sex distinctions. For whatever trait, if mice with Sry considerably diverge from mice without it, the difference can be traced to gonadal hormones. However, if mice including a Y-chromosome differ from mice without it, the dissimilarity can be connected to the counterpat of sex chromosomes. The FCG illustration can further ascertain whatever interaction that might result among gonadal hormones & sex chromosomes.
The FCG representation can be utilised to exclude the factor of gonadal hormones in sex distinctions; women & men differ of the intensity & severity to which each sense particular pain-related disorders – Raynaud’s disease, Carpal Tunnel Syndrom, & migraine headaches. They discovered that XX mice were quicker to respond to pain than to the contrasting mice when using the FCG regardless of their gonadal sex, indicating that genes on the sex chromosomes had an explicit consequence on sex distinctions in intense nociception that wasn’t mediated by gonadal hormones. FCG also shows direct effect of varying behavior of chromosomal sex of environmental reward or stimulus. Case, males are more pronet to trial & abuse of substances un-permitted by authority. Females though indicate to be more controlled by effects of such substances. By the FCG model, scientists discovered that XX & XXSry mice more rapidly gained unhealthy consumption customs for sucrose set to XY- & XYSry mice. One discovered the addiction formation in the obverse: XY- & XY-Sry mice more rapdily gained compulsive thirst addiction compared to XX & XXSry mice when substance consumed was alchohol. Therefore, although the FCG model can indicate direct effect of chromosomal sex on sexually distinctive behaviors, it can also indicate that the direct effect of sex-chromosome set is reliant on the exhibition or type of reinforcer – alcohol vs. sucrose – that organisms meet.
The FCG standard can be employed to discover any transfer effects the joined effect of doubled sex chromosomes & gonadal hormones. Males have aggression & commit violent crimes reportedly by larger frequency than females. However, there’s a seperate article that female aggression is much different than male & less reported. Psychologist: Seth Meyers, Psy. D stated his regualar trainings cites by experts that the number of female psychopaths is actually higher than documented. Relational aggression is more of a female type – damaging someone’s social status, using proxy violence, & ruining others’ relationships. The way the judicial system is operated is to prioritize femalehood, so less documented female criminals, as well as obliging to false allegations by females. With temperament by female psycopaths being a distinctly different type of comfort, arrogance, & non-domineering, it is not an “aggression” society can recognize easily, or even cares to acknowledge.[Source: Seth Meyers Psy. D., Aug. 10 , 2015. Your Field Guide To The Female Psychopath (& why we rarely see her coming.)] Not everything is documented. With the FCG standard, it was researched that there was a reciprocal effect between chromosomal sex & gonadal sex on aggression: with 3 other types of FCG mice, XX mice with ovaries had least amount of aggression. Parenting behavior was also different that showed an interaction effect. Of most species, females oblige more parenting than males. “Pup retrieval” is one instance; actively retrieving offspring removed or fallen from nest. XX mice with ovaries were more prone to persistent response to retrieving pups compared to the other three types of FCG mice. unique discoveries as these suggests how absence or presence of the Y-chromosome or gonadal secretions could influence sex specific traits.
The FCG mouse model is very good to understand the factor of sex chromosomes & gonadal hormones. Still, if an explicit corrollary of sex chromosomes is discovered, it the unique aspect of the sex specific sex chromosome summarized: Is the recognized absolute consequence due absence or presence of the y-chromosome? Or is it due to the reality of two x-chromosomes rather than one x-chromosomes? To confirm this problem, scientists can better the model to investigate the core effect of the Y- & X-chromosome. As with the original FCG model, the role of the existence of the Y-chromosome by camparing columns of the 2×2 model can be solved. Reversed, there can be a detection of the direct effect of having two X-chromosomes by comparing rows of this reduced representative. The consequences of this standard can answer the scientist as to which sex chromosome to analyze. BY comparing XO females to XX females, it’s conceivable to ascertain an effect of the number of X chromosomes. One more model that can be used if it’s definitive that the X-chromosome is the cause of the effect. Of the subsequent reformation, the source of causation for the x-chromosome is contemplated. Pointedly, is it significant if the X-chromosome is paternally transmitted – Xp0 symbolized – or maternally imparted – Xm0 symbolized? comparable tests have been done, though they didn’t proceed via the FCG mouse model. It was discovered that XmO women displayed more communal ruination – lacking awareness of own behaviour with others, onconsolable when uncomfortable, & lacking empathy – compared to Xp0. Next, a new maternally signified candidate gene – Xlr3b – affecting cognition was discovered in XmO mice. Comprehensively, the three patterns of the FCG model can help scientists investigate specific genetic systems affecting behavioral features.
Apart from the FCG mouse model, scientists can try to discover particular genes that differentiates sexes directly via the brain. Anatomizing brains of mouse embryos 10.5 days post conception-prior to the flow of gonadal hormones with association with sex terminus. 50 genes were labeled that were differently embodied between female & male, furthering the idea that genes likely have a direct effect on specific brain parts, which induces sex distinctions. Infra, it was disclosed that the Sry gene directly affected the biochemical properties in the substantia nigra causing a decrease in tyrosine hydroxylase expression-an enzyme that is a factor in the biosynthesis of dopamin. Apperantly, certain sex-specific assets of the dopaminergic neurons are controlled by genes listless of gonadal hormones.
Conclusively, many sex differences – both psychological & biological – exist with female & male. Gonadal hormones is one major facor of such differences. Accumulating research though states that not all differences are reliant on amount & presence of estrogns & androgens; sex chromosomes & genes are also a factor. What has been reviewed:The model of sex determination & differentiation is mainly directed by lack or presence of testes. The 2×2 four-core genotype mouse model is increasingly applied to disclose the role of sex chromosomes & gonadal hormones of sex differences. There was also a proposal of some refinements for scientists to use if they determine that sex chromosomes activate a more important effect than gonadal hormones. Lastly, the only known neuromolecular report on the direct effect of a specific gene involved in sex determination was presented. As sex differences being a role of welfare & health becomes critical, theres several science questions; how might inherited epigenetic mechanisms, such as histone modifications & DNA methylation, influence sex differences of the brain? Which workingscontrol sex biased gene definition of women & men, & how do they give to sex-specific diseases, like Alzeimer’s disease & Huntington’s disease? Can info. of molecular pathways be applied to tailor patiens? What degree do epigentic modification maintain & establish sex differences?

