Liberal Men And Fat Chicks

I’ve been meaning to read Jonathan Haidt’s new book “The Righteous Mind“, on the recommendation of many readers who say it is an epic synthesis of human morality that merges Darwinism with political ideology.

From a customer review at Amazon:

[A]ccording to Haidt’s and others’ research, there are at least six mental ‘modules’ that go into moral and poltical decisions, and it is difficult to argue that any one (or two or three) are more important than others. And they are: care/harm, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, sanctity/degradation and liberty/oppression. Some people (often of the political left) care most about care/harm and fairness/cheating in their emphasis on egalitarian politics that aim to provide care for those in need and create fair rules in the sense that everyone, relatively speaking, starts on an ‘even playing field.’ Others (usually conservatives) have tempermants that focus on authority/suversion and loyalty/betrayal, focusing on maintaining or promoting institutions that foster some level of deference to authority (in legitimate hierarchies), and loyalty (whether to country, God, family, etc).

One point Haidt makes is that conservatives score stronger than liberals on the disgust (sanctity/degradation) module of morality. (Interestingly, liberals appear to have no ability to even relate to this aspect of human morality, whereas conservatives can relate, albeit with a weaker degree of intensity, to putatively liberal moral modules such as fairness and care.)

Conservatives feel stronger revulsion toward disgusting things than do liberals, who, apparently, like to wallow in shit, (or to reframe it in a nicer way: like to experience unique vistas). So when the conservative thinks about gay sex and the penis pushing hard into another man’s anus, he recoils with revulsion. The liberal merely shrugs his shoulders. Not a sermon, just a naughty thought.

Which brings me to pondering something critical to the maintenance of our nation’s infrastructure: do liberal men, with their higher threshold for disgusting things, tend to fuck fat chicks more often than conservative men fuck fat chicks? Is the liberal male more open than the conservative male to slumming it?

Have any of you readers noticed differences in the strictness or laxity with which your liberal and conservative friends hold their standards for opposite sex partners? Have you noticed if the libs you know like to dumpster dive with dirigibles more than you’d be comfortable doing? Have you noticed if the conservative men you know are more judgmental of fat chicks? Do your con or lib male friends date skinnier, hotter women?

This post is purely speculative, because personally, I have not noticed much of a difference between men of differing political persuasions in their willingness to tumble with a landfaring tanker that couldn’t be more parsimoniously explained by differences in sexual market value, rather than liberal comfort with or conservative distaste for the dung heap of humanity. Some leftie men I know, while they preach a good bit about beauty being subjective, are quite the unforgiving judgmental pricks when it comes down to decision time, and they make their choice for 0.7 waist-hip ratio slender babes (when they can).

On the other hand, the flabby swingers and dirty scenesters I’ve met were all, to a tee, left wing cranks. As are the postmodern aka smear menstrual blood on a canvas “””artists”””.

I wonder if Haidt addressed this pressing question in his book? If he did, his may be the best book ever written in the PC era. Kudos would go to him.

Now I can already hear the liberals who read this blog whining that disgust is a weak moral module that should have no impact on public policy or personal choice. Consenting adults, and all that. But the utility of disgust is underrated by the neckbeard crowd. Disgust helps uphold lofty norms, and demands the best of society’s members. Disgust makes lebensraum liveable, and raises the beauty aesthetic. Disgust protects a tribe against being overrun by beastly invaders.

Disgust, it could even be plausibly argued, created female beauty. Generations of men over the eons, sufficiently disgusted by ugly chicks and fat cows, have done their part to bang and reproduce with the best looking women, and that gift is bequeathed this day to us, their descendants, in the form of barely legal porn and hot Russian tennis minxes. If our ancestors had all been live-and-let-live liberals with a weak disgust reflex, we modern men might be hitting on hairy cavewomen with long, dangly breasts and anvil-shaped jaws that could shell walnuts.

I mean, if you can pick up a steaming shit without flinching, maybe you shouldn’t have too much say in local zoning laws.

I have a very strong disgust reflex, for those of you wondering. If I see even a tiny superfluous fold on a chick’s belly, I get my whiteboard pointer and poke the offensive fatty deposit a few times, until she takes the hint. Protractors and tape measures are often utilized to emphasize the teachable moment.

Related, here’s a good discussion on the morality of disgust, over at Mangan’s.





Comments


  1. Liberal betas will say fatness doesn’t matter, just as they say how superior they are to conservatives for their open-mindedness towards race (even though using that zip code race locator page you tweeted would prove how hypocritical they truly are). Liberal alphas will say they don’t bed the fattie (as long as their friends don’t see them typing on this blog).

    Like


    • on July 13, 2012 at 12:46 pm ThatNorwegianGuy

      I agree. I haven’t noticed a pattern in terms of actual sex partners, though the high value conservative men I know tend to pay a lot less (if any) lip service to things like fat acceptance than the leftist ones.

      Like


    • on July 15, 2012 at 2:44 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      hey heratsistesS!!!!

      i saw a fat cchcizkzkas wearing dis hsirt da pytehr dayz zllzozoz

      http://www.cafepress.com/greatbooksformen.582539788

      zlzozozzozhzjgfz;z
      lzozlzozlzoz

      Like


    • on July 15, 2012 at 4:25 pm Reality Perspective

      I disagree. Liberals are actually the most closed-minded people about race. Any discussion conservatives have with liberals about race, genetics and socio-economic outcome is immediately met with hysteria and name-calling. Far from being open-minded, liberals will scream “racist, racist, racist!” to avoid an intelligent discussion on the subject.

      On a similar subject, the quote from the book review about liberals valuing fairness is inaccurate. Liberals do not believe in fairness, especially in the context of race. Because there are very pronounced genetic differences among races, social and economic outcome among ethnic groups will be pronounced as well. This happens regardless of any ethnic group’s historical relationship with the white race. Instead of accepting this reality, hard as it might be for an egalitarian, white liberals want to deprive their own ethnic group of job opportunities, college admission opportunities and other things that are deserved by those who have rightfully and fairly earned it. Ironically, these liberals speak as if they aren’t a part of the ethnic group they want to dispossess, and none of them are willing to forgo work and education opportunities for non-Asian minorities despite their ignorant support for affirmative action.

