Hillary Clinton Is Wrong: It Doesn’t Take A Village To Raise A Child

This is getting to sound like a broken record. Yet another liberal shibboleth is discredited.

It doesn’t take a village to raise a child after all, according to University of Michigan research.

“In the African villages that I study in Mali, children fare as well in nuclear families as they do in extended families,” said U-M researcher Beverly Strassmann, professor of anthropology and faculty associate at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR). “There’s a naïve belief that villages raise children communally, when in reality children are raised by their own families and their survival depends critically on the survival of their mothers.” […]

In her study of the Dogon, Strassmann found that children’s risk of death is higher in polygynous than in monogamous families. This reflects the hazard of living with unrelated females whose own children are competing with the children of co-wives for limited resources.

Supporting this finding, Strassmann cites “Hamilton’s Rule,” established by British evolutionary biologist W.D. Hamilton in the 1960s. It is the first formal, mathematical description of kin selection theory, the idea that the degree to which we are willing to invest our resources in another person depends, in part, on the degree of genetic kinship we share with them.

It should also be noted that different human population groups, adapted to their specific environments, practice different reproductive strategies. In Africa, where this study took place, monogamy is less the norm than it is in Europe or Asia, and fathers come and go and have less certainty of paternity. This encourages an r-selection strategy where women pump out lots of kids and hope for the best, as opposed to a k-selected strategy in groups where enforced monogamy is the norm and fathers have more certainty about paternity. In the latter, you can expect to see more fatherly devotion and resource provision to his family, and more ill effects when the father abdicates his duty or the children are bastard spawn raised by single moms. (The author of the study commits a laughable PC error when she says that Bill Clinton is proof that kids of single moms turn out all right. No, that is proof that kids with extraordinary IQs and a particular suite of personality traits can overcome a crappy single mom family environment. Some of these social scientists should refamiliarize themselves with the axiom that exceptions prove the rule.)





Comments


  1. No, exceptions do not prove the rule, except in the sense that
    if, even in truly exceptional situations, the rule is still upheld,
    then this is strong evidence that the rule is correct, or at least useful.

    But, yes, beware of anecdotal evidence. That’s a good rule.
    And WJC does not have extraordinary IQ, but he has some
    unusual personality traits, among which is a ruthlessness
    unusual in the West, even among politicians. Mainly, he would
    (and presumably will) try to destroy not only his enemies,
    (like, allegedly, Nixon did), but will also not hesitate to destroy
    his friends. Add to that a certain low cunning. Maybe its the
    same thing.

    Even chimps – where paternity is normally unknown – take special care
    of known kin. Even maternal grandmothers show special care for
    little Apie.

    Thor

    Like


    • Thor is right that exceptions do not prove the rule. The principle can be more simply stated thus:

      Exceptions prove the rule to be false.

      Always glad to help out here

      Like


      • Exceptions do not nullify nor prove the rule to be false.

        Lets get this straight.

        Just because you find that one rare woman who does what she says does not mean that the rule “never trust a woman on what she says about what attracts her” is proven false.

        Like


      • Fucking aspies who can’t understand generalizations and probabilities…

        If you really want to help us, go ‘off’ yourself.

        Like


      • The ‘Prove’ in this saying is old-english, meaning test, as in a legal test. The point of the saying is “This one specific exception (along with explanation) reaffirms the validity of the rule.”

        Rule: Children of single mothers edure greater adversity

        Test: Bill Clinton was a child of a single mother; however, luck and a suite of unique personality traits allowed him to overcome it.

        Rule: Though occasional exceptions excel, statistically children of single mothers endure greater adversity.

        Like


  2. When Clinton made her riculous statement she did not mean Village, she meant women of the village. Let any non-family male show any interest or concern in a child and he will instantly be branded a Pedophile or abuser. This is the result of allowing women to dictate how men should behave. Clinton is wrong in terms of Biology, and thus Society. You only have to look at the Tottenham Riots where over sixty per-cent of the youths do not come from Nuclear Families, to observe the sort of thing that happens when you allow a ‘Village’ to raise a family. I feel sorry for Bill.

    Like


    • It’s takes a villlage to raise an ill-behaved entitled socialist.

      Like


    • I’m not familiar with those riots. I wonder if white people suffer as much damage from single parenthood as do blacks.

      And then I wonder again if high IQ white people do.

      If how well a child does is due to environment plus genes, maybe a shitty environment aint no thing if the dad gave great genes.

      Like


    • I don’t really trust most of my female friends with raising children.

      First, they’re mostly obese. What kind of society is OK with that sort of “role model”?

      Secondly, they feed their children poison. Ever read the label on baby formula? Corn syrup, wheat starch, etc. Disgusting. What happened with wet-nursing? Healthy and proper.

      Thirdly, the public school system and the predecessor, daycare. Talk about exposing kids to authority figures too soon.

      Not that the beta males these broads married are any better. Strong parenting means actually parenting. I would say that most Western “adults” can’t afford to be parents, financially or time-wise.

      Me? I want kids. Dozens of them, if possible. I want a mix of genetic breeding with a few women, who integrate to raise the kids with some interactions. No, not “Big Love” style, but *my* village of sorts.

      Until I have a few million in the bank, I won’t start. My father continued to have children into his 50s, my gun won’t shoot blanks.

      Like


      • Meh, you don’t need a ton of money to have kids. You just have to give up a bunch of other stuff you and the kids don’t need. And you don’t need a ton of money to homeschool your kids, either. It’s a few hundred dollars a year if you buy the books new. Far less if you buy used or simply borrow them.

        You are going to need more than the average family guy for what you say you want, but you don’t need millions unless you plan on a house for each mother. Or, an apartment building.

        Like


  3. Wow, some reactionaries still so butt-hurt over Clinto they’re reduced to referring to him by his initials rather than his surname; also, WJC’s awesome ruthlessness is accepted as well-established whereas Nixon’s is merely “alleged.” Cool.

    In a way it’s almost more endearing than the the demented right-wingers who admire Clinton as an alpha psychopath.

    [Heartiste: Super alpha Bill wasn’t a psychopath, but he was a grade A narcissist with borderline sociopathic tendencies.
    Not that there’s anything wrong with that!]

    Like


  4. The author of the study never noticed Bill Clinton was a pathological liar? Granted, after Bush and Obama, I am now nostalgic for the Clinton era.

    Like


  5. Another really interesting thing is how r/K strategies are even causing the European/Asian populations to divide within themselves. America has almost no cultural controls on behavior, and so people are left with their own personal genetic predispositions and nothing else. This has resulted in people ‘sorting’ thsemselves according to how r/K selected they are, and passing on their extreme genetic predispositions to their offspring. Eventually this will result in even more powerful psychological barriers against ‘intermarriage’ across classes, because class differentiation will have such an unusually strong genetic basis.

    In the past, things were different, because the culture caused genes to get ‘shifted’ around more between classes.

    The days of interclass mobility are long gone.

    Like


  6. on September 10, 2011 at 1:43 pm The Shocker (is hungover)

    Comparing Africa to USA to Europe?

    Norway, best educated and most entrepreneurial population.

    USA grinds 300 million to get 100,000 good ones.

    Africa, 1 billion and gets 0 good ones.

    Nigeria has a population of 150 million people– HALF the US. Know any famous Nigerians?

    Daddy fight or flight rates can’t explain that.

    Like


  7. “Village” is one of those leftist highjackings of language.

    There used to be somethign called “community”, a thing composed of nuclear and extended male-led families who shared friendship and cultural values, and would look out for one another.

    “Village” is what Hillary Clinton means by first having organic communities atomized, then having families atomized into single-mother bastardy, and then having the state at its Federal level take over all those dismantled functions.

    [Heartiste: Right. “Village” is just a leftie euphemism for the state. I bet the words “on-site corporate daycare” give ol’ hatchet-faced Hil a clit boner.]

    Like


  8. @The Real Vince

    Oh, my we have touchy feelings here. WJC is a value-free reference,
    just like JFK, LBJ or FDR. Neither a put down nor a positive.

    And, unlike most of his predecessors, he would throw his friends
    to the wolves. Susan McDougal and her sometime husband are
    good examples. Now, Susan McDougal was small potatoes,
    presumably clueless about what was going on – and neither she
    nor anybody else knew at the time that the scheming Clintons were to get
    into the national spotlight.

    But she did hard time for the Clintons, for which she received – AFAIK –
    nothing. So did her husband James.

    Also, note that Hillary went after Billy Dale of the White House travel agency,
    an innocent and apolitical bystander. The president could have let him
    go without prejudice, he served at the pleasure of the president (about
    half-a-dozen of them), but it would have looked bad so they decided
    to smear him first. Except that he fought back and won – even if a Phyrric
    victory.But the word was out FL (first lady) wants the slots…

    And yes, going after your enemies big time is not nice, but about par.
    Going after friends and neutrals to destroy them was new, at least
    for America.

