Category Archives: Alcohol

by | June 7, 2017 · 6:08 AM

Psychopathology of Serial Murderers

The primary problem with almost all serial killers is simply ASPD, Antisocial Personality Disorder, derived sociopathy or primary psychopathy. It is present in almost 100% of such cases. Most everything else is rather secondary to this primary character disorder, which is the most prominent symptom.

Very rare is the serial killer without this disorder, although there have been a few. I remember a long-distance trucker who turned himself when he walked into a Northern California police station with a woman’s breast in his top shirt pocket. He had camped out in forests while trucking and had picked up women and killed them. He kept the body of one in the truck for three or four days and drove around with it.

Experts said he was quite unusual in that they said he actually felt bad about what he had done. I wonder how bad he really felt though. You could not get me to drive around in a truck with a dead woman in the back for very long. I would go into severe panic pretty fast, would stop the truck, get out and start walking or probably running away. I would not be able to walk around with a woman’s breast in my shirt for long either. I would completely panic almost right away, take the shirt off, throw it on the ground and start running. But then I am a pretty guilty type person with a strong conscience.

Based on that, while I am sure he may have felt some guilt for his killings, the fact that he was able to drive around in a truck with a dead woman in the  back for 3-4 days shows without completely flipping out shows to me that he didn’t feel that much guilt, certainly not on the level that most of us would. And the fact that he could rather calmly walk into a police station with a cut off breast in his pocket without flying into total panic shows to me that he didn’t feel that bad about it. So guilt, even when it is present, is not as strong as in most of us, otherwise they would not have even done such horrible things in the first place.

Sexual sadism is also often present, and I have heard that Sadistic Personality Disorder is very common. Juvenile delinquency, voyeurism, exhibitionism, burglary, prowling, petty thievery, etc. typically precede the serial killings. When the serial killer starts killing, he usually has a fairly long rap sheet of more minor offenses. The murders are best seen as an escalation of a chronic criminal character type.

The ones who kill children are typically though not always preferential or fixated pedophiles. Certainly the ones who kill only children are preferential pedophiles. There is a type of pedophile called a mysoped, which is a sadistic pedophile. They are not very common. I doubt if 5% of pedophiles are like this, but these people are very dangerous. Probably almost all serial child killers are mysopeds and these crimes often have a sexual basis.

95% of rapists are the type that rarely if ever go serial, but the sadistic rapist, composed of no more than 5% of rapists, is very dangerous. Most if not all rapist serial killers are sadistic rapists.

The rage rapist is dangerous, but he generally does not intend to kill his victim although he assault her. If she fights back or gets difficult, he can fly into a rage and beat her so badly that she dies but again he usually does not intend to kill. I doubt if these types go serial much if at all. Serial killers intend to kill; rage rapists do not.

Malignant narcissism, the disorder, believe it or not, of our wonderful President, is also present sometimes. Ted Bundy was a malignant narcissist. Yes, our wonderful President has the same mental illness as Ted Bundy! Comforting thought.

A few have Schizoid Personality Disorder, and some of the more disturbed ones have Borderline Personality Disorder.

Schizotypal, Paranoid and Narcissistic Personality Disorders are rare if ever seen in serial killers. Schizotypals are probably too disorganized and decompensated and just out and out strange to commit such crimes. The serial killer must blend in, and schizotypals do not do that. A few schizotypals have committed mass murders. James Holmes the Aurora Batman Theater Shooter, was a notable case. But note that he was caught immediately.

Paranoid PD is rarely if ever seen. These people tend to be rather retiring and like to hide away from a hostile world. They also do not like to call attention to themselves from a hostile world. They are suspicious and distrustful by nature and this makes it hard for them to blend in well with ordinary society as serial killers often do.

Narcissists are usually too self-centered to kill. While narcissists are often very mean, the disorder is usually well-controlled in that the rage rarely escalates to homicide. There have been a few cases of NPD’s committing mass murder, usually of their families.

The case of Jeffrey MacDonald, the mass murdering physician of Fatal Vision, seems to be such a case. This is a superb true crime case by the way.

Also narcissists think that if they kill, they will get caught, and if they are in prison or jail they will not be able to live this wonderful life they are supposed to be killing. They are “too cool to kill.” Killing would mess up all their wonderful plans to exploit others and hold them up to contempt by millions of people, which the narcissist would have a hard time taking. The narcissist is “too good for prison.” Prison would be such a crushing blow to their self-image that it would very hard to take.

