Smiling While White: A Microaggression

A comment at Chateau Heartiste:

The only crime these boys are guilty of is being a white young male in 2019. They are effectively considered 2nd class citizens in the eyes of the Liberal Marxist Left and thus must be put in ‘their place’. Which for now is a revolving purgatory of humiliation and ridicule but will later be upgraded to prison/concentration camps if the LML gets its way.

Anyone with a brain must realize that, despite their young age, they all conducted themselves admirably and are beyond reproach. That little smirk however is a first hint of a new generation of white shitlords that appears to be in the making. Make no mistake, genZ is paying attention and there will come the day when the Left will rue the day it ever opened this can of worms. — Redpillage

Remember when “microaggressions” became a word? Right away, I recognized in it the spirit of feudal lord-serf protocols. Serfs had to lower their eyes when addressing a lord. Direct eye contact would have gotten them flogged for defiance of station.

But modern egalitarianism arrests this tendency to stratify people by class. For example, someone like Jeff Bezos still expects his employees to call him “Jeff.” (I don’t know if that’s literally true of Bezos’ style, he’s just my shorthand for any liberal Fortune 500 CEO).

Leftism is a drive to reestablish an aristocracy of elect Whites over ordinary Whites. Of course, an internet celebrity bluecheck on Twitter or a social justice bluehair barrista is not ‘elect’ but he aligns himself with the actual Leftist elect through his submission to, and aggressive guardianship of, the Leftist narrative.

Hierarchy, legitimate or otherwise, always reasserts itself — in spite of modern egalitarianism, in spite of the manifest absence of individual superiority of Western nations’ ruling classes over their people. In a work-around those things, Leftists have created their proxy lords, which is “people of color.”

I know. POCs are not lords. By no stretch of credulity are they more noble than the European people on whose lands they squat. But just like Caligula’s horse wasn’t a senator, woe to the man who pointed that out. POCs are proxy for the Leftist narrative itself, a totem that’s as taboo to micro-aggress as it was once taboo for a serf to eyeball a lord.

Caligula and his horse were patiently suffered until they weren’t.



100 thoughts on “Smiling While White: A Microaggression

  1. For example, someone like Jeff Bezos still expects his employees to call him “Jeff.”

    As a fan of what one might call, I don’t know, “historical psychology” (there’s probably a term for it), I often wonder how people really felt in earlier times. When a serf had to lower his eyes, was he okay with that, because it’s just how it is? Or were previous eras everywhere characterized by constant and extreme resentment and revenge-plotting?

    With respect to the Bezos comment, I would say let’s just dispense with it and have proper rank distinctions and widely-agreed-upon ettiquette, more comfortable for everyone that way.

  2. — I often wonder how people really felt in earlier times

    Going by older fiction literature, people accepted the hierarchy. The stratification was reinforced by differences in things like literacy, manners, horsemanship, and clothing. The 19th century literature, one can object, romanticized earlier eras from the perspective of a higher-class writer. Nonetheless, it’s credible to me.

    Noblesse oblige made things a two way street. Abuses we hear about (death for poaching, prima noctis, the excesses of decadent courts) were not typical. We know of them because of how sensational they are. The pizzagater of her day, noblewoman Elizabeth Bathory, got capital punishment – imprisonment in a windowless cell until her death – for her crimes against families of peasant girls.

    Eyeballing a lord, I’d guess, would have gotten you no sympathy with your fellow serfs. People accepted their station. Life was rough but order created security and aristocracy upheld the order.

    People are hierarchical and social. We accept legitimate hierarchies. Legitimacy is largely derived from the governed being of the same culture, language, religion and racial appearance as their rulers.

    michaelfury: good stuff! Playing it now.

  3. People will find their salvation in themselves, not in any organization that meets the definition of “institution” existing today.

    From the Roman Catholic Church (and its endless divisions and departments) to the Federal Government itself (all three branches, plus endless labyrinths of state and local satraps), each dinosaur-institution has reached the end of its lifespan and, just as with apoptosis in the body, each institution is literally killing itself from within, as the people who run it and whose lives depend on it take sledgehammers to its foundations.

    For the civilizational trend change to fulfill its destiny, the masses of men must lose all allegiance to these dinosaurs and false gods. This will happen whether people have an alternative or not. The trend of the last several centuries was toward ever-larger economies of scale. This led to monopoly, and there’s an IRON LAW of monopoly that applies. If “when elephants battle it’s the grass that suffers,” what happens when tyrannosaurs battle, in the twilight of their existence?

  4. “…legitimate hierarchies.”

    One avenue inclined in this direction would be to somehow (re)advance the tradition of ‘Bildung,’ which Goethe is considered to have founded “posthumously.” Here “the masters and achievements of the past became… guiding ideals in all situations of life,” in the words of E.H. Gombrich. The past biotically greases and orientates the bearings of the social arrangement. The experiential cellar is thus stocked with both worthy wine and sommeliers of the spirit & general concordat.

  5. Deter Naturalist: Yes. The Left’s cargo-cult thinking assumes that corrupted institutions will grant them the power of that institution in perpetuity. Le Chatlier’s principle:

    “if a constraint (such as a change in pressure, temperature, or concentration of a reactant) is applied to a system in equilibrium, the equilibrium will shift so as to tend to counteract the effect of the constraint.”

    The institution is a custodian. The authority that people associate with the institution is a migratory spirit.

    Spirit over matter. As I like to say, the Right follows Truth, the Left follows Power.

    Each Pond Gone: Your comment flashed up the inside of Boston Public Library in my mind. I spent many a Saturday afternoon in that reading room twenty years ago:

  6. @PA. Re your comments ending “Eyeballing a lord, I’d guess, would have gotten you no sympathy with your fellow serfs. People accepted their station. Life was rough but order created security and aristocracy upheld the order.”

    Those days are over. We cannot hope to have them back. You can’t just somehow recreate a system in this foolish world of ease we’ve been contentedly mired in without recreating the entire era that caused us to accept our station. We are almost a different species now, the whole lot of us. There is no strength left in the majority.

  7. Dear white boy…

    You will be forced to self-annihilate…

    So you must choose white (S)upremacy.

    In the mud of the roaming (c)atholics lies the seed of a Roman (C)atholic.

  8. Pingback: Smiling While White: A Microaggression | Reaction Times

  9. Hierarchy in human society is a topic that comes naturally to us in the same way that Race does, as in Tanstaafl’s analogy about physics and football. Iow you don’t have to be an advanced level genius to be interested in it and know something about it.

    But then in America it’s all inverted and on top of that [beneath it rather] belied with the pretense of equality. So hardcase Indian Omaha is an Elder but wise-beyond-his-years Kentucky White is supposed to suck his dick or else there’s trouble on Twitter!

    Hierarchy is so much a part of “who we are”. Which phrase is problematic but that’s another post: It’s problematic because it’s the primary legitimate question but our enemies have known this and so made a cliche out of it.

    The topic of Hierarchy itself is frustrating, for some reason. These are the categories that Vox Day is generally credited with, though these categories have a longer history:

    Alpha — Trump, Putin, Soros
    Beta — Kushner
    Delta — Everyone else on staff
    Epsilon [what’s this, you ask?] — everyone else on staff about to be fired for drunkenness and general falling off

    Omega —

    Lambda —

    Gamma — many such examples! sad!

    Sigma — everyone wants to be a sigma

  10. I like the above categories, and give credit where due, but absolutely insist that the category of Epsilon be included. It’s sort of a liminal category between Delta and Gamma, for those who are failing to be Deltas. And it’s necessary to reflect the clownworld we live in.

    And also this following is my spin on it. The hierarchies can be grouped in two sets.

    The first is the main set and the second set is


    The second set is


    The category of Lambda is a catch-all for losers who might be homosexuals for instance, but they are not as low as Omegas. They still have some social value and are tolerated.

  11. It’s also worth pointing out that such categorization scheme is merely a [elegant metaphor goes here].

    It’s an open question whether such categorization scheme, is ENTIRELY arbitrary; or not.

    I am being facetious, it’s not entirely arbitrary. For instance there are two types of lobsters and that’s just a fact.

  12. People get hung up on who is alpha and who is beta? blah blah blah etc

    But the more interesting question is how we are doing w/o a guiding hierarchy in our day-to-day. And even more to the point, how having with one that is twisted against us, fucks us up!

    I tried to make that a theme of my early commenting career, about the effects of the inverted hierarchy on your own dick performance. And took a lot of heat for it. Plenty of old school WN 1.0 were just all like I don’t wanna hear about your problems kid, STFU and hit the weight room

    As a matter of practical advice of course they were right. Concurrently they failed to see the point: the hierarchies that “obtain” [pretentious word use alert] influence quality of life and life story results.

    See for example any White girl who got impregnated by a black football player. And more to the point, the White kid who didn’t get to fuck that same girl.

  13. Did you know that the standard shoelace knot can be tied in two ways, so that the bow on ye old shoes falls either vertical or horizontal?

    Class and Status are not the same thing. Class was a stand-in for Status in America, for the last many generations.

    In a stable society, it might have been the case that Status was a fractal within Class, so that everyone had a class and then a status within it.

  14. “everyone wants to be a sigma…”

    Sigma is Alpha’s dusky sundial; the barbarous shadow of the fæger rattlesnake’s rattle. It’s best known when it’s seen athwart, and ultimately shows more vocal lions that they’re mere lionesses when it comes to deciphering what Time it really is.

  15. Here’s an interesting Gamma story (or not-Gamma) that happened to me yesterday. It’s like something from a movie script, and underscores an impoartant distiction:

    Many moons ago, 15 or so years ago, I guess, when I was a much younger man, I found myself in a workplace situation in which I was, what might you say, treated very unkindly and unfairly by a particular individual who was slightly senior to me. I hate to use the word “bullied”, cause it sounds weak, but in essence I was.

    Fast-forward to this week, nearly 17 years later, and who did I run into at work, but that very same fellow! The difference is that this time I have achieved worldly success and vastly outrank him in the workplace.

    So what did I do? Nothing. I don’t give a flying fuck what happened almost 2 decades ago, my life is great and I’m not holding onto the least amount of resentment towards this guy.

    But a Gamma would.

  16. Excellent, S.J. Grudge-holding is gamma. A character trait reducible to female qualities in a man.

    My similar gamma story. As it happens, it was also 17 years ago, and I was also newish to my line of work.

    One late afternoon, a slightly older colleague and I are wrapping things up for the day. We were alone in the office. I always gave him due deference on account of his seniority over me. He was a hardcore liberal but kept politics mostly out of any conversation. He was also genuinely intelligent.

    There was a tall partition between our connected desks. We’re bantering, and he makes an unprovoked cutting remark at my expense. Completely uncalled for. I defuse it with a quip but he doubles-down with the snark.

    Wanting to nip any such problem in the bud, I get up out of my chair and walk around the partition and asked, “[Name], what are you trying to tell me?”

    To my surprise, he shrank back in his chair and stammered out some backpedaling words.

    The gamma is brave when he thinks you’ll just take it.

  17. everyone wants to be a sigma…

    In people’s minds, the appeal is “Alpha privilege without the Alpha burdens.”

    Sigma can be thought of as simply an introverted Alpha. All of the Alpha’s social dominance and charisma with women, but with an aversion to spending excessive time with people.

    If you’re a generally well liked and respected introvert with a sigmaesque independent streak but you don’t naturally attract the hottest women and get subordination from men, you’re a Delta who happens to be introverted.

  18. “…an introverted Alpha.”

    I’ve considered it a more semi-willful introversion, sampling it and enjoying it as one would use the steam rooms in Ancient Rome. Think Carl Jung, Georges Batatille; in music, Sviatoslav Richter. Having legitimately been an Alpha in one’s younger days could be an important precondition for Sigma.

  19. If you’re a generally well liked and respected introvert with a sigmaesque independent streak but you don’t naturally attract the hottest women and get subordination from men, you’re a Delta who happens to be introverted.

    That’s me. I actually sometimes get a kick out of the number of IRL people who *don’t* poast on blogs, and then I realize, to be a consistent blog poaster you’ve probably gotta have some quirky combination of personality traits, strong introversion (usually, but not always) being one.

    Do you know, though, sometimes I prefer Roissy’s simpler and older tripartite hierarchy. It’s less unwieldy and just easier.

    I dunno, I suppose I say that because of my own inexperience. Put yourself in my place: you’re a shy kid who, for religious reasons, doesn’t even TRY to play the modern sexual marketplace. Gradually, over the years, you gain worldly success and attendant confidence, and at some point in your thirties you notice that women seem comfortable, even flirty, with you – and you don’t know what to do with that, because you never played this game.

    I am consistently astounded at the sociosexual knowledge that seems *instinctive* to a Roissy.

  20. This morning’s daily off topic excitement news.

    Zephen Xaver, 21. Moved recently with his mother from Indiana to Sebring Florida where he shot up a bank and killed five people. Sometime recently was a “former prison guard trainee” but dropped out presumably because it was it sucked.

    The commenters at Daily Stormer are hoping he’s a jew. From Indiana and with this face?

  21. “…and you don’t know what to do with that, because you never played this game.

    I am consistently astounded at the sociosexual knowledge that seems *instinctive* to a Roissy.”

    I have been playing this “game” a looong time. I started young, and I have continued my pursuit of understanding the “fairer sex” well into my adulthood. (almost too long, except I’ve now settled down with “the one”.) it has been a passion of mine since the beginning. and I would say it was insprired by the awful sexual dynamics I observed between my parents.

    here is the conclusion I’ve come to: women, aside from being the vessels in which we plant our “seeds” for the future, are proxies for competing with other men. the more powerful (ie, in-demand) the woman, the more powerful the men you’re competing against for her attention. competition is a GOOD thing, for us. it brings out our best.

    for all the talk about women being “stupid” (they are, in many ways), they are perfectly well adapted to their environment. they sort men into heirarchies with an efficiency that terrifies most men. granted, their heirarchy is not the one that’s good for society, but it’s legit and nature put it there for a reason. they can bring a so-called hard man to tears, just by crushing his ego. and there are hard men that need to be humbled. fertility is as important as being able to crush your enemies. and, like it or not, women are the gatekeepers of fertility. (nb4 “but women are out slutting it up and not having kids!”, I would just say, what are their options? beta hubby? they already rejected that.)

    I have a hard time reading the conversations over at CH because they are so incredibly blithe and superficial about what women are and aren’t, what you can do with them, what you can’t do with them, how to manipulate them, etc. very shallow stuff. few people ever get to the real truth over there (or anywhere):

    by pushing the right buttons you can literally get a woman to do whatever you want her to do.

    to me it’s obvious that men are the problem, not the women. they want the highest quality women but they don’t want to do the work. they want a woman to surrender but they have no life plan. surrender to WHAT? so then it becomes a question of accountability. what are you doing with these women, and why? manipulating then towards what end? for her to give up free sex? and you complain about the downfall of civilization? puh-leeze.

    I had a point to this and that is, there is real power in understanding what makes a woman tick. sexual performance is only one part of that equation. sexual performance can be learned.

    when I look back on my younger self and think of how I really didn’t understand women sexually when I was young, didn’t understand how they wanted to be F-U-C-K-E-D, I wish I had had the humility to simply ASK them instead of letting my ego get in the way and thinking I could simply impress them with my motorcycle riding skills or whatever. if I had just ASKED what they wanted, I would have learned. but of course, pride and all that. so my advice to young guys is, if you’re not a natural, find a nice girl and ASK her what turns her on.

    for whatever reason a woman’s getting fucked properly is what drives them towards certain men. it is why the beta male patriarchy collapsed under the weight of the single straw of women’s sexual liberation. women WANTED to be free to go find the guys who would fuck them properly. you could not take that desire away from them without severely weakening our vitality. of course now the whole world is collapsing because of that but… can we really go BACK to what we had before? I don’t see how.

    anyway, another long, poor-grammar stream of consciousness comment written on a smart phone.

    elk, I enjoy reading your comments. if you’re curious about women I would recommend getting to know them more intimately. I would only offer one tip: lack of the proper application of sadism towards women is the bane of white men. once you understand that the world of women will open up to you.

    obviously I’m not talking about inflicting ACTUAL harm, here. I’m talking about you pushing the buttons in their hindbrains that need pushing. they WANT the sadism, tailored to their pain threshold. teasing falls in this category. pleasing them does not.

    the more beautiful she is the more likely her pain threshold. the woman I am with is very beautiful, and I am quite a bit older than her. if the promise of some kind of pain or torture from me wasn’t always lurking right beneath the surface she would be bored. but she’s never bored. because I’m always switching things up. she gets a lot of attention from men. I have to always keep that in mind and keep her stimulated.

    if that sounds like a lot of work that’s because it is, and you should never expect otherwise. it gets easier with practice. and with a beautiful enough (inside and outside) woman the payoff is enormous. she will inspire you to do great things in ways that are simply impossible when you are alone or with some bland, low energy broad who needs you to lift her up all the time.

  22. I am consistently astounded at the sociosexual knowledge that seems *instinctive* to a Roissy.

    CH’s knowledge of game is the opposite of instinctive. Learned and practiced, or whatever is the opposite of instinctive.

  23. what are you doing with these women, and why? manipulating then towards what end? for her to give up free sex? and you complain about the downfall of civilization? puh-leeze.

    It is hypocritical to promote casual sex, and then complain about declining values in our civilization.

    Perhaps many of the CH regulars, and the host, would say that they are not promoting casual sex; that rather they are promoting Game and what the acolyte does with it, is up to him.

    Reality check: that’s not the theme over there. The theme over there, when it’s not specifically politics and is on the topic social sexual dynamics, is getting women into non-committed, non-procreative sexual relations.

    Anyone with enough dick strength and Game, who wants to do something for society, has to lead by example.

    Otoh it’s easy to moralize.

  24. Plumpjack, great stream of thought. There is a balance to be struck between suffocating and liberating European women. Traditional patriarchy commanded women to be modest, to keep their feminine energies covered. An ordinary man wasn’t a silver-tongued lover, but he was free to slap a wife that itched for a touch of sadism.

    Beta civilization collapsed because women were unburdened of their obligations. Thank the washing machine and automatic transmission (dont even get me started on power steering).

  25. At this point in life for me, relationships centered around casual sex are a no thx. I would like to have children, to bring some around some joy though.

    There’s not much point in posting about it. Women want gamed, news at 11. On the other hand, the way things are, so many of them are desperate to be saved, and are willing to “settle.”

    I posted here not so long ago, about the last girl I got some dickswell on. It kinda makes me sad. The long and the short of it is we were two dysfunctional personalities and it didn’t work out. She literally, as in literally, tried to arrange a meet-up for the three of us with the guy she was living with and fucking. It’s like, bitch, I don’t play that. I told her to fuck off, and haven’t heard back.

  26. — I would like to have children, to bring some around some joy though.!

    I married in my early 30s (a much younger woman) and had children in my late 30s. Had I not done that, I’d now, in my late 40s, feel the same way. One thing though, when it comes to fulfilling a big desire like that: a man must make it his number one priority. Devote his entire attention to making it happen. You can do it.

    If that wish is not strong enough to try so hard at this age, it’s ok. Life is bittersweet and everyone has his share of regrets. But if the desire to have a child at this age is powerful enough for full commitment — where there is a will, there is away.

    Lots of older American men knock up a Latina or a Phillipina but I’d advise against it. At least from my perspective, the child has to look like my blood. So there are 18-32 year old White women to be met. Game on, if you have the commitment — find one.

    (“You” in general, not specifically you Elk)

  27. “Beta civilization collapsed because women were unburdened of their obligations.”

    that’s an interesting angle. I’m wondering if it was the industrial revolution in general that caused the collapse. I look at the ridiculousness of the carnage of the world wars and think “yeah, that was peak beta male patriarchy.” women didn’t cause that mess. at least not directly. and their sexual liberation came soon afterwards.. perhaps they were both semi-naturally-occurring evolutionary events.

  28. There’s not much point in posting about it.

    I agree, I’m not really interested in re-hashing stuff we already talked about. At the end of the day I just think some of the hierarchy-theorizing gets misleading, it’s like, pretty obviously it’s not only Alphas that get flirted with by women; and also I just can’t get over the idea that people – men OR women – would sleep with each other so easily.

    Here’s a story that happened last year, I don’t think I told this anywhere:

    I was away in Big City for professional training. We had an instructor, up from Big City USA in fact, typical “nice, upper-middle class” career chick whom I surmise was married to a beta colleague.

    So me being me, I mean I say I’m not all that experienced in this stuff, but IRL I am somewhat sarcastic and whimsical in a charming way, so I invite her to go out with a group of us to dinner. Except it turns out that the only other person that can come is my good buddy who (as he will be the first to admit) is a literal sperg, like literally Aspie.

    So the three of us are walking to the restaurant, and my Aspie buddy says, in his Aspie way, he wants to introduce some topic, so he says, “Now I want to ask you guys something… now I know we’re all monogamous here, but…”

    And I’m thinking, “Bud… where on earth are you going with this?”

    And Nice UMC Career Girl laughs and suggestively says, “Well, not necessarily!”


    And that’s the end of that story. We went out for dinner and talked about the differences between the USA and Canada, and Nothing Happened, but I couldn’t believe that anyone IRL would openly say something like that.

  29. “At this point in life for me, relationships centered around casual sex are a no thx.”

    the only time in life when this m-i-g-h-t be appropriate is between maybe 17-19. maybe. the types of women who engage in this behavior have never appealed to me. so one has to wonder, what type of men are attracted to the type of women who give themselves up freely? somebody here is getting a bad deal. maybe they’re all losers and that makes it okay. idk.

    the other option is playing the “serial monogamy” game where you have committed relationships but you keep upgrading. this generally helps men more than it helps women, provided that you’re determined about the “upgrading” part. in my view this is a viable way to build the skills you need to land the woman you want for this next part:

    “I would like to have children, to bring some around some joy though.”

    there really is no other social sexual dynamic that matters. the fact that guys aren’t going for that is 90% of why they aren’t “successful” with women. they want the woman to choose THEM, instead of them choosing her. your determination and clarity of purpose (but NOT neediness) is what makes her want to have kids with you.

    neediness is what kills it for women. that’s why experience with women is necessary for having kids with them. knowing that you have options is what makes them loyal to you.

    “I posted here not so long ago, about the last girl I got some dickswell on. It kinda makes me sad. The long and the short of it is we were two dysfunctional personalities and it didn’t work out. She literally, as in literally, tried to arrange a meet-up for the three of us with the guy she was living with and fucking. It’s like, bitch, I don’t play that. I told her to fuck off, and haven’t heard back”

    there’s some opportunity here for you to practice your sadism skills. “it didn’t work out”, if I may respectfully say, is a copout.

    obviously you had a connection with her. enough for the two of you to get together. she sounds like a loser. or not. I can’t tell. the fact that she floated the threesome idea suggests loser, but first and foremost it is a shit test. which, if you had passed, would have made her respect you and possibly become loyal to you, which you may not have even wanted.

    so the thing to do here, with these shit-testing women, is the practice your listening and interrogation skills. don’t judge. at least not overtly. ask her PLEASANTLY what exactly she has in mind. what get thoughts on monogamy are. ask her about her sexual history. what SPECIFICALLY she wants to do with the rest of it you. is she free of STDs. how many guys has she been with? has she ever ever wanted to get married, etc. ask her every uncomfortable question in the book. make her SAY, outwardly, what a piece of shit she is. try to break her. make her cry. make her justify why she acts this way. and do it all non-judgementally. poker faced. this will be a very good learning experience for you.

    remember, you will be making a HUGE investment in whatever woman meets your requirements. would you go into any other investment without asking about an the risks. you’re looking after you’re own interests here. so no need to tell her to “fuck off”. it’s not personal. you’re just doing your due diligence. this is an important frame to keep. the higher quality women that you will eventually be meeting will need to see that you have standards that she/they m-i-g-h-t not be able to reach. this works on all of them. ALL of them.


  30. “knowing that you have options is what makes them loyal to you.”

    there are many that say some women are innately “loyal” and to this I say bullshit. women are loyal to men they respect, that they, to some degree, fear, and to whom they are attracted.

    every woman has a disgust threshold that, once crossed, will tell her hindbrain to leave and take her chances. being a weak needy guy is generally what pushes them there. (not abuse – it’s hard for guys to wrap their brains around that.)

  31. “this will be a very good learning experience for you”

    this is really about learning how to push their (womens’) boundaries. you have to get comfortable doing this. guys are too timid, and then they wonder why women don’t want to have kids with them. women WANT you to impose on them, in all the ways. there is security in this for them. safety. they WANT you to have them explain themselves. they just don’t want you to be emotionally invested about it. they want to know that you can walk. (it’s weird, I know.)

    however, they want you to do it (impose on them) SKILLFULLY. so you have to practice pushing their boundaries to develop that skill. you will make mistakes and you will embarrass yourself. don’t get discouraged. just get back on the horse and keep going.

    when you get comfortable pushing their boundaries, say, by asking them to talk about their sex lives, or whatever, then the sexual performance will follow. because you will stop caring what they think and you will just plow. and that is what they want you to do. to just plow. generally. you can work out the refinements later. that will be in the next chapter.

  32. There is this much-mocked tweet by a newly laid off liberal journalist:

    Eleanor Goldberg @ESGoldberg
    While reporting today about federal workers who can’t afford tampons, I was laid off from HuffPost. If there’s anything I can say after 7 years, it’s that I will finish the story. (Also if you’re looking to hire a reporter to cover poverty and inequality, I’m available)

    It’s said that boys like potty language… yet when free to write what they want, women gravitate to the icky subject of undercarriage fluids. It had to be about tampons. It couldn’t be something else. Or maybe it’s just Goldberg.

  33. I personally don’t know any men I’d consider sigmas. I can think of a few alphas, but it does seem like a lot of work.

  34. I’ve recently met two Sigmas in my industry on two separate occasions. Outside consultants in both cases. Both commanded the room, one made the Alpha uneasy at first, until the Alpha relaxed and let him do his thing.

    One of the Sigmas was paired with a much older Delta vice president (still talking rank, not the airline) on a major task. The Delta was secure and easygoing enough to not be threatened, the Sigma was mature enough to follow the older man’s lead.

    In both cases, it was a beauty to watch and be part of it.

  35. “they sort men into heirarchies with an efficiency that terrifies most men”
    You guys do the same with us. That’s why it’s a good thing to find things you enjoy in life besides just being attractive to the opposite sex. Of course it is a wonderful feeling when it happens, but being dependent on it only results in unhappiness.

  36. My hierarchy for women in high school:

    Queen bee

    The hierarchy is determined by girls’ beauty, family wealth/neighborhood, and personality.

  37. I can think of a few alphas, but it does seem like a lot of work.

    Like anything, sometimes it can be a chore.

  38. I was a wallflower/outcast in high school and had very little attention from boys. In college I got way more attention from boys because there wasn’t such a rigid social hierarchy. Even some of the boys I went to high school with showed an interest after we graduated. It’s funny how that works.

  39. My father gave my his old Mustang when I was about 19. It was a stick shift and a hard car to drive. I remember always being a little nervous when driving it, and having to really focus on certain things like merging into high speed traffic and stopping on hills. I ended up buying another stick shift a few years later. Driving a stick shift was something I enjoyed and was proud of myself for doing it. I miss it.

  40. I also had a manual transmission, back in the day.

    My dad was able to get me a deal on his friend’s beater car which wasn’t working. We went over there and put in a new battery and it was good to go.

    This friend of his was a “super smart guy” but apparently, not very mechanical.

    Some people will recall, and I don’t think the word is still in use quite the same, but back then and in the suburbs you were either “mechanical” or you were not.

    Looking back it’s an absurd way to look at it. This was a huge topic and it’s what Pirsig’s first book was all about. How some people just didn’t get into being “mechanical” because it wasn’t natural enough for em.

  41. That whole topic of trying to square the mechanical and the romantic side of things, or how was it characterized, the right-brain way of looking at things in terms of their look and feel instead of their underlying structure: romantic isn’t what he called it.

    The main problem NOW IS that we are not learned [no sic] to create a satisfying living environment, a nice comfy extended phenotype if you will, without shitting things up. That’s one big issue of the age. People have never before had to dispose of industrial waste on such a scale. On the other hand they have always had garbage, and always had to deal with overfishing and overhunting and over grazing and blah blah blah. But not like now.

    This problem of the ecology that we can live in for the long term, is something that should be a unifying thing.

    It would be neat if humans could avoid total war as a necessary solution to going extinct from other tribes.

    Probably not though. That’s why Whites have to dominate and probably come to an agreement with the Chinese and the other advanced Asian races, to not exterminate each and also preserve the planet. Everyone wants this.

    Let us have a Dissident Right platform that includes straight up front an answer to this problem.

  42. “Extended phenotype” is a great phrase, I assume yours.

    Good example of White extended phenotype: Cobra Kai Dojo 1984.

    Not our extended phenotype: Cobra Kai Dojo 2018.

  43. Extended Phenotype is a science phrase from some contemporary geneticist. It means an animal’s built out environment. Like a beaver dam and pond.

    I use it colloquially, and loosely. A dobro with the right spirit and attitude and instructors, is a good example.

    They used it all the time back at Majority Rights, circa WN 1.75; MR was very influential back in the day with Bowery and Guessedworker and Fred Scrooby. Generally when they used it they were referring to the cultural influence of the jews. The jews create an extended phenotype within their host society.

  44. A dobro with the right spirit and attitude and instructors, is a good example.

    That was a “freudian” slip. Meant to agree with dojo but dobro works just as well for an example.

    The concept itself is very useful. I checked wiki briefly and it’s from Dawkins; the summary above is correct.

    The larger, less formal usage of the concept is in the sense of the habitat that we create for ourselves, which habitat includes culture.

  45. — “dobro works just as well for an example.”

    It does. “Dobro” is the noun form of “good” in Polish. And as I just learned, Dobro is also an American brand of resonator guitar.

  46. My guess as to the VD-scale rank of personalities at Heartiste’s:

    Alpha: you’re unlikely to see VD’s scale Alphas spend much time in that medium. They are too extraverted and impatient to play the “deep thinker,” even the highly intelligent ones. Elements of Carlos Danger and Trav777 personae have that feel. However, probably not, given their late-life marriage and/or bachelorhood. Alphas are conventional when it comes to that sort of thing. Marry the top beauty at 25, maybe have discreet affairs.

    Laguna Beach Fogey was an Alpha.

    Beta: Greg Eliot

    Delta: most of the decent commenters

    Gamma (high functioning): Matt King

    Sigma: Heartiste

    Omega: A bunch in the past, no one name comes to mind.

    Lambda: as self-confessed

  47. I might be exaggerating my negative high school experience, but I definitely had some social problems. I attribute a lot of it to my lack of character development from not having a strong relationship with my father. I didn’t have many of those character developing interactions with a father that help you become a good person. It took some painful self assessment and a realization that I had a lot of traits I needed to work on.
    Here are some traits I think make people likable: not taking things too personally, having empathy for others, putting yourself out there and seeking out human interactions,and pulling your weight and doing your fair share.
    These journalists who are saying Nick Sandmann reminds them of all the bullying they endured in school are pathetic. They are blaming others for their personal failings. Also, bullies are usually losers themselves. The popular kids just ignore you.

  48. The “outcast” girls were few in my large school. There were certainly lower-tier female cliques but that was lower-socioeconomic class in a mostly upper middle class school. And they were insular anyway and had their own guys in Redneck/metalhead cliques.

    There were also girls who were assertive enough in not letting some popular bitch mess with them.

    Three genuine Outcast girls:

    One Outcast girl was paralyzed with awkwardness and kept to herself. She’d walk down the hallways with books pressed tight against her chest and a look of fear in her face, eyes always to the floor. As far as I know, regular girls left her alone. Boys also left her alone but we’d sometimes bust each other’s balls: “Hey, you don’t have a date to homecoming, ask [her] to go out with you!”

    Another was very socially needy, offputtingly needy. Not attractive, did gross things like let her snot hang, which were unforced errors. She kept trying to hang on to a Wallflower clique of girls, who let her join on the periphery but they were cruel to her. Guys made fun of her too because she serially approached “approachable” boys hoping they’d date her.

    Third Outcast girl was messed up. Average looking, but certainly victim of abuse. In junior high, she’d flash her boobs (first female toplessness I’ve seen after puberty) and once fingered herself in class when goaded by some kid when the teacher left the room. All the while laughing and grinning. She transferred to another school after that year. I recently looked her up in my early-80s yearbook. Her eyes were pretty crazy and downright scary.

  49. That’s meant as a sort of gen x joke, which as a joke is good enough that it doessn’t need explained, but here’s the explanation.

    There was a good gen x joke from the 90s or approximately that went something like: “you peaked in high school” and by implication you’re not making the grade at Encorpera, or for that matter as far as compared to Charlie Croker in Atlanta. The joke as it pertained to Charlie Croker would have modified to peaking in university. That was the explicit story line for him: Did he peak in college, or was he to overcome that arc? (He overcame it.)

    So “I peaked in 6th grade” is a self-deprecating doubling down on that joke: not even in high school. I used this joke to good effect on numerous occasions in real life.

    It’s funny because it’s true. It’s been a struggle to be a man. I’ve more or less come through on the other side, but it’s a bitter sweet reflection at this age. I have a big interview next week with the government for a sweet job. Have to get my hair cut and lose the good-looking greaser. Sad!

    My dad made a joke about his driver license picture. He’s old now, but he looks like a badass on his picture with his full white beard and classic face. I told him once I was always proud to be his son and that would have to do it for deathbed dramatics.

  50. Charlie Croker is the hero of A Man in Full. Which book by the deceased Tom Wolfe came out in the early 90s incidentally, the same time that joke about peaking in high school, itself was peaking!

    So those are co-incidental memes! (Charlie Croker being one, and the joke being the other)

    Also on this theme, Sailer gets credit. He is the oldest version of gen x, and he used to do a joke about high school that went,

    They used to ask about your mom, but now it’s “how did you rate in high school?”

    nb4 It’s not the same in high school anymore. I have no idea what it’s like in high school. I was banned from the synchronized swimmers fan club, which fan club I started so it’s especially bitter.

  51. Now that it’s been long enough I can probably go back to high school. I live in the same god-damned neighborhood …

    Their big drama club production, for the “fall season” and which was promoted on the promotion sign on the corner of school grounds by the busy intersection where the cars drive by, was for a play about Anne Frank.

    I wish that was made-up joke but it’s not. So apparently Gen Z doesn’t apply to that clique of the high school. Which is not surprising. Drama Club.

  52. Owen Benjamin would get paid two thousand per hour, to write comedy. Or that is what he said.

    I missed my window for that though. It has already passed. There is a time in a person’s life when sees how differently the younger generation sees things. I am fairly “young at heart” and relate better than avg to the kids, but even so.

    Their farm of reference is different and from “another country.”

    Relatedly, such was my takeaway with the last girl I kissed and swelled up on. She was 25 years old, and wants things “to happen.” That’s how girls should be and can’t be faulted for. Were I myself not dysfunctional I would have literally swept her off her feet and we would have two kids by now. This was already 2-and-a-half years ago. How time flies. That was the last time I made kissy face and genital swell with a girl. It was mutual, the attraction.

    Captain Obvious misses on some of his stuff. Don’t get me started on “you got to go to that Dark Place” but he is right about the chemistry bit. Anytime there is real chemistry it’s a special thing; a sign from God as it were.

  53. The girl in question was from outstate. A prominent city out in the country. What are those cities called in the parlance of geography? She was like 5 foot 8 about 155 lbs and so needed to drop 10 or 15. Dark hair and grey eyes. By her face I would guess German and Old American ethnicity: a good match.

    The right ethny, the right size. Her size is BMW: big midwest girl. Whereas mine is “barely medium” sized for a man in these parts. Men are very big in the Upper Midwest, so being barely medium sized here is not so bad.

    I can fit my hand into a big mouth mason jar though, to clean it. I bet that out in country, that only 10 or 15 per cent of the adult men can do that. In the metro here probably 30 per cent of the White men can get their right hand, their “dish hand”, into a big mouth mason jar.

  54. She was 25 years old, and wants things “to happen.”

    CH commenter trav777 made an observation on that theme. He was totally right. Iow he employs perspicacious theory of mind in order to get in their pants. Girls want to be swept in experience and things happening. Especially applicable to those girls who are out on the town.

  55. PA’s rating of the characters on our favorite blog, are classic.

    But there’s the whole issue of Deltas wanting to rank higher. But I think now lately it’s a more accepted concept, and men can take pride of place in that designation.

    Owen Benjamin calls himself a Delta, and he is fairly influential.

    I have a pretty strong will to power, and am not a delta. Not being large of physical frame, and not having much success in life, makes that problematic; but even so.

    Success in life has to be refigured to include the crucial data point of where you are at this moment. That might seem too freakin obv to comment upon. We talk about those sorts of things a lot in AA.

  56. People “run away” from Delta because they think it means sheeple and unattractive. That’s incorrect, of course. Independence of mind is not exclusive to any rank. Also, all but the lowest Deltas can easily turn on and fuck good and keep a girl in their league, provided that they dont self-sabotage with their proclivity to idealize women.

    For the same reason, everybody wants to be a Sigma. They think it’s the one rank that transcends our souls’ entanglement in our social animal nature. Which is nonsense.

    Your Epsilon: a subset of Deltas, not toxic like Gamma, not gross like Omega, but also not a team player like other Deltas? A “likeable stoner?”

  57. Delta seems like a high quality man to me. He would be physically fit, well adjusted, socially adept and successful in his career. He’s basically the type of man most women would find attractive. Alpha men are rare and being one seems to come with too many drawbacks. Trump is an alpha and I’m not sure most men would even want to be in his shoes right now.

  58. Also, all but the lowest Deltas can easily turn on and fuck good and keep a girl in their league

    Yes, but you hardly ever hear this acknowledged – in fact I don’t know that I ever have seen it stated quite like that – which is why I said that I frankly prefer the more simplistic three-tier system. Fact is, it gets complicated if you let it: in any group of Deltas there’s going to be an “Alpha” Delta, etc., etc. Yeesh, let’s just follow the KISS rule.

    Another thing about Deltas, relating back to something I had said a few days ago, is that compared to Gammas they are much LESS likely to engage in posturing and/or dominance behaviour. I think that, without even realizing it, some reluctance to accept “Delta” comes from wanting to be able to BTFO all the Gammas in one’s life, or just not have to deal with them.

    One more thing: I think when an inexperienced man rises from low-Delta to high-Delta, he can (in various ways) fool himself into thinking he’s risen further than he has, just because from HIS point of view, the surroundings have changed so much, if you will.

  59. I mean if the vast majority of men are Deltas, and true Alphas are actually fairly rare, then to me that just means the Delta spectrum is enormously broad, with contextually “Alpha” Deltas, “Delta” Deltas, etc., etc. You could get mass-spectroscopically analytic about all this, but I don’t think it’s worthwhile.

  60. One more example:

    “Alpha men are rare” – I mean, are they? Aren’t we all familiar with the concept of the Alpha *because* we’ve known some? Sometimes I think when we have these conversations we aren’t actually using the same definitions of the terms.

  61. — Yes, but you hardly ever hear this acknowledged

    Manosphere readers are sensitive to the pernicious impact of feminism on society. Women are hypergamous, that’s a eugenic law of nature. Unleash it and civilization falls. An ordinary man gets a leg-up on hypergamy in his traditional culture. I’m not talking some pie in the sky Patriarchy, just a normal world where women are more or less chaste and drawn to marriage with a man who is (1) responsible, (2) attractive (3) and with a modicum of social charm. She’ll be happy with any two out of three.

    As much as PUAs go on about needing thermonuclear Game out there today, and that’s true for high-shield environments like nightclubs, all an average man otherwise needs is the bare basics and watch women’s eyes light up. They too are starved for non-soy sausage.

    — with contextually “Alpha” Deltas, “Delta” Deltas, etc., etc

    I give due deference on this to Vox as the author of this social theory, so this is my own analysis, not necessarily his. My view is that that there is a fractal effect: any five Alphas will stratify into a leader, two lieutenants, two followers. Same with five Deltas.

    However, I believe that unlike with Heartiste’s fluid and to a degree situational Alpha-Beta binary scale, VD’s scale is essential to a man’s neurowiring. Just like from among five introverts, the least-shy guy will emerge as the talker, but he’s still an introvert in an absolute sense.

    Same with the five Alphas I mentioned above. Yes, they will stratify by fractal dynamics but none of them will suddenly play the Gamma. The situational followers will look for opportunities to advance in rank. They’re all simply Alphas in a high-level league.

    And same with those five hypothetical Deltas. They’ll also stratify, but the emergent leader will not feel those ambitions to take it to the next level.

  62. “…starved for non-soy sausage.”

    That made me chuckle. Alpha deltas. High-function gammas. Lieutenant Alphas. Sounds like we’re breeding horses for high-stakes steeplechasing… Also makes me think of the ‘Alpha Plus’ sundering in Brave New World. Wishing you a strong recovery, PA.

  63. Thank you sir!

    It’s easy to get fascinated by all that taxonomy, isnt it. I find it immensely so. And since they inflicted “The Authoritarian Personality” on us… stand by.

  64. Just like from among five introverts, the least-shy guy will emerge as the talker, but he’s still an introvert in an absolute sense.

    Heh, I know that feel, the handful of times I’ve been in a group and suddenly realized, What, I’m the most outgoing guy here?!

    My view is that that there is a fractal effect: any five Alphas will stratify into a leader, two lieutenants, two followers. Same with five Deltas.

    I’m glad that we agree on this at least. My point is just that the concept really loses its utility if the vast majority of men one meets are Deltas; in order for the scheme to be useful in an everyday sense there needs to be a way to stratify those Deltas…

    … and so that in the end, I’m personally not really sold on the whole model. It’s a working model, yes, but JUST a model.

    PS: I’m recovering from outp. surgery a few days ago. Nothing serious, but comes with lots of time to read and blog.

    Heh, I did notice you’ve been pretty quick on the uptake. Also best wishes.

    [Thank you! – PA]

    That made me chuckle. Alpha deltas. High-function gammas. Lieutenant Alphas.

    Yeah, see? It’s all a bit silly.

  65. One more point, and then I will stop beating the horse for the night:

    I think one reason men claim to be higher than they are is that the manosphere has done a real disservice in painting a 90/10 picture with respect to alphas/deltas; insinuating that Deltas are basically dogs picking at the scraps. I know VD has said, look guys, remember there’s nothing “wrong” with being a Delta – but it doesn’t come across as terribly convincing when the manosphere tells us over and over again that only Alphas are having sex.

    So lots of guys will say to themselves, well look, I’m successful, I have men under my authority, I’ve never had trouble attracting women… I don’t fit the model of the Delta that’s been presented.

    Some questions:

    -do romance novels ever have Delta heroes?

    -we read again and again (in this very thread, even!) that Alphas get married young and have affairs. Do Deltas have affairs?

  66. — do romance novels ever have Delta heroes?

    I don’t know much about romance novels but I reckon that the Strong and Silent archetype figures in there. If you are the best man you can be, you will always be alpha in her eyes and that will inspire you to be the best man you can be. That’s not a pretty lie because love is real.

    Off the top off my head, popular songs by women about men:

    Alpha – Carly Simon “You’re So Vain”
    Beta and Delta – Whitney Houston “All The Man that I Need”
    Sigma – Heart “Magic Man”
    Can’t think of one for Gamma
    But even an Omega has a love song: Concrete Blonde “Joey”

    Delta songs:

    A woman longs to rescue him:

    A pretty girl dreams of him:


  67. The topic of hierarchy needs the big brain treatment. I applaud everyone in this part of the internet who tries to elucidate on it, but really it’s very complicated.

    On the one hand. No doubt human societies are stratified, and there are different castes. Also, these castes are probably almost certainly discreet categories.

    On the other hand. Is there ACTUALLY a reliable model that we have? Does the Vox Day model actually corresponding to reality?


    What’s the caste category that goes most along with old and tired?

  68. One reason that men don’t want to be Deltas is because our current society is not allowing us much dignity. And so we think that maybe the more rarified higher ranks, might have some of the dignity that we are lacking.

  69. Taylor Swift sure has gone off the radar. It was only not so long ago that she was a big deal.

    My opinion as to whether or not she was a man, wavered back and forth. There was a video I linked to, that made a very convincing case that she was, based on standard metrics of how bodies are proportioned, in fact a man.

    But these days there is so much criss cross, it doesn’t mean that she’s a man because she has long arms. I saw some woman today with a jaw like Jesse Ventura. Unlikely she could fit her hand into a mason jar.

    My opinion on Taylor is back to that she is the proud owner of a front-hole.

  70. Sorry for referring to Ms Swift’s genitals in such a vulgar fashion.

    It would do wonders for her health and not to say rep, for her to have some kids.

    The fact that she doesn’t, is itself suspicious. Especially given the content of all her videos such as the one linked to above, in which she plays both female leads. That’s a goofy device. Even by the low standards of tween pop.

    Taylor should want to avoid the fate of those awful others like Ashley Judd and Charlize Theron. She sings about wanting to pair up, ffs.

    We’re to believe that she is unable to do so, for reasons …

  71. Foolish Games by Jewel is a very strong song. It is her song: she has the songwriting credit.

    I had forgotten how remarkable her story was. Mormons, German descended, Utah Alaska BYU etc

    She seems to have stayed clear of the degeneracy and is listed as having one child.

    A female friend was a huge fan and said she saw her all the time at the start of her career in cafes.

  72. There was this show I once saw, that Jewel and a group of her male companions from the TV or something went to a karaoke bar in some honkytonk in the middle on nowhere. The guys dressed and acted the part of passing-thru-town Chads, and Jewel, on the sly, had a professional makeup artist make her look mousy, completely unlike herself. She assumed some mousy name too, like “Jane.” Even wore a fake nose. None of the bar patrons knew it’s Jewel.

    At some point, someone calls up the next volunteer to do a song, and one of the Chads shouts, “Hey, Jane, you go up there!” She acts mortified “no, no way, I’m not going up on stage!” But the Chads start egging her on, and soon the entire honkytonk chants sympathetically: “Jane! Jane! Jane!”

    Eeeeever so reluctantly and bashfully, “Jane” steps on stage, takes the microphone, and tells the DJ that she’s choosing a Jewel song. I don’t remember what song that was.

    She starts singing it in her real voice…and everyone starts looking on, in disbelief how well she sings. She’s done, graciously waves to the crowd, hurries off-stage, still in her shy “Jane” character, and goes back to the manager’s office, where she’s quickly cleaned up to look like herself. Within minutes, she takes the stage again, introduces hereself as Jewel, and gives the local folks a concert.

  73. Quote by Charlize Theron: “There are some parts of America I wouldn’t travel with my kids and that is problematic.”
    She is raising her children to see themselves as victims of racism. I have a feeling that is going to end up backfiring on her.

  74. Pingback: Cantandum in Ezkaton 27/01/19 | Liberae Sunt Nostrae Cogitatiores

  75. I just read VD hierarchy. I was confusing Deltas and Betas. Anyway, based on his descriptions Sigmas and Alphas don’t really seem to fall in love with women. It’s all about them.

  76. I just read VD hierarchy. I was confusing Deltas and Betas.

    “Hey, remember when I said Deltas seemed like the kind of man women would want? Yeah I meant Betas.” Whatta riot.

  77. Not apropos: I’ve lately very much disliked the term “civic nationalist” as too generous. From now on I’m going with “liberal capitalists.”

    Inspired by @slav on Gab just now. His style is severe but he’s also open-minded in discussions with anyone:

    Civic “nationalists” (liberal capitalists if we’re being honest about it) are so pathetic in their twisting of reality that they make leftists seem coherent.

    I’m just done arguing with individualists. They’re a cancer on society.

  78. In a while-back chat with me, he came around to my view that his small native country, which is Serbia, would not be well served by an influx of poz-fleeing Westerners, even if they are right wing.

    His avatar, I think, is a national hero, it’s not him. He is in fact a young guy.

    I came steps-more around to his sympathy for old school Eastern European communism and complementary loathing of capitalism. As my views go, there are nuanced objections that I’m not getting into now, but I am coming strongly to the belief that commercial freedom leads to a very bad place.

    His and my personal or parents’ memory of communism is very different. Without going into nuances now, I remember that era in Poland as paradise.

    Serbs under Tito, I think, had to deal with anarcho-tyranny, with minority-Albanians and others empowered by the government to act lawlessly against the Serbs (we’re there now in the West). I think that Croats were in a similar pinch in the more ethnically diverse areas, but my knowledge of Yugoslavia is not deep.

  79. As everyone knows it’s the middle of winter and that means suicidal despair snow!

    Haha. I actually have come to realize that joking about suicide and despair is not funny. Not at all. All the people who actually go there, make it not funny. It’s not a funny thing, this life of trials.

    I thought to make an effort comment on the shows that were on netflix last night. Sometimes at the end of the day and instead of reading and or doing something else, one will surrender to ye old easy chair and remote control. And so it goes.

  80. For starters let me say it’s a pirated account. No shekels from this smarter-than-avg goy.

    For seconds, pleased to be knowing, it’s mostly shite, but some genres are not so much. To break it down quickly —

    1. Dramas in the classic made-for-tv format. They are still pumping these out. They suck.

    2. Nature documentaries. These can be ok. Most of them are narrated by arch Brit David Attenborough who is famous in the Dissident Right for being literally the biggest status signaler in the world. He is the ultimate Boomer. He has had a great life and therefore the kids will just have to adjust to the new reality, and if they complain about things, well they should get their noses back on the grindstone and makes something of their situation, which is what they did back in the day. (They worked really hard.)

    The problem with nature documentaries is that they make me feel bad for being inside on an ez chair and not living in a burrow like good prairie dogs do.

    They also make me feel bad for not being an accomplished natural scientist which is what I was supposed to do in life, but head injuries and other problems aw shucks I didn’t want to burden this post with those details …


    3. Standup Comedy. Netflix for awhile was famous for this. Netflix was the apex achievement for standup. In fact it still is, but as we know comedy is dead.

    Benjamin Owen calls himself the last comic standing, and he deserves that accolade. In spite of his youthful arrogance and stupid avatar which features the Washington monument as a phallus, he seems humble.

    But the death of comedy is well worn theme by now. It’s sad and it’s true. Real comics (ahem) have been driven underground.

    However, it’s still the apex accomplishment for working standups to get their netflix feature. The top comic who is not funny and so still on the circuit, is called Sebastion Maniscalco and his 2019 netflix feature is Sebastion Maniscalco: Stay Hungry. It is filmed at the big stage in New York and it’s a cultural even that is worth noting because it goes to show how sad and dreary we all are, especially his audience who shows up for a big night on the town and wanting to be entertained.

    I will not jstify him with an effort comment except to say that

    a) Yes he is White but Southern Italian (i think)
    b) He makes sure to countersignal Whites but tries to walk that line
    c) I watched less than 30 minutes of his special because bored
    d) His opening bit, which as you will know, is his strongest material, was good. It was about being 50 years old and how in the old days you might square off and fight with some dude at a bar but that’s just not practical anymore
    e) Then he went into this weak stuff about working out at the gym. Dude that stuff is old!
    f) His wardrobe and his look is childish. He is mid gen x but in order to be a comic which is to say not have much self respect, he has to dress like a child.

    In other words, he in on a premier stage in NY wearing sneakers and skinny jeans. What a loser.


    I have one more comment that is about what was on netflix last night, but it’s sensitive, and I am reluctant.

  81. Did someone say “suicidal despair”?

    We’re on something like our 6th consecutive winter of practically no snow. Dan Fogelberg needs to get his posthumous ass kicked for thinking that “snow turned into rain” is an uplifting metaphor.

  82. 3. Documentaries about Human Ecology. For starters I want to say that I don’t what Human Ecology means. It is an actual science phrase that JB ‘the Godfather’ kicks around and uses in the correct sense but this is not on that level.

    I like the sound of it though and it seems to fill a need to describe, well, human ecology. As in all angles and aspects of the social world that we live in and create. And especially including the health of the individuals that make up said society, and more especially including their relationships and how said relationships reflect in the individuals and outward too.

    Like I said, it’s an actual science term and pleased to be advising: I don’t know what it means.

    So in a vague way Documentaries about Human Ecology means historical documentaries from the second half of the 20th century and they always have the subtext of what tf happened? Wtf went wrong?

    This category of documentary is totally where the action is at. So much footage is available, and everyone wants to know what happened. And so actually footage, it seems that this medium is helpful and necessary, and belongs on the shelf with history books.

    Needless to say it is political and therefore watch out for jews getting their noses into it.

    Oh yeah what was controversial documentary on human ecology that is sensitive and I don’t want to post about? Here is its title and tagline:

    Abducted in Plain Sight
    In this true crime documentary, a family falls prey to the manipulative charms of a neighbor, who abducts their adolescent daughter. Twice.

    It’s about a pedophile and but here’s the thing. He’s White and they people it’s set in White America in the 70s and beyond. Idaho specifically and the characters [real people] are LDS.

  83. The aforementioned documentary, Abducted in Plain Sight, currently on netflix.

    As a cultural thing, it’s a pretty big deal. The woman who was abducted has a book out and this is part of her journey. Her name is Jan Broberg. This link to The Sun summarizes the documentary,

    On Twitter, one person said: “Abducted In Plain Sight is the single craziest thing I have ever watched in my entire life.”

    Another added: “I just watched Abducted In Plain Sight on Netflix […] That was, by far, THE WILDEST documentary i have ever watched.”

    “Currently watching Abducted in Plain Sight on Netflix and it just keeps getting stranger and stranger,” another person tweeted.

    The pedophile was Robert B Berchtold, aka ‘B’.

    The documentary itself is in fact NSFW and can be accurately called lurid. As an example of its lurid detail, it says that the girl was penetrated one inch but her hymen remained intact. By the details of the documentary, it is not made clear whether whether she was violated more than that.

    nb4 Death to all pedos

    BUT it was odd that the facts regarding the exact nature of the sex abuse she suffered, and as explicitly presented, are exactly as summarized above.

    The girl’s parents are totally at fault. ‘B’ literally seduced both of them, and so they were compromised. He seems to have done so with calculated deliberation so that they were compromised.

    The father masturbated him off, and the mother eventually had sex with him. They both describe him as charming. Which is hard to believe, but that’s a sex predator at work, finding compatible victims.

    The father, Robert ‘Bob’ Dean Broberg, is worth an image search. He died just last year, it turns out.

    His participation in the film, is his confession.

  84. Beyond it being a ‘crazy’ documentary, there are a couple larger points on some of the themes around here.

    1. Pedoface. The picture above features the pedo from the film, and his face. And to the point: his face qualifies. Better pictures than the one above, are abundant in the documentary.

    How it is that he wasn’t “spotted” and further, was described as charming, is the larger theme that is weird. Actually though, one of their other residents of that community DID spot him, and made a point of shunning him. But on the by and large, he was free to roam. Oh and also his brother knew about his problem.

    It begs the questions about what was community in America in the 70s. I didn’t grow up in Idaho in the 70s, but in many ways there were similarities.

    I was accosted by a suspicious man when I was 8 or 10 and wearing one of the cool kid jerseys with your name across the back. From his car he called me out by name, and asked me something, I don’t recall what. I didn’t get any closer to him. What possible reason could he have had, for doing that?

    My father had a guy in his neighborhood growing up who invited the kids over for a choral group in his basement, and particularly the sensitive and vulnerable ones.

    2. Weak Fathers. What more can be said. Robert Broberg.

    3. Sex Abuse. I get cynical about it though, because circumcision. Yeah it’s terrible what was done to that girl, but jeez it beats having being strapped down and cut on and diminished. By literally a thousand of magnitude.

    That’s the topic that is most, uh, “out of bounds”. Yeah it’s terrible what she went through, is she a wrecked or broken person because of it; and should she be automatically thought of as such?

    How many girls in the history of Life, get sex abused. How many in your own family tree. Certainly far enough back. The whole history of conquest and war and blah blah blah etc.

  85. Had I been given the choice, “I would rather” have been abducted, at an equivalent age and by the homosexual version of that guy, and then returned in one piece as was his victim, than what was done in the circumrestraint.

    All this outrage and shame about this girl, but not one word about having your dick cut on and tossed in the trash w/o so much as the courtesy of biohazard bag.

    Remember the 120 Million. It’s not a joke. Should not there be redress?

  86. “w/o so much as the courtesy of biohazard bag.”

    This detail according to Canadian Christopher Guest, MD. He is best youtube on the topic of circumcision.

    If you were done in America in the 70s or approximately, not only were you not anesthetized, your foreskin was disposed of in the trash w/o so much as a medical waste bag. Now that’s class!

    This link courtesy of Age of Treason is good too,

    They point out that in America today, if you tattoo on your baby boy’s shaft and you are going to jail for a long time. But cut it off and you can probably get the hospital to give it to you and then you can put it in your soup like those cute jews do in that movie with Ben Stiller.

    That particular podcast is good, but their arguments are from an Enlightenment Perspective, as Morgoth would point out. For instance, an argument used is saving the poor African Capoids who have to cut their dicks w/ rusty nails and other available scrap metal.

    Or intersex kids can be cut at the discretion of the medical staff and parents, but ONLY IF they are determined to be male! If they are designated female, then it’s hands off. That’s how the law stands in America for instance, and I think most of Europe. Save the poor girls.

  87. Had I been given the choice, “I would rather” have been abducted, at an equivalent age and by the homosexual version of that guy, and then returned in one piece as was his victim, than what was done in the circumrestraint.

    It’s a LURID way to make a point, yes it is!

    But for the sake of argument. A man has to make a choice, for himself or maybe for his son. Which does he choose?

    A. Standard American brand neonatal circumcision, with or without anesthetic; or

    B. Abduction, abuse, and but then returned physically and in one piece, with the abuse-in-question near to identical as possible, to what Jan Broberg suffered as described above.

    However: Clearly the question can’t actually be answered w/o more specificity as to what Jan Broberg suffered. It was odd how the film left it open to interpretation.

    On the one hand the totally went there but otoh they left that one (crucial) detail. Maybe it’s in the book?

  88. On the one hand they totally went there but otoh they left out that one (crucial) detail. Maybe it’s in the book?


    Is it too much to ask, for the details of the sex abuse in question?

    Is it too much to ask for the details?

    Because what we are being asked to consider, is the crime; but they withhold the details because sensitive.

    Any adults in the room, or just children?

    Here’s the thing: the details are the most RELEVANT part of the story.

    nb4 Yeah but it’s prurient. Yeah but otoh yet again, no one is disputing that sex abuse is bad.


    On a recent Third Rail they were talking about the VERY bigtime director what’s-his-name Singer, who has been outed as an abuser of teenage boys and or maybe other classes of vulnerables.

    Borzoi, the host of the show, was reading a story on the abuse as it went down, which read went something like Singer followed the kid [teenage boy] into the bathroom and sexually abused him.

    That’s pretty vague.

    We don’t necessarily need to know how many times he came in the kid’s ass, but if that didn’t happen then it shouldn’t be intimated.

  89. I am not much of a social scientist. It occurs to me now, that 120 million American fathers have already expressed their revealed preference, on the question of what they would do with their sons, given the choice. And they weren’t even facing the specter of having to pay for an intact set, with something later on in life.

Comments are closed.