      Like


    • on July 15, 2012 at 5:51 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      lozozzoz

      hey heartsitsez!! dis morning i went to church and wortee a poem soem poetry dedicated to jeststh and moses and aoslsomon and god! lzozlzzo

      Today’s “Church”
      is little more
      than a front
      for the banking cartel’s divorce and child-support industry
      today’s church
      is like a used car lot
      where the pastors and preachers
      try to get you to buy
      a cum-guzzling, beatup old woman
      with dents and dings from lotsa cockas
      lzolzoozozzoz
      with suspension damage from having been driven hard
      over speedbumps asscockig speedbumps
      driven hard hard hradrr lzozlz yah faster harder! he ssveemed! lzozlzlzo

      other men drove her for free
      and now the preacher tells you
      that she is really good as new
      so “man up!” the lordeth commandeth! zlzolzoz
      and buy the gas-guzzling broke-down money pit!
      which other men drove for free
      hen it was younger hotter tighter
      and fifty pounds lighter!
      for free before the rust ate it out
      alongside the tongues of many menz
      who deluged her in buckets
      of foamy slaty cum zlzllzolzo

      buy it! da preacher commandeth
      from teh pulpit! lzozozol

      the preacher commands you to say “i do.”
      as ben beranke slips fiat dollars into the preacher’s pocket
      knowingly winking at your wife-to-be
      who was buttcocked and desouled
      in a secretly-taped butthexting session
      by neocon heroic butthexter sodomite
      tucker max rhymes iwth godlman sax
      lzozlzzlzzozo

      he got her ass, and soon,
      so very soon, while the wedding cake is yet moist
      as mosist as her pususy was for all da assockers
      dat got her beforre you
      she will seize your assets and children
      and hand them
      over to the buttehxting corporate state church cartel
      lzoozozozzoz

      such is the way
      of modern marriage
      in da buttehxt matrix

      i can show you the door
      neo
      but you will have to walk through it
      without dripping on all da lostass cocatsskskas
      in her fitrue wives bbuthozlzozlzozlzozl
      zlzozlzlzoz

      Like


    • on July 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      lzozozozoz

      hey heartsistez!!! i worrte a better version fo the of the blogz! zlozzo

      lozozzoz i made da poem btter which i penned in da churdches pew

      hey heartsitsez!! dis morning i went to church and wortee a poem soem poetry dedicated to jeststh and moses and aoslsomon and god! lzozlzzo

      Today’s “Church”
      is little more
      than a front
      for the banking cartel’s divorce and child-support industry
      today’s church
      is like a used car lot
      where the pastors and preachers
      try to get you to buy
      a cum-guzzling, beatup old woman
      with dents and dings from lotsa cockas
      lzolzoozozzoz
      with suspension damage from having been driven hard
      over speedbumps asscockig speedbumps
      driven hard hard hradrr lzozlz yah faster harder! he ssveemed! lzozlzlzo

      other men drove her for free
      and now the preacher tells you
      that she is really good as new
      so “man up!” the lordeth commandeth! zlzolzoz
      and buy the gas-guzzling broke-down money pit!
      which other men drove for free
      hen it was younger hotter tighter
      and fifty pounds lighter!
      for free before the rust ate it out
      alongside the tongues of many menz
      who deluged her in buckets
      of foamy slaty cum zlzllzolzo

      buy it! da preacher commandeth
      from teh pulpit! lzozozol

      no pimp would ever charge ye
      for past use of a puusy
      but dat is what the beranke corporate-church-state
      dost to thou via alimonies
      and child support
      which yuor ex will use
      to fund future assocking sessions with other men
      da central bankers and your preacher
      exalt in humiliation
      abortion and assocking aare not enough
      but they must make good men
      pay for it
      and den do dey clap witheir stanaic liteles hands
      and counte their fiat dolarz
      and say “god is good yah god is good” lzozozlzo

      the preacher commands you to say “i do.”
      as ben beranke slips fiat dollars into the preacher’s pocket
      knowingly winking at your wife-to-be
      who was buttcocked and desouled
      in a secretly-taped butthexting session
      by neocon heroic butthexter sodomite
      tucker max rhymes iwth godlman sax
      lzozlzzlzzozo

      he got her ass, and soon,
      so very soon, while the wedding cake is yet moist
      as mosist as her pususy was for all da assockers
      dat got her beforre you
      she will seize your assets and children
      and hand them
      over to the buttehxting corporate state church cartel
      lzoozozozzoz

      such is the way
      of modern marriage
      in da buttehxt matrix

      i can show you the door
      neo
      but you will have to walk through it
      without dripping on all da lostass cocatsskskas
      in her fitrue wives bbuthozlzozlzozlzozl
      zlzozlzlzoz

      Like


    • on July 15, 2012 at 7:02 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      “Darryl X July 15, 2012 at 15:19 writes @ the noble spearhead:

      Yup. Today, just about any wife will defy her husband and work to destroy everything he does in the name of God. And with help by the government, she doesn’t have to work very hard. She demands to be the center of attention and puts herself above her husband and God. And the churches promote this idea by pedestalizing women in the church when they should be condemning them at all opportunities. The institution of marriage is a primary mechanism of how the government has violated separation of church and state and corrupted the church.”

      YES! EXACTLY!

      what the churches no longer teach is the fundamental law that jesus came to fulfill–from the KJVB GENESIS:

      “16 Unto the woman he said,

      I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception;
      in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children;
      and thy desire shall be to thy husband,
      and he shall rule over thee.”

      by eliminating MOSES and GENESIS from the CHURCH, the CHURCH is now serving SATAN, as the bankers enslave men to gina tingles and butt tingles while deconstructing and denying God.

      women are taught to first and foremost serve the corporate-state’s bottom line after their own bottoms are lined with semen, as they are methodically desouled in neocon asscocking sessions which are really just typical preemptive neocon wars waged against both the soul and the butthole.

      neocons profit via debasement and debauchery of both the currency and the culture. in the same way they profit by turning education and healthcare into debt-creating vehicles, they also profit by transforming marriage into a debt-and-debauchery-creating system.

      Like


    • I’m pretty liberal about a lot of stuff. I won’t fuck a fat woman for anything. Fat grosses me out more than just about anything. I would rather have a skinny 6 than a fat 8.

      I wouldn’t even begin to associate how someone feels about Keynesian economics, historical interpretations, roles of government, etc and taste in females.

      I wouldn’t even associate politics with beta/alpha determinations. There are plenty of conservative betas. The whole essence of modern Protestantism is to placate princess, respect your wife, if you have the morality then you have the authority, no porn, no cheating, be a more helpful kitchen bitch.