    Like


  9. For anyone interested in how to really educate a child, read

    Emile
    By Rousseau
    Translated by Allan Bloom

    Like


    • It is difficult to take seriously the advice of Rousseau on child rearing, who sired several children with Thérèse Levasseur, his live in lover, and convinced her to give them all up to an orphanage on child rearing.

      As I understand Voltaire, a man not without his own criticisms, was very critical of Rousseau’s theories on education and used this fact as a barb.

      Like


      • Even if Rousseau was a demon, he was still a demon genius. He understood human nature better than anyone else.

        Like


      • Rousseau is well worth reading if only to understand the assumptions about human nature we all take for granted as self-evidently true today. He is brilliant, a thinker to grapple with.

        Yes, he also was a reprobate who produced a brood of bastards. What does that have to do with the clarity of his thinking? His autobiography Confessions, the first of its kind, was a brutally frank analysis of the life he lived, and it takes a certain quality of mind to produce such a book, a quality evident in the rest of his work. And, in many ways Rousseau was PUA before PUA was cool, when there were serious structural disincentives against the player lifestyle, back before we were swimming in a sea of hyper-plenteous vaj.

        Rousseau laid the deep foundations for modern godless socialism that Hillary relies on in her derivative book. At the foundational level Rousseau has a real argument to grapple with, which spawned the daffy milkwater Marxist claptrap that burdens us today. Go to the source.

        Emile is a great, great book, but it is less a literal child-rearing guide than a meditation on what good character is and how it should be instilled. It is an Enlightenment product in contradistinction to the City of God pedagogy regnant in his day.

        Of most interest to this website are his seminal observations on the nature of women, truly good stuff if you want to take game as deep as possible:

        http://tinyurl.com/6dhrjg9
        http://tinyurl.com/665mjzv
        http://tinyurl.com/6bx6h3x
        http://tinyurl.com/62bxrys

        Samseau is just defending Jean-Jacques because he shares a syllable with the great Swiss thinker. Seau that’s why he’s seau big on J-J. But the Alpha Before There Were Alphas is worth reading anyway.

        Like


  10. Just finished G. Clark’s “A Farewell to Alms”… interesting part about Polynesian infant mortality. Without diseases, Polynesian babies had high survival rates, so what they did was bash the baby’s head over a rock soon after birth (or strangle, drown, feed-to-pigs, I don’t know). this way, they wacked 75% of all new-borns, and esnured just enough children to keep the population stable on that small island.

    Contrast that with Fletcher’s mutineers who ended up on Pitcarin Island. Within a few years, all the men except Fletcher had been murdered – within a few generations, the population was too great for the small space.

    In europe, filth ensured high-infant mortality rates well into the 18th and 19th centuries. Now, modern medicine has stranged our mating strategy here, but in Africa, it’s really messed things up.

    Like


  11. Blacks are a different breed altogether. They generally don’t form nuclear families – the man runs away – and the women group together and mutually care for a wide variety of children. In the Milwaukee area – we had a black girl go missing – her biological mother thought she was with relatives in the South – and despite not hearing from her – or sending her – gave it no thought. The girl was found murdered by the railroad tracks. Do not compare white people to black people – they are two different species with traits all their own. This Shit was brought in by the Jew, Hillary Clinton, to dumb down white people – and it has worked.

    Like


  12. Its worth noting that “extended family” can occur in several diferent models, and in some, with certainty of paternity.

    There is a difference between the tribal african extended familily and the latin extended family.

    In the latin model (much like the sicilian mafia model itself), its as if several nuclear families are more attached.

    In a nuclear family, “uncles” are distant relatives, and the authority is based in the head of the nucleus.

    In a latin extended family, “age counts”. Relatives like uncles are to be respected – and held responsable – right after the father, and play an important role in education as well as they are to be obeyed and respected, and taken care of, like a secondary institution.

    However the nucleus of the family is respected (i.e.: father and mother), “the village stills raises the child” (i.e.: uncles and aunts are expected to participate and be benefited). Its a patriarchal structure nonetheless, where the “other men” of the family are secondary father figures.

    Wich one is best? I can’t tell. I live in an hybrid family, where my pa is from a germanic (nuclear) family, and my mother is from a spaniard (extended) family. So I was raised in both systems, where sons have more autonomy inside the family (as typical of nuclear families) and AS WELL as observing extended relations (as typical in extended families).

    My uncles played great part in my education (not bigger than my father), and my aunties cajole me like I was theyr child (sometimes more than my mother). I buy flowers to my aunties, my uncles taught me to drive and spoke me about women, I almost never say no to them, and they are very generous towards me. There is a sense of brotherhood with my cousins. But that’s the spaniard side – the germanic side is more distant (there is love, and there is more individuality).

    ***

    However when I see american liberals talking that “it takes a village” I never get the sense that they mean a family like mine. Sounds like they mean an african tribal kind of family, in a matriarchal structure.

    No, thanks.

    Two of my germanic aunts (the nuclear side) are divorcèes and theyr kids are fucked up. The daughter of one is a spinster (and a slut un younger age), and the son of the other is a bissexual emo with no sense of loyalty, and who lives above his means (I sometimes suspects he prostitutes himself to older men).

    We meet seldom. I avoid them.

    Like


  13. Faulty premises all around. First, HRC doesn’t care about raising children per se, she cares about absorbing power and thus the village idiocy is more about let us, the government be powerful enough to take the place of parents.
    Second, WJC seemed to have a very high IQ but that’s beside the point because, like the low IQ BHO, believing in the wrong things and being around the worst people whether it’s the Daley machine or the Arkansas mafia will lead to bad results. The point is is that WJC may have lost his dad but his mom shacked up soon afterward and had him stashed with his grandparents in the mean time. Garbage in, garbage out.

    Like


  14. on September 10, 2011 at 2:30 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    lzoozlzozlzlz

    hey heartistse

    the biblical stories and homeric works especially the odyssyey emphasize teh importance of the FATHER

    god is the FATHER

    this is because the WEST develeoeped teh ideas of freedom, liberty, and proeprty rights; that EVERY MAN who worked provided had teh RIGHT to keep the fruits of his labors lzozozlozloz

    Moses came down form teh mountain twith THOU SHALT NOT STEAL

    this means that it is IMMORAL to tke one man’s goods and sevrices and give it to another man’s SEED

    the west had teh greeks free greeks of sparta fidghting AGANST the persians PERSIANS who were SLAVES

    the GREEKS fought so fieercely and braveley because tehy were fighting for their OWN PEOEPRTY AND FREEDOM lzozozoz

    ZEUS wa sthe god of the common man the stranger and beggar

    When the lead commaner agamenenn took away Achilles woman, ACHILLES QUIT THE GREEK ARMY.

    just like ntodya when the noeoenc colleeges tucker maxes asscock outrr future iwves we QUIT lzozozozzl

    ZEUS sided iwth ACHILLES when ACHILLES quit the GREEK army lzozolzlozloloz as ZEUS KJNEW that ACHILELELELS WAS RIGHT lzozozl and AGEMENANENON WAS WORNG fro taking ACHILLES PRIZE

    indeed the first word of the ILAID IS RAGE !!! THE RAGE OF ACHILLES

    the rage of ahcilles was inspired by the king/state/bernanke taking achilles prize wwy form him so achilles telles aagemennion to CUK OFF and quits the GREEK ARMHY

    the main pouin of the ODYSSEY is also cenetreaed aorund proeprty rights and a man’s property rights. in his 20 year absence, his home and peorperty and son are only presevred thorugh his wife’s peneppeelope’s FAITHFULNESS. the usitors ar etrtyihg to woo her , plotting how to kill odyssyeuiss son, but in the ebnd all is PRESERVED as PENEL:EOEP is faithful. this is contractes with clyumengtstsra agemamaneon’s wife who takes on a new suitor who KILLS AGEMEEENEON upon his return. later, AGEEBEGEMnnon’s son avenges his fatehr and kills the suitor,.

    the WEST arose from these pwoerful styories and MOSES stating THOU SHALT NOT STEAL, THOU SHALT NOT COVET BUTTHEX THY NEOGHIBOR’S WIFE (nor secrelet tape it for sodom an dscheisster lzozlzozo)

    The fmeinist movement was deisgend by the central beernakknek bankaers to transfer and cash out out on the west’s wealth, to assock and deosul womenz and have them transfer welath form menz to the creators of fiat/central banksters wanksters zlozlzlozzoo.

    The bankers use the fiemins movement to DECONSTRUCT THE GRETA BOOKS and classics and repalce fatherhood and zeus and moses with butthex, oprah, and hillarly clintonz lzozozlozzlo.