However, malignant narcissists can be very dangerous because this is a combination of psychopathy, sadism, Paranoid PD and Narcissistic PD. When you weaponize NPD with paranoia, sadism and particularly psychopathy, you create a dangerous illness.

Cluster C Personality Disorders like Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder, Self-Defeating Personality Disorder, Dependent Personality Disorder and Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder are rarely if ever present in these types. These are PD’s where aggression is mostly displayed passively, and serial killers display aggression actively, not passively.

Mood disorders do not seem to be common. Bipolar Disorder is not common, and serial killers are rarely if ever depressed. They displace guilt and loathing outwards instead of pushing it inside of themselves as depressives do. Depressives are passive, and depression acts as sort of a freezing agent in that it tends to immobilize people by its nature. Men in general tend to either experience less depression than women or mask it with other things such as anger and rage, drinking, drugs, gambling, promiscuity or even workaholism. It is simply not acceptable as a man to be depressed, so depressed men simply channel their depression into other things and say they are not depressed, they are just drunks or workaholics, for instance.

Substance and alcohol abuse issues are quite common with serial killers, but the better ones are more sober, as drinkers and dopers tend to be scattered and unreliable and serial killers must be on the ball  24-7.

Only a few are psychotic. 2% of serial killers are psychotic. Psychotic people can barely organize a trip to the bathroom. How are they going to plot out elaborate and professional serial homicides?

They are motivated by many things, but your typical rape-murders of murders of attractive young women almost always have a sexual component. I would call these serial killings lust murders. The Germans coined the term. Even among the lust-murders, there are a number of different types. Some are motivated by purely sexual desires, others get off specifically on killing and the power gained from it, others are hunter types who get pleasure from the hunt and chase as if they were hunting an animal, which they are of course, but when we refer to hunters, we are always talking about hunters of non-human animals.

2 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Antisocial, Borderline, Crime, Criminology, Depressants, Depression, Intoxicants, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Narcissism, Narcissistic, Pedophilia, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotic Disorders, Schizotypal, Serial Killers, Sex, Sociology, Sociopathy

by | May 26, 2017 · 5:10 AM

A Myth: Your Childhood IQ Score Is Inaccurate and You Need to Retake the Test As an Adult

I once had a very high IQ commenter, a more or less autist neckbeard HBD’er who seemed like he couldn’t get laid with God’s help like most such types. But have no fear. He was going to conquer the world with that towering thundercloud of an IQ score of his. I’m afraid he is in for a very rude awakening.

We were discussing IQ’s in the comments when somehow we got invaded by neckbearded HBD autists. The conversation turned awkward and uncomfortable real fast like it always does with these social retards.

We are telling each other our IQ scores, and I volunteered mine, recorded at age 14. I’m not taking any more tests. I got my score, and I ain’t taking any more tests, thank you very much. I don’t need to keep going back and keep checking to see if my brain’s still there. Plus I am terrified I won’t reach my old score, and I’m vain as Hell. We conceited folks don’t take too kindly to assaults on our egos. They’re quite painful actually, almost physically painful.

This autist got all huffy and aggressive like they always do and insisted that my childhood score was completely worthless because child brains and adult brains are too different species that can’t mate or something. Or nothing. Or whatever. Or this or that. Or bla bla bla. I had to go back and take the IQ test again in adulthood to prove my head hadn’t fallen off at some point on the boy to man journey.

His argument was about as retarded as his socialization. I scoffed at him and told him that research showed he was wrong. He dug in his heels, got his back up, and pretty soon we had an argument. He kept repeating his notion over and over. He just would not let go of it. He was like a dog with a bone. That’s socially retarded, but it’s typical for these types once again.

I believe your IQ is pretty much fixed and research indicates that this is the case. You can raise it quite a bit in adolescence or early adulthood around college years. I believe you can raise it maybe 15 points. And perhaps you could drop your IQ by 15 points if you simply choose to turn your brain into a beer-addled couch potato.

Yet past age 23 or so, IQ is generally remarkably stable. In fact, statistically it is quite stable at age 7. If your childhood score is very high, you can usually take it to the bank. I don’t buy the idea that a childhood score is worthless and you have to go take the test again as a grownup to find out your “true adult IQ.” It’s asinine.