      I am so liberal I am certain Christianity is a bitches religion. Nietzsche said it in the book “Will to Power”. Every major value is about suppression of male sexuality, guilt about sex other for procreation, societal behavior that makes society better and safer for women, and on and on. That’s why feminists and conservative church goers form alliances so well. They want the same thing any preferences of men are bad, preferences of women are good.

      Yes, lots of liberal men support feminists, but a lot don’t. Liberalism is big tent and just because I think fiscal policy is more effective than monetary controls, just because I think markets need regulation doesn’t mean I give two shits about what bitches want or think.

      I have always been this way, there are fat bitches and bitches. I ain’t fucking no fat bitch.

      I live in Texas and there are far more conservatives here than liberals and I see plenty of pick up truck driving beta fellows placating plenty of heifers here. Any one that tries to associate tolerance for fat bitches to political inclination is just yammering. Heck, I think most of being a real beta is being somewhat conservative. They may not support feminism but they do fall right in line with White Knight mentality, monogamy, oneitis. If you ask a person that still plugged to describe what is alpha and what is beta, they will probably say something like successful guys are alpha. They might think some corporate director is alpha when in reality as soon as that guy hits the front door of his house he is beta as fuck. And a lot of corporate managers are quite conservative.

      Mentu over at University of Man wrote an essay about being in a restaurant with a girl and she started a whole crying game thing for manipulation about some stupid shit that had nothing to do with him and he wouldn’t give in to it. Some friend of the family had cancer or something. He asked the girl what she ordered to eat right while she was blubbering and then what sides came with it. He said you could see all the White Knights get alarmed and start to come over to intercede. A cowboy actually came over and said “Everything all right here ma’am”. Mentu challenged him with “That will be all” and the cowboy was adamant “Ma’am” and Mentu stared him down.

      The word “liberal” means “of the books”. It comes from Rome. The “lib” part was a citizen of Rome, thus liberties, rights of a Roman. Books were denied to slaves because they contained seditious ideas. So yeah, I’m liberal, meaning “of the books”.

      And now I got a new book. Evolutionary Psychology.

      The academic basis of game is Evolutionary Psychology. So right there you have to be somewhat liberal. You gotta believe in science. You have to accept evolution. You have believe that idea of the “soul” is ridiculous. You have to believe somewhat that a bitch is just a chemical robot and if you push the right buttons, you get the responses you want. Game doesn’t just turn feminism on its ear. It supersedes any previous male idea about relationships. male attitudes towards women, male responsibility towards women. I would say that’s pretty goddam liberal. I would even say that after 50 years of feminist shit that feminism and Christianity together form a new conservative agenda. If I tell someone the optimum strategy for a young man is game, a harem, pump and dump, study PUA as much as any academic study, manipulate women for what you can get and then discard them, to never marry, and never take women seriously, never trust them, I would piss off as many conservative betas as I would manginas. Basically I am saying “Fuck the Bible and what momma said”.

      The question is not whether you are conservative or liberal. The question is whether you are unplugged or not.

      So this is just a lazy post. Like something over at Jezebel like “Do PUAs only like drunk girls with low self esteem that they can control?”

      Like


  2. But a flaw in the disgust theory is that too many “males” on the religious right are disgusted with the idea of heterosexual men having sex with 17 year old females.

    And, in fact, they seem to have more of a problem with that than with gay sex.

    Dalrock has pointed out that feminism has taken ideological control of much of christianity and, as night follows day, “traditionalism” in America. Much of the learned “disgust” comes from what the holy hags have told the obedient males to be disgusted over.

    Now we all know it’s really envy and rationalization about the seemingly irrevocable life decisions of the “disgusted males”, but this concept tears a hole in the above theory somewhat.

    Like


    • Well, there’s that whole illegal thing. Two men having sex isn’t illegal unfortunately. Having sex with a 17 year old will get your ass thrown in jail.

      Like


    • It’s just envy expressed in a socially acceptable form – disgust in their own circumstance, turned outwards.

      Like


      • Outhouse psychology, mindlessly parroted over the internet by the MSM/PC-imbued South Park generation.

        Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar… and rancor is merely rancor.

        Like


    • “But a flaw in the disgust theory is that too many “males” on the religious right are disgusted with the idea of heterosexual men having sex with 17 year old females.”

      Nah, they are not disgusted by it, they are just railing against it like a closeted gay dude rants about gay sex. They want it soooooooo bad, but their desire torments them and their self-image.

      “And, in fact, they seem to have more of a problem with that than with gay sex.”

      If they are straight, that is what I would expect.

      Like


    • Most traditionalists are lickspittle beta males. Strong men have left the church a while ago.

      Like


    • Yeah, it’s ridiculous. And there are constant attempts by usually conservative legislators to up the age of consent to 18 in states where it’s still 16 or 17.

      I guess they do this because it’s sexual activity the libs won’t jump all over them for trying to restrict. And maybe the conservatives who support this are overprotective fathers with daughters that they don’t want deflowered until they meet a nice man in their church and marry him.

      Like


      • “And maybe the conservatives who support this are overprotective fathers with daughters that they don’t want deflowered until they meet a nice man in their church and marry him.”

        This is the more likely and obvious answer. It makes a lot more fucking sense than “Conservative Christians are feminist puppets”.

        Like


      • But the envy theory makes even more sense. In fact, it is not a theory. Fathers of teen daughters who can still get teen tail themselves, will do so, especially if divorced or otherwise free. Whether they will specifically guard their own daughters until the right suitor comes along will have no effect on what they will regard as their alpha prerogative to bed hotter, younger, tighter themselves.

        Those who can no longer get teen tail, make excuses for themselves as they boil with envy. They are disgusted with their own situation, often married to a fat cow. I have seen this first hand. It is not a theory. It is a fact. They will even admit it when cornered in real life.

        Having a daughter does not make a man a eunuch. Using that as an excuse for one’s own approach anxiety for the hottest women is pathetic. It’s notable that many of the social conservatives who condemn sex with hot, legal teens do not have teenage daughters themselves but talk of hypothetically having one. The rest of us don’t have to buy the dad vs cad bullshit.

        Like


      • Possibly. I agree that envy plays a role in getting conservative betas to support this crap. I also think that their old fat wives play an even bigger one. In the James Hooker case, it seems to be conservative women who bitch the most about him.

        I know that a lot of churchgoing men are pressured into doing the “Christian” thing and marrying Susie Seacow if the congregation is short on hotties. This might be one reason why obesity is so bad among Southern white conservatives. The normal penalty of being left high and dry while the men hump the hotties does not apply to churchgoing chubbies, at least in the Bible Belt where the whole town still usually goes to church. And hot women, unless they’re strict Calvinists or Mormons or whatever and are really attached to their fathers, will pick whatever alpha they fancy, churchgoing or not. (Yeah, I’ve run into a few such girls who wanted me to ask their father for permission before dating them — and if you aren’t in their church, or at least a denomination acceptable to him, you’re S.O.L.)

        Teenage and college-age girls, ironically, are often easier to get along with than older women, who expect you to be making bank and want to marry you Real Soon Now because they’re getting old and want to have kids.

        Like


      • Interesting point about the marriage habits of the churchgoing. They truly are insular communities.

        Like


      • Guys, I’m inserting this here so my two-cents doesn’t get lost. First, I’m not here to argue theology or apologetics with y’all. I just wanted to say this: I’m a Southern Baptist and regulary attend a nice, farely large church in East Tennessee. I’m happily married. However, I will say that every Sunday I see literally 500-600 (yes, hundred!) incredibly attractive Christian women at our church. I mean dressed up baby dolls, absolutely beautiful. Some are country girls, some are professionals (or wives of professional men), some of those ladies are scorching hot teenage and college-aged daughters, young mothers, housewives, the whole spectrum. So, I’m curious as to how many folks here have actually set foot in these churches. I’m not chiding anyone for not going to church. I’m just saying, I do attend church and I’m not seeing fatties and betas (and yes I’ve been to more than this one church). I see a lot of alpha males with MILFS on their arms and cute college girls and a trail of jailbait, teenage dreams following behind them. Maybe y’all are going to the wrong churches.

        Like


      • Tank, thanks for the comment. I don’t live in that part of the country; all I know is that obesity rates there are very high, even among whites. My best guesses at this point are that 1) you go to a more upscale church, and/or 2) you live in a town where you can walk around a lot and get exercise, and don’t have to drive everywhere. (The Houston, TX suburb I visited was NOT pedestrian-friendly, at all.)

        Like


      • Thanks for beating me to it Tank. Christians on average are wealthier and better educated than the average American. Mormons live eleven years longer on average as well. Your redneck stumped-tooth stereotypes notwithstanding. In the AA community, being a Christian is central to becoming and remaining middle class. As far as their wives are concerned, you will see lots of nice looking women at one of the better churches. It’s indeed a class thing. I live in a wealthier part of Alabama, but I see lots of nice looking women all the time, many in their 40s. The young ones are nice looking too.

        Like


      • Tank, I’ve gone to churches in several states, including in the South. The only way your church has hordes of beautiful women is if you are in a wealthier area where women are more likely to watch their weight, eat healthy, exercise, and get botox or plastic surgery. This is not the norm in our country or in Christianity.

        Some of the more conservative churches I attended expected women to “dress modestly”. They ended up looking like they were wearing tents because they were so fat. In one denomination, the fatness of the women was so legendary it was a standard joke at the Bible college I went to. The guys knew their wives were going to end up like that unless they were really lucky. Most of the girls I went to Bible college with and have reconnected with on Facebook are quite large now.

        But really, what else can you expect when everything but eating is denounced from the pulpit as sin? You know a church has gone overboard when they won’t let kids play Dungeons & Dragons, “demonic” cabbage patch dolls, or watch ET (he’s a demon…). If they’d loosen up on the nitpicky rules, people would have something to do besides stuff their faces.

        Like


      • Envy is real, but it hardly manifests itself the way you claim. Not every family dynamic is a footnote to game. Especially since envy naturally turns into paternal concern upon having a daughter, where the well-adjusted dad (especially an alpha) is forced to encounter and plan against the vulnerabilities of today’s woman, perhaps for the first time in his life.

        Are we to believe all fatherly behavior is some cryptic Oedipalism waiting to be translated into pick-up jargon? Beta men with beautiful offspring are not automatic slaves to resentment. They can be proud without acting out their sexual frustration through proxies and compensations. It may be difficult to fathom in your world of magically fatherless hotties, but protectiveness is not a projection of envy.

        True, “having a daughter does not make you a eunuch.” Then again, it has the common effect of altering a man’s perspective on the sexes. You extend the utility of the “alpha prerogative to bed hotter, younger, tighter” past the point of recognition, taking an important truth and mangling it into a dogmatic flaw.

        Matt

        Like


      • How else can you do so and not hang your head in shame?

        Like


      • Exactly… that whole envy thesis is outhouse psychology of the lamest “you’re just jealous!” kind.

        Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and rightful rancor merely that.

        Like


      • As “Cordite” said, envy is an even better explanation.

        Religious men stuck in their marriages to aging wives, while other guys their own age are dating young chicks.. Plain old sour grapes.

        Like


    • And this is the reason, anonymous, why I, a right-in-the-middle moderate can’t take this post seriously.

      Also, the whole argument is based off shoddy Claims in the first place. There was a psychology article that did find conservatives experience disgust more than liberals, we can see with this blog post how far laymen will take these findings.

      Liberal or not, when I’m banging your mom you’ll feel disgusted.

      Also being on the west coast, many classmates disagree with me on political views. Wait till their income passes 200k, we’ll see how liberal they are…. But that’s another story, they are STILL disgusted by fat chicks.

      It’s only to a degree which they repress that disgust. I’m a little more vocal about it than them.

      I don’t even think about a man penetrating another man in the first place. Oh wait………… Fuck.

      Like


    • But a flaw in the disgust theory is that too many “males” on the religious right are disgusted with the idea of heterosexual men having sex with 17 year old females. And, in fact, they seem to have more of a problem with that than with gay sex.

      Those heterodox institutions and attitudes are moribund, no matter how much the smug left eggs them on with promises of social acceptance and being on “the right side of history.” They took the bait and complied with their own extinction. Their churches are emptying and coming to mine. The “religious right” is much smaller a constituency than is believed, but it is growing exponentially, and it is a more closely-knit force than is imagined.

      “So shall my word be that goes forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall.”

      Further, do not imagine that the official line is the clearest expression of the Ecclesia Militans in a culture where speaking the truth has become de facto illegal. Being discreet is not stupid when enemies are easily riled into inconsolable, queeny faggot-rage — all the emotion of a woman combined with all the aggression of a man. You’ve probably seen it. You don’t get lured into fighting them. You wait for them to exhaust themselves, then move decisively.

      Matt

      Like


      • Matt:

        Are you a Jesuit?

        Like


      • Jesuit institution, Jewish teachers — who essentially glossed over the years AD 1 to 1500 right under the priests’ noses. Which cohort should be blamed more for this travesty of education, the academic-Semites and their millenniums of denial, or the oblivious sodomizing fifth-column leftists in S.J. cassocks who infiltrated a once glorious order? I don’t know. Unless you go to seminary, you have to be an autodidact to get a proper theological grounding these days.

        The modern Society of Jesus is a shameful shell of its former self, but I count myself a casual Ignatian. If only so that I can go to the victory parties in the upcoming decades as the Jesuits’ original mission winds down to its nonviolent climax, and the triumph of the crusade becomes clear. The Counter-Reformation is over. Protestantism went out with a whimper, not a bang. It lasted almost exactly 500 years. What’s left are mop-up operations.

        Ad maiorem Dei gloriam, “Bishop” Katharine.

        Matt

        Like


      • I’m a Jesuit product too. They’re amazing educators–full of piss and vinegar.

        Like


      • The cut of your jib is resplendent… preach it, brother.

        Like


      • on July 16, 2012 at 10:00 am andrewmichaelmedina

        I’m rather happy to see that the androsphere has it’s own Christian apologetics. Although I think he needs to get his own blog, or at least guest post at Dalrock’s. It’s a shame to have to dig through comments threads to read the good Mr. King.

        Like


      • barf.
        Merely reading dalrocks drivel is like being kept after school.
        Posting there, would be staying after school
        with a Jesuit in overly-tight short shorts

        Like


      • Someone learned how to link youtube clips. Looookoutbeloooow!!!

        Like


      • Very minxy.
        and tres lol: I actually PICTURE dalcrock as the judge’s pal
        That Minister who gets electrocuted during the storm while having the perfect game. I however, do imagine dally’s wife as demanding
        “Elihu, please come and LOOFAH my stretchmahks!”

        Like


      • “And please don’t be offended at my views;/They’re really only offered to amuse.”
        – The Wife of Bath (Chaucer)

        Like


    • I think men should limit sexual access to their daughters, while at the same time have sexual access to unrelated young women.

      Like


  3. “I have a very strong disgust reflex, for those of you wondering.”

    Oh my god, me too! I feel nauseated all the time and I even vomit a lot. It started after some non-consensual sexual experience years ago. I always say that disgust saved my life so it’s one of my favorite emotions. Whenever I feel disgust I’m very grateful because it forces me to improve my life (or, for example, leads me away from people with disgusting personalities).

    “But the utility of disgust is underrated by the neckbeard crowd. Disgust helps uphold lofty norms, and demands the best of society’s members. Disgust makes lebensraum liveable, and raises the beauty aesthetic. Disgust protects a tribe against being overrun by beastly invaders.”

    Exactly! I enjoyed reading this part and I agree 100%. ❤

    "Some leftie men I know, while they preach a good bit about beauty being subjective, are quite the unforgiving judgmental pricks when it comes down to decision time, and they make their choice for 0.7 waist-hip ratio slender babes."

    True! Liberals are usually childish and selfish hypocrites, IMO. Politically, it's best to be something in the middle (if this is possible).

    Like


  4. http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

    Pretty common knowledge that Bible Belt / Southern states tend to be fatter than blue states. If conservatives cared about slimness enough to shame the loathsome fatties in their midst, I don’t think the stats would look like this.

    Like


    • Yes, but don’t those states also have higher proportions of black people?

      Like


      • Yup, and Hispanics too (especially in Texas). But their whites are also somewhat fatter.

        Like


      • Have you even been to Branson, Missouri? Fat and white. It looks like a waste hauler full of lipo biowaste collided with a grease truck.

        Like


      • My impression is that in the south even the proles tend to vote republican. It is not necessarily an indicator of conservatism but of racial identity.

        Like


      • Yes, blacks are responsible for everything.

        Like


    • “Bible Belt / Southern states” are not immune to the comprehensive triumph of feminist entitlement. A state’s party affiliation has nothing to do with conservatism rightly understood.

      The important distinction in ethos is seen in Southern hospitality, Midwestern friendliness, and the resistance against dismantling feminine traditions, like beauty pageants, cheerleading, and evangelical purity pledges. All contribute to a girl’s proper development into femininity. None are safe from feminist corruption.

      Even the defenders of tradition — conservatives — have lost the language to defend themselves. Anyone who does not display Kim Jong Ilian fervor for what’s considered official “progress” is excommunicated latae sententiae as heretically retrograde or as a bigot. (See the sudden explosion in pro-gay and pro-green ad campaigns by “conservative” corporations. A true WTF moment. Disagreement = hatred.)

      The success is so complete that police are no longer needed: feminism is a masterpiece of psychological self-enforcement. You don’t even know it when you are furthering its cause. What’s the harm in cheering on the first female-this or -that? The harm is diffuse and therefore easy to deny. Dissent is easily caricatured, and caricatures are easily demonized.

      This is why we actual conservatives don’t mince words about ugliness or pulchritude, obesity or health, femininity or manliness, beauty or truth or evil. The surreptitious redefinition of words has led to an implacable regime of certain, select, “correct” concepts, to the exclusion of all other thinking. If we don’t bludgeon even allies memorably with the truth, the default mechanisms creep back in. The tyranny of ideas is so undetectable that we accidentally impose it on ourselves.

      Matt

      Like


    • Actually, the south is the “fattest” specifically because of blacks and hispanics. The whites there overall are not fat compared to average. The fattest whites are in the mid-west.

      Like


  5. NT that could be due to them marrying earlier…marriage->weight gain

    Like


    • Nope. For women, it’s getting older -> weight gain. Marriage or children is not really a factor, although everybody seems to think it is.

      Like


  6. on July 13, 2012 at 1:30 pm The Shocker

    LOL. It’s the polar opposite- you rural retards are the ones rewarding obese women with dick. No question about it. Red states = highest rates of obesity, that’s science bro. Don’t even try to blame it on fat mexicans or Precious- true for 80%+ white areas like Appalachia too.

    The mental schema you’re trying to push here of limp wristed libs doesn’t fit with something called reality, sorry, rural = poor = red = anti-learning = poor = fat.

    I laugh and laugh at American vets returning home to their cuntry wives: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081216013135AAeFheP

    Red-state: http://www.jonathanivyphoto.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Military-Wedding-4.jpg (lol)
    Blue-state: http://data.whicdn.com/images/23818622/12358170962588747719_large.jpg

    Conservative men = doughy, white, straight laced, not charismatic, bow to authority, Beta. Unless you go all in and carry, drive a big car, make your views known, that’s a style thing that’s in vogue but even then you’re a bitch for adopting an identity.

    Not all moral mental modules are created equal. Disgust/loyalty is for the ignorant. For the tribal. Dumb red team Americans. Blacks who voted down gay marriage (yeah you both agreed on that one, hmm wonder why, cause you’re all narrow retards). Do you think people who are actually able to think for themselves let disgust/loyalty/attraction to authority drive their thinking? Confucius, Plato, Copernicus, Bacon, Newton, Voltaire, Kant, Jesus, Darwin, Dante, Shakespeare, Keats, Ghandi, Dalai Llama, ALL great musicians, actors, creatives….. not one of them. Their lives were a struggle against reactionary tribals.

    Conservatives only strength is your simplicity.

    Good thing the ‘moral’ stances conservatives take are universal and not trendy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States

    You’re sucking on the dick of alpha charisma every time you admit to yourself you enjoy watching hotties on Fox make fun of Solyndra or whatever straw man is in vogue. You’re the little spoon purring away in the big furry arms of the country-style know-it-alls on Fox on Friends. You’re agreeing with a style of argument focus room-tested for the dumbest, weakest & most ignorant segment of our population.

    Conservatives don’t even have a platform anymore. There’s no position or vision. It’s all anti- anti-Obama, anti-immigrant, anti-other countries, anti-gays, anti-hippies, anti anti anti. It’s asshole-ism in it’s purest form. And you love sucking it’s dick. You’ve probably even said to yourself, “Fox news hosts are such assholes….. but I can’t stop liking them.”

    Fags.

    Like


  7. I’m conservative, in pretty much every sense of the word. To get a first date with me, you must be attractive and slender. For a second date, you must on the first date have proven yourself sweet and feminine. I would rather do without than lower those standards.

    At my age, and with those standards, I don’t get many dates. OTOH, I get asked out a lot by…well, the not-so-slender segment, and have a lot of fun putting them in the friend zone. And the more I do it, the more I get asked out. Go figure.

    Like


  8. Loser guys in general will dumpster dive with fat beasts. Not sure it matters left/right on the political spectrum. Anyone who does is disgusting in my mind.

    Like


    • I agree – it’s not about left vs. right or liberal vs. conservative but Beggars vs. Choosers. Tapping fuglies is like driving a crappy car – everyone wants to drive a sexy car but for some they’d prefer to drive a crappy car than riding a pushbike.

      Like


  9. My girlfriend has slacked off a bit from her diet/exercise regimen in recent weeks; she looked incredible about a month ago. Last night, she was lounging in the recliner watching TV, and I caught a glimpse of superfluous fluffiness emanating from her tummy. I just had to look away. Last night, I dreamed she was walking around my house with a bowlful of candy in her hand that she was slothfully munching on.

    Happily, my disgust reflex remains turgid.

    Like


  10. There’s a short article by Haidt about these ideas here:

    http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/morality10/morality.haidt.html

    Disgust is often explained as a natural defense against dangers such as excrement or rotting meat; but it also seems to be (a negative) part of the sexual response. In this article, a divorced woman who is well past her prime expresses her disgust at the “nice men” who are available to her. Her words are as good a description as anything written in the manosphere of the contempt and disgust in which women hold beta males:

    http://planktonlife.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/sure-as-clockwork-another-random-plankton-rant/

    Like


  11. Nietzsche also made the connection between the morality of care and absence of the disgust reflex. He likened the constant bemoaning of suffering and misery to painting the world with excrement.

    Like


    • Morality of distance.

      Like


    • A guy worth having a beer with, that Nietzsche.

      Was ist deine jahr?

      I felt an urge to ask that to a German tourist in the beach yesterday, she looked really fresh, feminine and beautifull. Problem is, she was not older than 15, probabily 12, 13, 14?

      A lot of potential though. Hope she’ll grow up to not be a hhooker or a whore.

      Like


  12. on July 13, 2012 at 2:05 pm god hates us all

    This post smacks of self-affirming ego investment. The need to identify as liberal/conservative is self flagellation induced by a culture and national soul pissed upon by the ‘elite’. Fatties get fucked by lesser men of both mindsets. Finish the unplugging and step outside of the pre-programmed choice of either liberal or conservative. I am a man and my roots here go back before my ancestors booted the imbred island monkeys more affectionately known as redcoats. And while I’m at it FUCK Is re eel and the zionist faggots that created it.

    Like


  13. Interesting that in Haidt’s book (which I too strongly recommend), he traced moral disgust to the “omnivore’s dilemma” – eat a lot of things but not the wrong things.

    While I can’t trace DIRECTLY a liberal openness to porkers, I would suggest that a vegetarian develops a disgust for meat as a way to consciously deal with omnivore’s dilemma. I think carnivores are more welcoming to the zaftig since most vegetarians are dealing with malnutrition. Liberals and vegetarians overlap more than conservatives do so…ergo, liberals have a slight tendency to be disgusted by fatties.

    But, I’m not sure of my logic here. Counterarguments welcome.

    Like


    • on July 13, 2012 at 2:39 pm Backdoor Man

      I don’t think many vegetarians are disgusted by meat. Some claim they are, but it’s mostly psychological cover. I was a vegetarian for some time, and my wife hasn’t eaten red meat or pork for 25 or 30 years, but even she loves the smell of bacon and anything grilled. When I didn’t eat meat, I loved those smells too.

      Like


  14. I am still recovering from a recent trip to Liberalville. Down is up; up is down. Man is small; woman is large. Child is saint; husband is garbage. A dirty house shows how much you are devoted to the children. Who cares if your child makes a mess at a public restaurant; you’re tipping ten percent! No respect, no humility, no more, please.

    Like


  15. You have unwittingly given the liberals a means to prevent the infiltration of their ranks and gatherings. A cabal of liberal mafia can make a defilation pact with each other or one may have to do the fat biker chick at the door before they may enter. I now believe I have lost my chance to ever attend the democratic convention.

