Category Archives: US Politics

by | November 15, 2017 · 6:53 PM

A Call to All Liberal and Leftist MRA’s: Please Join Us in Building an Anti-Feminist Left!

I submitted a post something like this to a couple of Reddit boards, including Men’s Rights and Masculinism. Masculinism is probably saner. Men’s Rights are MRA’s and most of them are nuts. Men’s Rights buried my post somehow. Masculinism kept it up there, and we will see what the response is, if any. It’s a low-volume group. There’s no way to post on Redpill, and it’s probably a waste of time anyway. Men’s Liberation are some feminist MRA’s. It’s crap. It’s part of the feminist movement, thought I will grant that it’s a bit more sane than feminism. Men’s Liberation started out great. Warren Farrell was one of the founders, but it went full SJW long ago. There’s probably something worthwhile there, but they would never accept a post like this.

Regarding this post:

Angry Harry, Left-leaning MRA? from MensRights

I believe that the Alt Left should incorporate anti-feminism as a core value. Nevertheless, that statement is an extreme one. I think there are many good things about feminism, but some things are so horrific that they have poisoned the entire movement. In particular, they seem to have morphed into Puritanical, Victorian, prudish, frigid Comstocks who seem out to shut down all heterosexual sex as illegal or a societal transgression.

I am an MRA. In fact, I am an ultra-MRA. Nevertheless, I do not like many things about the MRA movement. In fact, I hate the MRA movement. The MRA’s are almost as bad as the feminists. Nevertheless, the toxicity of modern feminism must be opposed. Mostly I feel like Ryan Englund that the MRA movement is the other side of the mirror of the feminist movement. They are basically the same thing while being opposites of one another. And I am very concerned that the MRA movement is becoming just another Identity Politics rabbithole.

I also, like Warren Farrell, came out of the feminist movement back when it was sane. I was actually a dues-paying member of NOW for a number of years, much to my mother’s pride. I would not join NOW at the moment if you put a gun to my head. I still support liberal feminism, equity feminism, and sex positive feminism. Nevertheless, it is clear that feminism is a clear and present danger to all real men in the West. And as this feminist cancer spreads beyond the West, all men on the planet will soon be menaced.

Yes, we hate feminism, but we are Leftists! Or at least the movement as it started was a Leftist movement. The real Alt Left worth defending has morphed into a Leftist wing and a liberal wing. The rest are just rightwingers, and most are supporting Trump. I have renounced all of them.

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/18/proposal-for-an-alternative-left/

https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/02/19/dealbreakers-what-the-alternative-left-is-not/

Those are two early foundational documents.

We are a big tent movement with a philosophy of “everyone form your own wing.” That’s not completely true, but what I mean is that except for a small set of non-negotiables, everyone construct your own ideology via picking and choosing the beliefs that suit you best. We are not party line, and we don’t have a lot of litmus tests.

The early founders were straight, masculine men who love sex. Such men either do not exist on the Left anymore or they are being burned at the stake as witches. However, one of our top thinkers is also a gay man. Nevertheless, we do not spend a lot of time on Gay Rights. The Cultural Left has that area pretty much covered. I myself support gay political causes and I even work on them. I am on a number of gay political mailing lists and I work for their causes. A lot of them hate my guts and call me homophobe, but I will continue to work for them no matter how many names they call me. For the most part, gay rights is a matter of doing the right thing. People deserve basic rights whether they like me or not.

We started out as race realists, but most of the movement has rejected that.

Mostly we just think the Cultural Left is out of its head. A lot of us are social conservatives to some extent, but we are not femiservatives and we despise the social conservatism is the US Republican Party. The principal nonnegotiable is on economics. You must be Left on economics! No exceptions! Other than that social conservatism is ok. Some have called us conservative Leftists or socially conservative Leftists. But at least my wing are radical social libertarians.

I came out of the Left. I was a member of the Communist Party USA. I even got a membership card! I used to be on the mailing list for the Weathermen. I bought guns for the Marxist rebels in El Salvador. You get the picture. But a man-hating psychotic feminist Left is something I want no part of.

As a Leftist, I am utterly sickened and disgusted at the reactionary nature of nearly the entire MRA movement. It’s vile and disgusting. We are MRA’s, but we want no part of these ruling class suck-ups. We are for the workers, the working MEN in particular!

Peace out, from a brother to the brotherhood.

I make this post as a call to all lonely MRA liberals and liberals and Leftists wandering in the political wilderness. I call on all of you to come join us to help us build a real anti-feminist, pro-men Left!

5 Comments

Filed under Civil Rights, Conservatism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Masculinism, Political Science, Politics, Radical Feminists, Republicans, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, US Politics

by | November 14, 2017 · 11:04 PM

Why There Is No Left in the US: The Pathetic Story of the Cold War Liberals

In Haiti, Father Bertrand Aristide was a Leftist Catholic priest, a follower of Liberation Theology, who ruled the country for years. He won completely free and fair elections with 94% of the vote. He was removed by the Bush Administration which funded an insurgency out of reactionary Dominican Republic to overthrow the state.

Aristide had been reappointed by Bill Clinton after being ousted in a previous coup, but Clinton demanded that Aristide the disband the army and the national police as part of a deal to put him back in power. In this way, Clinton the liberal Democrat assured that Aristide was helpless against the insurgency that invaded from the  Dominican Republic. Now you understand why I hate American liberal Democrats so much. They’re all reactionaries! Yes, they are more Left that the ultra-right Republican Party, but not by much. At best, US Cold War liberals are centrists or the center-right. At worst, they are just another species of conservative.