I will not tell you the score I got at age 14.

Just to show you what a tool that guy was, I retook the test in a clinical psychologist’s office at age 29.

My mother worked for a clinical psychologist and one day she asked me if I wanted to take an IQ test because he would give it to me for free where it usually is ~$200. The test was not all that hard but it was a bit challenging. Mostly it was just fun. It seemed to consist mostly of little puzzles, often weird figures and such and you had to figure out the pattern and predict the next one in the sequence. It was easier than I thought it would be, and I bombed out of high school math.

I never heard my score and he didn’t give it to my Mom. He just said “Over X number (I will not tell you the score).”

I received basically the same score as I got at age 14, and that was after the drugs had set in.

I’d been carpet-bombing my brain with all sorts of substance ordinances since age 16. But by that time at age 29, I had cut back. I only smoked pot maybe three times a month. I drank a couple six packs every weekend and maybe 2–3 beers a night during the week. I rarely did coke and that year I took my last LSD and psilocybin trips. I’ve only done meth maybe three times. I hadn’t taken pills in years. The rare PCP trips were a thing of the past, thank God.

I’ve been too scared to do psychedelics since, though I have taken them ~40 times with almost nothing in the way of problems. But then I often carefully prepared for trips and waited until I thought I was in a perfectly clear and centered place in my head before I tripped, especially on acid. I once kept a hit of acid in my fridge for 1 1/2 years because I didn’t think my head was OK enough for it. Finally after 18 months, I felt my head was sane enough to trip, and so I did.

But by age 29, my partying days were through. The Endless Party is the Greatest Show on Earth, until one day way you’re dead and it’s all over way too soon. You’ve got to quit or cut back sometime.

At age 29, my score was pretty much the same as it had been at age 14, with my pristine and virgin brain tissue still intact and not yet violated by a single drink or hit off a joint. The score was even somehow immune for the dope artillery barrage I had been firing at it for years.

I don’t really no what to say about this but maybe heavy pot and psychedelic use doesn’t have any permanent effects.

I can’t speak for other drugs because I never did enough of them. I did cocaine recreationally for 13 years, but I never got hooked on the stuff and my lifetime dose of the drug is probably less than an ounce. I took meth three times, enough to decide it was the most evil drug on Earth. I learned my lesson with PCP. They stuff even tasted like poison. It had this creepy metallic taste to it like it was actually chemically toxic. It wasn’t even fun to smoke like pot or hash. It felt like you were dunking your head in a pot of weird smelling chemical stew in some chemist lab.

Got a fancy childhood IQ score? Frame it and put it on the wall of your mind and don’t bother with another test.

 

8 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Cannabis, Coke, Depressants, Dissociative Anesthetics, Dope, Hallucinogens, Intelligence, Intoxicants, LSD, PCP, Psilocybin, Psychology, Speed, Stimulants

by | May 26, 2017 · 5:09 AM

A Modern Myth: The “Fried Brains” Lie

I was a fairly heavy drug user, mostly pot and some psychedelics, for 15 years or so as a teenage boy and young man. But when I took an IQ test at age 29, I got the same score as when I was 14. You would think the equivalent of spraying Agent Orange in my brain for a decade would have fried a few cells here and there, but I guess not. I generally felt as smart as ever.

There were times I thought I was permafried. I took crack and had an empty head for three days. I did speed and vaporized by skull for a week. I drank 10 beers and did lots of coke one New Years and had the brain of a grazing animal for 10 days. I took acid and had memory issues for a month.

Every time I thought I had finally cooked the goose for good, the drug effects would wear off and my brain would wake up again, buzzing along fast as ever. I don’t think there are any permafried people. It’s an urban legend. Every so-called drug casualty I met was currently using. Even heavy Ecstasy use usually recovers in ~eight years. The brain is an adaptive organ. It’s as if it thinks for itself. Even if there are damaged cells or connections, the brain just cuts new passageways around and tries to circumvent the damage, like building a temporary dirt road around a landslided  highway.

My position is that there are no such thing as drug casualties, acid casualties, fried brains, permafried people or any of that. All of the casualty cases were currently using and they often using very heavily. Many of the times they were said to be permafried, they were just tripping on PCP or something, passed out with a beer in their hand and lying on the patio with pissed pants. What people called permafried were just the results of very heavy current use and often acute intoxication.

