Women Create Drama To Socially And Sexually Bond

An eccentric psychosocial study reveals an abiding truth about women and indirectly validates a core Game concept.

Emotional arousal when watching drama increases pain threshold and social bonding

Fiction, whether in the form of storytelling or plays, has a particular attraction for us: we repeatedly return to it and are willing to invest money and time in doing so. Why this is so is an evolutionary enigma that has been surprisingly underexplored. We hypothesize that emotionally arousing drama, in particular, triggers the same neurobiological mechanism (the endorphin system, reflected in increased pain thresholds) that underpins anthropoid primate and human social bonding. We show that, compared to subjects who watch an emotionally neutral film, subjects who watch an emotionally arousing film have increased pain thresholds and an increased sense of group bonding.

Wew cads. Let’s lick our way to the sploogy goodness at the center of this study.

The shared experience of drama increases pain tolerance and bonding among (active or passive) participants.


Drama queens.


Shit tests.

Connecting the dots?

We used an emotionally intense made-for-TV film (Stuart: A Life Backwards; 90 min), based on a real-life personal story [38]. The film portrays the life story of Stuart, a disabled and homeless child abuse survivor, often in harrowing detail, and provides a disturbing insight into how a disabled child could end up being driven to prison, drugs, hopelessness, a life on the streets and eventual suicide. In all, 169 participants (101 females; mean age = 24.8 ± 10.2 years, range 18–72) watched the film in a small theatre environment in groups of varying size (mean 11.3, range 2–49). As a control condition, 68 participants (42 females; mean age = 29.7 ± 12.3 years) watched two documentaries (The Museum of Life, Episode One (BBC, 2010; 60 min) and Landscape Mysteries: In Search of Irish Gold (BBC, 2008; 30 min))

CH and other PUAs have long contended that the female shit test is a form of flirtation that women use to filter out weak defensive men and select for self-confident jerkboys, and as such should be viewed as an opportunity for, rather than an obstacle to, romance.

What this research highlights is the essential need of humans, and particularly of women, for drama as social glue and pain reduction. Women shit test male suitors to CREATE THE DRAMA THEY NEED TO SOCIALLY AND LATER SEXUALLY BOND WITH A MAN, and to reduce the pain of hastily acquiescing their vaginas to a passionate impulse.

The shit test is a dramatic fiction novel written by a woman on-the-fly, to bond her more strongly to you as the mutual seduction plays out to its welcome end. Men who take shit tests personally have a complete misunderstanding of it, thinking it’s a personal attack. When they act butthurt or spiteful in reaction, the bonding spell is broken; the woman has lost her partner in drama. But the man who knows that shit tests are a woman’s invitation to keep telling your story and ramping up her buying temperature with dramatic plot lines, twists, and temporary impasses, is the man who will laugh off her shit tests and amplify them to absurdity. Drama.

Seduction is manipulation, and manipulation is goal-oriented communication. To be complicit in one’s seduction is to know the destination but demand the scenic route. A woman wants the scenic route because that’s where the best stories are made and told.


  1. on October 13, 2017 at 1:34 pm Charlesz Martel



  2. Absolutely, this is true, and I’ll go a step further than mere shit tests. When in a LTR girls will juuuuust nudge you enough to draw an emotional response out of you anyway they can…Conversely, sometimes I’ll make shit up just to keep them on their toes when too much time has elapsed without a little sexual fire…Never let them get comfortable…


    • It gets tiring after awhile though.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dam right..

        Liked by 1 person

      • Not when your dating Catwoman.


      • on October 13, 2017 at 5:36 pm Difference Maker

        Indeed. Don’t care for this. Female sexual harassment

        Because of value inflation through culture and internet, too many random girls try this


      • on October 13, 2017 at 6:25 pm Captain Obvious

        The purpose of all this feminine Sturm und Drang was to equip women with the psychological capacity to make it through a successful NATURAL CH!LDBIRTH [[email protected] delivery, no epidural] – not just once, but six or eight or ten times over the course of their lifetimes.

        And beyond the horror of having their bodies ripped apart by the b!rths, the ladies also had to contend with the ever-living emotionalistic nightmare of raising those six or eight or ten ch!ldren over the course of several decades.

        Working 9-5 as a 21st Century cubicle monkey wage slave for ZOG is a stroll on the beach compared to the psychological tornado of b!rthing & raising a brood of progeny.

        Liked by 1 person

      • on October 13, 2017 at 6:26 pm Captain Obvious

        tl;dr == Your woman’s appetite for pain will never be satiated until you get her busy b!rthing & raising your progeny.

        Conversely, if your relationship [with her] isn’t supplying that constant pain [& euphoria] for her to experience, then sooner or later, her Hamster is going to start looking for it elsewhere…


      • on October 13, 2017 at 6:28 pm Captain Obvious

        [email protected] delivery


      • It gets tiring if you haven’t done it enough. If you’ve done it enough, it just gets boring after a while because the new sex toy luster wore off and most women are shit at keeping attraction going.


    • on October 13, 2017 at 3:47 pm Gunslingergregi

      Yea hos will lol woman I’m love just are in live they do anything you want

      Liked by 1 person

    • it does get tiring

      that’s why you have to be careful not to pick girls who have too much of a need for drama. they will seem fun and exciting at first but it’s get old real fast.

      a little is normal but if the shit testing is constant and never let’s up no matter what you do, you’re going to exhaust yourself trying to manage them. have never met a girl who was worth that kind of stress

      Liked by 1 person

    • We are conditioned to receive our information in narrative form, hence the popularity of storytelling entertainment going all the way back to the first myths as well as the degeneracy of modern legacy media selling out its primary function, to tell the truth, in favor of promulgating the most sophisticated narrative their miseducation provided them, i.e., Cultural Marxism.

      The storytelling instinct is not limited to the weaker sex, but they are the quickest to be duped by its power. That’s why there’s the term “Drama Queen” rather than “Drama King.” That’s why the acting profession is essentially feminine. Female acting-out precipitates a response in men that instantly creates a narrative in which she is the lead player. It’s also why the deliberate/conscious application of “game” — or the “Venusian” ♀ arts vs. the “Martial” ♂ arts — is essentially girlish mimicry relative to the unselfconscious behavior of successful men, termed “naturals.”

      Women are experts at precipitating drama because they are the weaker sex, and narrative theatrics are a way of manipulating masculine power to their advantage or survival, grounded in the most primary of our civilizing instincts, to tell a story, or “the will to narrate.”

      Again, I think it’s a vulgar application of wisdom and the height of groidian Muh Dikkery to use this most fundamental observation of the human condition for the sole purpose of getting your dick wet, but it was ever thus. Applied wisdom is often inspired to go to even fatal extremes (e.g., unchecked promiscuous sodomy in the time of GRIDS) when it comes to the least common denominator getting his nut, so sexuality often directs the pioneering application of a technology or freedom. At the same time, it’s like wiping your ass with the rarest silk, a profanation of the sacred.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. […] Women Create Drama To Socially And Sexually Bond […]


  4. rape is the height of drama

    Liked by 1 person

    • on October 13, 2017 at 3:36 pm Gunslingergregi

      Naa death is for the super drama queens he he he

      Liked by 1 person

    • Wrong, wrong, wrong. The Crucifixion is the crux of all drama, the climax that brings to a close all those lesser dramas that are distracting you from the plot, which are the precipitating events (or “inciting incidents”) you confuse for conclusions. Rape, childbirth, and death began in the feminine treachery of Eve but became transfigured into beatific ecstasy on the Cross:

      The Ecstasy of St. Theresa by Bernini

      The cross, where the horizontal of God transects the mundane horizontal of man, divinizing him via the Incarnation and Resurrection.

      In hoc signo vinces

      Think big, you miserable bastards! Bigger, biggest!


    • [sans graphics to escape mod AIDS, sigh]

      Wrong, wrong, wrong. The Crucifixion is the crux of all drama, the climax that brings to a close all those lesser dramas that are distracting you from the plot, which are the precipitating events (or “inciting incidents”) you confuse for conclusions. Rape, childbirth, and death began in the feminine treachery of Eve but became transfigured into beatific ecstasy on the Cross:

      [The Ecstasy of St. Theresa by Bernini]

      The cross, where the horizontal of God transects the mundane horizontal of man, divinizing him via the Incarnation and Resurrection.

      [The Jerusalem Cross, via “Alt-Right Street Theater (from blitzkrieg to crusade),” May 17, 2017 CH post.]

      In hoc signo vinces

      Think big, you miserable bastards! Bigger, biggest!


  5. Does this mean that men who dismiss shit tests are “not playing by the rules” and showing their inner jerk causing more arousal in the female to “up her own game”? Sounds like a mix of jerk boy and flip the script.


  6. on October 13, 2017 at 2:15 pm The Philosopher

    100%. You can almost see the the smirk on some of them when they do it. Its not any different than ‘playing hard to get’ really. Anyone watching teenagers can see it.


  7. Weinstein is probably guilty but apparently these days a mere ACCUSATION constitutes sufficient proof to throw a man to the wolves and destroy his reputation.

    What’s the latest on the rumor that Harvey’s brother Bob leaked this info to consolidate power over the company?

    The commenter who said “The plebe cries ‘justice!’ as a fat clown is thrown off a bridge by people twice as evil” hit the nail on the head.

    Also, as a side note, French media is pronouncing Weinstein “Weins-steen” in an apparent ploy to hide his yiddishness..clever, don’t want the goys to start asking TOO MANY questions.

    Liked by 1 person

    • on October 14, 2017 at 2:30 pm Jooseverywere

      Jesus you’re stupid. Its how French and other Euros pronounce tgar typw of name, Einstein. JOOOZ you fairy


    • The German pronunciation is Vine-Stine (wine stone), but in its anglicization, the double “ei”s were mysteriously made to be pronounced differently. But I defer to native speakers and Yiddler historians on this.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Fronkenshteen! It’s pronounced Fronkenshteen!


  8. on October 13, 2017 at 2:27 pm The Philosopher

    There seems to be genuine confusion in the Deep State about what to do with Iran. I’m starting to think Trump might be using it as a wedge issue. http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/13/politics/trump-iran-analysis/index.html

    Here he basically tells Congress to deal with it. Like DACA.

    Sanhedrin east cost says stick with Obamas deal. But Sanhedrin Council Foreign Relations + Netanyahu say invade Iran, goyims!

    Trumps bashing of the Iran Deal is definitely his least popular, least important stance to many normies. It is basically only in his stump speeches to curry favour with Sanhedrin CFR and the neocons. Our beloved, beloved neocons.


  9. High value men don’t have “insecurities” in the way that lots of beta males do. They may wish in passing that they had a nicer car, or got to go to Hawaii more than once every 10 years for vacation. But at a fundamental level, they know they can please their wife both in the streets and in the sheets, and everything else is peripheral. Life is good, and drama is no big deal.

    On the flipside, a beta male can have all the trappings of a winner; nice car, big bank account, nice suits and a fancy job. But, unlike the alpha, everything he does is a feeble, and futile, attempt at oneupmanship. He neurotically, endlessly works to convince himself and others that he has value, putting in unbelievable effort to shield his fragile self esteem from total destruction. So when drama comes his way, the shield goes up.

    This is the heart of game. Heartiste is one of the few in the manosphere who pops the delusional bubble that having cash makes your SMV go up on its own. I can tell you that I have known some men so rich that they don’t have to work, and it didn’t help them in the slightest.


  10. Also explains why women are naturally atteacted to me who are musicians, artists, and storytellers.


  11. on October 13, 2017 at 2:50 pm Oleaginous Outrager

    A woman wants the scenic route because that’s where the best stories are made and told.