Many will resist science on sex differences, but, considering it is madentory for physiologists in application to medicine, it’s obviously an important science.

Citations: Sex Differences In The Human Brain, Their Underpinnings & Implications by Ivanka Savic. PAGES: 65 – 73.

How to Fix Democracy

20160930_122802Right after the debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, we all sat down on our blogs, podcasts,youtube channels and social media, and began analyzing the results.  Who was the real winner?  Who made the better points?  Who looked like the bigger asshole?  The general consensus among 99% of the mainstream media is that Clinton won hands down because… well, because… SHE’S CLINTON AND NOT TRUMP, YOU RACIST/SEXIST!!!  She talked a lot about some nebulous concept of “income inequality”, made up the cute term “Trumped up trickle down”, smiled condescendingly and, from some sources, even signaled a few times to the moderator in order to get him to help her gang up on Trump.  Trump, on the other hand, laid out a few solid jabs in the form of attacking her and her husband’s support for NAFTA and pulled no punches when saying that inner city ghettos are shitholes.

Unfortunately he was also a bit defensive when questioned about allegedly supporting the Iraq war (which he never did) and was forced to defend himself against allegations of not paying an architect for designing one of his hotels or something.  So, in that respect, he didn’t exactly look good.  To the people who ACTUALLY analyzed the debate, the result was somewhat of an in-between loss and win, with Clinton being spoon fed soft ball questions – nothing about emails or Benghazi, of course – while Trump was forced to defend his not releasing his taxes, accusing Obama of not being born on American soil and other tabloid nonsense that most Americans don’t care about.