Some very  heavy users and drinkers are now in their 50’s and are affected. In every case I have seen, they are completely normal psychologically, but they do have some memory problems. I’ve never seen one of the legendary fried brains cases that haven’t used in forever but are still permanently out to lunch psychologically.

This is actually good news. Even if you are a heavy user, you will recover and  probably recover fully at least psychologically when you quit. Like with smoking, you are usually better off if you quit.

I’ve known many people who had taken LSD 100 or more times. 300 times was a pretty common number. All were psychologically healthy or even robustly or super-healthy. There’s probably a reason for that. The more disordered you are psychologically, the more likely it is that your trips are going to be quite unpleasant or even nightmarish. It takes a very cool and sane head to take acid trips in the triple numbers without having much issues. Some people simply “don’t have the head for it” and those who are robustly healthy in their heads are most able to weather heavy acid use.

Only one of these people was weird, and everyone brings him up every time I talk about acid. He’s supposedly a legendary acid casualty. He isn’t. He’s just weird. He’s got my exact IQ score (I saw his chart at the same time the counselor conspiratorially showed me mine and the problem with genius level IQ’s is that at and above that level, people start to get weird. And they get weirder and weirder at IQ rises higher and higher. At lot of people with IQ’s over 150 are  pretty damn weird.

Anyway it’s true. The guys is weird as fuck-all. But there’s harmless weird and scary weird and he’s just the harmless weird type. The two types are pretty simple to distinguish if you just spend a bit of time around them.

The problem with the acid casualty argument with this guy is that I knew him when he was 12 years old in seventh grade. And believe it or not, he was orders of magnitude weirder then and that was before he had sampled a single substance. If you want to play the cause and effect game, you have to conclude that all that acid made him much less weird. That’s a strange thing to conclude, but the Drug War crowd love to play cause and effect, so we can show them that it works both ways.

Personally I think the guy was just weird. He’s just one of those totally out to lunch genius types. all utterly harmless, you see wandering around university campuses with those permanently distracted weird blank stares that make you think they are insane until you talk to them and you realize you are talking to a remarkably sane person.

Like most weird, bizarre genius types, he improved a lot of his weird behaviors in adolescence but he still had way too many funny tics and verbal and gestural weirdisms. Once you talk to him, you realize he is quite sane. If you hang around with him, his behavior is remarkably normal. He’s rather inhibited, conservative, passive and in the background, but I would say your typical quasi-borderline modern woman is way flakier than he is. He never has meltdowns or even depressions or anxiety attacks. He’s not irritable at all. His moods are so calm he’s almost boring in that way.

Sometimes it’s even boring and frustrating to be around him and I even long for one of my typical Rollercoaster Quasi-Borderline Girlfriends like I usually end up with. Wild rides are scary, but they’re also damn fun. These psychobitches and crazy women drive me batty when I am with them, and then I miss them when their gone. What can I say?  The human condition is often paradoxical.

2 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Cannabis, Coke, Depressants, Hallucinogens, Intelligence, Intoxicants, LSD, MDMA, Neuroscience, Psychology, Science, Speed, Stimulants

by | April 17, 2017 · 11:18 PM

Psychological Effects of Their Work on Slaughterhouse Workers

Good comment from Kim, one of our excellent commenters. It’s not related to the murder case, but it shows you Delphi may not be the idyllic small Indiana town that everyone thinks it is. There is a very high percentage of RSO’s for such a small town, apparently related to the slaughterhouse in town. Slaughterhouse employees in turn develop psychological effects that would be at odds with the image of a peaceful and easy-going small town.

So beneath the cozy image, there does seem to be a very dark undercurrent running under the town of Delphi.

Kim: This is an article cited from another site about Registered Sex Offenders (RSO’s) and meat-packing plants. It may not be relevant to the crime, but it paints a grittier picture of the Delphi area.

Originally Posted by Blighted Star

No, you read right the first time. Those 54 RSO’s are are all linked to the very small town of Delphi, population 3,000. Check the other “known addresses” on most of them & you’ll see “Indiana Packers Co-op” (or something like it) on over 40 out of the 54 – because the abattoir up the road from the high bridge seems to have a hiring program for RSO’s. They’ve got men designated “sexually violent offenders” working on their kill floor & it doesn’t seem to occur to them that in that particular field of employment, it’s not necessarily a good thing to hire people who might be enjoying their work.