    Women don’t have the same moral bone (not nboneer zlzozl) that men have, an dthus you see even “conservtaive” womenz like Charlotte Allen of the Weekly Standard complimebnting and exalting asscoekcers and secretiev tapers of butthex bullies like Tucker Max lzoozlzloz, while ignoring the men and ture heroes bleeding oto death on foreign wars in foeriegen shores lzozlzlzlz.

    Basiclalay the better great heroic men–the Achilles–are sent to die for teh state while th Kings and ebernanke bankers ceize thier women and assettss and butthex their women’z asses zlzozlzlzl. Homer relaized the central immortality of all this and asked, “WHAT IF THE AGREAT AHCILLLES SAID FUCK IT AND DROPPED OUT AND QUIT THE WAR?”

    achilles–the greatest of all warriors aquuestions the use an dpurpose of war where he takes all the risk and the kings get all the rewards.

    note how achilles, hamlet, jesus, and the most decorated marine of all time smedley butler (read his book war is a racket!) notice how the greatest warriors all question war, while the sniveling neoongooncs like jonah goldberg and ben shaprior, who never ever willn nver suit up like buill crystal nevr will–notice how they are pro war pro feminisms lzozlzl

    gthis is because both war and feminism grwo the stae and make the in-the-beltway neoocnnosn vastly wrich and welathy as tehy convert theier fiat dolalrz into physical property lzozlzlozozozlo

    sorry if i misspeleled a couple things but with all teh pussysy i goota eat out and pound i didn’t have time to speeklelecheck eveyrting :O)

    lzozlzllzz

    Like


  15. on September 10, 2011 at 2:38 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    the welfare state

    relies on legions of cuckholded men

    all slaving away to pay the the child support

    of all the women passed aodurcnd from elite asscoker to eleite assocker

    as owmen publish, promote, and fornicate withh asscokers

    while deocnstructing the great books and classics

    ’tis a woman’s nature to choose the assockers

    over the heroic men and nice guys

    lzozozzoz

    this is why jonah goldberg and bill crystsl push for feminisms and war lzozlzlzl as both punish and transfer life, liberty, and peorperty form good mne to jhonah godleberg beltway fiat banksers lzozozl

    so civilization delcines when womn take the lead

    and it beocmes a society of welath tranfer, debt, and eprpertual war lzozlzlzlzlz

    how da university works: feminism = debt & debauchery & divorce & Desecration machine/army lzozlzlzlzlzlgh weo

    lzozlzlzlzlzlzlzlzlzlzozllzlz

    univeristies are at the tip (tit lzozlzlzoz) of our debt empire

    over the past thirty years or so univeristies desouled women in prima noctae assocking sessins (some of tehm secretly taped iwthout thei girls conthent as the neocons like it best) and they sent the army forth to 1) transfer assetts form menz, 2) destory the family, 3) murder 50,000,000 unborn innocent souls, 4) hype and sell sub prime loans while wearing short skirts lzozlzlzlzllzlzlz 5) lure men into marriage iwth their coconpirators the ministers who front the legal system that does what no pimp would wever do–charge men for past use of a pussy lzolsoslslslslslslslslsls

    the fembot army;s main corporate state job is to create debt debauchery destiutution debt divorce deconstruction and devastation lzozlzlzlz

    and they have succeeded!! lzozlzlzlzlzlzl

    today our debt deficit will be greater than the gnp!!!!1

    the feminsimt movement cooinnded with the largest greatest increase of debt ever known to namankinds lzozlzlzlzl this is because womenz who stamp their little feet and bitch and complain and tranfer and destory welath and say “me me m em e more material welath for me me me me for my gina!!!! it’s for the children (even though women aborted/killed/vacuumed 50,000,000 fetuss by their choice alone) lzozlzlz it takes a village–fund my village where we get to bang alphas and the betas pay for it whether we cuckold them in tehir homes or via the welfare state zlozlzozlzzlzl” and they bitch and complain and talk about handbags and butthex and twilight vampires and enocurage girls to long for and lust after undead bloodsucking vampire twilight monsters and butthexing douchebags and otehr things which make their bginas tingle repalced menz at univeristies menz who built invent iengineer buuikld invent reason truth write great books read great bookz think lzozlzl eb=engineer lzozlzlzozlzl replaced exaltation eand greatness with bdebt debuachery destitution lzozlz

    short beta men rose fast in teh unievristy as they were handed fiat bernanke cash fronm helicopter ben and they used it to surrpound themselves with syocphantic harems of womenze as all teh betas love honor worship tucker max their ultimate master because he rhymes with goldman sax and also he butthexes girls and films it woithout teh girlths ocnthent and the weekly stanadrd neocns repeat his lies lzozlzlzlzzl that he is six foot tall zlozzlzllzlzlzlzl honoring their #1 butthexual hero lzozlzlzl

    so anyeways teh fiat masters trianed owmen in the arts of divorce debuachery deseefxation destruction lozlzolzlzlz and abortion and debt creation, and as womenze rose to power on teh ffront lines of the epreemptive wars against teh unborn they murdered 50,000,000 since rose vs. wade they deconstructed and debuached tehc ulture on campuses as when yhou put womenze in charge it soons becomes all butthex all the time as priscilia paintion woemnze editor in chief of simon and schuster is publishing tucker max’s next book zlzolslssslslsoslsoslzozlzlzlzlz c hecks che-=checks it out peoples are saying and speaking out about the way womenze are debucahing defiling and butthexing the culture lozlzlzlzlzl:

    http://community.feministing.com/2009/09/why-are-female-executives-publ.html

    Why are Female Executives Publishing Tucker Max?

    Saw this floating around. good question!

    MCCOY MOUNTAIN
    ART, FILM, & LITERATURE GUILD OF AMERICA

    Ms. Priscilla Painton

    Simon & Schuster Editor in Chief

    RE: ASSHOLES FINISH FIRST, Secretive Tapings of Anal Sex without The Girl’s Consent, Corporate Douchebaggery, and the Epic Failure of I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell

    Despite the fact that teenagers nationwide are going to hear gem pick-up lines like “get away from me or I’m going to carve another fuck hole in your torso”, what truly crowns this film as an epic fail is its apologetic attempt to masquerade gratuity as an Apatovian bromance. –http://www.thelmagazine.com/newyork/we-hope-you-can-still-get-alcohol-poisoning-in-hell/Content?oid=1291260

    “Little Italy is fighting back against Tucker Max ‘s controversial ad campaign . Yeah, that poster on the right says, “Blind Girls Never See You Coming.” Va fan culo, indeed.” –http://gothamist.com/2009/09/21/tucker_max.php

    Dear Ms. Painton,

    I and my colleagues in the ART, FILM & LITERATURE GUILD have a couple questions regarding the direction you are taking Simon and Schuster in. Why are you guys/gals hating on art, literature, culture and America? It was recently brought to our attention that you are intent on publishing Tucker Max’s ASSHOLES FINISH FIRST, and that your company actually gave him a $300,000 advance for his fart art. As the editor in chief of Simon and Schuster, owned the CBS corporation, do you truly believe Assholes Finish First? It is oft said that girls like “bad boys.” Does Tucker’s fart art douchebag wit titillate and excite you? Is that why you are publishing and profiting from it? Did you laugh during Tucker’s recent film flop when what’s-his-name stated that overweight women aren’t real people? Do you smile smugly when your billion-dollar corporation profits from douchebaggery?

    http://gawker.com/5363233/tucker-maxs-campaign-of-hate-against-chicagos-transit-system “The ads were poetic ditties of white text on a black background . Like: “Blind girls never see you coming” and “Strippers Will Not Tolerate Disrespect (Just Kidding).””

    “Over at the Washington, D.C., premiere, Max’s video minion ridicules both Vietnamese and African-American women, the former for being employed as a pedicurist, and the latter for having a name he finds funny.”

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/10/spot-your-local-tucker-max-douchebag/

    Do you enjoy profiting from making fun of Asians and overweight women? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1220628/board/thread/148314040

    http://tuckermaxdoucebag.blogspot.com

    http://tuckermaxlies.blogspot.com

    Does this make you laugh Ms. Painton? It is not too late to choose the right direction for Simon and Schuster and CBS and walk away from publishing Assholes Finish First . At most it will bring in a few pennies, which will lead everyone to conclude that you and CBS aren’t in it for the money, but just the debauchery and destruction of the culture. As Tucker Max pointed out, the feminist movement empowered women and gave them the right to choose the art they affiliated with and promote. So now, with all the power in your hands, what will you chose on behalf of women all over the world? Please do us proud and choose the right thing.

    “The ad campaign for the new flick “I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell” includes slogans like “Deaf Girls Can’t Hear You Coming” and “Strippers Will Not Tolerate Disrespect (Just Kidding!).””

    –http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/New-Movie-Ads-Take-Offensive-to-the-Max-59695522.html

    Why is corporate America, under your direction Ms. Painton, forcing epic “Richard Kelly” fail fart art and film on the common public? Do you also find secretive tapings of anal sex without the girl’s consent to be entertaining and titillating art?

    http://gawker.com/5363233/tucker-maxs-campaign-of-hate-against-chicagos-transit-system

    Let’s talk for a sec about something Tucker glamorizes and pretends is funny in his ‘book’: filming a naked women in his bedroom without her consent. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that while he’s doing this he is coaxing the girl to have anal sex with him, an exploitative act that a guy like him probably especially enjoys.

    –http://www.bitchmagazine.org/post/douchebag-decree-marketing-tucker-max

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/11/the-rapiest-quotes-from-i-hope-they-serve-beer-in-hell/

    “OK, we can try anal sex , but I want it to be special and romantic. …. process: I was going to fuck her in the butt and film it without her consent ,” — http://www.tuckermax.com/archives/entries/date/tucker_tries_buttsex_hilarity_does_not_ensue.phtml

    Do you and the CBS Corporation find this entertaining? As you know, sodomy is a sin in the Old Testament as is sex out of wedlock and fornication. What is your motivation in working with those who promote and profit from secretive tapings of anal sex?

    Do you find such “literature” and “art” to be representative of Simon and Schuster and CBS?

    “In one of his most notorious pieces, he convinces a girl to have anal sex and tapes it without her consent.” — http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/08/tucker_max/

    Despite the fact that teenagers nationwide are going to hear gem pick-up lines like “get away from me or I’m going to carve another fuck hole in your torso”, what truly crowns this film as an epic fail is its apologetic attempt to masquerade gratuity as an Apatovian bromance. –http://www.thelmagazine.com/newyork/we-hope-you-can-still-get-alcohol-poisoning-in-hell/Content?oid=1291260

    Ms. Painton–do you find that entertaining? Is it good literature? Do you consider demeaning stories about having sex with midgets good literature? Do you consider it good business to make fun of Asians, overweight women, and minorities so as to bolster your bottom line?

    What is driving you to publish Assholes Finish First ? What are your motivations? Money? America does not want Tucker Max, as demonstrated this past weekend at the boxoffice. Do you find these signs to be entertaining/a good CBS investment?

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/15/tucker-max-fans-fight-rape-with-racism/

    Is Tucker Max’s fan base the group that Simon & Schuster is seeking to serve under your leadership?

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/14/tucker-max-too-sexist-for-ad-space/

    It seems that America believes otherwise as Richard Kelly and Tucker Max’s I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell has proven to be a colossal artistic and financial failure.

    “Not faring so well, however, was the Tucker Max adaptation I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, which took in $369,000 from 120 theaters with a well-below-average $3,075 per-screen average.” — http://www.movieweb.com/news/NEdXykfeBDXwhe

    So Priscilla, please tell us about your douchetastic love affair with Tucker Max and his fart art. Does it really titillate you as a woman and feminist? Say it isn’t so! Is this good Simon and Schuster/CBS branding? Why did your massive billion-dollar corporation reward Tucker with a $300,000 advance?

    “Little Italy is fighting back against Tucker Max ‘s controversial ad campaign . Yeah, that poster on the right says, “Blind Girls Never See You Coming.” Va fan culo, indeed.” –http://gothamist.com/2009/09/21/tucker_max.php

    Does CBS and Simon & Schuster approve of registering fake email accounts to promote stories regarding secretive tapings of anal sex without the girl’s consent?

    ” The lack of traditional plugs forced Max to promote his web site and book via the internet. He would create fake e-mail accounts and then bombard entertainment sites and news aggregators with links to his material.” — http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/11/tucker_max_sxsw/

    For this, your billion-dollar corporation rewarded Tucker with a $300,000 advance.

    “Max may have to concentrate on his agent style business moving forward because he’s running out of material. He’s received a $300,000 advance for a second version of his drunken, sexual exploits – a tome that will contain the stories not ripe enough for the first cut.” — http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/11/tucker_max_sxsw/

    Are you proud of Simon & Schuster and your corporation? Funding and encouraging hype, failure, douchebaggery, debauchery, lies, secretive tapings of anal sex without the girl’s consent, and making fun of Asians, overweight women, and minorities. Is that what attracts you to Tucker Max, or is it the epic artistic and financial failure of his film?

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/i_hope_they_serve_beer_in_hell/

    “I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell fails in its attempts at raunchy humor, and Tucker Max comes across so unlikable and outrageous that the film’s inevitable story arc feels forced.”

    It is not too late to choose the right direction for Simon and Schuster and walk away from publishing Assholes Finish First .

    Best,

    McCoy Mountain & The ART, FILM & LITERATURE GUILD

    –http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1220628/board/thread/148314040

    Will Priscilla Painton at Simon & Shuster still Publish *beep* Finish First?

    the title makes no sense. *beep* might finish first in some silly women’s eyes, but they epic fail in reality, as demonstrated by tucker’s epic fart art film fail, which priscilla painton is pretendning not to notice.

    What’s up with women these days?

    It seems the more they run things, the more they try to force douchebag fart art on everyone:

    Former ‘Time’ Exec. Relieves Venerable Editor Mayhew At Simon & Schuster

    http://gawker.com/5002333/former-time-exec-relieves-venerable-editor-mayhew-at-simon–schuster

    Anywho, does Priscilla Painton at Simon & Shuster have a personal vendetta against asians, minorities, overweight women, and little people?

    Does she think tucker’s ads are cute and humorous?

    http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/New-Movie-Ads-Take-Offensive-to-the-Max-59695522.html

    Does she get off on this?

    “The ad campaign for the new flick “I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell” includes slogans like “Deaf Girls Can’t Hear You Coming” and “Strippers Will Not Tolerate Disrespect (Just Kidding!).”

    Is that supposed to be funny?” –http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/New-Movie-Ads-Take-Offensive-to-the-Max-59695522.html

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/10/spot-your-local-tucker-max-douchebag/

    Is this the new face and culture of simon and schuster?

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/15/tucker-max-fans-fight-rape-with-racism/

    Does Priscilla Painton at Simon and Schuster giggle at secretive tapings of anal sex without the girl’s consent and also this:

    http://www.penguinblogs.ca/davidson/archives/00000079.html

    http://tuckermaxlies.blogspot.com/2008/08/sillylittlefreak.html

    http://www.tuckermax.com/archives/entries/date/the_absinthe_donuts_story.phtml

    “11:17: The girl starts saying something about what a horrible person I am. I stare at her, but I am not listening. I am preparing myself. I am B-Rabbit. This is the final battle rap. I will win the hostile crowd:

    [I interrupt the fat girl] “Ward, I think you’re being a little hard on the Beaver, [as I point to each in turn] so is Eddie Haskell, Wally, and Miss Cleaver.”

    [To the fat guy with greasy hair in the camo vest] “Look out everyone! It’s the Pillsbury Commando! Hey Chunk, when was the last time you washed your hair? Does it give you more hit points to have that grease helmet? I hate to break the news, but +5 defense only counts in Dungeons and Dragons.”

    [To the ugly Asian girl] “Why you no rike me? You want me frip over? You no piss me off! ME FIND YOU IN POCKING ROT!! YOU NO TAKE MING ARIVE!!”

    [To the small frail dork–I notice he has a lazy eye] “Dude–Look at me when I’m talking to you–BOTH EYES AT ONCE. Are you really this ugly or are you just playing? EVERYONE, BE CAREFUL, THIS GUY LURKS UNDER THE STAIRS AND TRIES TO LICK YOUR SHOES WHEN YOU PASS BY!”

    [To the original fatty, pause for effect] “Why do you do this to yourself? WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO YOURSELF? Look, I’m gonna give you some advice-leave the party, take the geek squad with you, go to Denny’s, order about 10 Grand Slam Breakfasts, and eat your pain away. Won’t be the first time will it?”

    11:19: I am finished. The kitchen is quiet, except for Eddie and Rich laughing. The four freaks are completely speechless. Everyone is staring at me. I blurt out, “WHAT? I’m pretty sure it’s what Jesus would’ve done.” Eddie and Rich promptly remove me from the kitchen.”

    Is Priscilla Painton publishing tucker’s next book for the love of literature, art, or money?

    ‘Cause it seems that those who work with tucker generally hate and lose literature, art, and money.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscilla_Painton

    http://www.theladyfinger.com/2009/09/tucker-max-brings-his-misogyny-to-big.html

    “What ensues, according the film’s trailer, is alcohol-fueled misogynistic mayhem. Max has sex with several women, including, to his smug satisfaction, a dwarf.”

    See? That is the clever banker ruse.

    Have women such as Priscilla fund and promote it, while others protest it, enriching the bankers as marriage is destroyed and the state is grown.

    http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/

    “A Site about the Divorce Regime, Family Court Corruption,
    and Government’s War on Fathers”

    “The divorce regime is the most totalitarian institution ever to arise in the United States. Its operatives in the family courts and the social service agencies recognize no private sphere of life. “The power of family court judges is almost unlimited,” according to Judge Robert Page of the New Jersey family court. “Social workers are perceived to have nearly unlimited power,” a San Diego Grand Jury concludes. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Total immunity [enjoyed by social workers] is absolute power.”

    The divorce regime is responsible for much more than “ugly divorces,” “nasty custody battles,” and other clichés. It is the most serious perpetrator of human and constitutional rights violations in America today. Because it strikes the most basic institution of any civilization – the family – the divorce regime is a threat not only to social order but to civil freedom. It is also almost completely unopposed. No political party and no politicians question it. No journalists investigate it in any depth. A few attorneys have spoken out, but they are eventually suspended or disbarred. Some academics have written about it, but they soon stop. No human rights or civil liberties groups challenge it, and some positively support it. Very few “pro-family” lobbies question it. This is because the divorce regime operates through money, political power, and fear.” — http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/

    –http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1220628/board/thread/148314040

    Have you seen/read END THE FED by Ron Paul? “Everyone must read this book–Congressmen and college students, Democrats and Republicans–all Americans.”
    –Vince Vaughn

    When you think about it, Tucker Max was the Fed’s ultimate creation–a soulless, debased douchebag:

    “My name is Tucker Max, and I am an *beep*

    Think about it–Tucker’s motto @ http://tuckermax.com could be the Fed’s motto:
    “I get excessively drunk via inflating the currency at inappropriate times, disregard social norms (funding feminism/debauchery & debasement of the family/currency/culture/tucker max(educated at the Fed’s University of Chicago’s School of Economics (school of freakanomics) and Duke scholarship)), indulge every whim/war, ignore the consequences of my actions/bubbles/bailouts, fund idiots and posers and tucker-max-like CEOs, sleep with more women than is safe or reasonable/luring them with fiat currency & a fiat-funded bus, and just generally act like a raging darko/douchebag/dickhead.”

    What do you think of Ron Paul’s new book–End the Fed?

    http://www.amazon.com/End-Fed-Ron-Paul/dp/0446549193/

    Review for End The Fed
    “Rarely has a single book not only challenged, but decisively changed my mind. “
    –Arlo Guthrie

    “Everyone must read this book–Congressmen and college students, Democrats and Republicans–all Americans.”
    –Vince Vaughn

    Vince Vaughn is a far, far better actor/director/writer than Tucker Max, so it makes sense that Tucker and his jealous friends at the Fed detest Arlo Guthrie and Vince Vaughan as well as art, film, and literature.

    The book has much better reviews and is far-higher ranked than Tucker’s douchey books/film/trailer–Five solid stars!

    Why do you donnie darko douchos/cbs haterz hate on art, the Constitution, morality, goodness, sound money, peace, prosperity, love, the family, kindness, and Ron Paul so much?

    And like the Fed, tucker privatizes all the profits of his private jet while sharing all the risk with his volunteer employees, who work for free.

    “Feminism which espoused “women’s rights” actually has driven femininity underground, torn the sexes asunder, and stripped woman of recognition for being wives and mothers, roles essential to their own fulfillment, to men, and to children and society.” –http://www.savethemales.ca/

    http://www.amazon.com/Save-Males-Matter-Women-Should/dp/1400065798

    Like


  16. Feminism as supported by Hilary Clinton and others is all about destroying civilization so women can get their GINA tingles satisfied. Patriarchy precedes and is aprecondition of civilization. Civilization is a a product of Patriarchy not Matriarchy. For millions of years before the daen of human history a few thousand years ago, we had matriarchy. The patriarchy came into being which produced civilization. Instead of supporting the weakest link in a family which is the biological father, feminism tries to destroy him. The state of nature is feminism of a single mother and her children. A state of civilization is a father and his children. Civilization is better than the state of savage nature but feminists don’t know or don’t care. Most women these days don’t either. Ignoring actual human nature, rather than a sentimentalized version of it, will lead to failure, resentment, nueroses and backlash. The last sentence was in a long but highly informational article I read, and gives the reasons why I said what I said. Here’s the link:
    http://www.fisheaters.com/garbagegeneration.html

    Like


  17. The problem is not liberal lies being repeated as Truth by All Media, but that the public must still be warned that Liberals Lie.

    Like


  18. modding?
    great

    Like


  19. on September 10, 2011 at 2:50 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    “it takes a village to raise a child” is jonah goldberg/hillary clinotn code skeak for “it takes a bunch of cuckholded beta men to work their lives away to fund a village of idle fiat bankers who create naught but debt and tuckler max assockers whymes iwth goldman sax lzozlzlzlzl, to figt and ide on foreign shoeres in foreign wars while tehir womenz are asscocked in cocleege lzzozlzlzlzl”

    Like


  20. on September 10, 2011 at 2:51 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    ^^^^

    oops i misspeleld “speak” as “skeak” above.

    soooo sorry!! lzozlzlzl

    Like


  21. on September 10, 2011 at 3:20 pm Ghost of Amneus

    It takes a village to raise a family only if you follow the feminist idea of what a family is: mothers and children. Take away the men (the workhorses and the guardians of civilization), and you’re damn right you’re going to need a whole village to raise a few kids. Still, that village will be far less prosperous than villages with a patriarchal system and probably won’t last very long.

    I urge everyone to read The Garbage Generation. It’s an incredible book that explains clearly why our society, and others that follow these same trends, are collapsing. It’s out of print, but you can read it for free online.

    Like


  22. It takes a village idiot to believe anything Hillary, or Bill Clinton says. Of course, the Hildebeast’s real meaning was that the socialist state could do a better job of raising your child than you can, because you are stupid. The State, however, being led by a Ruling Class full of Harvard grads is just so much smarter than you. Look how well they are doing running the country! So, turn your kids over to govt. schools, and govt pre-schools, and govt. daycare, and don’t worry about a thing!

    Like


  23. Regarding the comments. I was silently around before Sodini. The quality of the comments has not changed in any way. In general, the quality of the discussion depends on the quality of the original post.

    Blog whiners always imagine a golden age that never existed.

    Like


  24. So if Bill is alpha why he stays with such old ugly and arrogant feminist? Political reasons? Or because his wife is more important than him now? Not very alpha.

    This fact very much lowers his “alpha” status (if we mean with alpha a bjowjob from the usual careerist young bitch).

    Like


  25. When I first heard, “it takes a village to raise a child” I interpreted it not in a literal sense, that the entire village should be raising your child, but that parents want the values they teach to their children in the home to be reinforced by their surrounding environment. So that if you are teaching your child A, but the surrounding culture enforces Z, you are going to have a very difficult time keeping your child on the straight and narrow.

    Just see how isolated Americans have become in their own homes.

    How often do we see kids outside playing in groups?

    The way things are, I don’t know why people even bother to have kids anymore.

    Like


    • I always interpreted it as “Society should be composed of responsible, married couples, whose husbands should feel comfortable yelling at your special little shit when he messes up, if you’re not around – not a bunch of princess mothers who don’t allow anyone to discipline their children.”

      But I can see how this could be twisted into advocating socialism.

      Like


  26. Another bit of feminist drivel debunked by the cold-hearted truth of science? I’m absolutely shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

    Like


  27. Well, Hillary only pushed that community crap because she is essentially a communist. You guys think Obamacare was bad? You should have been around for HillaryCare. Caused a fricken red-alert, all hands on deck lockdown on the part of patriotic Americans, who made it die. We owe them thanks. It was pure communism. Additionally, some of her college papers are kept secret, probably because she was writing communist crap in them she learned from her femnazi all girls school.

    Like


  28. “exceptions prove the rule”

    When this phrase was first used, the word “prove” meant “test”

    Exceptions TEST the rule. That is, they DISPROVE it.

    Like


    • on September 12, 2011 at 8:01 am Marshall Lentini

      So “test” is equivalent to “disproof” in your language.

      If I hand you a basket of oranges, and in it you find an apple or two, it is still a basket of oranges for the sake of signaling convenience. The presence of apples does not “disprove” the basket of oranges; modifies it, but does not negate it except in the narrowest logical sense — which is not the purpose of empirical science.

      Like


  29. “…kids with extraordinary IQ’s and…”

    When Bill Clinton IQ was measured?

    Like


  30. Find me a politician that DOENS’T lie…

    The Clinton era was one of the finest in American history.

    Who gives a flying f ck if our prez was catchin dome in the oval office

    1 the budget was balanced (and acutally ran in a surplus for a little)
    2 the stock market was booming
    3 there was no international conquest, fueled by a military-industrial complex
    4 other countries RESPECTED america, we were the future.

    Now look at us.

    1 we are running at a deficit, our debt is ridiculous, and social security makes no sense
    2 the stock market has tanked, and will probably double dip
    3 we are fighting major wars on 2 fronts
    4 people see americans as fat, concieted and presumptuous

    Democrat, Republican … doesn’t matter.

    We need to pull ourselves together. Whatever we are doing, isn’t working…

    We need a president who will

    Step 1. Audit the fed.
    step 2. pull out of ALL wars, all foreign military bases.
    step 3. balance the budget by cutting social security, universal healthcare, and large amounts of defense department.
    step 4. invest in infastructure and education
    step 5. create a system that foster entreprenuership and business by cutting taxes
    step 6. catch dome in oval office.

    Like


    • The Clinton era was one of the finest in American history.

      Who gives a flying f ck if our prez was catchin dome in the oval office

      1 the budget was balanced (and acutally ran in a surplus for a little)
      Except we didn’t, that was a just a lie of the politicians. If we had a surplus why didn’t the national debt go down. It was a fake, a lie.
      2 the stock market was booming
      Until the dot-com bust in March 2000. The whole dot-com bubble was cheap credit and fiat money, that GBFM waxes so eloquently about. It was a fake, a lie.
      3 there was no international conquest, fueled by a military-industrial complex
      Unless you count Bosnia-Herzegovina.
      4 other countries RESPECTED america, we were the future.
      Are you serious?

      Like


    • [quote]«The Clinton era was one of the finest in American history.

      Who gives a flying f ck if our prez was catchin dome in the oval office

      1 the budget was balanced (and acutally ran in a surplus for a little)»[/quote]
      Except we didn’t, that was a just a lie of the politicians. If we had a surplus why didn’t the national debt go down. It was a fake, a lie.

      [quote]«2 the stock market was booming»[/quote]
      Until the dot-com bust in March 2000. The whole dot-com bubble was cheap credit and fiat money, that GBFM waxes so eloquently about. It was a fake, a lie.

      [quote]«3 there was no international conquest, fueled by a military-industrial complex»[/quote]
      Unless you count Bosnia-Herzegovina.

      [quote]«4 other countries RESPECTED america, we were the future.»[/quote]
      Are you serious? No they didn’t.

      Like


  31. When Hillary said “a village” she meant “a women-dominated single-party all-powerful nanny state.” And when she said “raise” she meant “indoctrinate.”

    Like


  32. Hold on for just a minute. We shouldn’t forget the work of Judith Rich Harris. It depends on the interpretation of the proverb. What the research shows is that it is the village that does raise the child. The parents don’t have much control over how their kids turn out. They do have an massive influence on whether the kids are materially taken care of or not, and they can to some extent choose what community they want their kids raised in, but basically that’s it. You might say that it takes a village to raise kids right.

    Like


  33. Mrs. Clinton seemed to have interpreted the proverb as being, “It takes a state to raise a child.”

    Like


  34. Bill Clinton proves kids can have single mothers and come out all right? Damn, look out for an increase in shotgun weddings!

    Like


  35. It’s a liberal shibboleth because Hillary Clinton said it?

    Also, have a read of the article and compare it to what Heartiste says about it:

    “Cooperative breeding is not the universal, evolved pattern. Instead there is huge diversity in the array of successful family systems in humans. For example, in the U.S., there are a huge proportion of nuclear families and single moms. Certainly many children of single mothers not only survive but thrive. Look at Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.”

    Bill Clinton, as well as Barack Obama, are referenced as examples of how “many children of single mothers not only survive but thrive.” The supposed “axiom” that the exception proves the rule is not relevant (Wikipedia puts it better: “a stated exception implies the existence of a rule to which it is the exception”) because WJC and BO are “examples of” and not “stated exceptions to”. Of course, you can talk about the proportion of children raised by single mothers who have good life outcomes vs. bad life outcomes, but talking about it in terms of rules is bollocks.

    Like


    • They are leaving out that part about how Obama’s mom disappeared for most of his childhood, leaving him in the care of his maternal grandparents, who were stable and loving.

      His mom? Oh, she was nailing dudes in third world countries, and doing some “research” lol for her PhD is some silly non-science social science.

      And BTW, people who want to be president are often deeply flawed, messed up people, not success stories of well-adjusted, decent people.

      Like


  36. Seinfeld

    Like


  37. This encourages an r-selection strategy where women pump out lots of kids and hope for the best…

    “r-selection “strategy” = satanic hell-on-earth.

    Like


  38. “Been getting criticism from valued commenters that comment quality has tanked. Should comments be moderated? Send your informal vote:”

    The comment quality is seemingly declining because there are just more people reading and commenting now. you have the tragedy of the commons happening (or “the tragedy of the comments” BA-ZZZING)

    maybe:
    raise the cost of commenting by making people register or something… or … isn’t there some sort of system where comments can be voted up or down?

    the last thing you want to do is moderate the comments yourself… because the whole point of the comments is to get new, different angles on your posts. if you’re moderating them, everything will get filtered through you. plus it seems like a lot of work.

    Like


  39. “The author of the study commits a laughable PC error when she says that Bill Clinton is proof that kids of single moms turn out all right.”

    A student must have to surrender several major brain lobes to get into journalism programs these days, so she can be taught things like “datum = proof.”

    It’s another example of the fallacy “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” Actually, Clinton might well have been even more alpha had he come from an unbroken home.

    Like


  40. Clinton does not have an extraordinarily high IQ. That’s just Democratic talking points (“liberals are smart”). He was a smart prole.

    On the other hand, he was extremely ambitious and had other good qualities (not IQ) which made him what he became in life.

    Like


  41. The American Negro reverted to form – sub-Saharan Africa’s maternal/polygynous family structures – shortly after the imposition of Great Society welfarism. The elites and their handmaidens who helped structure and direct the Great Society’s programs must have passed along every last one of their lessons learned to the next generation of elites and handmaidens who in turn imposed programs of their own on American Whites. Although the destruction hasn’t penetrated as far nor as fast with Whites as it did with Blacks, the widespread misery and suffering are no less palpable.

    Like


  42. Saying that it takes a village to raise a child essentially allows cads to run away from their fatherly duty. Listen up, guys: if your kids get the message that you don’t care enough about them to be around them, they’ll be messed up for life.
    Your call.

    Like


  43. *Off topic

    Female lion kills male lion mate in jealousy over younger female lion.
    http://news.yahoo.com/tiger-love-triangle-kills-mate-texas-zoo-222652586.html

    Like


  44. While I’m not a huge fan of Clinton by any means, to claim that his intelligence was less than extraordinary is way off — he’s certainly the smartest president since Nixon in terms of IQ.

    Like


  45. Worth noting that Bill Clinton is certainly exceptional rather than indicative. What about Roger Clinton?

    Like


  46. Thanks for the enlightenment

    Like


  47. Hillary didn’t believe it either, she was just invoking “for the children” to ramrodd through more spending on social welfare programs.

    Like


  48. I am nostalgic for the Reagan era.

    Like


  49. Hah, 4 comments. Good job.

    Like


  50. I thought that weird saying came from Africa – and what a role model of a continent that is . . .

    Like


  51. Yeah, comments suck. I barely check them any more. Too many feminist tourists who get far too many replies. Not nearly enough sharing experiences about how to seduce women.

    Like


    • The comments are great as long as Neecy and Maya and similar are not allowed to post 10-20 attention-baiting comments per post. Too many guys get caught up in the back and forth flirty exchange bullshit that the rest of us have to endure. Fuckin sad sack losers.

      Like


  52. It takes a child raised by a village to raze a village.

    Like


  53. We need some kind of collection of Hillary’s idiocisms to stick next to the other maxims. You know, like the ‘women are the primary victims of war’ one…

    Like


  54. “In Africa, where this study took place, monogamy is less the norm than it is in Europe or Asia”

    Africa is not a country, man. There are places in Africa where monogamy is more the norm than in most of Europe/Asia.

    Like


  55. “it takes a village to raise a child” isn’t for the benefit of the children, it’s for the benefit of the parents.

    The child is going to grow up either way, but a parent without a village doesn’t get to sleep for four years.

    Like


  56. @Opus

    Yep and you only have to look at who was standing up to the rioters, it was religious men of south asian and middle eastern origin with the cohesion and honour to stand up for themselves and what is right. Men with strong values who have been demonised as archaic or extremist for years now.

    it was a tragedy what happened in birmingham when the rioters couldn’t handle getting their asses kicked by a few muslim men of pakistani origin, so they came back in a car and ran them over. While everyone is fussing over shariah law, in reality the streets have already descended into lawlessness. This is what happens when you let women and the PC crowd decide whats cool or allowed, wow this muslim guy who looks after his family, expects strong values from his wife and children is a demon. But the nigger piece of trash crackhead in a hoody and nike trainers is cool, and allowed to do as he pleases in the name of equality…..bullshit

    Nuff respect for the muslim brothers. More in common with them everyday of the week than the trash piece of shit scum that make a large per cent of the british population now.

    Like


  57. a fascinating story about a sorta ‘r’ strategy can be found in “escape” by carolyn blackmore, one of several wives of a fundamentalist mormon bigshot.

    i say ‘sorta’ because it was less haphazard than the african version: the wives’ faithfulness was enforced, and both men and women were indoctrinated-brainwashed is more like it-in their duties to the family. this burden though probably fell more heavily on the women than the men.

    she describes her competition with her ‘sister wives’ over getting things for her kids that had to be okayed by the dad, and shows how wives were punished thru their children so they woud stay in line. wives were favored by their sexual appeal to the dad as well as their fertility, despite the pieties mouthed about the husband’s duty to give equal attention. the wives could discipline each others children which predictably led to excuses to punish in order to get back at another wife.

    as the title suggests, she and her brood of 8 got out. great read.

    Like


  58. heartiste– i suggest you do a post on fundamentalist mormons if you know anything about them. you speak of ‘harems’–here’s the genuine article in a western society, albeit formalized by the sect’s peculiar religious beliefs. a natural experiment even, and one that warrants looking into.

    Like


  59. In English, the sentence, “The exception proves the rule,” means “tests” the rule. “Test” is one of the meanings of “prove,” the other being “demonstrate” or “establish.”

    Like


  60. “No, that is proof that kids with extraordinary IQs and a particular suite of personality traits can overcome a crappy single mom family environment.”

    Eh. Study after study has proven that IQ is not the primary predictor of success. And scientists have still not discovered exactly how much of it is heritable. The estimates are somewhere between 20 – 60 percent, I believe. And recent studies have indicated that infectious disease explains much of the variation in average IQs between regions:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-is-average-iq-higher-in-some-places

    We’re a long way from figuring out the IQ mystery. But I have a feeling that when all is said and done, both the HBDers and the blank slaters will be sorely disappointed. I predict future generations will look back on our obsession with and misinterpretation of it as silly.

    But I do agree that all that’s really necessary to raise a child is the nuclear family. Having the extended family just forms an additional safety net. High extended family involvement was really just a product of a world where long-range transportation wasn’t possible yet. When children grew up, they simply couldn’t go very far in a world without cars or trains.

    Like


    • can two rats give birth to a rat with an IQ on par with a human? if the answer is no, then yes, IQ is heritable. The brain is an organ, and IQ is a trait based on part of the human body, like height. more nutrition equals more height, yes… but for the most part, its heritable. The scientific consensus is .75 to .85 correlation.
      these arguments are so effing predictable… first.. “oh its not heritable”… then when it comes back that yes, it is (based on thousands of studies like the Minnesota twin study done by liberal scientists trying desperately to validate their view)… then its “oh IQ is meaningless anyway, what does it even mean, or IQ is just the white man’s cultural invention”… then when that comes back as bunk… they turn to “oh well, its vague, who knows, I don’t have an opinion therefore I’m smarter because I realize my ignorance and neither ‘fundamentalist’ is right”. which is bullshit as well. the gray area fencesitters make me sick… there are objective truths, and taking the side of truth doesn’t make someone a fundamentalist.

      Like


    • “Study after study has proven that IQ is not the primary predictor of success.”

      Dead wrong. In fact in reality study after study have shown that it is the primary or secondary predictor, outweight race, gender and social class.

      Just because it is politically correct to ignore facts doesn’t make it true.

      Like


  61. Someone’s been reading his Rushton. He is of course completely right in his theory.

    Like


  62. Clearly, “the village” is an allegory for the huge government bureaucracies in which Hillary Rodham “I went to very expensive schools & so know whats best for you” Clinton invested herself.
    These arent necessarily the sole province of the female, but large social welfare systems, courts and fiefdoms and soup kitchens, do absolutely presuppose the weakness and irrelevance of fatherhood and, by extension, manhood.
    Why any heterosexual man is a liberal democrat is baffling to me, as baffling as a Jewish Nazi or an African White Supremacist.
    Anyway, it may not be a coincidence, as Roissy elliptically alludes to, that she married a narcissistic, libidinous alpha. Liberal democrats simply assume all men leave their reproductive consequences to others. Insulting, and generally untrue.
    Far more men pay for and endure illegitimacy or the results of female irresponsibility than not, particularly in upper and middle classes.
    The village is the government – omnipotent, ubiquitous, extravagant, and tyrannical. The village is the structure of kings and cathedrals, of ministers and tax collectors, and, in this day and age, grasping greedy legislators and politicos, the daughters of upper class elites, full of entitlement and patronizing, castrating “noblesse oblige.”
    They can be circumvented, I believe, with careful applications of game and with modern prophylactics.

    Like


  63. “But, yes, beware of anecdotal evidence. That’s a good rule.
    And WJC does not have extraordinary IQ, but he has some
    unusual personality traits, among which is a ruthlessness
    unusual in the West, even among politicians.”

    For the purposes of this argument, above 125 is an “extraordinary IQ.” He almost certainly has that beat (Phi Beta Kappa at Georgetown U.)

    Like


  64. The “It takes a village” mentality is about avoiding personal responsibility in regards to raising a child. It has nothing to do with actually raising a physically and emotionally healthy child. It’s all about the dilution of blame across a greater spectrum of community. A daughter burns down a house because she was angry at something that her mother did. Well it can’t be the daughter’s or the mother’s fault, it must have been the fault of the village.

    Like


  65. Like you say elsewhere, its always been about power. If Hillary could declare that it took a village to raise a child, then she could set up the village, set up its committees, appoint its members and declare herself the chief Queen Hillary! Reality is for the little people!

    Like


  66. on September 11, 2011 at 1:45 pm Marshall Lentini

    In my days traveling around Latin America I’d see those signs sometimes, in English of course, and kick them down or put them in the nearest rubbish bin. Despite the wholesale dismantling of everything we are, in a way we have a better defense against New Anglo Moralism than the latinos; the moralism is attached to the financial hand-outs and humanitarian aid like rider legislation.

    This is “tend-and-befriend” writ large. A culture bereft of the father, and in fact of a guiding culture, naturally falls back on the hen circle for the policing of its worthless wards.

    http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/mccarthy.html

    In rural Europe from France to Siberia it was the custom for the father’s brother to take over paternal duty if the father was otherwise engaged or refused to claim the child. This was an informal system among the ancient and pre-modern Slavs (read Gimbutas for more on that) where the father of a child in one doma would serve more as an impersonal authority than the uncle further off, who would be his practical familiar. That’s about the extent of communal child-rearing, and it involved two directly related grown men.

    Like


  67. Hillary Clinton may not have been talking about extended families when she was talking about a village. She may have literally been talking about ‘a village.’ My parents are West African and it was common knowledge that if a child did something wrong outside of the home, any adult had the authority to discipline the child, usually by spanking them. This way, children knew that good behavior wasn’t something that was limited to the home, but the community at large. Although most power regarding the rearing of a child still belonged to the parents.

    Regarding the statements on polygyny, monogamous families do make up the majority of African families. Most African men cannot afford to take on multiple wives and have just one.

    Additionally, I’ve noticed that you often suggest that African families consist mostly of matriarchal single mother units as if it is something inherent to black culture when this simply isn’t the case. The average nuclear family unit in Africa, like most everywhere else in the world, consists of a mother, father, and children with the father as the authority. This was the case of African-American families as well throughout slavery and segregation, up until the 1960s, when our current welfare programs were put into place.

    Like


  68. Since Twitter Updates asked for feedback … yes, comments should be moderated. As a longtime reader of R/CR/H, I’ve noticed the comments decline gradually, then preciptously; it’s now in the toilet, quality-wise.

    I can’t help but notice that the quality of comments has largely tracked with the quality of the blog itself. I say that with sadness, since this blog, whatever it’s called, has done so much good for men, yours truly included.

    Like


  69. The hallmark of modern western civilization is that while one set of parents is responsible for their children, the larger community does assist in raising the child through such institutions as schools, churches, sports, scouting, etc. It is the sign of a backwards society not to have such possibilities for a child.

    The differences between African and European culture and racial makeup have everything to do with the types of environments they evolved in. The main threat in Africa comes from micro-parasites. The best strategy to survive in such an environment is to have lots of children but to not invest too many resources into any. It is basically just a genetic roll of the dice as to which children will have the right genetic mutations to survive the constant onslaught of microbes. The climate is warm and food grows fairly easily so great intelligence was never an asset to survival. The classic example are the Ik tribe in Uganda where children are booted out of the house at three years old and left to fend for themselves. You see echoes of this in the way American blacks raise their children.

    In the harsher European climate (especially in the north) the threat was nature writ large and the best defence was careful planning, hard work, and intelligent use of resources. Lots of parental resources were invested into a smaller number of children because their survival depended on their developing the skills necessary to defeat nature year in year out. Sure the plagues occasionally invaded but that was such a black swan event that it did not affect the culture greatly.