But, at the end of the day, it didn’t matter, because the majority of American citizens aren’t analytical or deep.  So, what we – and by “we”, I mean Trump-supporters from all sides of the right-o-sphere (hey, I still LIKE mainstream conservatism, I just think it needs a good kick in the ass) were concerned with was not so much if Trump “officially” won or lost the debate, but rather how it would effect the psyches of the majority of people.  My belief is that, if any man is even thinking of voting for Clinton, it MUST be because his wife is denying him sex.  Otherwise, if you’re a man, and you saw the way in which Clinton condescendingly smiled and the phony performance she put on, and you still didn’t get mad, then you’ve never worked for a company with a human resources department.

In other words, most people are not voting analytically; they are voting from the gut.  And people who are allegedly smart engage in this all the time.  If you’ve been paying attention at all to the world around you, you would be absolutely fearful of the kind of world that Hillary Clinton will foist upon the American people by letting in something like 100,000 Syrian “refugees” into the United States.  The number one issue behind this election is immigration, with law and order in the inner cities and renegotiating job killing trade agreements in a second place tie.

The argument against Trump from liberals is simply that he’s a big, racist, meany-head, who wants to deny amnesty to those poor “refugees” and close the border to Mexico because he hates Mexicans.  Oh, and that he hates women and calls them fat.  THAT’S IT!!! They have no other argument against him.  The argument against Clinton is that, with a population of a third of a billion people, she wants to let in MORE people, and have those people be from a part of the world with a culture that is FAR different from ours; and, as witnessed in places like Sweden and France, just doesn’t mix well; I mean, unless by mixing well, you mean white women having mixed race children after being raped by a Muslim from Somalia.  While that is technically a “mix”, it is not a good mix by most people’s standards.

Clinton will continue policies that were started by the Bush administration, the very administration these same Clinton supporters attacked in 2003 for going into Iraq and turning it upside down, effectively leading to the birth of ISIS.  I guess, in their minds, if a woman does it, it’s all good, right?  Now, in a normal person’s mind, keeping a group of people, whose values aren’t your values, out of your country, while NOT blowing them to bits is FAR more humane than bombing their country back to the stone age and THEN letting their refuse into OUR country.  Of course, when I told a liberal feminist chick that, “Clinton wants to bomb the Allah Akbars, and that isn’t humane”, her response was, “uh, Allah Akbar is a saying, not the name of their people.”  Apparently mine and Trump’s words are more hurtful than burning napalm.

But we’re not dealing with normal people; we’re dealing with people who don’t vote based on policies and logic, but people who vote with their feels.

When I was younger I had less respect for people who didn’t do their “civic duty” by not voting.  “It’s part of being in a democracy, man!”  A more naive version of me had equated “voting” with knowing what the fuck you’re actually voting for.  Nowadays, I have FAR more respect for people who say, “I can’t stand either of those assholes, and I’m not voting” or “meh, don’t care about politics”, then the people who go around encouraging people to sign up and vote.

In fact, as many on the Alt-Right and contrarian right would agree that they would SEVERELY limit who is allowed to vote.  When I posted something along those lines on Facebook, my former “friend”, Tom E (not going to say his last name because if this gets back to him, he might have a hissy fit and threaten to sue my ass) told me I was advocating Herrenvolk democracy.  But that’s bullshit.  I DO feel there ARE certain groups of people who, by any logical and moral standard, have NO right to vote.

For instance, welfare recipients have no right to vote.  Why does someone who sucks at the government teet and gives nothing back have equal say on how to spend the money I earned?  That one should be obvious to anyone with half a brain.  Furthermore – and this may seem harsh, but – people on disability  should’t have the right to vote.  Even if someone legitimately needs to be on disability, that person is still taking government money, and there are far too many people, like my former friend, gay fag “skinhead” Nick, who could work, but chooses not to so he can spend government checks on booze and drugs.  Either they have to make requirements stricter, or we have to employ harsher rules.

But, let’s get down to the real nitty gritty.  Welfare is still a choice, and disability is something you get on later in life when you discover you can’t or decide that you don’t want to work.  Let’s talk about the horrible, awful, discriminatory concept of… GENETICS!!! Who REALLY shouldn’t have the right to vote?  To be honest, as far as race goes, I don’t fuckin’ know.  We’ve seen numerous demographic voting shifts with virtually all ethnic and racial groups.

DON’T YELL AT ME!!! I know blacks have trended Democrat since the 60s, but I honestly feel that’s cultural, rather than genetic.  The real controversy appears to be with letting women have the vote in 1920.  As Ann Coulter once correctly stated, “if women couldn’t vote, we’d never have another Democrat in office ever again.”  Of course women and liberals in general got mad, but it’s essentially true.

Women don’t vote based on logic, numbers or on what policies work for everybody, but on what the government can dole out to them; women are wired to like security, and the government has become the new sugar daddy.  They’ll try (and fail) to rationalize why giving them free everything is a net good for everyone – and, if you’re a good looking guy in your 20s, who just wants to fuck loose hoes, I suppose it is.  The very second that women got the right to vote, they voted in overwhelming numbers for prohibition.  Since the 1920s, with the woman’s vote, the government has increased in size.  With the government providing the sustenance, women can finally be “free” to slut around on the its dole and not need a men to provide for them.  The government provides money to women for every child they have, and, when they decide they don’t really want to have a child, the government provides the abortions as well.  Now feminists want the government to give them free birth control, as if paying $40 a month is SUCH a huge expense, and non-feminist women will go along with it EVERY SINGLE TIME because it’s another level of security.

So, the question someone might ask me in is, “are you saying your solution is to take the vote away from women?”  NOPE!  Somewhere in my libertarian lizard brain, I STILL feel that the law should treat everyone equally, while not insuring equal outcomes even if my empirical brain also realizes that there ARE differences in races and sexes – especially the latter – that guide people to make the choices they do.  So, what’s the bottom line?

Administer a voting test!  That’s it!  Every year, if you want to vote, you have to take a test and PROVE that you’ve got the goods to vote.  If you don’t know what you’re voting for, or if you’re just voting on your feels, then you shouldn’t have the right to vote.  But, if you can prove that you know what you’re talking about, then by all means.  The test would be administered every single year before every election your local governance might have.  Okay, in towns with like 2,000 people, where they vote the same way for trash commissioner, I suppose you wouldn’t need this test.  But, in densely populated areas where you vote for your congressman or the President, you simply have to take this test, and, if you score roughly 85-90%, you can vote!

That way you show your opinion means something.  The very first question would ask how much the national debt is.  If you can’t write in the approximation of the national debt – no, you don’t need the EXACT number – then you fail.  If you get it right, you move on.  There would be questions on which demographics commit the most amount of crime, which groups of people contributed to what policies and their net effects and questions in general pertaining to historical events and their impact.

For example, a question might be, “which group of people were slaves at some point in their history?”  If I need to tell you that the correct answer would be “all of the above”, then you shouldn’t vote.

And, If you pass the test, you’ve proven that have the mental wherewithal to debate politics and policy, to determine which programs and laws to keep and discard and to decide where other people’s money should be allocated; that way you’re not just voting because the politician you hate called someone fat.  With this test, nobody could complain they’re being discriminated against, and that way, the tiny percentage of women who enjoy reading about history, politics and statistics of group demographics, and deal with the facts in a dispassionate nature, will get to vote, while the rest can go back to watching Dancing with the Stars or Cheating on Your Boyfriend of Five Years.

Oh, one last thing: if you have a name like Deandre Jones or Dung Pham, you would be represented by a number, rather than your name, so you could never complain about being discriminated against for your race or ethnicity.  Cool? Cool!