Holy crap!

This excerpt is taken from:

Killing for a Living: Psychological and Physiological Effects of Alienation of Food Production on Slaughterhouse Workers

By Anna Dorovskikh University of Colorado at Boulder

http://scholar.colorado.edu/cgi/view…xt=honr_theses

In Perpetration-Induced Traumatic Stress: The Psychological Consequences of Killing, the study by Rachel M. MacNair describes Perpetration-Induced Traumatic Stress as a from of post-traumatic stress disorder with symptoms of drug and alcohol abuse, panic, depression, paranoia, dissociation, anxiety, and depression stemming from the act of killing.

One study found that slaughterhouse workers, especially those responsible for the direct delivery of the act of killing and participating in the process of slaughter on a daily basis, may be susceptible to PITS as form of PTSD (Dillard, 2008).

One of the symptoms of PITS is having recurring dreams of violent acts, and there are several reports of workers being taken to the mental hospital for treatment of severe cases (Dillard, 2008). Certain jobs like having the responsibility to be the first to kill the animal may have stronger effects on the worker than other jobs. Oftentimes substance abuse of drugs such as methamphetamine (Schlosser, 2002) and alcohol is very common amongst slaughter employees as a coping mechanisms of the emotional toll (Dillard, 2008).

A former hog-sticker (worker who stabs hogs to bleed to death) said, “A lot of the slaughterhouse hog killers have problems with alcohol. They have to drink, they have no other way of dealing with killing live, kicking animals all day long. If you stop and think about it, you’re killing several thousand beings a day” (Dillard, p. 397, 2008).

Another employee explains that slaughter workers can’t care about animals they’re killing.

“The worst thing, even worse than the physical danger, is the emotional toll of the job. If you work in that stick pit for any period of time, you develop an attitude that lets you kill things but doesn’t let you care. You may look a hog in the eye that’s walking around down in the blood pit with you, and think, God, that really isn’t a bad-looking animal. You may want to pet it. Pigs down on the kill floor have come up and nuzzled me like a puppy. Two minutes later I had to kill them by beating beat them to death with a pipe.

Use of a pipe to kill hogs came up quite a few times reading through literature and general websites. Another employee interviewed said: “It’s called `piping.’ All the drivers use pipes to kill hogs that can’t go through the chutes. Or if you get a hog that refuses to go in the chutes and is stopping production, you beat him to death. Then push him off to the side and hang him up later” (Eisnitz, p. 53, 2009).

Some employees even report killing animals for fun without feeling any remorse, suggesting that they are suffering psychological damage to the point of developing abnormal cruelty. Mental changes of this sort would generate concern amongst the general population (Dillard, 2008).

Several studies on empathy amongst farmers in animal agriculture show that slaughterhouse workers and farmers exhibit lower levels of empathy towards animals than the general population. Desensitization was not an uncommon factor amongst the employees of this sector (Dillard, 2008).

A study done on butchers working in the slaughterhouse and retail meatpacking business revealed that as butchers work in a negative environment almost every single day, they displayed the highest levels of somatization and anger hostility among the general occupation of butchery. Once factors like age and education were accounted for, this study of 82 male butchers found higher rates of work accidents, injuries, physical disorders, use of alcohol and drugs, as well as a higher employee turnover (Emhan et al. 2012).

Usually fully aware of the kills that go on every single day, the workers either become very distressed and leave the job or they become numb and begin to display signs of apathy. Some even begin to enjoy the infliction of pain (Helle 2012). Some become less empathetic under conditions of stress as well. See this example:

“This is kind of hard to talk about. You’re under all this stress, all this pressure. And it really sounds mean, but I’ve taken prods and stuck them in their (hogs’) eyes and held them there.” (Eisnitz, p. 53, 2009).

Lower empathy in slaughterhouse workers may be responsible for higher crime rates in neighborhoods where such facilities are located including homicides carried out in a manner of animal slaughtering practices (Dillard, 2008). Amy Fitzgerald, a sociologist investigating the effects of slaughterhouses on communities tested a “Sinclair effect,” a theory Upton Sinclair proposed more than 100 years ago, noting that slaughterhouses had negative effects on workers and communities through increases in crime and unemployment rates.