My own father, a dyed in the wool liberal Democrat and former member of Americans for Democratic Action, one of the most Left parts of the Democratic Party back in the 1950’s, supported both the removal of the Sandinistas and Aristide. My father was a Cold War Liberal. This is as Left as Democrats get in the US, and by world standards, my father was a reactionary!

Bernie Sanders is also a Cold War Liberal. His domestic policies are pretty good, but on foreign affairs, Sanders is a nightmare, just another damned reactionary. In the US, everyone is reactionary on foreign affairs – all of the Republicans and almost all of the Democrats. It’s the bipartisan reactionary consensus – they’re throwing it all down for US imperialism,  come Hell or high water. And this sorry fact makes a good case for the argument that there is no Left in the US –  or none to speak of for that matter.

9 Comments

Filed under Caribbean, Cold War, Conservatism, Democrats, Geopolitics, Haiti, History, Imperialism, Latin America, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, US Politics

by | November 14, 2017 · 12:18 AM

Alt Left: “Why I am Not an MRA”

I continue to say that Ryan England is one of our finest Alt Left thinkers. I say that in part because I agree with him so much. I would put him up there with Brandon Adamson, who I also agree with a lot. And both Brandon and Ryan are two of the finest writers, as in prose stylists, in our movement.

I have reputation for being so radical and nuts that I am almost persona non grata in this movement. I know that posts linking to me have been removed from the Alternative Left that Ryan started. Apparently I am “raciss” or something. It takes almost nothing to get called that anymore. Just be a bit honest, and you’re done. I also have a reputation, via Lord Keynes, for being an extremist on the Cultural Left.

It is said that I have some extreme positions on the SJW Left. He is also rather astonished at how socially conservative I am. But I am not a social conservative at all. My views are Democratic Party’s Official Platform 1995. That these views are now seen as just as socially conservative as Roy Moore is quite astonishing, but it shows just how fast the runaway clown car train called the Cultural Left Freakshow has gone in just ~20 years. And indeed I am not just a conservative. I am also a reactionary. I want to roll back the clock – to Democratic Party 1995. That this is considered Troglodytism is one again a symptom of the disease.

Part of the controversy was that I supported Antifa. That makes you almost persona non grata on the Alt Left. It was said that I had moved to the extreme Left. That’s hardly possible as I have always been there. I was on the mailing list for the Weathermen for Chrissakes. After that, I was buying guns for the Marxist rebels in El Salvador. And I haven’t budged since.

The funny thing is that despite my supposed extremism, I find myself agreeing with Ryan England (who is actually himself quite a radical Left type on the Alt Left) a very good part of the time. This post could have been written by me, but I am not eloquent or disciplined enough to have done so, so Ryan had to do it. If you want to know where I stand on the issue of feminism, etc. (I am supposedly an MRA radical) just read this post. I am as MRA as Ryan is. That our mild views are now MRA shows just again just how insane the “normal” has gotten now. Yep, you read that right. Crazy is the new normal. Sane is new bigotry and reaction.

Not going to say much more about this except that I hope it spurs some comments. Like Ryan, I am also a feminist. I came out of the feminist movement back when it meant something. Once again the crazy train left me stranded at the station holding flowers and jilted once again. I still support liberal feminism, sex positive feminism (though if Jezebel is the definition, I have my worries) and equity feminism. I think Ryan might want to identify as a masculinist or Men’s Liberationist. These are the left wings of the MRA movement to the extent that they exist at all. One can be both a masculinist and a feminist and the demands of basic equality nearly mandate it.

I have scarcely seen an article that lays out the poison of modern feminism so eloquently and accurately. Once again, his words are mine. My principal beef with feminism is outlined here by my alter ego, Ryan.

Read and enjoy.

Why I am not an MRA

By Ryan England

Feminism 101

Doesn’t it want to make you swoon?

 

I know I’m going to catch flak for this, but I don’t care much for the men’s rights movement. I do think they make good points – I’ve read Warren Farrell for example and found his work quite profound. In fact, it really takes a wrecking ball to this idea that men have conspired to make the world a wonderful place at the expense of women. You can’t reasonably believe that after reading Farrell’s works.

Why I don’t really relate to the MRM is rooted in my overarching distrust of identity politics. I do think that there’s all kinds of room to criticize the excesses of feminism, and some points made by the MRM are valuable in that regard.  Decades of ideological protectionism has produced a very real feminist echo chamber with next to no external checks on its claims.  The MRM can by helpful in remedying that.  The MRM also brings our attention to real issues that men are confronted with.  Glaring disadvantage (to varying degrees depending on jurisdiction) in divorce settlements and child custody arrangements being the most obvious example.

The feminist demonization of male heterosexuality; this presumption underlying much of feminist theory that male sexual attraction towards women is somehow demeaning and objectifying of women is something else that needs to be challenged and the present taboo against disagreeing with feminism desperately needs to be broken here.  The MRM can help in that regard.  The equation of compliments and polite civil greetings on part of men towards women with harassment, objectification or even oppression, commonly seen on social media, is a manifestation of this.  If taken at all seriously, especially in any kind of public policy context, this kind of thinking could effectively close the door on prospects for male-female encounters of all but the most institutional kind.