 

Dude, I’m Not Racist, I Have Bl… Aww, Fuck You.

racist_bingoI’m not racist.  No seriously.  When I’m driving, and I get cut off, the first thing I say is, “you fucking asshole, arrghgh, I hope you get colon, lung and skin cancer!!!”.  Then, when I see who the driver is, and he/she/it happens to be black, I go, “yeah, you’re STILL a fucking asshole!!!”  What difference does it make to me what your race is if you cut me off?  As far as I’m concerned, there are assholes in every croooww—-

People on the Alt-Right will read this and say, “what a cuck, trying to appeal to blacks when he knows that blacks hate white people, and he’s a Jew, so he really has an ulterior agenda!”  But the fact is that, in my 32 years of existence, not a single black person has made me feel the intense, virulent hatred that some white people have.  Nope, not a single one.  I’ve had my car stolen twice, and I’m going to assume it was by black people, and I think the people who did it are shit stains on society, and I would have loved to put a slug in their chests, but it wasn’t personal.  They’re just lowlife pieces of human trash.

We’ve come to the point where people on the left are sooo fucking obsessed with race that, in spite the 1964 Civil Rights act, the 1973 affirmative action quotas, the fact that blacks can get into universities with lower SAT scores than whites and Asians and the fact that black crime is never reported by the mainstream media in an honest way, apparently, somewhere deep in the annals of American society lies the deep seeded cancer of racism that, no matter how many provisions are given, will never be expunged.

By most people’s standards, I’m white, and that means I’ve got some sort of “privilege.”  Did I come from a nice, upper middle class background?  Absolutely.  Do I have more opportunities than people who come from the ghettos OR meth infested trailer parks?  Well, duh.  Do American employers consider me over Darnell-Tyrone Jackson III for a mediocre data entry position?  Give me a FUCKING break.

Lauren Southern, the hot, Aryan commentator at Rebel Media posted “white racist bingo” on her FB wall, along with the comment, “:::shrug::: these all seem reasonable to me.”  Why?  Because they ARE.

So now, white people of America, I shall absolve you of all your guilt by explaining each of the bingo squares for the purpose of turning  “Casually Racist Whites Bingo” into “Normal Statements That Make Sense Bingo.”

“I’m not racist I’m 3.837% black”

The idea here, so they say, is that, if you have some black blood in your genetic heritage, you feel you have the right to say anything you want about black people without reserve.  Of course, you ARE part black, but I guess you’re not black ENOUGH to call someone who is MORE black than you a “nigger”… er sorry, I meant “nigga.”

“#alllivesmatter”

First of all, NOT all lives matter.  Does the life of a child molester matter?  What about the life of Charles Manson?  Secondly the idea behind this hashtag is that, in response to #blacklivesmatter, a few well-meaning, but too old to “get it” conservatives responded by saying that we’re ALL in this rat race together.  The #blacklivesmatter protesters responded by saying, “you’re just deflecting from the REAL problem, man!  Blacks are getting killed in the streets by cops, and you don’t see it as a problem!”  Well, it is a problem, and it could easily be solved; just stop committing crimes, and you won’t be hassled by the man, man!  Okay, I get it.  There are cops who like to fuck with people.  But just look at the numbers.  Cops kill more whites than they do blacks.  When cops stopped patrolling in the Baltimore, the murder rate between the black gangs skyrocketed.  Oh, and Milwaukee.  So, to all the #blacklivesmatter activists out there: all lives do not matter, but you can sure try to help your community prove otherwise.

“brings up black on black crime”

I personally don’t care about black on black crime because I don’t live in areas where there is much of it, but maybe black people SHOULD, since little kids get caught in the crossfire, and y’all iz killing off your own people.  Just a thought.

“white people were slaves, too!”

Well, they were.  So, what makes blacks so special in this regard?  The Japanese were tossed into internment during World War II and somehow survived the ordeal and now dominate the tech field, so what’s your problem?

“reverse racism”

Bleh…

“doesn’t ‘see race'”

Oh, I fucking see it!  But, I’m not the one constantly reminding everyone about it 24 hours a day.  ‘sides, how can I not see race when I have a hard-on for Asian women, specifically Korean women?

“i was bullied for being white”

Hmm, let’s see; we allow blacks to take isolated incidents and turn them into national stories, but white kids who live in black neighborhoods are supposed to be “understanding” of why they’re being put through their ordeal.  Fortunately my parents moved out of the predominantly black Southfield, so I never experienced this.

“confederate flag”

Yeah, we took it down from every building, so racism is officially over, right?  No, but seriously, it’s not a racist symbol; people just want to think of it that way, in spite it representing po’ white trash from the South, rather than the slave masters.  But, in our politically correct climate, Dukes of Hazard was cancelled, and amazon.com won’t sell the flag anymore.  And guess what; they’re STILL not happy.  Some guy has now claimed that the “don’t tread on me” flag is racist.  You know what’s not racist?  The swastika.  It’s an Indian peace symbol.  We need to bring it back.

“quotes MLK out of context”

What context should I quote him in?  I personally don’t remember a single line King has said other than “I have a dream”, so if I to quote that, I guess it would be out of context, since I don’t think King had a dream about hunting for gold during the gold rush only to have the western imagery fade away, and reveal itself to be a hologram created by a simulator machine.  So, if he did have this dream, then I suppose I’m quoting him in context.

“slavery is over”

Well, it IS.  So, what’s the problem?  I get it; slavery is over, but apparently subtle forms of discrimination are still going on.  And it won’t stop because we’re guilty… and our children are guilty… and our children’s children are guilty… and they always will be, so stop pretending, you racist.

“brings up affirmative action”

What?  Just out of the blue?  Like while we’re watching a football game?  “Say, Chuck, have you heard about that affirmative action?  I hear it’s the worst!  I hope my children never come down with it!”  Actually, it IS bad, and it’s the reason why standards have gone down.  I mean, if people can’t pass certain exams, but you have to have quotas of those people in certain professions, then I guess you’ll just have to make the tests to get into those professions easier, won’t you?  I mean, if we don’t have an equal distribution of a certain demographic, then clearly we’re discriminating against that demographic.  Oh well, it’s not my house that’s burning down.

“has ‘dreadlocks’ or defends white dreads”

Good call; only gross, smelly people have dreadlocks.

“FREE”

The amount with which certain people want to live in certain parts of the country while other people pay for it.

“i’m not racist, i have black friends”

I’ve never understood why this was such an issue.  If you ARE racist or hold some sort of grudge towards black people, why WOULD you have black friends?  I can give a myriad of reasons, such as “access to crack or hookers”, but I’m not going to because no black person I know has access to those things.  Well, my dreadlock wearing, Zeppelin loving friend Jeff is the guy I did blow with from time to time.

“you’re not helping your cause by being hostile”

I completely disagree with this one.  It’s pretty much been determined that every problem ever has been solved through hostility.  The worse the problem is, the more hostile you need to become.  And drunk.  That always helps.

“so black people can use the n-word but I can’t”

Which “n-word” are we talking about?  Nerd? Nazi? Necropolis? Napoleon?  Sheeyit, nigga, it’s not that I’m afraid of using it; it’s that I’m afraid of using it in front of people who will sock me in the mouth.  Incidentally, I don’t know why blacks would want to use that word since it’s not even a real word, but a phonetic pronunciation of “nigger”, and I don’t know any blacks who go, “Hi, nigger, how are you?”  If there are, let me know!

“i don’t have white privilege, i’m poor”

Dr. Dre, who is worth $500,000,000, is more downtrodden than a poor and starving white person.  He just is; don’t ask why.

“invalidates POC anger”

Still can’t help but think POC stands for “piece of crap.”  I SHOULDN’T think that, but I do.  That’s why I just stick to the colloquial of “black.”

“oh but if there was a white history month it would be racist”

We’ll just honor the accomplishments of white people in other ways; ya know, by using all of the inventions they’ve given to society.  Hey, I often don’t take credit for stuff I do either because, ya know.

“not ALL white people”

Not all white people what?  Watch television?  Listen to Metallica?  Take black dicks up the ass?

“fucking sjws”

Yeah, fuck ’em.  They’re annoying.  They’re the reason why college has been reduced to a joke and why every millennial crybaby, who claims to be part of an oppressed group, needs a “safe space.”

“we’re all one race the human race! uwu”

I SUPPOSE if it eats, breathes, shit, walks on two legs and stands upright it belongs to the human race, but this whole “one race” thing is defined rather loosely.  I really wish I wasn’t part of the same race as, I dunno… you fill in someone who is totally lame, but make sure it isn’t a black person so nobody gets the wrong idea.

“white people are discriminated against, too”

Hey, I want to be part of the NBA, but my 5’7″ height prevents it.  Do YOU want to watch basketball with 6′ high baskets?  Didn’t think so.

“brings up discrimination against Irish people”

So, it’s not enough to mention that white people as a whole don’t deserve to have their history of discrimination recognized.  Now you have to mention that the subjugation of a specific group of whites all of a sudden doesn’t count?  Is that because of Ann Sterzinger’s shitty dating past?  Well SORRY, but even she realizes that there are good Irish people.  Or maybe she doesn’t.  Goddamn potato scarfing, alcoholic bastards.

“learn to take a joke”

Okay, I get it; if your friend Clarissa runs to you after she had just been gang raped by a group of Chinese Jews (NOT by blacks, you racist!!!), and you say, “hey, Clarissa, did you hear the joke about the girl named Clarissa who was just gang raped by a group of Chinese Jews?!” and then follow that up with, “what? Learn to take a joke!”, you might be an asshole.  But, in probably most other cases, especially those that aren’t grounded in anything personal, learn to take a joke, faggot.

Now go home and listen to Chuck Berry, Jimi Hendrix, Thin Lizzy, Living Colour, Body Count and Bad Brains at the same time while watching re-runs of Sanford & Son.

 

Why Are People on the Left Obsessed with Balance?

book_stack_2.0In the aftermath of the Orlando shooting, I’ve lost a number of Facebook friends, including a couple of gay ones, who tried to pin the attack on the “Christian Right” or the precarious concept of “homophobia.”  Anyone who isn’t completely retarded knows that the reason Omar Mateen opened fire on a bunch of gays in a gay club is because he’s a Muslim, and Muslims hate gays.  He openly expressed ties to ISIS and acted exactly as his holy book told him to.

And, believe it or not, there ARE people on the left who completely agree that Islam is exactly what motivated Mateen.  HOWEVER – and this is HUGE – leftists STILL feel the need to give a tit for tat rationalization for the event.  In other words, even though this guy acted in the name of his whackadoodle death cult, according to leftists, Christians are JUST AS likely to act in the same way.  And aren’t they correct?  I mean, you have the Westboro Baptist church and this hilarious black preacher yelling about gays shooting fire out “they ass”, and you have the Crusades, and you have Timothy McVeigh and Dylann Roof and Christopher Harper-Mercer and Elliot Rodger; clearly, nutjobs come in all walks of life.

Except these arguments are all completely wrong.  If Christians are JUST AS likely to commit the atrocities that Muslims commit, how come something like 30,000 of the last terrorist attacks since 9/11 have been linked to Islam?  When is the last time a group of Christians flew planes into buildings, opened fire into gay clubs, raped a bunch of women on New Years Eve or blew up the Bataclan in France?  And, last time I checked, the Crusades happened more than 700 years ago.  Christians en masse don’t do that anymore.

And, for Timothy McVeigh, Dylann Roof, Christopher Harper-Mercer and Elliot Rodger, you literally have such a diverse motivation for their actions, that to find any pattern at all, other than that they’re crazy and should not have had access to the weapons they possessed, is completely disingenuous.  McVeigh was a crazy militia guy who hated the government, Roof was racist, Harper-Mercer was sort of like a cross between McVeigh and Roof, only he was half black, and Rodger was pissed off that he was still virgin at 22, not to mention being half Asian.

Yet, I still have a Facebook friend who claims that Christianity’s influence, while not having the direct, “kill all the infidels” message of Islam, infiltrates more subliminally, commanding the McVeighs and Roofs of the world to kill people.  I’m sorry, but that’s really dumb.  That’s so dumb, that I wonder if this person is just saying it because he NEEDS to maintain the notion of balance, that “there’s assholes in every crowd”, or if he legitimately believes it.

He’s right about one thing.  There certainly ARE assholes in every crowd.  Nobody denies that.  There are also good people in every crowd as well, including Islam.  But individual circumstances or the “have you actually met a (fill in the blank) person before?” philosophy completely goes counter to the law of large numbers, which we have been using for centuries to figure out how to deal with different groups of people.  Unfortunately the left, or rather the politically correct left, simply cannot fathom that some races, ethnic groups, sexes (and there’s only two) or religions are over or under represented in various walks of life simply because they are.  Or maybe they secretly DO realize this, but don’t want to say so out loud.

I was talking to another friend of mine I told him that it’s not racist to blatantly say that black ghettos are dangerous and violent, more violent than the ghettos of any other group of people.  His response to me was that poor, white trash areas are ALSO violent.  Yeah, because statistically speaking, trailer parks are known for their crack gangs and drive by shootings, where little children are gunned down.  It’s that denial that leftists wallow in just so they don’t have to confront the ugly reality that maybe some groups of people haven’t gotten their shit together.

I dare ask why a place, such as Ferndale, MI, which is right next door to a crime ‘n’ crack infested shithole like Detroit is almost entirely free of crime.  I read that police officers were accused of stopping blacks and Latinos more often than anyone else for traffic violations.  This means either that cops are overly mean to dark people or that dark people from Detroit are simply speeding more.  Either way, considering how blacks are responsible for over 50% of homicides and make up only 13% of the population of the entire country, there IS a reason why they’re not bringing much of that violent crime over the Eight Mile Rd. divide, which separates Ferndale from Detroit.  And I’m fairly it isn’t because of an invisible force field.

A couple of my friends also wanted to draw the direct parallel to college kids rioting whenever their football teams won or lost.  Real smart there guys; last time I checked college football riots didn’t destroy entire communities and make business owners pack up shop when they collected their insurance checks and moved to other communities, ones less prone to self destruction.  Another one of my friends drew a direct parallel between the Ferguson rioters with the group of bikers who caused a bunch of trouble last year, as if that too is a common occurrence.  You see, numbers.

But, of course, actually saying any of that will get you branded as an evil, racist, neo-Nazi, poo-poo head.

Just like it will get you called a racist for complaining that Indians (dots, not feathers) bargain too much.  A former QuickenLoans coworker who is Asian (Korean, I think) complained about this, that every time she hears “that accent”, she knows she’s going to have to be on the phone that much longer to try to hammer out a deal.  She also told me that I’m not allowed to make this same observation because I’m white.

Or get you called anti-semitic for pointing out that nearly every major media outlet is owned and/or run by Jews; Jews like Steven Spielberg who make movies like Schindler’s List in order to shove heaping piles of guilt down everyone’s throat, as if most people who saw the film were ever involved with the Holocaust.

Or get you called a sexist pig for pointing out that the reason women only make $0.77 for every man’s dollar is because they choose easier professions that don’t pay as much along with working less hours.  If every woman in the world stopped working, the only professions that would be greatly affected would be nursing and elementary school teaching.  Yet, since women insist they’re equal to the men, they go through college, bust their asses AND… get mediocre office jobs that anybody could do.  Or get bumped up to H.R. positions, so they can discriminate against men, mainly white men.  Ever wonder why the staff at Huffington Post is ALL women?  Yeah, me neither.

But, wait, isn’t women’s soccer more popular than men’s soccer?  Shouldn’t THEY be making as much as the men.  First of all, no, it’s not, and, second of all, how much they make is up to whoever THEY negotiate deals with.  For the women’s soccer league to demand as much money as the men’s is the same as people who work at Walmart complaining that they don’t make as much as the people at Meijer.  Why is it Meijer’s responsibility to make sure Walmart employees are paid more?    It makes no sense; but, it makes good propaganda!

So, what gives, eh? I don’t freakin’ know.  Since nowadays you can choose what race, sex, ethnicity or species of animal you want to be, there’s no reason to complain about inequality at all.