5 Comments

Filed under Agricutlure, Alcohol, Animals, Anxiety Disorders, Crime, Depressants, Depression, Domestic, Intoxicants, Labor, Mental Illness, Midwest, Mood Disorders, Pigs, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, Serial Killers, Social Problems, Sociology, Speed, Stimulants, USA

by | March 1, 2017 · 11:34 PM

Jim Beam

Of course I drink whiskey. I’m a real man. Wine and beer is for pussies and fags.

Anyway, I drink all sorts of brands and I even drink Scotch. They mostly taste all the same. I don’t buy the expensive stuff because I can’t afford it. But I found some Jim Beam on sale at a great price and I couldn’t pass it up.

I must say, this stuff is a cut above everything I have drunk so far. Wow. This Jim Beam whiskey is really good! Damn.

27 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Depressants, Intoxicants

by | December 18, 2016 · 11:23 AM

Three Drinks a Day

That is what I drink. Is that considered to be acceptable, or is it too much? I am hearing different things.

15 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Depressants, Health, Intoxicants

by | November 20, 2016 · 10:02 AM

“The Fine American Art of Making Bourbon,” by Alpha Unit

Liquor is big business – international conglomerate-style big business. Your favorite American whiskey could be controlled by people in office buildings halfway around the world. But those people rightly saw something enormously valuable when they purchased that brand. Americans are superbly skilled at making whiskey. And bourbon is signature American whiskey, as American as anything gets.

By law, bourbon must be at least 51% corn. But bourbon isn’t really about corn. It’s about trees – oak trees, in particular. If the whiskey isn’t aged in new charred oak barrels, it isn’t bourbon. For whiskey barrels, white oak, native to North America, is the gold standard.

White oak (Quercus alba) grows up and down the eastern half of the United States. It has always been plentiful in the Central Mississippi River Valley, notably Missouri Ozark country, and in the Ohio Valley, where the Ohio River makes its way westward through Appalachia. When they select white oak, log buyers for the bourbon industry are interested in the location of the trees, the age of the trees, and what growing conditions the trees were in. But it’s white oak they want because it is the most leak-resistant of the oaks.

To digress a bit about trees in general: Sapwood is new wood that acts as a conduit for water and sap distribution. As sapwood matures its pores begin to fill with organic material such as resin, and it becomes drier and stronger to form heartwood – the central, strong pillar of the tree. The sap-conducting pores of white oak are naturally plugged with a water repellent (tyloses), making white oak heartwood virtually impervious to liquids – and a distiller’s dream.

Once loggers fell the trees, truck drivers transport the logs to sawmills where workers turn them into lumber. The companies that make whiskey barrels want white oak lumber to be quarter sawn, or cut at a 90-degree angle to the growth rings. This means less twisting, warping, and cupping, as well as even greater leak resistance.

Log buyers only want wood that is straight and knot-free, with good tannin content. The grain has to be tight and predicable. The selected lumber is seasoned for a number of months, and once cured, it’s ready to be turned into whiskey barrels at a cooperage facility.

A worker will cut each board into sections, creating the staves that will make up the body of the barrel. He narrows the staves at their ends and hollows them slightly on the inside, which will create that characteristic barrel shape. Once milled, the staves are placed inside a metal hoop that will act as an assembly jig. The hoop is lined with as many staves as it takes (usually about 32) to minimize gapping between the pieces.

Now it’s time to bend the pieces. In the traditional method, the staves go through a steam tunnel that moistens them into a flexible state. Held by the metal hoop and other temporary metal rings, the wood curves into the form of a barrel. Now that it’s moistened, the wood is going to expand, creating enough friction and pressure to meld the staves into a liquid-tight container that won’t need any glue, nails, or screws. The heads – the top and bottom of the barrel – will be added later.

Charring the interior is the next step. Barrels pass over a gas-burning conveyor belt that shoots flames into each barrel to toast or char the insides. This essentially cooks the wood, extracting its flavors so that the whiskey can absorb them in aging.

Charring breaks down the chemical bonds in the wood fibers, creating smaller molecules that will impart flavor to the whiskey. Heating lignin, for example, creates vanillin, the characteristic vanilla fragrance of good bourbon. Charring releases a lot of other volatile compounds in oak, including lactone, which adds a coconut note to the whiskey. It also caramelizes wood sugars that are going to leach into the maturing spirits.