The ever expanding definition of rape, and the ever narrowing definitions of consent, and the increasingly onerous requirements for obtaining legal consent – an express verbal “yes” given for every touch, kiss or caress, and even that be nullified if there’s any alcohol or mental illness or any factor that could in the slightest call into question the strict legal capacity to give consent, constitute another manifestation of this.  The end game here, I suspect, is to make legal intercourse, for all intents and purposes, impossible for men.

Although most feminists profess to disagree in principle with the notion that all things “boy meets girl” are inherently sexist or oppressive – and may even trot out their own relationship as proof of this, the restrictions imposed on gender dynamics by these kinds of very popular demands made by very widely circulated and credible media outlets that represent the mainstream of liberal opinion on gender issues, would make establishing even platonic, let along erotic relationships extremely difficult.

That many feminists choose to make exceptions to their own rules for themselves and the men they get the D from should not be taken as proof of feminism’s flexibility and open mindedness.  It should be taken as proof of moral hypocrisy on part of the feminists so doing, and a tacit admission on their part that their system of sexual morality and conduct is no more reasonable and in alignment with human nature than that of the religious conservatives they so smugly see themselves as superior to.

Compound that with inundation of  feminist perspectives casting heterosexual relationships in so consistently negative a light; as being about nothing other than unequal distribution of domestic labor, unequal pay, riven with male insecurity and unreasonable male behaviors contrasted to the relief women are expected to seek and experience in all-female spaces, as characterized by universally poor male sexual performance and an expectation of female preference for marital celibacy, dildos, lesbianism, asexuality, promiscuity, anything other than relational intimacy – all hermetically sealed by a propensity to yell “fragile male ego” at any dissention from any of the above on part of men – as if this kind of petty weaponized rejection is something we should just sit back and relish, and feminist gender dynamics become a mortal threat to healthy heterosexual relationships, even if it turns out to be death by a thousand cuts rather than a swift beheading.

A strong MRM could be a countervailing force for reason and love in gender relations.  On the other hand, groups like MGTOW could just up the ante and make things worse rather than better.  Don’t get me wrong: you, dear reader, be you male or female, have every right as far as I’m concerned to live your life as you see fit, and if that involves not having a significant other of the opposite sex, good luck to you.  I once wanted an unattached life myself.  May you succeed where I failed.

But to advocate widespread rejection of the opposite sex, as feminism often implicitly and, in the case of separatist feminism, explicitly does, and MGTOW likewise does, is to advocate for the infliction of protracted neurosis and frustration culminating in a demographic holocaust upon whichever population is to embrace this as a form of gender based political activism.  It would inflict incalculable and irreparable damage on the psychological fabric of such a society.

But even a less strident form of male activism than MGTOW could end up becoming a gender flipped version of the worst aspects of feminism.  I’ve noticed that in every debate I’ve ever read between feminists and MRAs – though flame war is a better description in just about ever case, since debate implies a reasoned exchange of views and that’s most definitely not what happens – the exchange always boils down to each side saying to the other, “you’re just ugly and can’t get laid” – with cats and mother’s basements figuring in there somehow. Inevitably, one side resigns in frustration over the strident unreasonableness of the other, and both remain more convinced than ever that the opposite sex is hopelessly screwed up.  There’s not much of a future in this.

Taken to their logical conclusions, demands upon heterosexual relationships would end up more closely resembling shari’a law than they would anything previous generations of liberal feminists struggled and fought for.

Wait a minute …

Of course,  feminism – in its more reasonable forms, is still needed to protect and safeguard the rights of women. Life is certainly not all wine and roses for all women at all times, and men are not blameless. This is especially true in communities where, for religious reasons, women still very much are second class citizens.

This is what I find both astounding and disturbing about What looks like an alliance of feminists and Islamists, particularly in opposition to the Trump presidency.  While I don’t condone the more boorish things Trump has said about women, you can’t compare the danger posed to women by macho locker room bluster with the danger posed to women by shari’a law.  Given the dour attitudes that both feminists and Islamists appear to have towards free and fun expression of happiness and attraction between the sexes, however, I can see the kinship the two might have with one another, though from where I sit, it promises to be a stormy relationship.

What I worry about regarding the MRM, though, is its own potential to become a kind of rank gender partisanship. That “Male good female bad” thinking could, and does, easily arise from it.

Because that, in its own way, is exactly what happened to feminism. What began as being “just about equality” or just about “the same treatment of women as for men” has become a blinding and fanatical form of gender partisanship. Motivated by dogmatic adherence to feminism, whole cohorts of young women (and their male sympathizers) have circled the wagons and harnessed collective groupthink to hermetically seal themselves away from any kind of criticism or dissent.

Driven by a sense of universal and historical mission, these women regard themselves as quite entitled to ceaselessly make unilateral demands of men with no countervailing concessions, tar all men with collective responsibility and guilt by association for the very real crimes and misdeeds of some men, and to effectively kill any prospect for intimacy and trust between the sexes by making militant confrontation the permanent and universal norm for gender relations. Backed by unilateral academic and media support and an arsenal of canned responses and copy pasta with which to respond to naysayers, the impact that this has had on gender dynamics is nothing short of devastating.

As an antidote to this, we need to step back from identity politics. We don’t need a male version of the same thing. Given what we should now know about ideological and identitarian polarization, feminism and the MRM will most likely feed off one another and each further radicalize in response to the other. This is certainly what I’ve seen in every single exchange between MRMs and feminists that I’ve ever seen. If that process becomes normalized, it could well mean the death of heterosexual love in its entirety. The prospect of this worries me greatly. I really hope people of both (yes, both) genders can learn to take a step back from their attachments to gender ideology and start reasoning honestly about these kinds of issues.

13 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Democrats, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Islam, Law, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Masculinism, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Radical Feminists, Radical Islam, Religion, Republicans, Romantic Relationships, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, US Politics

by | November 8, 2017 · 2:28 PM

We Are All Narcissists Now

This is an older post that I fixed up and added a lot of new stuff too.

fMRI scans show that we’re most comfortable looking at faces similar to our own.

As you can see, we are always in love with ourselves. Even when we are in love with other people, we are really in love with ourselves.

In my opinion, everyone is somewhat narcissistic. It’s adaptive to a certain degree, especially among males. It’s only when it starts getting out of control that it is pathological.

Keep in mind that another word for narcissism is self-esteem. You either have low, moderate or high narcissism, which means you either have low, moderate or high self-esteem. High self-esteem in and of itself is not pathological and instead is typically seen as a sign of good mental health. However, they can seem a bit overbearing or too much, I would agree with that. These are the people who we say are egotistical, have huge egos, or are self-impressed.

Visualize a scale from 0-100. A score of 1 is the least narcissistic, most ashamed, guilty, self-effacing, self-denying, masochistic doormat around.

Anything above 50 and you are starting to get into the narcissistic without being pathological, high narcissism or high self-esteem folks, which is where a lot of males are anyway, and it’s definitely where I am. Here you find a lot of folks, mostly males, who are vain, conceited, self-centered and sometimes arrogant. They are friendly people, but people who get close to them, for instance female lovers, often complain, “You don’t even care about me.” As a matter of fact, this is a very common complaint that women in general make about their male lovers/spouses in general. They make this complaint because males tend to be more narcissistic than females.

A female friend of my mother’s once asked her husband, “Do you still love me? You never tell me that you love me anymore.” Her husband looked around at the room he was sitting in, looked back at her and said, “Well, I’m still here, aren’t I?” A classic male response. “Hey, if I didn’t love you or like you, I wouldn’t even stick around.” But that’s not good enough for women. Women want to be reminded. Males and females are capable of love, even intense love, for each other, but they often express it in different ways. Women fall in love and form relationships for attachment needs – needs that want and require continual reinforcement. Males fall in love and form relationships for other reasons.

When you start getting up around 70 or so, you get into some pretty pathological narcissism, but it’s not yet the nightmare world of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

I had a friend on the Net who was very perverted and loved to talk about sex all the time. He was a bit of a swinger, and he had screwed countless females. He was also somewhat bisexual, as many male perverts are. We would get into long, dirty conversations on the Net, and he would tell me all about his life from a sexual point of view.

One very interesting story he told was that when he was a teenager, his parents hired a Thai maid. She slept in a bedroom next to his and they could sort of hear each other through the walls. He jerked off every night like most teenage boys. At some point, every time he jerked off, he heard strange noises coming from the maid’s room. After a while, he figured out that every time he jerked off, she was also masturbating in tandem with him and getting off herself. A great story!

But he would go on and on with these wild stories, talking a mile a minute like someone hyped up on speed. But the stories were all about him and his doings and goings on. I really didn’t mind because I am narcissistic myself and listening to others gets me out of my head for once. But he was definitely a self-centered person, and he was also pretty vain. These people can be annoying, but they are not a walking catastrophe.

The dividing line seems to be whether or not you care about others. As narcissism goes higher and higher, typically people care less and less about others. It’s as if we only have so much love inside of us. If we use up all of our “love potential” on ourselves, there’s nothing left for anyone else. I have no idea if this theory is correct, but it’s an interesting idea I thought I would toss out there.

Now we get to the NPD’s, the Narcissistic Personality Disorder types. These are simply a disaster. Some of them can be nice to some people if they choose to be, but in general, they are uncaring and not very nice. They brag constantly and can’t be bothered to do anything for you.

There are degrees of NPD. There is Mild, Moderate and Severe NPD. NPD is not incurable, but it is quite hard to fix. But some can get better if they work on it. I have known some NPD’s who made some decent progress. The NPD’s who get better become much less annoying and insufferable, show more insight into their behavior and in general simply become better and wiser human beings.

The reason NPD is so hard to fix is because most simply think there is nothing wrong with themselves and hence don’t think they need fixing. If you have NPD and are aware of it, look around at your relationships with others. Are they satisfying or dissatisfying? If they are dissatisfying, you might want to look at working on the NPD.

I had an NPD friend who made a big deal about how he was going to my father’s funeral, but then he never showed up. It turned out he didn’t even have a very good reason either. He just didn’t care. If it wasn’t about him, it was irrelevant. If you started talking about you, he would listen for a bit and quickly become bored and uninterested.

An NPD I have known for many years will ask, “So what’s been going on with you lately?” You start to tell them, and after about 15-20 seconds, they are already bored and looking around the room. Like most narcissists, this person is absolutely clueless about how and why they offend others or why so many people despise them and want nothing to do them. I finally cut this person out of my life after decades of trying to suck up to them, be nice to them, and get them to like me. They were always disappointing me, and it felt like they hated me. I blamed myself and said it was because I was such a loser: “If I wasn’t such a loser, they might like me better.”

After decades of this, I started acting about as crappy towards them as they did towards me. This caused this horrible person to have hurt feelings that I didn’t like them, which they tried to make me feel guilty about. This person was also 100% clueless about why I was returning his jerkiness in pure form. Mutual friends got on my case about why I was being “mean” to this family member. Apparently this person gets to be a shit to me for the rest of my life, and I’m evil if don’t kiss their ass, smile and refuse to fight back.

NPD’s are a nightmare. If you have an NPD in your life, you really need to think about maybe getting this person out of your life. Some of the NPD’s I have known have only caused me pain and damage in my life. It’s not worth it.

Going further along, you get to the Elliot Rodger type of Severe Narcissistic Personality Disorder. NPD’s are not typically violent, but they are definitely capable of it, especially if they are shamed or rejected – because they can’t handle any rejection. They may then commit acts of aggression, dishonestly, and even violence as revenge. Elliot Rodger is a case in point that shows how NPD at certain times can lead to violence, even extreme violence.

Beyond that we get into the real monsters. These are the malignant narcissists. Ted Bundy comes to mind. Others call these narcissistic sociopaths, among other terms. I don’t understand them very well, and I am not sure how this differs from pure narcissism or pure sociopathy. Obviously, these are some of the worst human beings on Earth, incurable and often highly dangerous. A number of serial killers have been diagnosed with malignant narcissism as opposed to sociopathy.

You might be interested to know that our own President Donald Trump is a classic malignant narcissist. Of course he is an awful person, and he is definitely dangerous. All malignant narcissists are dangerous by default, but they don’t always act out with violence extreme enough to get them in trouble with the law. There are controlled malignant narcissists just as there are controlled psychopaths.

6 Comments

Filed under Crime, Gender Studies, Man World, Mental Illness, Narcissism, Narcissistic, Personality, Personality Disorders, Politics, Psychology, Psychopathology, Republicans, Romantic Relationships, Serial Killers, US Politics

by | November 8, 2017 · 1:59 PM

Orgasm Addicts

Women are masturbating like crazy for some time now, a good decade I would say, and maybe even longer. I’d call it a fad, but I’m afraid it’s more accurate to say it’s here to stay. Generally they are almost all capable of orgasm, and they usually reach orgasm when they masturbate.

I knew one wife in a sexless marriage where it was the husband who was not having sex (mostly for physical reasons) who rediscovered the joys of masturbation. She was in her 40’s and she was in a sexless marriage. She told me she was doing it 7-10 X/week. That’s about in line with most single women I have known.

If there’s no man around, most single women nowadays aged 27-50 are masturbating just about every day. Some maniacs are even doing it 3-4 X/day. I have had female friends in their 20’s who sometimes did it off and on all day if they have the day off or all night if they don’t have to get up in the morning. I knew a woman who had a driving job, and she used to go to abandoned parking lots between calls and rub herself off in her car in broad daylight. I would be texting one of my woman friends, and she would say, “Excuse me, I have to go masturbate. Be back in a bit.” I would chuckle, and then 30 minutes later I would get another text, “Damn that felt good!”

A lot of them stop or slow way down after menopause when the female sex drive often goes belly up but I had a date with a 58 year old woman recently who told me she masturbated pretty much whenever she felt like it.

Even teenage girls are doing this. I had an 18 year old girlfriend several years ago who told me when I met her that she did it every day.

How do I know all of these gruesome details? Women told me!

And then of course there was my infamous survey of young teenage girls posting on teenage girl chatrooms about their masturbation habits. I do a lot of research on sexology, mostly around sexual orientation. I think there is me and a gay clinical psychologist (who I have tremendous respect for, as he is actually doing good science), and we are the only people in the country actually studying this issue. The question about the causes of sexual orientation has been taken over by science-allergic Gay Lobby and Cultural Left types who are are mostly obfuscating the issue, lying like mad, and flooding it with gay propaganda like they always do.

I was looking at teenage girls’ bulletin boards to try to get some data on the onset of some puberty milestones and menarche these days, as there are a lot of reports that the age of puberty is going down. I also wanted to find the age at which the female sex drive came on, as there is almost no data about this, shamefully. I was reading through their responses and tallying them up. It happened that on a lot of these boards, the girls were discussing masturbation, so I thought, the Hell with it, might as well tally this up too. I read through their responses and tallied them up just like the other figures I was researching.

The figures really shocked me. ~70% of girls aged 13-15 reported that they were masturbating to orgasm every day or almost every day.

Even more stunning was that ~7% of 13-15 year old girls were masturbating with their own sisters! What!? They were either each doing it on their own next to each other or they were actually having sex with each other to get each other off. Apparently none of them were lesbians. I had no idea there was this much incest between sisters. Parents have no idea what their kids get up to.

Once females figure out how to have that orgasm, a lot of them are addicts.

When I meet a single woman now as part of dating or pre-dating, I usually don’t even bother to ask if she masturbates because I figure they all do.

I also have to ask questions about masturbation sometimes with my female counseling clients (and of my male counseling clients too for that matter), particularly when we are dealing with sexual themes. I would love to not have to ask questions about this, but when they come to me with sexual themes that they are going through, it’s a necessary part of the process, and a large part of my practice involves people dealing with sexual stuff. Almost all (90%) of my female counseling clients masturbate, even the married women. I must add that a few don’t though. Even women from very conservative cultures such as Pakistani Muslim women say they do it.

I remember when I was growing up, girls and women never discussed this subject. Either they weren’t doing it, or they were doing it and not talking about it. There was this idea that it was a shameful subject. It was not uncommon to have a girlfriend who said she didn’t do it. I can’t remember one girl or woman that I dated who told me that they masturbated.

I also remember a lot of discussions about women who could not reach orgasm during sex, and I had girlfriends who never got off or even more frequently, were not sure if they reached orgasm, whatever the Hell that means. Surveys routinely found that 25-30% of women were anorgasmic, that is apparently they had never had an orgasm in their lives. Nobody talks about women who can’t reach orgasm anymore. They’re all masturbating like forest shrews on speed, and once they figure out how to get that orgasm, they can usually give themselves one anytime they feel like it.

It’s like something has changed. There are theories of early sexualization that state that teenage girls nowadays are undergoing early and profound sexualization due to a variety of things, but the availability of Internet porn seemed to be the main factor. There was a documentary about this a few years ago. I forget the name of it. The lead character is a 12-year-old girl, and in my opinion, she is far too sexualized for her age. It’s quite shocking.

There are also reports that girls who get molested when they are little girls experienced an increased sex drive, sometimes said to be up to 3-5X higher, when their sex drive comes on at puberty. It’s as if the early molestation “primes” them for the real thing.

Good God, we are raising whole generations of female masturbation addicts!

21 Comments

Filed under Biology, Cultural Marxists, Girls, Homosexuality, Politics, Pornography, Psychology, Psychotherapy, Romantic Relationships, Science, Sex, Solitaire, US Politics, Women

by | November 1, 2017 · 9:35 AM

Political Lean of Ethnic Whites in the US

Italian-Americans tend to lean Republican nowadays. So do French-Americans, Greek Americans, and Irish-Americans for that matter. Polish-Americans are 50-50, but they went for Trump. Greeks, Italians, Poles and the Irish were Democrats for a very long time in this country. I don’t have figures on any other groups.

Frankly, most if not all White ethnicities have been voting Republican for some time now in the US. This has been happening ever since the Reagan Democrats.

2 Comments

Filed under Democrats, French, Greeks, Irish, Italians, Poles, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, Whites

by | October 30, 2017 · 8:43 AM

Paul Manafort Just Got Arrested

Surrendering to the FBI right now.

Charges are related to work he did for a pro-Russian candidate in Ukraine. Manafort was paid millions to help get the man elected. He may have  been paid $10-20 million. Another man named Gates, Manafort’s assistant, is also charged.

They are charged with attempting to defraud the United States. He never declared the money and instead Manafort laundered it through all sorts of other entities. He also never registered as a foreign agent in relation to this work. One of the charges is tax fraud or tax evasion.

I am pretty sure there are going to be more later on this week.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Corruption, Crime, Eurasia, Europe, Government, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Russia, Ukraine, US Politics

by | October 29, 2017 · 12:53 PM

Civil War in the Democratic Party

Tulio: I hope this isn’t a disappointment. They called Reagan “the Teflon president” but Trump is Teflon coated with axle grease. I’m desperate to see the Trump admin taken down but this guy has more fucking lives than a cat. The Republican base has gone batshit insane and will defend him to the death.

I’m not sure I believe in the devil, but if one does exist, I’m convinced Trump has made a Faustian pact.

Traditional Republicans willing to challenge Trump risk the ire of the base and being primaried by Bannon-sponsored fascist. The sad thing is even if Trump is gone tomorrow, we’re still left with his base. 80% of Republican voters approve of the president…80%!!!! My worry is that now that the Bannonite strategy worked, the next GOP candidate may be another Trumpian, but perhaps one with more acumen and deft and an ability to do with damage without constantly tripping over his feet.

Crazy times.

Robert, what do you think the Democratic strategy should be going forward? Should the Democrats run hard left in an attempt to energize the base but possibly alienate moderates and frustrated swing voters? Or should they find another Obama type centrist candidate that will appeal to mainstream liberals but also to some heartland swing voters in key states? Just like the GOP, it seems the left is at war with itself and are separating into the Obama/Clinton camp and the Sanders/Warren camp. Where do you stand with regards to the direction we should take from here?

The unique thing about Obama is that he was so broadly appealing. At least at during the first election anyway, he unified both the progressive wing and moderate wings as well as got some moderate swing voters(some of which went for Trump). I see Kamala Harris as possibly being a figure that could unite both wings of the left the way Obama did. I’m not sure how well she would do with heartland swing voters though.

All-out Civil War in the Democratic Party

Yes, I am deep into this war myself. Your average liberal Democrat is a pretty lousy person politically speaking. They aren’t even very liberal! They suck as far as I am concerned. I actually hate most of them. They’re crap.

The Daily Kos is the base of the Democratic Party, and they just gave me a lifetime ban. They are tone deaf and completely brainwashed. I tried discussing the Alt Left with them, but it was like talking to a wall. They kept to their lines about “Alt Left was invented by evil Republicans to smear the Left.” They also talked about how “Alt Left was invented by Hillaryites to smear the Sanders wing of the party.” These are the two “party lines” in the Democratic Party, and Kossacks are not allowed to think outside of their scripted brainwashed lines, so they never do. The brainwash of the base of the Democratic Party is profound and extreme.

However, if you get outside of that bubble and go over to Nation of Change and Alternet, there are some very interesting things going on on the Left. But these people are typically so disgusted with the Democratic Party that they are not part of the party base. They typically say that they hate both parties and won’t vote, but they often vote Democrat anyway. The real Left of the US does not have much of a presence in the Democratic Party,  despite the lies of the Democrats. Yes, there are some of them, but they are not the majority and their presence in the party, even at the base, is rather small.

Most of the base are what might be called liberal Democrats, and they are largely split into Hillaryites and Sandersites. There is a large group of DNC Centrists in the Hillary wing. These people are supporters of Bill Clinton, Obama and later Hillary. However, there has been a shakeup in the DNC, and the DNC organization itself is now in a state of virtual civil war. So far the Hillaryites seem to be winning but not by much. The DNC is now close to 50-50 Sandersites and Hillaryites, with a probable lean towards the Centrists. A Centrist named Perez won the race for the DNC Chair, but his co-chair, Keith Ellison, a Black Muslim from Minnesota, is a Sandersite.

The civil war in the party is extreme. Kos is in a state of all out civil war. Mods have to keep wading into threads to keep the Sandersites and the Hillaryites from murdering each other. The hate is severe and palpable. The Sanders wing hates the Hillary wing, while and the Hillary wing is more resentful than hateful towards the Sanders wing.

The Hillaryites blame the Sandersites for Hillary’s loss in the last election, but that’s not true. They also say that Sanders is not a Democrat, which is true, so they see him as basically a traitor.

The Centrists calling the left wing of the party Alt Left was a clumsy smear to make the Party Left look like leftwing Alt Right types. The Left was also called racist, sexist, fascist, etc. Sanders supporters were called brocialists and accused of being misogynistic. This is an extreme bum rap. None of it is true, but the Hillary wing are SJW’s who hallucinate sexism and racism under every bed they see. Now I think these terms are grossly abused, but I will always defend nonsexists and nonracists against such charges. You cannot possibly make a case of Sandersites being sexist and racist.

For a long time, Sanders was anti-Identity Politics, and he has long been been an Economic Reductionist who has wanted to tone down a lot of the Cultural Left Freakshow. I guess that makes him racist and sexist or something. At any rate, Sanders caved very badly to the SJW’s early on, went full SJW himself and stayed that way for the rest of the campaign.

The Sandersites say that the party has been losing because it has been running too many Centrists, and the Centrists say that anyone running to the Left is doomed to lose, and the party has to go more towards the Center if it wants to win.

 

I believe that the Party Left has a point. It seems when we run these Centrists against conservatives, we lose. These Centrists usually run as, “Hey, vote for me! I’m kind of a conservative too! Just not as crazy as this guy! But I’m no liberal, I’ll tell you that!”

I have no idea exactly what happens, but it seems like the party base stays home in disgust at the Centrist who just insulted them taking their votes for granted. The conservatives say, “He’s still a liberal. He’s just pretending to be conservative. I’d never vote for him anyway” and go ahead and vote for the real conservative.

The moderates look at the race and say, “Hmmm, a fake conservative and a real conservative, what a choice! I think I will pick the real conservative then!”

What Is To Be Done?

Bottom line, I would say we just need to win. If we have to elect these disgusting Centrists to win, so be it. A Hillary Administration and a Hillaryite Democratic Congress would be horrible in many ways, but it would be so much better than a Republican Congress and Trump that there’s no comparison.

People on the Left like me always feel like we are being asked to choose between two shit sandwiches, a Republican one and a Democratic one. The Republican shit sandwich smells so bad you can’t even be in the same room with it. Sure, the Democratic one is gourmet sandwich with the finest ingredients, but at the end of the day it is still a damned shit sandwich no matter how much they fancy it up.

Kamala Harris is not as leftwing as you think. She is not exactly a Sandersite, and she has sucked up to Wall Street terribly and taken so much money from them.

The whole system is sickening, and it makes me want to vomit. I really don’t know what to do. Maybe just say the Hell with all of it and open another beer.

1 Comment

Filed under Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Democrats, Government, Left, Liberalism, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

by | October 29, 2017 · 12:43 PM

That’s What We Get for Electing a Nigger

There has been much talk about why the Democrats have lost so many seats all across the land. There are a variety of reasons for it, but the main reason is right up there in that ugly title of the post. We Democrats had the temerity and nerve to elect a Black man to  President of the US. Can you imagine that? We actually elected a Black man! How outrageous.

The rest of the country looked at the  Democrats in disgust and said, “I can’t believe you Democrats just elected a nigger President of the US! Just for that, I am voting Republican at the federal, state and local level! The nerve of you Democrats – electing a nigger! You thought you could do that and we would just sit here taking it sitting down – I don’t think so!”

There really is no other explanation for the Democrats’ loss of over 1,000 political positions countrywide since the election of Obama.

Part of the losses can be explained by increased voter fraud and rapidly declining democracy in the US, but even without those problems, we still would have lost seats due to real changes in opinion since 2008.

Fraud and the War on Democracy

I am not sure exactly why we lost all those seats but part of it has to do with the death of democracy in America.

The whole country is gerrymandered to Hell, and this right there has led to huge Republican gains. Once Republicans get into a state government, they start gerrymandering the state like maniacs.

The vote-stealing by computerized election machines that started in 2000 has continued and increased every year. They don’t just steal Presidencies. There is good evidence that they are stealing Senate seats as well and they stole at least three last year, one each in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and probably Missouri. The last election with Ossoff in Georgia was almost certainly stolen, so they are stealing House seats too. Republicans are doubling down on the election machines by refusing to remove the ones that are most easily hacked.

They have also passed a number of laws making vote recounts after elections difficult or even impossible. You saw how all of the 2016 recounts were shut down by Republican state governments and courts.

In addition, the Republican Supreme Court outrageously overturned the Voting Rights Act in one of the most racist decisions since Plessy v Ferguson. As a result of this wildly racist decision, Republicans all over the land have formulated all sorts of new election laws and rules that have the end effect of making it harder for Black and Brown minorities to vote.

In addition, in several elections this year, Democrats who were voted into office were actually removed from office by state legislatures in a move so profoundly anti-Democratic it is frightening.

The attacks on democracy across the land by Republicans are vicious and ugly. They are some of the worst we have seen since 1964 before which Blacks could hardly even vote in the US.

Given all of these wildly anti-democratic actions, how anyone can say with a straight face that we live in a democracy anymore, I have no idea. The whole idea that this is some kind of a democratic country is some sort of a sick joke.

Actual Moves towards Conservatism in the Population

Nevertheless, polls do show a huge swing towards the Republican Party since 2008 when Obama was elected. As Obama was a mushy Centrist and most of us on the Left think he is just a Republican, it can hardly be because Obama was too liberal.

I assume that the Democratic Party was punished at all levels for the crime of electing a Black President. Basically, “This is what we Democrats get for electing a nigger.” It’s Johnson’s White House comments in 1965 after the Civil Rights Act all over again: “We will lose the South for the next generation.” Just like in 1964, we Democrats are being punished horribly for doing the right thing. We are being made to fall on our swords for the crime of supporting Black people.

The fact that Democrats were crushed all over the land after we elected a Democratic Black President to me shows just how profoundly racist this country still is. And it looks like the Republican Party is becoming the de facto party of resentful White racism, mostly anti-Black racism but to a lesser extent anti-Hispanic racism too.

30 Comments

Filed under Blacks, Civil Rights, Conservatism, Democrats, Discrimination, Government, Hispanics, Law, Local, Midwest, Northeast, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Republicans, South, US Politics, USA, White Racism, Whites, Wisconsin

by | October 28, 2017 · 12:01 AM

Mueller Files First Indictments in the Trump-Russia Investigation!

Breaking news right now. Robert Mueller has just filed the charges in the Trump-Russia scandal he has been investigating for some time now. The investigation is wide-ranging and covers all sorts of things not necessarily related to either Trump or Russia, but they are all related to either Trump or his staff or associates.

I am thinking this is about Michael Flynn. I can’t recall too much about this particular Orc other than that he was always one of the worst of a crowd that’s been The Bad, The Worse and the Ugly from Day One. I believe he was some sort of general? I know he was in the Obama Administration, but I am not sure as what. I am thinking some Pentagon – National Security State Deep State psycho. I do know that Obama fired him, saying he was incompetent, which he probably was. I know that he was furious about being fired, and then Trump hired him, I believe as Chief of Staff? He was particularly awful in that role even by the zero standards of this Misadministration. Apparently he angered Trump like everyone does and then got fired by Trump like just about everyone does who makes him mad.

I do know that the Virginia Grand Jury has been after this rogue’s ass for some time now.

I am thinking that this has something to do with the Turkish rendition case, where the Turkish government demanded rendition for Gulen, the opposition leader falsely blamed for the bizarre coup that resulted in the maggot known as Erdogan decaling himself officially Sultan.

Gulen is a Turkish citizen who sought refugee status in the US due to obvious persecution. It was granted to him. The US refused to extradite Gulen to Turkey on the obviously fake charges of fomenting a coup that he had nothing to do with. Yet somehow this Flynn character, whatever his position was at the time, met with the Turkish government to discuss illegally kidnapping Gulen, spiriting him out of the country and handing him over to this crooked bastard Erdogan. Apparently this plot never went down and I don’t understand how just talking about it was illegal, but apparently it was.

I understand that this is one of the issues that Mueller has been investigating.

I believe that the execrable James (Mr. Deep State) Woolsey, former CIA (of course), ultra neocon and all around despicable reactionary, was somehow a witness to this nasty illegal extradition effort. Woolsey apparently committed an actual crime in the process or around the same time. This crime was not a part of the Deep State crimes against humanity he has been committing for decades now, which are of course not illegal, as these crimes are the pillars that the facade known as America, land of freedom and democracy, rests upon. I mean he committed an actual violation of some US penal code.

I believe the following:

  • Woolsey was at the meeting where the plot to kidnap Gulen took place, was horrified by what he heard there, and went to Mueller with his information.
  • Woolsey has agreed to testify against Flynn in this case.
  • Mueller plans to use Woolsey’s testimony to bust Flynn in the rendition case.

Let’s wait and see if I am right about this. I hear that the arrest will probably come Monday; however, if Mueller felt that the person was a flight risk, the person named in the indictment may already have been arrested. On Monday, this person will either surrender, be forced to surrender or be handcuffed and taken away.

This really is just the first domino. After this, I believe a cascade of events will be set into motion which will rapidly cause this investigation to explode with many more players looking into the crosshairs of the law.

At any rate, this is definitely explosive news.

As an aside, Republicans all over our land are scurrying about, gesticulating wildly, screaming and hollering, and generally losing it. Sean Hannity’s increasingly unhinged tweets point to that, but he’s just the first. Roger Stone also melted down. Donald Trump also bellowed forth some sound and fury about Hilary Clinton in response to news of the indictment, echoing Hannity’s desperate attempts at distraction.

And so it begins.

Stock up on the popcorn, folks. It might just be a long autumn this year.

5 Comments

Filed under Crime, Democrats, Europe, Government, Obama, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Russia, Turkey, US Politics, USA