    On the other hand I suppose the conservatives can also make use of them. Only by offering a cruel humiliation of the fat chick at the door may one enter.

    Like


  16. Fatties disgust me. So do ugly people. My whole life I’ve been shamed into thinking that judging these people is wrong! Fatties moreso than uggos because they can do something about it. Well, uggos can generally work with hair (and in the case of women–make-up), clothes, fitness, and the way they carry themselves to improve.

    The worst are fat and ugly. And they are all over the city I live in.

    Like


    • Fatties moreso than uggos because they can do something about it.

      There is plenty the ugly can do. Ugliness is the external sign of evil. Monster in the face, monster in the soul.

      Evil triumphs because we tolerate ugliness. We tolerate ugliness because feminism has convinced us “it’s not their fault” and therefore unequal treatment of self-hating uggos is “unfair.”

      A girl is stuck with her gene pool, true. But — especially in the bloom of youth — abject unattractiveness can only come by choice. The choice is to give up on one’s appearance and accentuate the negative (tattoos, piercings, posture, expression, attitude, psychological weight gain) out of despair. It is our fault that our culture encourages this despair in a perverse attempt at equality: if we can’t all be equal in beauty, then we all must accept the equality of hideousness, by persuasion and by force.

      Just the same, men are stuck with their upbringing. Is being raised by omegas and betas any excuse not to employ game once they encounter the truth? Girl game is beauty game. And “[b]eauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.”

      Matt

      Like


    • You can do something about it too. Move somewhere else.

      Like


  17. on July 13, 2012 at 2:20 pm (R)evoluzione

    “Disgust, it could even be plausibly argued, created female beauty.”

    Yes, but in the negative, meaning that it was truly beauty acting as a magnet for men’s attention–a form of sexual selection at play, no pun intende. It’s been shown with DNA studies that beauty positively correlates with enhanced immunity. There was a very interesting study on the “milkmaid theory” that demonstrated the evolutionary selection pressure that occurred when our ancient northern Euro ancestors began to domesticate dairy herds, putting young women into close, frequent contact with the hind end of animals. It was the most beautiful young women who had the greatest resistance to the various pathogens that ruminants carry. This event was epochal, significantly modifying the bone structure of northern Euro’s. I’ll have to see if I can dig up that study/literature review.

    More pertinent to the post’s question re: lib/con sexual preferences: I’ve noticed a wider extreme with liberal men. They tend to have tastes and tolerances that bookend the more middle of the road conservatives. The conservative men I know tend towards the cute, if slightly plain, middle of the envelope girls, where liberal men tend to either demand perfect facial symmetry and no greater than 0.775 WHR, or they’re down to date walruses.

    Though I will say the most mismatched SMV I’ve seen a man on the wrong side, i.e. a stud dating a fat warpig, was a devout Christian conservative woh had so much going for him, dating a very overbearing land whale, all in the name of churchian sanctity and chastity. It was obscene. I pray that young man finds his nuts and realizes his own value as a man, leaving the sea mammals to Greenpeace.

    Like


    • Fascinating first paragraph. I recall Jared Diamond in Guns Germs and Steel made special note of the pathogenic pressure that our domestic animals put upon us, which lead to the extermination of the Nativer Americans. He over emphasized the environment and seemed to ignore too much the innateness the environment was selecting, but still offered interesting insights nonetheless.

      On your last paragraph the current state of the church is in the direction of being rather brutal on men. “Sexual sin” is at the top of the list while gluttony is encouraged with buckets of fried chicken and glazed donuts in the basement. Men’s urges are demonized ruthlessly and continuously while their fat wives sit on the arm rests. Yes there are still the biological rules that apply where the dominate men still win the most attractive women, and this is ameliorated by the better sex ratio given that it is a place hospitable to women. But the overt social pressure is intense. Also, the promotion of the weak and passive effeminate “love” is pervasive with no observation at all of the rather masculine and alpha attacks of John the Baptist against the Herodian household and Christ at the pharisees. The churches have become flabby wallows of fat women and eunuchs.

      Let the heavenly host hear your prayer and demand the sacrifice of the fatlings.

      Like


      • Jared Diamond is interesting, but somewhat wrong-headed. Read Landis’ book “The Poverty of Nations” as a counterpoint (or vice versa).

        But I think sorting disgust on a unidimensional scale might miss something. I am relatively hard to disgust (I have shoveled shit and I have cleaned sewers, really). On the other hand, seeing a tick BEFORE it had attached and was running around had me freaked out. This says more about my neural wiring than about the tick. (But it was a truly disgusting, grasping, creepy greedy little bastard).

        As to sacrifice, it works. Keep sacrificing enough virgins and
        famine will go away….in time….

        Thor

        Like


    • Fascinating comment. Thanks.

      Like


  18. 1. A high disgust threshold might be beneficial for knowledge acquisition which is a survival benefit.

    2. Tolerating disgust might have synthesis benefits. If I’m relatively attractive and I bang a porker with an IQ of 140 then my children will be average looking with above average IQs.

    3. Special selection – the preservation of the weak by the strong in case any potentially adaptive traits by the weak might be missed out on.

    4. Comparative shaming – shame the weak, white, male members of society to show higher status. Making fun of stupid rednecks who can’t handle the negropocalypse while living in protected areas is a turn on in the cruelty department as mentioned by you earlier.

    5. Numbers strategy – better to fuck everything that moves than just the high quality ones in order to empire build.

    6. Deception strategy – related to Comparative shaming. Pretend one thing and do another. Like gay people because they fuck pointlessly and reduce competition. Like swingers/cuckolds because they allow foreign entry. Like feminists because they constantly remove opportunities for clueless men.

    7. Possibility of environmental/experiential growth – I know, it’s all in the genes, but I don’t totally believe that. Willful ignorance to me doesn’t matter if it results in winnings.

    Finally – liberals are generally smarter than conservatives because of their disgust threshold. Machiavelli doesn’t care if you lie, he only cares that you win.

    To Maya: Moderates are airheads who are the more stupid of all the people engaged in politics. Nobody listens to a moderate – primarily because they are not sexy. Radicalism (left or right) is a turn-on.