In addition to imparting flavor and color to the spirits, char removes sulphur compounds and other impurities, making the whiskey less harsh and more mellow. Barrels are custom-charred to the specifications of each distiller.

The freshly charred barrels are extinguished with water and cooled. A worker replaces the assembly jig with stronger, galvanized hoops that are riveted in place; the new hoops will hold the barrel into its curvature. Grooves are carved into each barrel to slot the heads in place, and an opening is punctured into the center of the barrel and fitted with a stopper, or bung. The barrel is tested for water-tightness, and if it passes the test, it is shipped to the distillery to mature whiskey.

To be labeled straight bourbon, the whiskey has to be aged at least two years. But if you want to know the perfect age for bourbon, there is no answer. Bourbon connoisseurs will tell you that age is more about maturity and ripeness than a specific time frame – which makes whiskey production as much an art as science. It ultimately depends on the person tasting the bourbon.

Consumers generally believe that older is better. But not always. Some distillers and tasters prefer bourbon in the 8- to 10-year-old range; others like certain bourbons to be between 12 and 15 years old. One bartender says that after 12 years, bourbon tends to take on stronger oak notes, masking some of the “subtle intricacies” she enjoys. Another says he rarely picks the oldest in any selection, saying that many times the wood tannins have started to skew the flavor.

One thing almost everyone agrees on is that the whiskey has to be aged, period. You can drink “baby bourbon” that hasn’t been matured, if you insist, but it is nothing at all like bourbon. It definitely has its fans, but a lot of people who have tried it will tell you that it’s awful. “White dog,” or raw whiskey, is named for its high-alcohol “bite.” As writer Reid Mitenbuler otherwise stated:

My bourbon-appreciating father once artfully compared drinking white whiskey to getting stabbed in the mouth with a screwdriver that’s been used to pry open a gas can.

Bourbon is not only aged to be smoother, it is diluted with water and usually chill-filtered before being bottled. Bourbon contains vegetable solids, proteins, fats, and esters that will cause cloudiness when the bourbon is chilled. This cloudiness, or “flocking,” is due to these particulates settling out of suspension. Distillers filter bourbon because some customers notice this cloudiness in chilled bourbon and return the bottle or decide not to purchase the brand again, thinking there is something wrong with it.

But bourbon enthusiasts sometimes prefer unfiltered bourbon. To them, these solids and oils add extra flavor and a rich, buttery mouth feel. Some bottles even have a bit of charcoal sediment at the bottom. To many bourbon drinkers, this is the best part of the bottle.

4 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Alpha Unit, Guest Posts, Intoxicants, Labor, Law, Regional, USA

by | October 21, 2016 · 11:44 PM

11 Worst Things the Creator of GhettoWine.com Has Done In the Name of Hobo Wine

LOL.

Too funny. Good writing too, both of em.

1 Comment

Filed under Alcohol, Depressants, Humor, Intoxicants

by | September 10, 2016 · 5:47 AM

Get Her Drunk! Give Her Drugs! Have Sex with Her! Yay!

That is, I get loaded or drunk on dope or booze with women and then I fuck them. Of course the women and girls are willing participants, but feminuts say it’s rape anyway. Anyway, intoxicated sex is a blast, and I recommend it to all discerning degenerates. I have gotten high on a lot of drugs with women and then had sex with them, mostly marijuana and cocaine, and pills. The only pills were tranks like Xanax. They are ok for sex as they relax you.

I’ve never done psychedelics, Ecstasy or PCP and had sex. It sounds a bit frightening. I don’t do speed. I’ve never done narcotics and had sex, but that sounds like a bad idea anyway, and the only narcotics I ever took were pills, and I hardly ever used them. Narcotics kill sex anyway.

Don’t dose women. That’s as sleazy as it gets, and it’s quite illegal these days.

Do I feed women drinks to get them drunk? I dunno? As I usually drink along with them, I guess not. Don’t feed women drinks to get them drunk.If you want to get her drunk, I understand, but you may as well drink along with her. It’s only fair.

If a woman gets drunk and has sex, it’s rape and she’s not responsible, say feminuts. That can only be possible if women are children. So are women children? I guess women are children.

I would like to point out that a lot of females have sexual inhibitions, and they deliberately drink themselves to get themselves loosened up enough for sex. I have been a party to such self-dosing on many an occasion. Taking the feminut theory logically, I guess these women are raping themselves by getting themselves drunk, but even when women rape themselves, I guess men are still guilty.