    Like


  70. Didn’t Hilary Clinton have that book ghost-written?

    Like


  71. Off-topic, but since it’s Sept.11 today… never forget.

    Like


  72. I find it hilarious that so many com mentors on the news articles about Monica Lewinsky feel pity for her and think that Bill is a monster.

    In any case, a village raising a child is no more effective than a nuclear family. A stable family is very important to a kid being raised and no amount of feminist rationalizing will make for the fact that a single mom raising a kid does not mean the whole ghetto is raising the kid.

    Like


  73. “like, allegedly, Nixon did”

    Nixon had enough of a conscience to resign. He knew what he had done was wrong, and that to attempt to continue in office would have torn the country apart. Clinton never even came close to being that honest with himself.

    Like


  74. @samseau
    Rousseau was wrong about just about everything.
    The hubris of sitting in Paris and pontificating
    about “noble savages” would be laughable if it
    was not so tragic, and pulling in supporters to this day.

    @enicar333
    Until LBJ and welfare, both blacks and whites
    had very small illegitimacy rates (although
    that for blacks was higher). What is true is
    that welfare had a disparate impact on blacks,
    although white people are busily playing catchup.

    @traveller
    Bill nominally stays with the Hildebeast because of politics.
    In reality, he has no trouble getting laid, but he appears
    to have learned to be more discreet.

    @moron
    Excepions TEST the rule.

    Exactly!

    @Free guide to sex
    The Clinton years were by comparison pretty good,
    because we had the best thing on offer: Gridlock.
    Kept the government busibodies in both parties at bay.

    @somebody
    An IQ of 125 is not a big deal, probably about 20% of the population,
    I am too lazy to look it up. And I bet >50% of the writers on this blog.

    Thor

    Like


  75. I disagree with a number of the commentators here because they assume that the “it takes a village” philosophy is something that the liberal elites want to impose from the top down…i.e. an attempt at a social re-ordering. I do not believe this is the case. Rather, it is a politically correct way of suggesting an approach to alleviate what is organically occuring within the low IQ populations in our country.

    If the politically correct speak were removed, the philosophy would essentially say “look, we’ve got an undercalss in this country, over-represented by african americans and laninos, that have no stable family structure, leading to single mother households that often require federal and state subsidization. The products of these households go on to be extremely over-represented in our prison populations, uneducated, aand unemployable.

    The liberals are attempting to address this by inserting the state as a surrogate parent, mainly through the education system. They would love to start educating/parenting these children at age 2, to hopefully offset the affects of their organic home environmenet. I don’t believe it can work. Until our education system accepts that there are limits to the intelligence potential of certain people based on genetics, and that not everyone should be shoe-horned into a one-track education system, even their best efforts won’t accomplish anything but a watering down of our education system to give participatory high school diplomas to essentially illiterate kids.

    But I think it is wrong to suggest that this is the world the liberals want. In fairness, I do believe that most liberals believe in good faith that this is the best shot at fixing a problem. I just think its misguided. If you’re dealing with populations with average IQs around 85, you have to lower the expectations and find new goals for this populations versus ramming them through the one size fits all educational system that we currently have.

    Like


    • “It takes a village” = Casey Anthony with more money (be off clubbing and whoring around while the nanny raise the kid, it politically correct when liberals do it).

      Like


  76. I agree with Sidewinder about the folly of the “one size fits all” educational
    system.

    For example, I believe that high school graduation rates should be
    held NO HIGHER than 50%, probably as low as half of that.

    Easily half of the kids lack either the intellectual power or the
    attitude and inclination to benefit from a high-school education.

    If society wants to intervene and teach, teach the non-high-school
    track useful stuff. Gardening. Plumbing.Painting. Etc.

    When I was a kid, one of my playmates had an IQ easily under 100.
    But he became a successful housepainter and did just fine.

    As to the really lower echelons, there used to be a system that
    absorbed lots of people (far from all were stupid, but it was OK
    even if you were). Mainly, domestic service. The laws should be
    tweaked to make this easy, rather than difficult and legally
    at best in the gray zone in most cases.

    Thor

    Like


  77. @sidewinder
    “If the politically correct speak were removed, the philosophy would essentially say “look, we’ve got an undercalss in this country, over-represented by african americans and laninos, that have no stable family structure, leading to single mother households that often require federal and state subsidization. The products of these households go on to be extremely over-represented in our prison populations, uneducated, aand unemployable. ”

    I find this reasoning to be backward. …leading to single mother households that often require federal and state subsidization….

    Argghhh.

    The causality is empirically primarily the other way round.
    It was the subsidization that caused the family breakdown
    and single motherhood, not the other way round,

    Thor

    Like


  78. Heartiste, you are taking the “it takes a village to raise a child” line out of context.

    People who express that idea are not saying that the parents aren’t the folks most responsible, what they are saying is that it isn’t JUST the parents.

    In other words, your child isn’t raised in a cocoon until they are 18.

    Like


  79. Africa is not a country, man. There are places in Africa where monogamy is more the norm than in most of Europe/Asia.

    ANd there are places in Europe where Africans are more the norm than Europeans!

    Like


  80. I once heard an American visitor joking about the Clintons. He said that the first time Bill and Hillary went back to Arkansas after his election to the Presidency, the Presidential Limo got out of gas and they had to stop at a gas station

    Hillary saw the gas station owner and said: “Hey BIll, look, that guy was my first BF, the only one before you”. To which Bill replied: “see, if you stayed with him you would be the wife of a gas station owner”. But HIllary answered: “no darling, if I stayed with him he would be the President of the United States”

    Like


  81. Well, using Africans to understand the behavior of whites is like using college Freshman to study the behavior of normal people.

    Start with an IQ of 82, average. Bell shaped curved with an SD of 7. Do the math. Scary, huh?

    A recent study by the World Bank showed that 80% of Subsahara African people use either the flat ground or an open pit latrine to defecate. 10% have an outhouse (doesn’t have to have walls). 10% have a flush toilet. (AICD Background paper 13)

    Plastic bags are used in urban areas in Kenya (Personal communication).

    When you see Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle boarding Air Force One and looking all glamorous and everything, imagine them crapping into a plastic bag, like Obama’s relatives do back in Kenya. That’s what they can do on their own. Of course, whites have to give them the plastic bag.

    Please. Never generalize from Africans to Caucasians. You might as well generalize from Chimps.

    Anyhow, getting back to that study of child rearing. There were interesting points:
    1. Infant mortality is high.
    2. Having grandparents living with the family reduced survival of the infants. The grandparents competed for resources.
    3. Polygamy was associated with increased mortality, I think. The females did NOT work together to share resources equally with each others children.
    4. The average woman has nine pregnancies. That is the AVERAGE. Please, get out your wallets.

    In a word, a Darwinian world is tough. You marvel at the amorality of this researcher. She could have easily organized a charity to help these kids survive instead of counting their deaths and spinning theories. Why would the locals not hate her?

    Here is my conclusion based on Darwinian and genetic fundamentals: It is likely better to have 6 children, and invest minimal resources, and see three die by age two, than to have three children and invest the resources adequate to see that all survive to maturity.

    Well, this is the website where pretty lies come to die, isn’t it?

    Like


    • Yup, this the “rest of the world” that left/libtards would like us to be like (except for themselves, of course).

      Like


  82. On a related topic, this african r – selection strategy is why all those Africa foreign aid campaigns are flawed. They all assume that african parents would raise their children better if only they had more resources when the opposite is true: if they have the resources, they will use them raise MORE children as bad as they are doing it now. Pumping a lot of kids and “hope of the best” is very generous euphemism. This r-replicators are going to starve to death as many children as necessary to ensure one of them gets lucky to survive and then care for their lazy old asses. If people got to understand that, charity agencies would go broke immediatly. The only possible humanitarian act (that is, if someone bothers to care) would be to castrate this r-monsters and make sure nobody sneaks weapons for sale into that continent.

    Like


    • Yeah, look at welfare and stupid people in the ghetto… don’t matter the race, humans are like that when spoiled.

      Like


  83. “An IQ of 125 is not a big deal, probably about 20% of the population,
    I am too lazy to look it up.”

    For the most commonly used IQ tests (SD 15) it’s top 5%; top 20% is about 113 IQ.

    Like


  84. @Sidewinder; “But I think it is wrong to suggest that this is the world the liberals want. ”
    It may be the world that the Elites want. Keep in mind that there are TWO educational systems, the private schools that the Elites send their kids to, and the public schools that most people send their kids to. One way for Elites to give an advantage to their own kids is to sabotage the education of potential competitors.

    Like


  85. Y’all are kind of absurd sometimes. “It takes a village” was basically an assertion that kids need to grow up in a healthy society as well, not just a healthy family.

    There’s nothing controversial or leftist about that. There’s a reason you’re not rushing off to raise your kids in northern Florida.

    Like