    You mean replying to a woman’s endless, tiresome prattle with the verbal shrug “So?” is too few fucks given? Got it.


    • Depends on the woman, depends on the man in question.


    • If you ever date a girl you’ll like, it may help you to understand what’s going on in her brain. She’s fantasized about how date night’s going to go, how you’re going to give her unicorns and elf candy on valentine’s day. How you’re going to react to her bitching about the bitch susan in accounting.


  12. Soap Operas fully illustrate what women are all about — in their heads.

    They are always romantic pot-boilers — with a relationship crisis — or three — built into every episode — usually with plenty of nastiness, too.

    Babes are addicted to them — the dramas.

    Much of this is Hard Wired due to the fact that babies are all touchy-feely — and women have to be wired to bounce off that energy.

    You should best note that a mother doesn’t toss out her baby because it’s rebelling.

    Shit testing => friction => heat => passion.

    When you counter-bond with a babe with a ZFG attitude, it sends her into automatic relationship molding mode(*) … itself a reflexive social investment by her.

    (*) Bouncing off like a human pin-ball trying to find out what will light your buzzer.

    Restated: they want the sparks to fly.

    So treat shit tests as non-serious… across the board.

    BTW, they recycle their shit tests, so ZFG off-the-wall responses are appreciated.


    • on October 13, 2017 at 3:34 pm Gunslingergregi

      Ex mom calls me after I just saved her life and she said my ex fell out again like I’m supposed to jump to go get her she was to good to sleep in tent with me lol so I said hey if she wants to die she can anyway she in jail bout to go rehab supposedly


    • on October 13, 2017 at 6:07 pm Vagina dominator

      @ blert “BTW, they recycle their shit tests, so ZFG off-the-wall responses are appreciated.”

      Very good point.


      • Splunge.

        Remember the monty python job interview skit? Every answer given was wrong. Until the guy got so stressed out he just blurted out “splunge”. Which was the only correct answer.

        Just make up a meaningless word to answer shit tests.


    • on October 14, 2017 at 12:03 am Gregory Savoie

      Haven’t watched much soap operas but they never laugh in em from what I have seen


  13. on October 13, 2017 at 3:24 pm Gunslingergregi

    Took me and ex ex like day and half to drive home from NYC cause I stopped everywhere I felt like saw camels on a farm for fucks sake ROFL not a zoo in someone’s yard and shit..

    Liked by 1 person

  14. on October 13, 2017 at 3:46 pm Gunslingergregi

    I’d say the whores shit test though my first wife never saw a shit test till the end of marriage when she was getting physical with me just throwing her body at me a bit I went upstairs she followed continuing I picked her up by her face with one hand threw her on bed got on top and let her see Greg the demon in all his glory she left after. She saw but I did not allow her to experience it.


  15. on October 13, 2017 at 3:49 pm Gunslingergregi

    Can some nerd put all my comments into a long ass fucking file so I can print a book without changing a dam thing


  16. It gets da wimmenz hot…


    • on October 13, 2017 at 4:14 pm Gregory Savoie

      Be like fuck cable Xfinity then break a baseball bat off on your big screen and don’t buy a new one.


  17. on October 13, 2017 at 4:37 pm Gregory Savoie

    Ex ex daughter and I go to Walmart and I ask her what lightbulb to get she said she doesn’t know I’m like u been in school how long? But her school dies tell her she can only have 3 bathroom breaks in three months. I asked what happens if you want to take more she said you can’t they wont let you I’m wondering and betting money the female superintendent of her school system that more worried bout bathroom breaks than teaching takes bathroom breaks whenever she wants make it illegal for woman to be involved in education lol


  18. So if a woman has a high tolerance for drama… even a high taste and preference for drama (higher than the average woman), would that imply she is more immune to its bonding effects? She knows I’m her hindbrain that she needs much more of it to “feel alive”, which could mean that it has a lesser effect on her in general, which could mean that she generally struggles to form bonds in the real world under normal drama load, which means stay away from drama queens if you’re looking for something that lasts.


  19. I do not think that she ever craved drama
    There is something incredibly touching about that right photo
    Jeez there was once time when women were not attention whores
    How unfortunate one has to be to have never known it

    Liked by 5 people

    • We’ve always been attention whores. We were just taught to keep it under control, instead of being told that it was an essential part of our personality that we had to nurture and indulge.


    • It’s a continuum; there is never zero Attention Whoring in society, it rises and falls:

      The difference is, in The Good Old Days, the ingenuity, the prosperity, the bonhomie was Ours, before it was tainted by mud ‘culture’.


      • @4:18 – the two women on the right are solid natural babes. Ahhhh….when the future was bright and White.


      • WT actual F? I never had any regard for the “roaring twenties”, without ever bothering to look that deep into it. Seems you don’t need to, six minutes of footage tells you all you need to know. It’s like city girls have always been vacuous, attention whoring sloots.

        And what’s with all the short hair. It looks like a lesbian bikers festival. I know why you were immediately attracted to the ones at 4:18 JR, the far right one especially had actual female looking hair.

        Seems like The Depression really fucked these “flapper girls” over (for the better), it’s a pity that, as usual, flyover country had to pay the price for the excesses of the ((((coasts))).


      • Yes, at 4:18, 1.4 women actually managed to slip into the Dyke-a-thon.

        I remember how years ago my mother, who read a lot about fashion history at one point, said that [email protected] fully took over the fashion industry at the start of the 20th century (possibly slightly earlier, I can’t recall) and deliberately set out to make women’s styles as ugly as possible in an effort to make more men available to themselves.

        It didn’t really work because most guys are naturally straight. But looking at the ghastly ugliness of the hairstyles and clothing in that video, I can well believe that it resulted from the efforts of a bunch of [email protected] trying to make women unattractive. Mission accomplished that far, anyway.


    • reading the news behind the news on the napa fires. It’s bad shit. Some say there are dozens of cars in driveways that burned with their families inside trying to flee the fires. I$!$ taking responsibility again. Cali’s conservative wine country is taking it in the nuts and may be down for a decade. If you want full tin-foil, consider the conservative families in OC getting hit just like in LV.



    • “Happy right up until the last minute”?

      That is like the cliche when someone dies “doing what they love”. Gasping and choking to death on burning hot smoke would suck. My guess is they were quite unhappy for quite some time prior to their horrible deaths.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Fothermuckin instagram.


  20. yep, used to be the women who craved drama and endlessly shit tested you, were the girls men would pass over on their way to finding better girls

    not it’s assumed all girls drama queens who will test you constantly

    sad to think the kind of girls we used to think of as normal, naturally eager to please and not create problems for you, are now the exception to the rule.

    Liked by 2 people

    • *now it’s assumed…


    • A lot more Beta’s than there used to be.

      Even the relative Beta’s of the time had some masculine traits and society giving them “some” power, man’s home was their castle etc….

      Guy in the picture looks like he’s got some alpha traits plus he might be above average in size and height.

      Went one step further and got a woman “just” below his own SMV for added stability.

      Who knows about side pieces.


  21. Drama is for girls and gay men.


  22. on October 13, 2017 at 5:29 pm Vagina dominator

    @ Luciano “re: fighting on the inside. any tips for somebody like me with long orangutan arms?”

    I have replied to this in the “Trump was Right” post.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. An interesting article


    Off track subject-wise, but an interesting article about how men’s relationships with each other, i.e., ‘Bromances’ are bad for women, because they are good for men; to quote the article: The rise of the bromance “is very, very good for men,” White said.’ As for how it effects women, quote: ‘“But it’s not necessarily benefiting women, and in fact it may well be disadvantaging them,” White said.’

    In other words, men bonding in old-fashioned brotherly non-sexual relationships, as they used to have for millennia, doesn’t benefit women. I mean, men only exist because women need to benefit from them. sheesh…


  24. on October 13, 2017 at 5:55 pm Gregory Savoie

    Greg said I spoke I’m parables and I just read about them naa my shit real stories I been through shit Hollywood can’t even conjure up ROFL maybe Jesus had to speak I’m parables cause he hadn’t actually done everything.


  25. No wonder human brain mass has been steadily declining for the past 20,000 years.


  26. on October 13, 2017 at 6:11 pm Gregory Savoie

    Funny Jesus wasn’t accepted as good in his hometown I am


  27. This is really brilliant. “Wish I didn’t know now what I didn’t know then.”


  28. – Unhurt Woman Survivor, 100% Certain There Were Multiple Ground Level
    Shooters In Crowd, Tells Her Horrific Story – And Is Then Found Dead In Bed –



    • That is really weird. Some serious cover-up action is going on. This thing stinks to high heaven.


    • Dunno, looks like she had lots of health problems (as fatties usually do), could have been any of those, or even toxic shop from all her new tattoos. If she was slim and healthy it would be a possible story, but I think in this case poor health just caught up with her.


  29. – Las Vegas security guard Jesus Campos disappears moments before TV interviews –



  30. – Las Vegas shooter’s home broken into despite intense FBI, police interest –



    • You know that patsy Paddock had $1,000,000+ in cash stored around his house. People knew, or figured, that out. Too good to pass up.


      • A house that is probably being watched 24 x 7 by the FBI and other agencies. Seems improbable. The PULSE club in Orlando, where the gay shooting happened , was also broken into without any suspects. What are the chances ?


    • Clean up crew? The whole situation makes less and less sense each day.


  31. MGTOW taken to the extreme ?

    – Man-on-man ‘bromances’ are threatening heterosexual relationships, warn researchers –



    • Cuddling?

      To quote the great fictional cad Sir Harold Flashman, “Pardon me, madam, I am about to vomit for a while.”


    • on October 13, 2017 at 11:06 pm traitors first

      FFS …….. gag, barf, vomit


    • Beta coward genetics —> Impotent fear of girls —> Anxiousness with heterosexual bonding —> Men doing this ridiculous shit

      Either that or they’re gay and aren’t admitting it. I almost hope that’s the case instead of thinking that hetero men result to this


  32. on October 13, 2017 at 11:17 pm Diversity Is Good

    Where do the spankings fit in?


    • on October 14, 2017 at 4:30 am Vagina dominator

      “Little Hos on the Prairie” (yes, I know, but too good to resist)


      • on October 14, 2017 at 4:36 am Midnight Avenue J

        Some things really do deserve respect, VD. Foul.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 7:54 am Captain Obvious

        NATURAL CH!LDBIRTH – [email protected] delivery, no epidural.

        All of her Cluster B [her Histrionics & her Narcissism & her BPD “crazy in bed, crazy in the head” Estrogen/Progesterone insanity], all of her Hamster’s near infinite capacity & hunger for experiencing pain & degradation & humiliation, all of her ego’s desire for drama & social manipulation & cliqueishness & companionship & adoration – ALL OF IT gets channeled into something useful & productive & purposeful & righteous.

        Precisely as The Creator intended it to be.


        Liked by 1 person

      • on October 15, 2017 at 4:23 am Vagina dominator

        @ s150

        Yes, I knew as I wrote it that I was being brought undone by an immoderate love of puns. mea culpa.


    • on October 14, 2017 at 4:35 am Midnight Avenue J

      I’ll proba leave same comment at your blog PA since I’m in permamod here, but here goes.

      I’ve seen this image many times. This looks like a young Hutterite wife with her children. Hutterites are found mostly in the northwest, Montana and the like. They’re manner of dress is conservative in style if not in the color and pattern of the fabric. There is a shape of the face, too, that says “Hutterite.” But I’m not certain.

      Calling this Life the result of White Sharia…bravo, Elk, and others who’ve memes it into existence. Imagine the splodey-heads as libs sputter to draw the differences and realize. Slowly, slowly realize.

      It’s brilliant like the faces of these babies in the photo.


  33. I am reminded (and I suspect this will be a first for this blog) of composer Richard Strauss. He was in a room alone with a young woman. His acquaintances in the adjoining room could hear them talking and then arguing and then shouting. Some minutes later Strauss emerged with the young woman saying ‘Gentlemen allow me to introduce you to my fiancee’. Come to think of it another composer William Walton had a similar experience with his future wife (a fiery Argentinian) but one composer is enough for today.


  34. my problem with heavy handed [email protected] is that women need to shit test like men need to bust nuts

    let that shit build up and u’ll get mass female tantrums like f3minism. a shit test of that magnitude is something that an untested beta population (m o n ogamy creates betatude) ain’t equipt to handle

    at least in a european context i think patriarchy/feminism r cyclical

    game is a natural reaction

    but we have a sem1tic elite who want to suppress what is natural and self-correcting

    the joo is self-destructive because his linear view of history leads him to hubris


  35. on October 14, 2017 at 8:08 am Captain Obvious

    PHYSIOGNOMY QUIZ: Guess the personality.


    • Pedobear. But he looks a little Downsie, too.


    • A real-life Peter Griffin.

      Or, this man’s mother had an epidural during his birth and this is the result 40 years later.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 8:49 am Captain Obvious

        I had to j00gle “Peter Griffin”.

        I’ve never seen the show, but I doubt that it bears much resemblance to this fellow’s story.


    • close set eyes

      up turned nose

      facial compression


      i see one psycho fucked up niguh

      and co can lick my balls


      • i could see this dude cannabalizing girls


      • Yet another sock puppy monicker? (((shakin’ mah haid)))

        Boy, you are one fucked up sorry excuse for an individual, let alone a man.

        (((shakin’ it again)))


      • Talk about a drama queen…

        … and an eggplant hebe at that.

        Just was the chateau needs.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 10:08 am Captain Obvious

        You know what, GE? I think her Brandeis PhD in Behavioral Psych [and her Mossad training in goyische physiognomy] actually proved useful here: Former Trump campaigner and Rubio intern shot 13 times while sleeping http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3594879/posts


      • on October 14, 2017 at 10:09 am Captain Obvious

        A longtime GOP staffer who worked on President Trump’s 2016 campaign and interned for Sen. Marco Rubio in 2011 was discovered d3ad Tuesday after being sh0t 13 times in his sleep.

        Nick Corvino, 30, of Kissimmee, Fla., was sh0t in his legs, back and head, the arrest affidavit stated, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

        Corvino’s roommate, Scott Waddell, 45, who was arrested and charged with first-degree murd3r, told deputies he “sometimes has homicidal thoughts about k!lling young men, but has never acted on them,” Osceola County Sheriff’s Office said.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 10:10 am Captain Obvious

        A longtime GOP staffer who worked on President Trump’s 2016 campaign and interned for Sen. Marco Rubio in 2011 was discovered dead Tuesday after being sh0t 13 times in his sleep.

        Nick Corvino, 30, of Kissimmee, Fla., was sh0t in his legs, back and head, the arrest affidavit stated, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

        Corvino’s roommate, Scott Waddell, 45, who was arrested and charged with first-degree murd3r, told deputies he “sometimes has homicidal thoughts about k!lling young men, but has never acted on them,” Osceola County Sheriff’s Office said.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 10:13 am Captain Obvious

        Nick Corvino, 30, of KISS(IM)ME, Florida; former intern for Marco “Foambath” Rubio:


      • on October 14, 2017 at 10:15 am Captain Obvious

        sh0t 13 times in his sleep by Mr Physiognomy, Scott Waddell, 45


      • on October 14, 2017 at 10:28 am The Philosopher

        A strong tell for homosexuals is an open face. Someone the opposite of depressed. I think homos get more seratonin.


      • Howdy, Muerte aka Luciano, or whatever the hell your former identities were. It’s getting hard to keep track of all these annoying weirdos.


      • chea

        i wasn’t exactly trying to hide holmes


    • on October 14, 2017 at 10:29 am The Philosopher

      Id guess paedophile?


      • on October 14, 2017 at 11:03 am Captain Obvious


        Scott Waddell, 45, who was arrested and charged with first-degree murd3r, told deputies he “sometimes has h0micidal thoughts about k!ll!ng YOUNG men, but has never acted on them,” Osceola County Sheriff’s Office said.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 11:05 am Captain Obvious

        M0d is just k1ll1ing me here.

        Something about the v1olence of this story is triggering all of the f0rbidden keywords.

        Even when I mis-spell them.

        Liked by 1 person

    • on October 14, 2017 at 4:12 pm Oleaginous Outrager

      He’s damn near got both eyes starin’ out the same hole!


    • on October 14, 2017 at 6:21 pm earlthomas786

      Sexual predator.


    • He’s about to set the building on fire. Why did you have to take his stapler?


    • So … who IS this fugly specimen?


  36. Brain mass has nothing to do with intelligence. A rat and a human have similar brain masses with respect to body size. Difference is the surface area of the cerebral cortex. Rats and chicks have smooth brains and belong to a category of mammals called lissencephalics. Dudes have gyri and sulci that make the surface area substantially greater, ostensibly conferring higher intelligence upon them.

    Take any profession in the world and look at the top 10 people in that field. Only profession I can think of that women would dominate would be housekeeping / housewife.


  37. Pimps, of course, not only know this — they “game” it all the way to the edge of death. The pimp game works like this:

    The pimp lays down a rule such as: “Bring me all the money you make, bitch, or I’ll kill ewe.” (“Bitch” — that’s a pet name.)

    The woman “shit tests” the pimp by keeping some money for herself without telling him.

    The pimp find out and gets her into a situation where he can get away with murdering her and then proceeds to act as though he’s going to carry through with his “rule”.

    The woman then pleads for her life: “Please don’t kill me like you said you were gonna!”

    The pimp then has the woman’s heart and soul.

    There are delicate points in this game, such as “acting as though” and the way in which he relents. Both of these must be accomplished in such a way that there can be no strong suspicion in the woman that he would not have actually killed her nor that, by relenting, he is showing weakness.

    Such finely honed “game” demonstrates why “game” is, essentially, African culture.


    • on October 14, 2017 at 12:22 pm Gregory Savoie

      Jabowery are u saying you are a pimp or something?


    • game is applied dominance. african subhumans didn’t invent dominance. they simply practice a primitive, unrefined iteration of it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Game is not simply applied dominance.

        Game is the art of dominance in an environment where sovereignty — the normative initiation of force —
        does not reside with the individual applying dominance. It goes back to CHLCA about six million years ago, where gang warfare’s nascent eusociality took root in the primate line leading to humans. Cro Magnon started to escape this, shortly after leaving Africa: Replacing hominin intraspecific dominance hierarchy with inter-specific Cro Magnon dominance of coevolved wolf hunting packs, sometime between 15,000 and 40,000 YBP. An individual man could hunt without a hunting group of other humans.

        Everyman an alpha.

        Backhanding a “shit test” would have been hardly necessary, let alone “game”.

        As civilization arose in the neolithic, periodic invasions of “barbarian pastoralists” provided it with increasingly sophisticated programs of assimilation, culminating with JudeoChristianity’s final victory with the outlawing of Holmganga simultaneous with adoption of JudeoChristianity circa 1000 AD.

        Since then, Euroman has been trying to reacquire “game” so as to be more viable as part of civilization. For a while, St. Paul’s injunctions regarding women were an adequate substitute for “game” but, as we now observe, that is inoperative and is rapidly being replaced by Sharia law’s injunctions regarding women — which is one step from the ultimate pimp game now slicing through Western Civilization like a hot knife through butter.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Exactly. Women respond to dominace. Doesnt matter what type. African Dominance is brash in your face. European is subtle and shows development of a prefrontal cortex.


      • jabowery – Can you clarify your meaning here? You are alluding to some interesting ideas but I’m not sure if I am reading you right.

        It seems like you are saying that the tendency more-so towards gang-afilliation type of dominance displays within African culture, conditions downstream social actions towards faux-shivving-of-the-bluff-callers (by the men) in response to female attempts to rise towards better access to more dominant males within the gang-affiliation, by way of the female tendency for ascending bluff-calling of ever more dominant males within the gang-affiliation hierarchy. As such there arises a mutually conditioned (female on male conditioning, and male on female conditioning) dominance hierarchy within each gender, sorted by way of this ‘bluff-calling/response to bluff-calling’ dynamic (it’s a game of chicken …. inter-gender & multi-player – ascending-style). Fitness testing by way of a game that sorts dominance ranking by way of individual’s nervous system capacity to withstand stress related to existential danger, …… of course – with said nervous system capacity modulated by a myriad of factors including physical prowess, physical size, quality of health (especially as related to hormone optimization), machiavellian intelligence, and general trait dispositions across the big 5 personality traits, among other un-named parameters.

        So for african men, innately more-so predisposed towards operating within such cultural constraints, ‘game’ is: “playing chicken by way of faux-shivving-of-bluff-callers (with some real shivving coincidentally occurring upon occasion, as an unfortunate game-adjunct)? Do I have this right (as to your meaning here)?

        If so, I got some further questions I would like to ask you, but first I want to make sure I am understanding you correctly.


      • Wild Man — You’re on the right track if I read _you_ correctly: The “bluff” to which you refer is, essentially, the sneaky beta strategy to present two signals of fitness: 1) Most obviously — “I’m an alpha — let’s fuck.” and 2) I’m so good at being a sneaky-beta that my descendant males of high emotional intelligence will cuckold the apsie alphas — let’s fuck.” #1 indicates force (sovereignty). #2 indicates fraudulent subversion of sovereignty. Civilization essentially turns all males into betas submitting to The Alpha of State and
        intersexual selection of males by females is all about this bluff. Well-structured civilizations recognize this and facilitate the bluff with sexist laws pimping women out to their legally recognized johns. The image of Jesus as celibate King of Kings, constraining even Kings to not only beta status, but monogamous beta status, leaves no actual physical male a fuckable alpha in a harem — de facto or de jure. It short-circuits the female’s shit testing chimp. The rule of thumb — sanctioned by the physical King, is always available to the betas of the realm — a sanctioned shiv when the short-circuit opens and engages the females inner chimp.


      • jabowery – OK, I think I see your meaning.

        My next question is – well, doesn’t the true western mindset support the idea of sovereignty for individuals though? – each sovereign within their own individualistic domain, which is ‘themselves’, which upon careful consideration, is the idea that we are each sovereign with respect to the self-agency we value so much (at least some of us value it beyond all else), ….. with self-agency defined as: the idea that we each are beings that believe we have the ability to make meaningful non-deterministic decisions (i.e. – because I retain the power to choose otherwise), that therefore implies we also have personal responsibility for the consequences of those decisions.

        That’s the mindset I ascribe to (and always have as long as I can remember).

        When I look around to see the seeds of that mindset, well ….. my dad (born early 1920’s) comes to mind, but he was just ascribing to what any western man ascribes to, as supported by all kinds of western cultural influence.

        A man like this expects his women to value their own individualistic sovereignty. He actually expects everybody for which he allows any real influence upon himself, to value as such. Now it is true that women have more of a problem accepting these existential facts (for all kinds of good reasons as pointed out by evolutionary psychology theoretics, as well discussed at this blogspot) than a western man will. She needs help,…. a positive but strong masculine guiding influence in this respect, and for a western man …… to me ….. that is what ‘game’ in fact is.

        The shit the black cohort more-so tends towards around ‘game’ with respect to gender dynamics ….. is clown game in comparison. Because it reinforces manipulation by way of operant conditioning methods, by way of short-circuiting the conscious decision-making function by instead pandering to unconscious scripts, all in the service of a sovereignty residing outside of the individual, as you said …..

        “Game is the art of dominance in an environment where sovereignty — the normative initiation of force —
        does not reside with the individual applying dominance.”

        Everybody more-so playing this type of game that is more common within the black cohort are actually acting in the service of a sovereignty residing outside of the individual, which is this gang-affiliation. And in the end, that boils down to seeking power for power sake. End of story.

        But the true west appears to be about a more sublime take on this. The western idea is that seeking power, and power accrual, is put in the service of a higher ideal – the idea of promoting the particular conception of ‘fairness’ that is associated with a social field populated by agents of individualistic sovereignty.

        Now I agree that this ‘true west’ mindset has been attacked by a myriad of subversive forces, particularly in the recent decades, and in any event, never was free of the influence of the unconscious scripts we all are subject to. So …. far from perfect. But better than anything else.

        I also agree that this mindset probably was shaped by way of adaptation selection, by the environmental peculiarities of the hunter-gatherer phenomenon in Europe.

        Look ….. when you see it this way, the pimp game more-so promoted by black culture looks weak ….. it looks pussy-like, because either the dude is either bending to the baser nature that is being pushed by the women (so in effect he is pussy-whipped except he sees it as the opposite, that he pussy-dominates, because he is too dumb to see the facts before him) or he is bending to the baser nature pushed by the gang-affiliation-construct (which makes him a dude that chooses peonhood for hisself). Either way …. it’s pussy-like, imo. Or the alternative view would be that he is a dude that has not accrued enough self-awareness, either by way of experience, or because of innate deficiencies, to be able to properly understand the self-agency concept that the western idea of individualistic sovereignty is based upon. Discounting the ‘lack of experience’ explanation (because this should sort itself out given enough time), this alternative viewpoint with respect to the rationale for ‘pimp game’ weakness, also breaks down into at least two possible etiologies – either a psychopathic deficiency with respect to properly understanding the subjective/objective dichotomy, or just a general lack of adequate intelligence.

        jabowery – do you agree? If you don’t where to you see the flaw in my perspective?


      • Wild Man, I do disagree. The definition of “individual sovereignty” you cite is based on “the non-aggression axiom” with the corollary “no initiation of force”.

        Sovereignty necessarily entails the initiation of force.

        Here’s the correct way to view true individual sovereignty hence the evolutionary origin of “whites”:

        A Pleistocene Cro Magnon man supports his woman and children through the cold winters with his hunting pack: their dogs. They’re an autonomous nuclear family and he is answerable to no one but (to use an apt phrase in the context of “Independence”) Nature and Nature’s God.

        He goes out hunting one cold, full moon night with his pack. His family is hungry. They’ve already eaten one of their older dogs. They’ll eat more if necessary — perhaps all of them. Their newborn can no longer suckle. The mother’s breast has gone dry. She may have to put the infant out in the snow — as is the custom in this dire situation.

        While out hunting, he notices his pack behaving in an unusual manner — not as though there is a prey they’ve sensed. Then realizes what they are sensing:

        Another Cro Magnon man is out hunting in the same area with his pack.

        What do you think happens next, “Wild Man”?


      • on October 16, 2017 at 6:53 am Gunslingergregi

        Well they probably know each other and happy to see each other he he he


      • on October 16, 2017 at 6:56 am Gunslingergregi

        You can retain sovereignty without using animalistic non aquiesed force with actual sovereign people up to and including those two men talking and agree who or what should be eaten for the most to stay alive.


      • Gunslingergregi, than you for dispelling any lingering doubts as to whether you are a troll or merely dumb as a rock.


      • on October 16, 2017 at 9:04 am King George III

        >What do you think happens next, “Wild Man”?

        Absolutely nothing. Warfare is an artifact of civilization, and civilization is an artifact of agriculture. When two hunters are out roaming around, they take great pains to avoid each other, and hunter-gatherers have no stores of wealth except their women, so there is no incentive to raid unless one can afford to support multiple wives, which Northern Hunter Man could not.


    • Thus far we’ve had two dumb-as-rocks things jump wildly in and answer on behalf of “Wild Man”. This is, perhaps, to be expected when we get down to brass tacks.


      • Don’t be too hard on gunslingergregi… there’s a method to his madness, and his parables are not to be dismissed lightly, for those with ears to hear.

        On the topic at hand, I’d venture that maybe those two original Cro-Magnon hunters stop for a moment and, although wary, might find it useful to exchange some information… which may perhaps grow into a symbiotic bond of cooperation in their hunt, and the beginnings of tribal alliance.


      • Yeah, because we can always talk through our differences.

        OK, so maybe it isn’t that we’re dealing with dumb-as-rocks, so much as a little bit gay.


    • jabowery – alright – you are implying zero sum outcome for the scenario of the starving Cro Magnon hunter with dogs and a woman and child, meeting another hunter with dogs. And yes, zero sum scripts of nature are always there, available to all life forms, when the circumstances signal.

      All of life is in the exploitation game. A bacterium maintains a membrane, differentiating self from ‘other’ and exploits the ‘other’ (the manifold environment), for resources, used as means towards more control, for self-preservation purposes, as self-preservation is the first principle upon which life is contingent and not possible without the operation of said principle.

      But the interesting thing is, exploitation by way of zero-sum is not the whole story and it seems, never ever was. Because, life is also contingent upon 2nd principle, the competition/collaboration polarity, because exploitation requires exploration, and exploration potency is supercharged by way of replication, and replication implies collaboration.

      Now what does this have to do with our Cro Magnon hunter-gatherer man, now in trouble around self-preservation (or in the least, in trouble around the preservation of the means of replication)? What it means is that it is not certain what is gonna happen. Too many variables at play.

      Look – another way of thinking about all this is …… well – if one agrees that the difference with respect to the west is that it tends to promote the seeking of power, and the accrual of power, so as to be put in the service of a higher ideal – the idea of promoting the particular conception of ‘fairness’ that is associated with a social field populated by agents of individualistic sovereignty (said agents as I have already defined above), …. well then, how did that particular western dynamic arise? Perhaps via a more highly ordered (but therefore more precarious) energy state of the ever-present competition/collaboration polarity, resulting in the arising of the possibility of win/win outcomes (instead of just zero-sum), perhaps this eventuality shaped by the particular advantages that a social field colored by the principle of mutual trust would engender, perhaps shaped by the peculiarities of our European hunter-gatherer ancestors, as the ‘adaptation-selection/environmental-parameters’ dynamic played-out? This is not a farfetched speculation. Migration towards more highly ordered energy states of the competition/collaboration polarity, within ecologies, is not an uncommon occurrence. Some of these occurrences have even been robust enough potency-wise to engender a permanent new state. Is not the symbiotic relationship between prokaryotes and eukaryotes, by way of mitochondria, a primordial example of said dynamic?

      jabowery – you seem to be disagreeing with my view that the western mindset is contingent upon individualistic sovereignty as I have defined, because you believe that non-aggression is the antithesis of sovereignty, and so perhaps you are implying that individuals in the current modern milieu have no choice but to submit to non-aggression? I would not agree that that is the current case (that there is no choice). And I do agree that sovereignty is contingent upon at least the availability of the aggressing option. Or perhaps you are simply missing a key point – that sovereign choice with respect to aggressing or not, is not the same as submitting to non-aggression without choice.

      But I am probably still misunderstanding you. Because you said:

      “Wild Man, I do disagree. The definition of ‘individual sovereignty’ you cite is based on ‘the non-aggression axiom’ with the corollary ‘no initiation of force’. Sovereignty necessarily entails the initiation of force.”

      This idea of, sovereignty necessarily entailing the initiation of force, is a peculiar proposition. Given all of the above discussion, why would the initiation of force by a necessary precondition of sovereignty? Would not the option of the initiation of force suffice as the necessary precondition?


      • Wild Man resorts to tactical nihilism: “Now what does this have to do with our Cro Magnon hunter-gatherer man, now in trouble around self-preservation (or in the least, in trouble around the preservation of the means of replication)? What it means is that it is not certain what is gonna happen. Too many variables at play.”

        Nothing is ever certain. So what? The other Cro Magnon man _might_ have an enormous stash of frozen meat from a source that only he has the ability to exploit but he doesn’t have the dogs he needs to do so. So he calls out to our starving hero, “Here’s some meat I’ve caught — let’s talk!” and uses a sling to throw the meat at our hero’s dogs.

        Such abnormal scenarios are the stuff of reality distortion fields used by Jews in Hollywood — not a statistically accurate portrayal of what shaped us.

        Hell, _maybe_ the other Cro Magnon man had already independently invented agriculture and had a huge stash of grain.

        And to criticize my statement: “Sovereignty necessarily entails the initiation of force.” by saying I should have added the phrase “the option of” is such a nit pick as to qualify as intellectually dishonest.

        I’m not interested in further discussion with you until you admit that the dictionary definition of Sovereignty is inconsistent with the libertarian definition of “individual sovereignty”.


      • Wild Man, and anyone else who is interested in the origin of Euroman’s individualistic character, read the 7 points of agreement between individuals at this link:



      • Alright – I read the 7 points of agreement between individuals you provided in the link. As well, I checked the dictionary definition of sovereignty as per your suggestion. Here is the google definition:

        noun: sovereignty

        1) supreme power or authority.
        “how can we hope to wrest sovereignty away from the oligarchy and back to the people?”
        synonyms: jurisdiction, rule, supremacy, dominion, power, ascendancy, suzerainty, hegemony, domination, authority, control, influence
        “their sovereignty over the islands”

        2) the authority of a state to govern itself or another state.
        “national sovereignty”
        synonyms: autonomy, independence, self-government, self-rule, home rule, self-determination, freedom
        “the colony demanded full sovereignty”

        3) a self-governing state.
        plural noun: sovereignties

        jabowery – First, to be clear, it was you that introduced the idea of individual sovereignty in your 2nd comment in this thread here (your response to plumpjack) and in your 3rd comment in this thread here (your response to me), at least that is the way I took your meaning, which you didn’t dispel by way of your 4th comment in this thread here (whereby you were addressing my take on the term ‘individual sovereignty’, or ‘individualistic sovereignty’ that I understood you were implying, as a possible condition, at least during the time of hunter-gatherer culture in Europe).

        Now I note that there is nothing in the link you have now provided that informs that I was mistaken about these elements of the conversation as I understood them, – that you were in fact implying that the idea of individualistic sovereignty is within the realm of possibility for humans, and furthermore, this possibility has actually occurred, at least in the past. To wit – quoting from your link:

        “In what follows, underlined words are my modifications* to the original (cite given at the end) “Seven Points of Agreement Between Individuals” — a contract entered into by individuals with other individuals so as to create a society within which individual sovereignty is upheld.”

        So, to be fair, for the purpose of our ongoing conversation here, interpretation of the dictionary definition of sovereignty must naturally account for your implied meaning. Given this (the state of the ongoing conversation in this respect), I don’t see anything provided within the dictionary definition of sovereignty that dispels my interpretation of a libertarian-flavored individualistic sovereignty (the ‘individualistic’ component of said term being your nuance) in the terms I put forth:

        “well, doesn’t the true western mindset support the idea of sovereignty for individuals though? – each sovereign within their own individualistic domain, which is ‘themselves’, which upon careful consideration, is the idea that we are each sovereign with respect to the self-agency we value so much (at least some of us value it beyond all else), ….. with self-agency defined as: the idea that we each are beings that believe we have the ability to make meaningful non-deterministic decisions (i.e. – because I retain the power to choose otherwise), that therefore implies we also have personal responsibility for the consequences of those decisions.”

        Furthermore, I disagree that adding the phrase “the option of” to the phrase “Sovereignty necessarily entails the initiation of force”, so as to amend as “Sovereignty necessarily entails the option of the initiation of force”, is such a nit pick as to qualify as intellectually dishonest. The addition is an important nuance by way of a differing logic that clearly means something entirely different, and said logic differences will naturally lead to different downstream consequences (such as the difference between the clown game more-so practiced by the black cohort, as differentiated from true-west game, as I outlined in one of my comments above). Furthermore the libertarian view hinges upon such nuance and since you seem to be carving out an opinion that stands against libertarianism, it’s best you recognize the specifics of the differences between camps, instead of dismissing the idea of personal choice or self-agency that libertarianism is built around, out of hand, unless that is your argument (that here is no there, there, with respect to libertarianism), in which case, you should make that case, which you haven’t yet. And in any event, I can see that you will not be making that case, because the ideas you are promoting by way of the link you provided are contingent upon the nuance of logic I have suggested. To wit – quoting from your link:

        “Those who inspire and receive the protection of an individual sovereign are designated as “shielded.” The shielded have some protection by all sovereigns and some behavior is enforced on them by all sovereigns. When old enough, children of either sex who have been shielded, may choose forceful sovereignty. As an alternative, they may choose to continue non-participation in the use of force by not declaring their sovereignty.”


        “This agreement gives formal social approval to the use of force in certain circumstances by sovereign individuals”


        “Anyone who has reached the age capable of procreation may become sovereign by formal declaration of one’s sovereignty”


        “In such a Forum opinions regarding the interpersonal problems, and deliberated recommendations for settling differences, can be formally given, but such opinions and recommendations will not be binding on those Involved. Those who bring problems before the formal Forum may, if they choose, make personal agreements congruent with the Forum’s recommendations after the recommendations have been made.”


        “It Is intended that only one shall return alive from formal combat. When two return alive one shall forever be shielded by the other. The relationship must be announced jointly by them before they are permitted to leave the combat ground.”

        What is the common thread here in regards to the matter of choice with respect to the use of force? The common thread is that the matter of choice IS UPHELD.

        But, to be fair, there indeed are other passages in the link you provided that taken together are tantamount to a declaration that choice is in fact not an option with respect to the matter of the use of force, within this social framework. To wit:

        “Except for the special condition noted below regarding formal combat, a sovereign acting alone may remove the shield from one protected by it. Removal is made by a formal declaration of the fact. The shielded person thereby becomes sovereign.”


        “All who are protected by a sovereign’s shield become sovereign if their sovereign dies or disappears.”


        “Any sovereign may challenge another sovereign to formal combat for any reason. ”


        “It Is intended that only one shall return alive from formal combat.”


        “No sovereign who has an unanswered challenge pending may leave the community, refuse combat, or relinquish one’s sovereignty.”


        “Guilt for breaking any point of this agreement shall be determined according to Item 3 above. The invariable penalty for anyone found guilty of breaking any point of this agreement shall be death within twenty-four hours.”

        OK – so the social framework you are promoting as one possibility by which individualistic sovereignty may reside, entails both circumstances whereby there is choice in the matter of the use of force or not, as well circumstances whereby there is no choice in the matter of this use of force or not. The key phrase in your link, that binds together the conditions of these two sets of circumstances, is as follows:

        “A sovereign who, is shielding no one may cease to be sovereign and become shielded by another sovereign if formal declaration of the relationship is made by both sovereign and shielded.”

        So in effect, I guess what you are implying, is that for this particular social framework, in regards to the matter of choice with respect to the use of force, it hinges upon whether said individual is willing to pre-accept the real possibility of the use of individual deadly force, as can be forced upon him at any time for any reason (rational or not I suppose), so long as he retains the right to choose with respect to the use of his own deadly force upon another at any time for any reason (rational or not I suppose). If he chooses not to pre-accept the real possibility of the use of deadly force, as can be forced upon him at any time, thereby choosing to forgo his own reciprocal rights in that regards, he must seek the protection of another who is is willing to offer such, and if he is not able to procure said protection, the deadly force dynamic will be thrust upon him nevertheless. Furthermore, if he chooses the life of (faux) non-aggression for himself (this choice as conditioned by way of the success in his endeavor of finding a protector), he still retains the possibility of having the collective of aggressors acting on his behalf, against others who may have treated him unfairly (fairness as defined by the public agreements he has entered into).

        Alright – what’s your point here? This social framework you seem to be promoting as the impetus for the formation of western culture is schizophrenic, so I doubt it is said impetus (because western culture is not similarly schizophrenic). If impetus for western culture is your implied meaning with respect to this discussion about this particular brand of individualistic sovereignty, provide the theory then – how did we get for there to here?

        Also, for the record – “What it means is that it is not certain what is gonna happen. Too many variables at play.”, does not equate to tactical nihilism, because it is just stating the obvious. You be tricky jabowery.

        Look – you got some interesting ideas, and this has been and interesting discussion for me so far, and the exchange so far has hi-lighted that our difference of opinion seems to revolve around the value of libertarianism as you have pointed out. Look – If you define yourself as the chooser first and foremost, you will see that, that idea, is not antithetical to the concept of sovereignty – because who is gonna remove that choice-functionality from you if you don’t let them? No one. As such you always retain sovereignty over your own choice. And, by way of example, with respect to the schizophrenic social framework you are taking under consideration – that includes retaining the power to choose to walk away from that insanity. Choice trumps tyranny (by way of 1st and 2nd principles of biological life), and the schizophrenic social framework you have taken under consideration, retains the hallmarks of a particularly schizophrenic brand of tyranny, because it presupposes that choosing a fundamental lack of existential choice is virtuous. Where is the evidence for that?


      • Well, aside from the fact that Google is not a dictionary and is, in fact, increasingly politically biased — particularly about key concepts such as “sovereignty” (witness Youtube censorship regarding national sovereignty in the wake of Trumpism), there is a more fundamental misunderstanding now apparent:

        I’m addressing human biodiversity as the unconscious predisposition within which we may understand the “schizophrenic” (your term) nature of Western _civil_ culture that is now manifest. Now, undoubtedly, you will attribute this schizophrenia to recently emergent pathologies rather than to any inherent contradictions in Western _civil_ culture as “individualistic”. This is precisely where all attempts to deal with “liberty” go astray — including the “alt right” reaction against “libertarians”: whether “fascism” or a, as Andrew Anglin is now promoting, something like a “return to the white nationalist intent of the Constitution” or whatever. Until people reach down into the depths of the struggle for existence that, over tens of millenia, evolved a different _character_ for “whites” during the Pleistocene, their statecraft will remain subject to the same founding contradictions and will result in the same structural weaknesses.

        “The western mindset” is schizophrenic. You cannot have “civilization as we know it” with natural duel as the appeal of last resort in dispute processing. But natural duel as the appeal of last resort in dispute processing is absolutely essential to individual sovereignty — except as a schizophrenic abstraction.

        Your analysis of the contradiction regarding “choice” about the use of force vs “non-aggression” has this critical flaw:

        A sovereign has a “choice” to engage in the use of force or not to engage in the use of force, just as you have the option of moving your hand or not moving your hand. This “choice” is of a different _kind_ than is the “choice” to accept the offered shield of a sovereign: The former choice involves one person: The sovereign. The latter choice involves two people: The sovereign offering the shield and the individual accepting the offered shield.

        So, yes, there is no circumstance in which a person in a culture of individual integrity (as opposed to a culture of group integrity aka “civil society”), will be free to abjure all social force as an individual choice — without placing their very life in danger.

        There is nothing “schizophrenic” about this.

        There is, however, something “schizophrenic” about a civil society that has guys like Locke, Rand, Rothbard, Paul, etc. parading around the notion of “individualism”. This schizophrenia is precisely because of the contradiction between the two very real _kinds_ of choices that you conflate into one kind.


      • jabowery – thank-you for the response. Yes google is increasingly biased, yet their definition of sovereignty is fine as as far as I can tell (if you disagree please clarify).

        Anyway – I see you are drilling down more on the underpinnings or roots of western mindset, and if I am reading you correctly, you are of the mind that the origins of western mindset is contingent on individual sovereignty, (which I agree with, but with the proviso that this individual sovereignty means, in terms of the western mindset perspective, that the individual, fundamentally, retains the power of choice), whereas you see and agree with this proviso (I think), but only in so far as it is packaged with a further proviso, ….. that this fundamental power of choice can only be upheld in a social setting where “natural duel as the appeal of last resort in dispute processing” is available (natural duel as defined in your link, meaning death to one party is the usual and expected outcome). I don’t agree with the necessity of this additional proviso, with respect to the origins of the western mindset, and as such, I don’t see the fact that the current conditions with respect to the unavailability of “natural duel as the appeal of last resort in dispute processing” as a problem, for the continued operation of the western mindset.

        Yet as I have alluded to earlier, I do agree that from the origins-perspective of the western mindset (as well as from the current perspective), individual sovereignty is contingent upon at least the availability of the aggressing option. So where does that put us with respect to the difference of opinion?

        Best if we focus on the matter of the origins-perspective (because I think that perhaps your think that the current perspective of the western mindset is faux-western, in terms of being twisted by circumstance away from it’s true roots – at least many of your comments can be taken that way – if you disagree with my interpretation of your position please clarify).

        OK – so you are promoting the idea of a cultural milieu for the origins of the western mindset, whereby “natural duel, usually to death, as the appeal of last resort in dispute processing” is not only available but the key cultural fundament. Correct me if I’m wrong, but by way of your link, you are basing this sentiment partly on the existence of an historical artifact that was uncovered by way of a rather obscure book of rather obscure authorship, that contends that this particular cultural milieu was the norm for “pre-Christian Germanic peoples” – yes? OK – let’s say that the scholarly quality of these claims are good, and let’s even say that there is good scholarly evidence that this particular cultural milieu was the norm for, “all pre-Christian northern European people” (which is the further claim you are making in your link). Given that, can you answer the questions I would like to ask then – when was this?, for how long?, and what were the conditions of the cultural milieu of these peoples prior, and post, the era of “natural duel, usually to death, as the appeal of last resort in dispute processing”?, and what were the conditions for the sweeping-in and the sweeping-out of said cultural milieu?, and was such sweeping-in and sweeping-out, a homogeneous event across all said peoples, or did such change occur piecemeal across the cohort in question? and what occurred, during all these times, within territories adjacent to the territories occupied by said peoples? was their evidence for a gradient, culture-wise, with respect to hybridization?

        jabowery – it occurs to me that a culture like the one you describe was most concerned with the matter of trust, honesty, keeping your word, the importance of public agreements instead of secret agreements etc. etc. Obviously a people that has the practices you describe were vehemently, (at a deep visceral level of contempt) opposed to any duplicity or double-dealing. This was so important to them that they mandated these issues as a matter of life and death.

        Now this is where the questions I posed above become pertinent. Let me provide a speculation of my own, as to what may have occurred in the severe conditions of pre-civilization, during pre-history, in Europe, populated for probably 10’s of thousands of years by our hunter-gatherer ancestors. The groups were small. Some may have symbiotically used primordial dogs to aid their hunting efforts. But these men hunted very big game too, and that called for collective cooperation. Not least within the collective effort, was intel by way of scouting parties. Trust in the small groups was paramount. But merit within the group endeavors was also highly valued. As such it was within the realm of possibility of forming affiliations with a new promising outsider. Now, under these conditions, what would happen to a man that came back from scouting, too weary apparently to venture off again without rest, but advised the group that there was abundant herds that have now moved into grazing lands 5 days march away, ….. and if the group was in dire need of that meat, and if the weary scout agreed to stay behind with a few of the women, but it was all a ruse, a lie, to send the group to their death, so he could go the other way where he knew some more managable game actually to be, with the women? If the larger group survived they surely would endeavor to find him and kill him forthwith (after mercilessly torturing him for intel re any other duplicitous schemes he may have been privy too). So …… in such an environment where a high-trust culture was adaptive, the men would collectively decide to kill the psychopath. By consensus. But psychopaths were never completely weeded out, because group-adaptation to the ever present possibility of tribal warfare would favor a certain small minority percentage of those with the psychopathic traits to be so selected for. As such, the primordial origin of the western mindset, I speculate, is borne of the conflicts that such a mix of individuals conditioned by way of this group selection dynamic (the need for the majority valuing high-trust, high-merit, with a minority who will shit on that, given the opportunity) would engender. And we are not so far off from the genetic effects of the European hunter-gatherer era, and as such, we see this very mix, and resulting tension, within western culture to this day. Such a culture tolerates some psychopathic behavior, but not too much. Such a culture is different than the one you describe (that leans towards tolerating no psychopathy).

        The reason I insinuated that the cultural milieu you are describing is schizophrenic (as in “inability to orient oneself with reality”), is because it refuses to acknowledge all of the existential facts that the culture is subject to, but expects it’s adherents to orient within these ‘less than real’ parameters nevertheless. What existential facts does said culture refuse to acknowledge? Firstly – we have always been more dependent upon one another than the culture you describe presupposes. Perhaps there was a short time where more independence was afforded, but that would have been an anomaly, across the scope of the time of our primordial hunter-gatherer ancestors. Secondly – such an honor culture is valuing honor too much at the expense of at least some necessary duplicity. Duplicity is good with respect to tribal warfare. It’s best to have at least some who are especially proficient. Thirdly – such a culture upholds honor by the pain of death when there are other more nuanced and less zero-sum ways to promote honor. Fourth – I can go into the background details of this fourth contention if you would like, but suffice for now …… I contend that a high-trust environment is contingent on a mind that highly values self-agency, and such a mind naturally will despise tyranny. But as I have already pointed out, the culture you are describing is actually promoting a deep form of tyranny because it presupposes that choosing a fundamental lack of existential choice is virtuous.

        On your comment:

        “Your analysis of the contradiction regarding “choice” about the use of force vs “non-aggression” has this critical flaw:

        A sovereign has a “choice” to engage in the use of force or not to engage in the use of force, just as you have the option of moving your hand or not moving your hand. This “choice” is of a different _kind_ than is the “choice” to accept the offered shield of a sovereign: The former choice involves one person: The sovereign. The latter choice involves two people: The sovereign offering the shield and the individual accepting the offered shield.”

        But jabowry – doesn’t it take two to tango (as in duel)? But if the party offered the duel, doesn’t want it, he is not free to refuse – correct? So he has pre-decided upon accepting this type of ‘sovereignty’ at some point in the past, without access to the future facts that may color said challenge. That is schizophrenic as in ” inability to orient oneself with reality”. Does that then really meet the definition of sovereign?

        On your comment:

        “So, yes, there is no circumstance in which a person in a culture of individual integrity (as opposed to a culture of group integrity aka “civil society”), will be free to abjure all social force as an individual choice — without placing their very life in danger.”

        What? This statement is not clear. The logic of the statement is rather tortured. Do you mean that in the culture you describe a psychopath can’t act out psychopathic intents without placing their life in danger? If that is your meaning, well then, yes – that would be true ….. but it proves one of my points about how schizophrenic this all is. The promoters of said culture are willing to agree to all this constricting tyranny upon themselves, as described above, because they are so obsessive compulsive about psychopathy, that they will agree to ‘cutting off the nose to spite the face’? Like I said schizophrenic. Because there are other less self-damaging ways to deal with psychopaths.

        Now, in regards to current conditions within western culture. It is true that after we began to form groups larger than the small hunter-gatherer groups, there have been grave problems with respect to achieving consensus for killing psychopaths. And so that became less and less frequent as our organizational groups became larger and larger. Now …. intelligent psychopaths routinely rise to the top of western power structures. As such, the checks and balances of the western system were designed to alleviate this problem. But the checks and balances are now routinely subverted by psychopaths. This is a big problem and makes the current conditions of western culture look manic like you have alluded to (I think ‘manic’ is a better descriptive for this current dynamic than ‘schizophrenic’ though).


      • The fatal consequence of refusing to accept a challenge to natural duel need involve any agreement with the coward at all. The old Norse law — which is attested — killed such a man without any requirement that he be a party to an agreement with anyone.

        Look, we’re talking about at least 600 million years of sexual selection here. This isn’t some fly by night “schizophrenic” notion.

        Now, if you want to get serious about your speculations regarding human eusociality, I suggest you read a book about it by an expert in sociobiology as applied to humans:

        “The Social Conquest of Earth” by E. O. Wilson.

        What you are positing is the source of the high trust society is not unique to Euroman but, rather, goes back beyond Africans to CHLCA, as I already said.

        People think I’m kidding around when I talk about black pimps being king of Game. I’m not.

        I’ll go over, yet again, in more detail, the way Euroman ended up differing from the rest of humanity — thence “the western mindset”, but it doesn’t seem I’m getting through to you. It’s almost as though you don’t want to believe Euroman is of a different, deeply rooted, biological temperament. I mean you simply dismiss, out of hand, the importance of the symbiotic evolution of wolves to Euroman’s recovery of the 600 million year old pattern of sexual selection. Not only that, but you go on to describe a scenario as old as the earliest hunter gatherers manifest even today among the San bushmen of Africa.

        See the recent (2016) paper:


        This particular coevolution goes back tens of thousands of years — to the first anatomically modern humans to enter Europe 40,000 years ago — and it continued until the neolithic when agriculture started increasing the areal density of food calories, and created pressure to form groups again. That northern Europe held out for several thousand years before being civilized indicates they had a taste of something that they _really_ liked and didn’t want to give up without a hell of a fight.

        So let’s go back 40,000 years to the appearance of Cro Magnon. There was a dramatic change of fauna in its range. The exceptional phenotypic plasticity of the wolves pointed to by the aforellinkied paper may well have resulted in multiple quasi-domestication events throughout Eurasia that left little or no genetic trace in the wolves early in the coevolution. It could well have happened that as wolves, driven by the change in fauna, teamed up with the abundant trail of mammoth leftovers, young Cro Magnon males — having difficulty finding their place in the human hunting pack — found themselves preferring the company of wolves that treated them as alphas. The ones that, in this role, found success in hunting smaller prey could have fared relatively well with the disappearance of megafauna. The “dog” may have then appeared circa 16,000 years ago.

        Indeed, we may well see more of a genetic impact on humans than on the wolves early in the coevolution of the relationship, and this genetic impact may have been felt throughout the Eurasian range of what became Europoids.


      • Wild Man, read the “Minimalist Rules for Sortocracy” to see how natural dual can be the appeal of last resort in dispute processing while coddling your notion of individual sovereignty.



  38. Creating drama is part of my relationship game…you can search for it on my blog.


    • on October 15, 2017 at 8:55 am Uuggghhh asd is annoying

      Yah….we’ll all head right over……douche.


      • The point is that CH and I agree that girls need drama. I didn’t rely on CH to discover that fact. CH and I have some rapport and I’m not trying to build my blog into some commercial enterprise…I just blog for fun. You’re a bit harsh and go off half-cocked.


  39. At this rate the Alphas will be fighting each other over the few left “bangable” women left in the US.

    – Americans Have Never Been More Overweight Then They Are Now – New Survey Finds 40% Of U.S. Adults Are Obese –



    • America also has more PoC than before; how many of those 40% obese are non-white?


      • It also says 70% of Americans are overweight. I’m sure you can tell by visting an average Walmart, that even white Americans are letting themselves go. What a waste.


      • One of the biggest problems with going to all this effort to learn game, make decent money, get in shape etc……so very few women are honestly legitimate potential mates it’s almost disheartening.


    • on October 15, 2017 at 5:56 pm Oleaginous Outrager

      Why else would “free” healthcare be so popular, even compared to the popularity of other “free” stuff? Everybody can see the coming catastrophe, but they can’t get off the couch on their own anymore to do anything about it.


  40. on October 14, 2017 at 1:22 pm Les Saunders, Protestant

    (Homage to CO)

    Physiognomy Quiz

    Guess the personalities:


    • on October 14, 2017 at 1:26 pm Les Saunders, Protestant


      • on October 14, 2017 at 3:13 pm Lord of the Gulf Stream

        Demon in human form.


      • He looks almost precisely like a Julius Streicher cartoon of a fanged Jewish ogre devouring a mouthful of white people.

        I don’t want to link it here and potentially get our gracious host in trouble, but the nose, ears, eyes, and eyebrows are almost eerily similar.


      • Wow, apparently even the name J u l 1 u s S t r 3 1 c h 3 r is censored by the mod, even without linking a picture or anything. Now that is spooky.


    • first pic:

      straight shooting shitlord

      a goodfella

      deeper set eyes tend to go with intelligence, introversion, honesty, directness

      Liked by 1 person

    • on October 14, 2017 at 7:35 pm Vagina dominator

      Guy in the back is upset because they’d told him it was going to be red-fucking-tie day.

      I hate these greasy-pole climbing conformist fags. I’d k1ll 1000 in a day with a penknife and that night would sleep like a baby.


    • on October 14, 2017 at 8:34 pm Les Saunders, Protestant


      Top left: Roman Quadvlieg, hard-charging and straight shooting head of the Australia Border Force, forced out allegedly because of a legal, consensual relationship with a female employee 30 years his junior, an employee I might add who is just one in his agency of 10,000 personnel. Actual reason for the force-out, he is the most enforcement-minded anti-refugee government official in Australia and the creature below wanted him gone.

      Right: former Australia prime minister Tony Abbott, another well-built, lean shitlord anti-globalist who was deposed in a bloodless coup.

      Centre: this doughy, homely bugman with a combover is Peter Dutton, Australia immigration minister and part of the cabal that put the knife in Abbott’s back.

      Below: not to be confused with Podesta, this is Michael Pezzullo, Secretary of Home Affairs, who organized the ouster of Quadvlieg, and is known for saying “Australia shouldn’t be known as a settler nation any more.”

      Physiognomy is real.

      Liked by 2 people

  41. 17-year old White girl who is separated from her friends in the early morning hours in East London is raped on three (yes…3!!!) separate occasions by non-White muslim scum who have taken over that town.

    Islam = RAPE CULTURE!! White feminist women had better get that through their thick skulls. This young girl, sadly, was placed in the lion’s den by the liberals who filled her mind with thoughts of equality, and filled her nation with third world scum.


    • The problem is; women don’t really care about Islam being a rape culture or even really Islam at all.

      Virtue signaling, power plays and shit tests are all part of the game.

      And the higher up they are; the less they care about other women.


    • I sometimes wonder if it is indeed Islam that is the cause of these rapes. I would be really interested to see the rape statistics on white muslims. Not arabs. It may be possible muslims are raping people, not because they are muslim but because they are a third world, low impulse control, low IQ, highly aggressive race.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Don’t split hairs on semantics… when people talk of “muslim rape”, they MEAN the shitskins, not the White versions of said religion.


      • It’s not really spitting hairs. If people base opposition to immigration from the Dirt World on Islam that is a problem because a large portion of aren’t muslim.


      • Lesotho, for example is 90% christian and has the highest rape rates in the world.


      • Also I don’t know that a lot of people do view Islam as a race. The liberals allege it frequently, but I dont think it’s true. I think most people opposing Islam are doing it as a religion, not a race. Especially the evangelical Republican types. They sqwak about Islam, then adopt some african kid.


      • I’m just curious how much of the shittiness of those people is Islam and how much is innate. I’ll have to ask the sociology professor at my nearest public university.


      • Peel the onion any way you like, when the average person hears “Islam”,, they think of either some black-bearded dune coon of dark complexion or one of those bowtie-wearing Nation Of Islam ‘Murrican negros.

        They don’t think of White.

        That said, since Islam is a religion of no use to Christianity, and since race is still the big taboo to mention outright, banning immigration of “Islam” is a smart idea, no matter what the complexion of said follower.


      • And if you think those African savages are Christian, then you’re a disingenuous son of a bitch.

        Statements like your “Lesotho is 90% Christian and has the highest rape rates in the world”, alt-R ally, is why we lose.

        Bottom-line… everybody and their uncle knows that rape rates are proportionally related to darkness of skin. DUH!

        (((shakin’ mah haid)))


      • islam, xtianity

        it’s all foreign bs that obfuscates the reality of race when a nigga and a white can both be one in christ


      • xtianity can’t be reconciled with WN w/o completely massaging scripture


      • There are plenty of third world shitholes in which Christianity is the dominant religion. Uganda for example. If you say those people aren’t Chriatians, I guess you would have an interesting definition of Christian. If by Christian you mean White, those aren’t the same thing. Spare me the No True Scotsman fallacies.

        No, the reason we lose is the widespread and erroneous belief that we would all get along if only we had the same religion.


      • I’m not motivated enough to find scriptural support for white nationalism in the Bible. I’m sure you could. The Bible has been used to justify weirder things. That just ranks pretty low on my to-do list.


      • And I agree, not allowing any more muslims here regardless of color would be a good idea.


      • Bigjohn, it is both. If you start off with shitty genes, and then add a violent rape culture called Islam on top of it all, you get violent rapes of non-White women who get into situations where they are vulnerable (even though 30 years ago would have been perfectly safe for them to do). It’s just like those ‘stealing bicycles’ videos – if you leave an unchained bicycle out, a black person (even if only 10% of the population) is going to come around, see an opportunity, and take it. Same for raping women. That is why these people in no way, shape, or form belong in any Western society. By these people I mean all non-Whites (except for Japanese and some Asians) and all muslims.

        Liked by 1 person

      • First of all, this isn’t a discussion of WN.

        Second of all, if all races truly acted like Christians (and that includes Whites), then there wouldn’t be the strife that has littered the history of Mankind, hence no racial problems, and everyone would be living properly in their respective nations, among their own kind, bringing glory to God in their own ways, the way He intended.

        Third, as far as losers like eggnog go, find a thimble and they can fill it with everything they understand about Scripture.


      • “Radical Muslim” is permitted discourse, at least in the US.

        If you say “these shitskins are raping white women,” you’ve put yourself beyond the pale; if you say “radical Islam is importing rape culture,” you’ve cloaked it in enough euphemism to be quasi-acceptable, at least to right-leaning people and patriotard/civic nationalist types.

        Just like Obama’s birth certificate. Nobody actually cared about the authenticity of a damn piece of bureaucratic paper. It was a roundabout, semi-acceptable way of saying “an American is a white person, Obama cannot be American because he is a groid, and it is not fitting that a groid should rule over free white men.”

        It’s a deflection that provides a little deniability of the race realism hidden underneath.

        Liked by 1 person

      • The thing is it is kind of throwing a hanging curveball to the left when we oppose muslims as a euphemism for opposing non-whites. On what grounds do we oppose legal immigration from Mexicans, then? They aren’t muslims. The only thing against them is they are precisely the shit-skins we don’t want.

        I may be wrong but at least here in the US muslims aren’t really the problem. At least not relative to the 100 million mexicans.

        Also, I’m hypothesizing here, the problem may not be Islam at all. It may be solely an issue of race. I doubt those dune coons would rape any less if they were christian.


      • With Islam it could be a chicken-and-egg thing. Which comes first a primitive, aggressive, impulsive, low intelligence people, or a primitive, aggressive, impulsive, low intelligence interpretation of their religion? There are plenty of injunctions to violence in the Bible but white people don’t follow them. My guess is if all the muslims miraculously converted to christianity, shit wouldn’t be much different at all.

        The euphemisms just leave too many holes.


      • You’re correct that it’s a problem. That is, in fact, the big problem with being forced to use misdirection and innuendo rather than just speaking the truth frankly — the “franchise” of the free man, in its original meaning. Once truth is hidden, it also becomes less effective at doing what it’s supposed to do.

        Mexicans ARE a much bigger problem than Muslims in the USA. So the necessity to speak in riddles has derailed the necessary debate, including in the minds of people in general. Hence their particular frenzy against Muslims, I believe — they actually sense that their allowed “model” — opposing Islamic immivasion due to ‘radical Islam’ — is inadequate, yet because it’s the only foothold they’re allowed in indirect race realism, they cling to it with all the more zeal.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Acceptable discourse has destroyed America.


      • Ironsides, I think that is the best synopsis of the immigration debate I have every read.


      • I may be wrong but at least here in the US muslims aren’t really the problem. At least not relative to the 100 million mexicans.

        Absolutely right, and I can’t add any more light to the topic than Ironsides already has.

        But your initial remarks sounded like you were attempting a “don’t worry, be happy” gambit to take the heat off “muslims” (especially bringing in the remarks about imagined Christians), rather than attempting to show that the big picture of rape culture and immigration always boils down to race.


    • on October 16, 2017 at 7:00 am Gunslingergregi

      This is easy to have fun for men training to be snipers just have undercover woman set these rapist up and shoot them.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Leave it to the resident savant to figure out a way to dramatically reduce shitskin on white rape.

        That would of course never be allowed. Because they dindu nuffin.


  42. Exhibit 112564 is how shmart (((they))) are


  43. Like

    • Liked by 1 person

      • on October 14, 2017 at 7:37 pm Lord of the Gulf Stream

        Another demon in human form. See the resemblance?


      • on October 14, 2017 at 7:38 pm Vagina dominator

        Physiognomy is truth, and the truth can often be very, very ugly.


      • I would love to split that faggot’s face with a battle axe. Cleave him from head to his navel. Of course, I’d wear a hazmat suit to protect me from his AIDS blood spurting all over.


      • Physiognomy is the only argument you need.

        Leftoids are universally physical fuckups of some sort. Whether fat dykes, hideous rat-faced kikes, emaciated ladyboy fags like the homo in LA who made giving someone AIDS legal, etc it’s all the same.

        Now congoids have testosterone but their faces look like fat lipped chimps. And lo and behold, their actions correspond.

        Civilization has wiped a lot of the alphas out in the west it’s really sad. The easy life plus chemical waste everywhere is making a bunch of Vidya game fatasses instead of men.


    • They sure are pushing harder and harder, faster and faster, with their damn Stockholm syndrome and gaslighting. At what point does Nemesis follow Heebris?


      • @Ironsides: Karma is a cruel bitch. We cannot say that the West did not bring this on itself by fighting WWII (and “winning” against Germany and the Axis powers). This ending (of the Leftist narrative) is a natural progression of their degeneracy, and NECESSARY so that the New Right may rise up, from lessons learned, and restore order. It would be ludicrous to believe that the Left was merely going to stop in their perverted efforts after winning Jew War II. They just knew that it would take time to put their full agenda in place. What we are seeing now is the clown-world end days of their pathetic life cycle – it cannot be sustained, as it goes against everything that is good and natural.


      • Yes — “Rooseveltian victory” should probably join “Pyrrhic victory” as a description of losing horribly by winning. Or “Churchillian victory.”

        But, as you point out, their entire program is most unnatural — and thus must draw to a close, probably sooner rather than later.


    • The British Establishment is building a new temple to ZOG. At least it will make things more convenient for more than half of them to walk over at lunch and lick the arses of their masters. Wash the taste down with a spot of tea and some kebab.


  44. The “benefits of multiculturalism” and the saying ” that our immigration system is broken ” are both terms that are never defined, and only used as a means of psychological warfare. Has anyone actually listed any benefits of the multicult ? Has anyone ever explained how the immigration system is broken ? Of course not.


  45. For Dreg Smelliot to analyze :


  46. Spinsters gone insane!!! Lonely woman marries her dog because she couldn’t find a good man, I bet we will see more cases like this en the near future lolzozlzlzolzll



  47. 100% European

    0.0% Ashkenazi

    0.0% Celtcuck

    0.0% African, Semitic, Melanesian, or Asian

    Top quartile Neanderthal gene load

    Eat shit Mongrels!


  48. Additional content for Dreg Smelliot to think about :


    • jfc

      fuck u for posting this


    • on October 14, 2017 at 7:27 pm Vagina dominator


      • Don’t project your faggotism onto others.


      • on October 14, 2017 at 7:44 pm Vagina dominator

        Really? That’s your best? Ha ha ha! (I really am laughing!) Did it hurt? Ha ha ha!


      • on October 14, 2017 at 7:47 pm Vagina dominator

        Walk it off, fag. No, not near me. Over there.


      • Take it easy on the shill, fellows… who btw sounds suspiciously like TSW, the way he cops my phrases and tries to use the barbs that he himself got stung with in the past.

        Imagine this (((kike’s))) pain… unable to collect rent for the space I’m taking up inside his haid. kekekekekekekek


      • Don’t project your faggotism onto others.

        heh, heh… sez the schmuck who insists on projecting his cuck fetish onto others, go figger.

        Sigh… for awhile there the chateau was starting to get a more lucid and witty class of shill… now we’re reverting to the scrubs again. (((shakin’ mah haid)))


    • In an odd coincidence of was thinking (briefly) on this traitorous bitch today. The lower primates (mixed and full) must go, of course, quickly or slowly or whatever. But that evil hearted bitch has to go slowly. All by God’s hand, of course.


      • on October 15, 2017 at 4:21 am Vagina dominator

        Are you referring to the race mixer? She’s already gone. She wanted out. Now she’s out.

        You can go from white to black. You can’t go from black to white.

        By the way, the pic is of course posed to make it seem “candid” (oh, you caught us in bed, and the house is such a mess) but they have gone to very great lengths to make it seem like “Hey, black dads are *naturally* just like ideal white dads!”

        See, here’s one we caught in a candid action shot!

        “Things that never happened” but women are taken in by this.

        Still it doesn’t matter. Back in the world of reality, the nigger and the mudshark are going to starve to death, trapped in their mid-city condo. The blond lasses in PA’s pic will farm and live.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Yeah, the feeble minded race traitor.


    • ‘smelliot’

      i’ve seen commenters pwn and putin use this


      • It was originally attempted by TSW (Stapon) back when the yenta first started posting…

        … there’s been a few attempts by her fellow cubicle mates to make it stick, but such puerile attempts at wit rarely make it beyond the piehole whence they arose.

        I keep telling these South Park renegades, in order for mockery to stick, it needs to find that kernel of truth to make it actually funny…

        … witness the barbs that have stuck: Strapon, Saucy Queer, Deviant Kike, etc.


      • ‘inceliot’ is pretty good


      • Only in your own nappy haid, eggnog (one of the best mocks, btw).

        You, who can’t go from one week to the next without a new name or icon… you’re worse that a woman with shoes.


      • And last I checked, you aren’t even using the meaning of THAT term correctly… probably yet another case of you shills projecting your own woman-hating, sexless, Cheetoh-encrusted lives upon your betters, go figger.


      • chill hoe


      • greg

        u sort of set urself up to be troll’d but i don’t really dislike u

        i’m not a shill either


        i’m pretty sure i’m bipolar. i don’t know why i do the weird shit i do


      • To be trolled only by half-wit South Park renegades and shill shitskins such as yourself, eggnog… as I’ve said before, it’s a mark of honor when skraelings attempt to take down their superiors.


      • i’m neither a shill or a shitskin


      • Well then you REALLY have no excuse for playing the n1gger fool like you have been ’round chere.

        Clean up your act, eggnog.


  49. I’m shocked I tell you, just shocked.

    Liked by 1 person

  50. Trump: A good goy. Oy vey !

    – Trump goes full shabbos-goy –



    • podwladny

      Say hello to God damned BND plant in the next cubicle over.

      (psst … y’all would be tad more credible if you would not blackpill on our beloved TrumpFuhrer in exact the same way.

      Servus! )


  51. http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2017/10/13/live-updates-harvey-weinstein-scandal-unravels-hollywood-oliver-stone-accused-sexual-assault/

    “On sets…[w]omen in technical jobs were almost nonexistent, and when they were there, they were constantly being tested to see if they really knew what they were doing.”

    Wow, imagine sexist pigs constantly (*cough* shit) testing you because of your gender. I literally can’t even.

    “So now that we’ve dealt with Weinstein what are we going to do about Trump?
    — Josh Gad (@joshgad) October 14, 2017”



  52. Waaaay O/T, but if you get a chance to see the new movie, “Brawl in Cell Block 99”, go see it! Beaners and bad guys get fatal beat downs. It stars Vince Vaughn (who is one of the few conservatives in Hollyweird).


    • on October 16, 2017 at 3:27 am Vagina dominator

      Talking about recently released great cinema, how about “The Meyerowitz Stories”? My god, Dustin Hoffman *and* Adam Sandler!

      I am so excited I could plotz.


  53. White Supremacy Part 2


  54. This is how pro-America, pro-South/Confederate demonstrations should go. Coordinated flags/banners, ordinary dress, good looking girls included. Who wants to help organize something like this? I say we make the Washington family banner the primary flag. It stands for America and the people who made it what it is, as well as the freedom of speech, freedom to demonstrate, and gun rights.

    Liked by 1 person

  55. on October 15, 2017 at 2:16 am Gunslingergregi

    My mom died looked frozen kind of horrible but showed me no big deal to be dead so I think I’ll be going with her when I feel like it. Give the do not rescusitate order for us lol don’t let anyone escape.


  56. on October 15, 2017 at 2:32 am Gunslingergregi

    United states


  57. 14:30
    translate black dynamites pitch on game, what you think I think its well summed up


  58. ch

    my question is: how did shit tests work before language?

    i think ‘let’s u and him fight’ and manipulating men into v1olence against each other is an older instinct

    a psychological relic

    a very dark truth that bluepillers really don’t like is that women have evolved a taste for violent motherfuckers

    [email protected] had to develop to prevent constant blood baths within tr1bes

    a woman’s concept of hierarchy is completely different and incompatible with a man’s concept of hierarchy


  59. Hertha Berlin in soccer yesterday took the knee.
    I can see this becoming the trend now.
    Of the 11 players on the team, only 3 are German which is typical of soccer in Europe now.


  60. Meanwhile in other news…in Austria the anti migrant Conservatives will win with the anti migrant nationalists FPO in second.
    FPO were founded by ex SS.


    • on October 15, 2017 at 12:54 pm Captain Obvious

      Austria’s conservative ‘whizz-kid’ in election triumph… Austria’s political “whizz-kid” Sebastian Kurz… Kurz’s People’s Party (OeVP) won 30.5 percent of the vote, followed by Chancellor Christian Kern’s Social Democrats (SPOe) on 27.1 percent and the far-right Freedom Party (FPOe) on 25.9 percent… managed to attract supporters in droves by… talking tough on immigration… http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3595189/posts


    • Austrians have a good mix of genes…from the north, the strong Germanic genes, with just enough sprinkling from Eastern Europe (with that strong blood memory of being a ‘border nation’ under constant threat of invasion) to come out of this in one piece. That and their proximity to Eastern Europe, which they may eventually join into an alliance with against the POZ of the West. (Pozlandia)


      • on October 15, 2017 at 10:29 pm Captain Obvious

        Well they produced the greatest French Horn player who ever walked the face of the Earth, that’s for [email protected] certain.

        A frigging Army of One on lead horn – he could produce the volume of six or eight merely mortal horn players:


  61. – Closer To The Truth In The Las Vegas Massacre – FBI Wiping Computers Clean – Jesus Campos Gag Order – Introduction Of Bill HR 3999. –



  62. on October 15, 2017 at 12:51 pm The Philosopher


    Interesting site. For some reason I can read really dull 600 page history books about the 18th century, and also enjoy celeb gossip hahah.

    But this item I thought was relevant to this forum.


  63. on October 15, 2017 at 12:52 pm The Philosopher

    Google ‘The business arrangement blind gossip’.

    Interesting site. For some reason I can read really dull 600 page history books about the 18th century, and also enjoy celeb gossip hahah.

    But this item I thought was relevant to this forum as it proves Huma and Anthony were in a fake marriage and Huma is indeed a lesbian, and liklely hilarys lover.


  64. on October 15, 2017 at 4:04 pm Unacknolodged_legislator

    Closing. CH careful your transgressing into poetic mastery. Keep em coming!


  65. on October 15, 2017 at 5:05 pm Oleaginous Outrager

    Liked by 2 people

  66. on October 15, 2017 at 6:56 pm Gunslingergregi

    How ya get the 150 free acres I’m us and where saw something before


  67. It’s very simple, The Jew: white humans WILL have our own countries.



      • “The eight siblings stole their hearts.”

        Typical fvcking ni66ers.

        Liked by 1 person

      • christcucking retards

        Liked by 1 person

      • lemme guess

        this isn’t the true face of christianity

        Liked by 1 person

      • Actually it’s not… but it’ll take more than a few sentences to explain it all, and after all the effort, you clowns will still be making the same comments next week.


      • no-bones, this mutual admiration society you got going with eggnog is getting even more embarrassing than usual for you… which is TRULY saying something.

        (((shakin’ mah haid)))


      • >”Actually it’s not… but it’ll take more than a few sentences to explain it all, and after all the effort, you clowns will still be making the same comments next week.”

        believe it or not

        i’m a humble dude who can be swayed by a good argument. i’m always evolving


        go for it

        i just dunno how u can get 14 words out of ‘neither greek nor jew’


      • in a world that’s been made smaller by modern technology, xtianity no longer functions as a de facto ethno-religion

        ur seeing it in full pozz

        Liked by 1 person

      • i just dunno how u can get 14 words out of ‘neither greek nor jew’

        You’re making my point for me about how you clowns don’t listen… that verse has been discussed, dissected, and explained here at the chateau at least a dozen times in the past year… and yet you antiChristians still bring it up as if it’s proof that God wants us to mix into one giant coffee-coloured mass of humanity.

        But for the moment, let’s revisit and focus on that one verse from Galatians 3, just in case there’s a peanut gallery member who hasn’t heard the explanation before:

        28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

        In short, from a spiritual standpoint, physicality and worldly status are immaterial when it comes to grace and the salvation anyone can achieve if they are “one in Christ”.

        From a meatworld standpoint, however, it’s obvious that there were and remain indeed the material and physical boundaries of this material existence. Men can’t have babies, women are still ‘the weaker sex’ and are to be silent in church and not leaders of men, the institution of slavery still exists, and Jew and Greek are indeed different… and all negros and Arabs don’t suddenly turn into Sidney Poitier or Omar Shariff..

        In short, the realities of one’s spiritual existence and physical existence are often two distinct and separate concerns… the laws of Nature and, indeed, even the practices of Man in the world, have not suddenly been upended nor contradicted by God’s Word, and this verse in particular. All slaves have not suddenly become freemen, and men and women have not suddenly become unisex.

        Beings in heaven do not have the same existence as beings on earth, and when there are a new heavens and a new earth, these differences will remain. Adam was created “perfect” to live on the earth, and that part of God’s original Plan will not be gainsaid or denied once Mankind has learned the lessons of his initial folly in thinking he could rule this planet, perhaps others, without God’s guidance..

        So obviously this verse is not the ammunition you antiChristians thought you had with which to neener-neener us believers about Satanic globalism being preached as Christianity today.

        In the future, don’t bring up this weak-sister argument again.


      • Looch,

        God is generally about not going against nature because nature is his plan. It is all interconnected and messing with it screws up the universe in ways we can’t always imagine or understand. What Christianity really teaches is to treat all people decently unless they give you reason not to. The gospel should be taught to all and all will be judged according to their capacity to understand what is taught. You or I are held to a higher standard of behavior than someone with Down’s syndrome would be. That is the meaning of neither Greek nor Hebrew.

        Christianity was always meant to be spread beyond the Jews. Treating people fairly and decently doesn’t mean you have to give them your daughter. It means you don’t extort them or profit from their misery for starters. It means you live up to your responsibilities and promises and try hard to be a straight up guy. Alaric, Theodoric, Odoacer were all Christians BTW.

        I can recommend a great short film called After the Rain. It is Akira Kurosawa’s last film and he died while making it. You can find it on YouTube. The film is not about Christianity or even Christian. It’s a samurai movie. The main character comports himself as a nearly ideal Christian despite being a very talented swordsman and is probably a Shinto/Buddhist. Religion is not mentioned but values are discussed at length. Christianity is about transcending our selfish animal natures over a lifetime.


      • “The eight siblings stole their hearts.”

        Along with their wallets and bikes.


      • Well-said, Danger.

        And for your Pour Le Merite, I’m going to let the next three CTs pass unchallenged. 😉


    • on October 16, 2017 at 8:15 am baked georgia

      curious data: 16-29 women voted more for the “nazis” (fpo) than 60+ men. damn boomers

      Liked by 1 person

      • Those men, such as they are, are still reeling from the direct and relentless psyops browbeating they took at every turn as children, after the war ended.

        Liked by 1 person

      • before blaming boomers for anything imagine living in constant fear of the draft. those that survived were (mostly) grateful to be left alone.

        before weed, antidepressants, and internet porn, what better way was there to instill lasting obedience and quiescence in your people than to make them constantly aware that they could be uprooted and sent off to fight god knows where because “that’s what good patriotic, Christian citizens do”?

        “it’s just war, goyim. every good citizen does it! don’t worry… your priests will forgive all your sins, our doctors will heal all your wounds, and if/when you pay the ultimate price your mangled corpse will be treated with honor. here’s a piece of metal with some ribbon attached. you’re welcome.”

        what a mindfuck.

        Liked by 1 person

  68. Take a look at this image of the new Austrian leader Sebastian Kurz https://imgur.com/mNH9j6t

    the only woman who is not looking at him is looking at the other women with tight clenched mouth .. she’s a dry-egged manjaw!

    If there can be a replacement for the longstanding CH castle logo, this would be it methinks.

    And in case youre wondering, Kurz is /ourguy/ because being anti-immigration is pretty much the litmus test nowadays. It means you consent to being called rayciss and you will inevitably (((notice))) who has been foisting this anti-life policy on )))everyone(((.


  69. Maybe some fellow readers could help with my situation. Girl I was seeing as FB on the quiet ended the arrangement because a mutual friend (whom I have no intention of ever sleeping with let alone eating) likes me too much and FB-girl doesn’t want to fall out with mutual friend. I have dates with other chicks lined up so I’m not going without, but does anyone have any suggestions on how to re-engage the FB situation? Even when she ended it she was saying how much she wanted to see me again but was making rules – no drinking alone together etc…


  70. What do you think about common women question: “What are you thinking now?”. Is it some kind of shit test? How do you respond…what’s your answer?