After all, feminists insist that women are eternal children, objects who have no agency. I agree that women are objects, but I do not agree that they have no agency.

2 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Cannabis, Coke, Depressants, Dope, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Intoxicants, Man World, Narcotics, Sex, Stimulants

by | June 8, 2016 · 2:48 AM

IQ and Income: IQ Is Not Destiny

Rowlii writes: How can you be broke if there is a correlation between IQ and income? Do you count on lower IQ (like me) to finance your blog?

Come to France! The welfare state will take care of you.

More seriously, I love your blog.

I know a number of very high genius IQ people (over 140) who have no money at all and are low income if not in poverty. IQ is not everything, and even a genius IQ without EQ or emotional stability is almost worthless.

That said, a number of the very high IQ people I know are on disability. Two are on disability for mental illness, one has mental illness listed as one of the things wrong with him, and two more are on disability for a physical reason. I know another very high IQ person who has mental illness but is not on disability. 75% of the mental illnesses are mood disorders. Two have been hospitalized a number of times, and one has been hospitalized a few times.

One is chronically psychotic or nearly psychotic and is on anti-psychotic meds, and the other has been psychotic on occasion. Another has such profound Major Depression that they are barely function. One has listed an anxiety disorder as part of their disability. 2/3% are on psychiatric drugs, and the rest need to be but won’t take the pills. Only one of these people is even partly employed, and he works very part-time under the table. The highest income is $25,000/yr from disability and renting a couple of rooms in a house they own.

A friend of mine from high school has a genius IQ (the same score I have), and to my knowledge, he has never made any money. Last I heard he was living in Santa Cruz with some alcoholic older woman. He sent me a letter a while back asking for money because his car had broken down and he needed $2,500 to fix it. He was a heavy drug user and dealer for quite a few years, but in recent years, it was just pot. He had been arrested for dealing drugs.

He also had a tendency to go on wild alcoholic benders in which he sometimes did insane things. He sometimes got hospitalized when he went on these benders. He also acted very strange for many years. People said it was the drugs, but I knew him back in 7th grade before he had taken any drugs and he was actually even weirder then. He’d always been weird. He has all sorts of funny mannerisms and strange ways of talking.

My Mom has a genius IQ (150), and she spent her life as a housewife. She did hold a number of jobs later in life while still married. One of those was a paralegal, but she wasn’t very happy there. In recent years, she has worked at jobs like tax preparer and secretary at a community college.

I know someone with a near genius IQ (139) who has worked at menial jobs their whole life and never made much money. He was also an alcoholic for many years. He had something wrong with his leg due to the smoking and drinking but he refused to go to the doctor for whatever reason. It got much worse and the leg had to be amputated halfway up. This person has been an alcoholic for decades and they have also suffered from Major Depression for 35 years which was never treated or treated only with alcohol.

I recently met a woman with an IQ of 156. She was mostly a stay at home Mom of a seven year old girl. She lived off her husband’s income. For employment, she was trying to get a publishing business off the ground, but she wasn’t getting anywhere.

There are some people I have known who were very smart, but if I don’t know their IQ scores, I can’t list them. It’s not ok to discuss IQ pretty much ever in our society, so I do not know the IQ scores.

I do know a few people with genius IQ’s who have been fairly successful in life. Two out of three were females, and oddly enough, all had IQ’s of 143. One had made money in the stock market. Another worked for some oil company in Texas, but I am not sure what she did there. the man went to law school and become an attorney. Last I heard he was into real estate development, buying and selling mini shopping malls or whatever you call them.

Come to think of it, most of the very high or genius IQ people I have known in life have hardly been successful at all, and the only three I know who were even somewhat successful are listed above. Not including the near-genius, nine listed above or 75% have made little money in life, and five or 42% are on disability. Four out of 12 or 1/3 have serious mental illnesses. Five or 42% are on psychiatric meds, and two more or 16% need to be. That leaves us with 58% who are either on psychiatric drugs or need to be. 71% of the psychiatric conditions were mood disorders. Three or 25% have been hospitalized for psychiatric conditions. Only three or 25% have even been moderately successful, and only one or 8% could be thought of as quite successful.

15 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Depressants, Depression, Health, Illness, Intelligence, Intoxicants, Labor, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology