Everything as Sexual Strategy and Ugly Harper Lee

Sexual strategy is like that scene at the end of Wargames where Joshua the computer tries to launch nuclear weapons and start World War 3; the computer cycles-through launch codes quickly while keeping the bits of code that are a positive match. Most people unconsciously allow their brain to do this work, matching behaviors with their positive outcomes, and bookmarking those behaviors while discarding the ineffective.

The conversation almost always goes like this when you tell someone that everything a person does stems from a foundation of sexual strategy: they listen patiently, provide the socially customary nods of understanding, and then say something like, “well, okay, but not everything…”

This certainly seems like it could be the case; it almost feels reductionist on some level to think that men and women are constantly being guided through their choices and actions by some invisible force emanating from their genitalia, silently screaming at them to just get it the fuck in like a pack of dogs in heat.  That there must be a special designation, or a degree of intellectual sophistication , which separates the human animal from his more primitive underlings.

And this is certainly true; the human animal is civilized. We are conscious of a wider-span of potential emotions, and are gifted with the ability to fulfill more significant goals than simply eating and fucking. We can shape our consciousness with language, and vocabulary, and with language comes access to higher level thinking.

It’s a lot like when you were a kid in kindergarten, at the beginning of the school year, with all your little school supplies. You mom could have gotten you the boring eight pack of Crayolas, but you wanted the big box of sixty-four; you know, the kind that comes with the crayon sharpener. So instead of just “red” and “blue,” you had a whole variety of different shades of the same color to pick from, and lucky you, right?

No, stupid, they’re all still crayons.

Read More

Over The Rainbow: The Dark Enlightenment as Anti-Choice

Duty is not something a person will choose when given the option to make their own decisions; by-definition “duty” is an imposition and a responsibility- duty is about limiting personal freedom for the best interest of civilization.

A dutiful citizen is necessary for a functional civilization- this includes duty to family, duty to community, and duty to country. Although duty isn’t necessarily enjoyable by the modern understanding of the term- flashing lights and lines of cocaine- it must be prioritized above personal pleasure.  Duty must be foremost, and whatever enjoyment gleaned from life beyond duty becomes secondary.

Like getting all your homework done on a Friday night before hunkering down and playing Ikari Warriors; a life well-lived, and a little bit of fun too.

The sexy appearance of modernity has made the dutiful life seem boring by comparison.  The modern Progressive will view humility as a kind of self-imposed naivety– the dutiful experience has become synonymous with missing out on life; life as defined by escalating consumption.

When Dorothy clicks her heels at the end of The Wizard of Oz (1939) repeating “there’s no place like home,” she is acknowledging that happiness isn’t something that must be found in extreme individualism and a highly stimulating landscape; happiness isn’t about consumption. There is beauty in humility.

Dorothy learns the value in calm stability, and a life with family.

Thematically, The Wizard of Oz would be lost on the modern Progressive, confused as to why Dorothy didn’t stay in Oz, find a solid drug dealer, and a few dozen Alpha males to party with.

The very same modern Progressive is staunchly in favor of abortion.

Read More

Femininity and the Cancerous Female Ego

The most efficient way of understanding the truth about Female Nature is doing a quick reversal of the kind of Feminist theory that has become mainstream thought over the last half-century.

Women do, in-fact, need men; womanhood is defined through manhood.

If we understand the form of Masculinity as a man’s “efficiency in acquiring power, his comfort in holding power, and his ability to maintain power,” we can understand the Form of Femininity as a woman’s comfort in submitting to power. 

Read More

Guilt by Narration: Emma Sulkowicz as a Social Inflection Point for Fake Rape

Women say rape is about power because that is how they primarily understand sex; an exchange of power. A woman can wield her sexuality to the detriment of a man- the proverbial carrot on a stick- in order to manipulate ruthlessly to her own end… or completely relinquish this power, taking intense pleasure in relinquishment, when a man exceeds her threshold of attraction.

It bears repeating that real rape is a vile crime on par with brutal assault and a notch below murder- as serious as a crime can get.

However, Fake Rape is an overt power-grab by abusing the cultural and evolutionary dynamic of men lacking inherent public sympathy while women enjoy a nearly infinite supply of it.

Read More

The Modern Educational System is a Playground for Young Girls; Men’s Rights and the Mainstream

If the Return of Kings viral Mad Max story had taught us anything it’s that the mainstream media seems to think calling someone a “men’s rights activist” is an effective shaming technique- CNN would never put quotations around the word “feminist.”

The mainstream media and feminists alike understand that people are inherently unsympathetic to men- in particular, men who have unauthorized opinions– and to easily sway a story in the favor of good Hollywood versus bad opinionated men, all they really need to say is “men’s rights activist.” Anything further is academic- the term immediately invalidates any argument presented.

The mainstream narrative will always deny that feminism has become institutionalized. If the narrative is that men are privileged, of course men who are looking to defend themselves as men in a system they see as bias against them would be viewed unsympathetically; as hateful, greedy, misogynist losers.

The system makes it clear that women are the oppressed class and men are the privileged class, always and forever. Women need our resources and support while men only need restraint and emasculation.

Make no mistake that this mindset is pervasive and trickles down to how our Education system is structured.

Read More

“The (Almost) Perfect Guide to Imperfect Boys” and Indoctrination to the Culture of Categorization for Middle School Girls

When I wrote my very first blog post on the “unequal nature of equality,” I highlighted the significantly different ways in which men and women view each other stemming from how the message of equality is quite differently taught to boys and girls.

Men are biologically wired to treat women with kindness, and while there are exceptions, it certainly wasn’t difficult to indoctrinate men into a culture where they understood women as true-to-the-word equals: potentially friends, intellectual peers, worthy of their own opinions and voice with a valid world view based on their individual life experiences.

And men are taught, by every facet of modern life- government, academia, and the media- that both sexes possess the same equitable understanding of inter-gender dynamics; in fact, a man thinking any other way would be accused of misogyny.

The underlying narrative that governs the teaching of equality is anything but equal; boys are taught that they are somewhat responsible for a girl’s success and comfort, even when it is to their detriment, and girls are taught that their success and comfort should always be primary even when it is to the detriment of a boy (or, really, anyone else).

From an evolutionary perspective this is business as usual as men are disposable and women are valuable; a man’s value is derived from what he is able to contribute. This would be fine, as this is in line with Human Nature, but that is not what we teach boys and young men.

Boys are taught that men and women are quite literally the same in every way except for a minor difference in genitalia. And, historically, when all the naughty men were off building our civilization they were also systematically oppressing all of the victimized women; according to Feminist theory, this historic oppression has trickled down to a modern landscape where boys hold an invisible backpack of privilege and girl’s fight against a perpetual tide of oppression at every turn.

This creates a climate where boys understand the concept of being a Good Man as putting women first in all regards, and girls who feel entitled to the success of the most successful man. At maturation, this foundation breeds a generation of polite men, able see the humanity in women, who end up baffled by the disgust they engender by showing weakness, and women who openly reduce and objectify men.

From a biological perspective, it is necessary for a woman to be able to efficiently categorize potential mates and suitors.  For the sake of simplicity in mate selection, women are able to sort all men into one of three categories (although, they can admittedly be somewhat nuanced: 1) The Alpha Male, 2) The Beta Male, and 3) The Omega male.  

Read More

“Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire” (1989) and the Diminished Respect for Fatherhood

The very first episode of The Simpsons, “Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire” debuted the series on December 17th, 1989– roughly twenty-five years ago (I was there watching it live), launching the series and the family into the forever consciousness of pop-culture. I recently re-watched the episode and it shocked me how different the series was when it initially aired.

Watching an episode of today’s Simpsons reveals an entirely different show. The Homer character, while likable and endearing, is emasculated, negligent of others, and mentally handicapped.

Upon re-watching the first episode, Homer is instead presented as a sympathetic, under appreciated father whom, despite his best efforts, finds tremendous difficulty in providing a perfect family life for his wife and children.

Read More

“All vaginas are the same size~!!11” and the Unequal Nature of Equality

Men are universally able to separate all female acquaintances into two categories: women we want to fuck, and the rest.

The more of a beta-doofus you are the more likely it is that you want to fuck everyone you know, but for any man with a shred of dignity there will typically be a line drawn between potential fucks and “the rest.”

A female not being on our literal “to do” list doesn’t mean we want them to fall off the face of the planet or die in a fire, and it certainly doesn’t mean we wouldn’t lend a hand if they were falling off a cliff- it quite literally means that we don’t want to have sex with them. And it is this distinguishing detail that opens up the rather new, from a generational standpoint, possibility of becoming just friends with a woman.

 “None of these girls want to be your girlfriend…”

It’s twenty years later and I still remember the uncomfortable feeling my Dad’s blunt assessment produced.

Read More