    Like


  19. In as strange a transvaluation of presumable ideological norms as the existence of “neoconservativism”, the conservatives I’ve known have almost always been more likely to harbor a short-term mating strategy, which by definition makes them less discerning in who they fuck. The liberals may be more likely to commit to a fat woman (because their love of humanity leads them to pursue love in the form of a mutualist fantasy relationship) but the conservative assumption that humanity is base and animalistic makes them less likely to find it degrading when they say fuck it, get hammered, and fuck a fat girl one night.

    To clarify, I live just over the dividing line in the South, in an east coast city. Nobody is really conservative, but many apolitical types have conservative personalities. I don’t know any religious people.

    Like


  20. Liberals and betas: I’m reminded of a classic comment from Sailer’s, circa 2008: http://isteve.blogspot.co.il/2008/06/tattoos.html

    “Creepy” is a pretty interesting word when leftists use it. I remember talking to a leftist friend of mine about a series of painting an art class had done of the same nude model. It was interesting to compare the paintings – different styles, same subject matter. (Quite different than looking at two paintings of different subject matter, in different styles.) Some fine artists in that class, who didn’t IMHO capture the sexiness of the model but created largely worthwhile art anyway. Anyway, he eventually cut short our little armchair art history class, shamefully admitting that looking at a naked woman was “creepy and sexist”.

    But of course, he wasn’t a Leftist Big Man (LBM), who could cheerfully go to strip clubs and get lap dances and be hailed by the left as “annihilating puritanical middle-class morality” or something. He was a Leftist Little Man (LLM), a man trained to believe that heterosexuality is inherently – uhh … “creepy”, I guess. Think of the LLM as Kerensky while the LBM is Lenin.

    LLMs believe that any appreciation they show of women constitutes sexual harassment. LBMs cheat on their wives, and say it’s perfectly okay to do that, because it “makes the Christians mad”. LLMs court women haltingly, by talking about abstract subjects, or by talking about how guilty they feel about the poor, or whatever. Not surprisingly, that leaves plenty of success opportunities to the LBMs. This makes the LLMs pretty sad and lonely, and the lonelier they get the more leftist they tend to get. The creepier they feel they are, they creepier they seem to others. They don’t really understand why the LBMs get to drool over everything female and everyone pats them on the back, while the LLMs aren’t allowed to even notice that they women they love have, e.g., feminine bodies.

    It’s all a racket, created by the mental institutions we send our children to. The LLMs obeyed the rules; they listened intently to the PC crap and noticed it made no sense, and tried to believe it anyway, and got socked in the brains by the inevitable neurosis. The LBMs didn’t notice the PC crap made no sense, because they never paid attention in the first place. They made their scatalogical jokes, which the proles have decided is ample proof of “non-creepiness”. And the LBMs got rewarded in exactly the way that matters most to adolescent males – fawning attention from females.

    In truth, of course, LBMs differ very little from other Big Men. The former have just learned to put a political icing on their cake of barbarism, to attract a few more flies. While an old-fashioned Big Man would say, “I don’t care about anything except getting sex for numero uno” and LBM says “I don’t care about anything except getting sex for numero uno … and fighting racism” and the girls just swoon. (Some of them do! My guess is that young women from outside the institutional schools from our urban areas are less susceptible, but I have no statistics.)

    You want to find an LBM … pick a male comedian out of a hat and you may well have one. These are the guys who joke about how great is to be dump women and be an alcoholic … and then scream their heads off about how someone frowned at a black guy once. Bitter, easily enraged, red-faced hippies with drug problems – I’ll admit they’re easy to laugh at.

    Like


    • I think that covers lib-alphas and lib-betas pretty well.

      Now for con-alphas and con-betas? One large difference between the two is that in the sexual market, they look for women to marry rather than fuck, since they believe premarital sex is wrong.

      Con-betas are willing to follow the con-alphas and sacrifice their own well-being for the sake of the team. They know they’re low in the pack, but accept that’s the way things are. They’re the exact types who will marry the plain, fat girls who go to their church, and in business, are the reliable types who get promoted seldom, if at all.

      Con-alphas will marry the hot women in their church and have a solid marriage and several kids. Their wives may even stay relatively thin and attractive over the years. Their exact political attitudes are shaped by whatever religion they belong to.

      Like


      • I got called a John Bircher here so I’m pretty sure I’m conservative. I had lots of premarital sex as well as extramarital sex, post marital sex and marital sex. Its all good. I believe in God too, but don’t really go to church.

        Like


    • I was thinking of LBM as Bill Clinton…until you mentioned male comedian and Russell Brand was the first that came to mind.

      Like


  21. “Conservatives feel stronger revulsion toward disgusting things than do liberals, who, apparently, like to wallow in shit, (or to reframe it in a nicer way: like to experience unique vistas).”

    Once again Heart sums up years of confusing observations about my fellow humans…of course if you aren’t a sensation seeking stimulation junkie non judgmental novelty whore, you’re ‘vanilla’….someone either shoot me or the rest of the world; fucking shithole it’s become.

    Like


  22. The conservative knows that beauty is synonymous with truth, and both are synonymous with grace. The postmodernist has deconstructed and force-falsified all three.

    Fat kinky women graze the cow pastures of the left because the left believes beauty to be a patriarchal construct used to enslave women. It therefore must be violently rejected for any hope of female “liberation.” Politics trumps the senses. Ideology overcomes experience, by totalitarian force. “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” Liberal men hold their nose for the cause. Hippie chicks eschewed make up and didn’t bathe or shave in an act of rebellion against Daddy Patriarch. It worked.

    Couple that with the misguided attempt to effect false female equality, and we all must pretend the ugly are as worthy as the pretty; boner-test be damned. Boners are the unfair weapons of the oppressor class. Corollary: all sex is rape.

    No feminism is possible without forced redistribution of women’s most precious asset. This is why womyn’s studies departments are dungeons of the hideous. They are refugees from the sunlight finding in lesbian solidarity the strength denied them by nature. They derive no true power from their witch circles, of course, but they feed each other enough resentment (and cheesecake) to reject the tyranny of the beautiful as not real.

    Hot chicks don’t notice them. B-plus women laugh at them. Average Janes know not to associate themselves with the smell of cowshit, if they hope to avoid spinsterhood. “I believe in women but I’m not a feminist!” That leaves the dregs to populate the ranks, who seek compensation for their curse in a false communion with a false goddess, rather than the false communions with the one true God, where they can allay their forced celibacy by imagining “Jesus is my boyfriend.”

    Feminism, atheism, postmodernism. Fruit from the same poison tree.

    Matt

    Like


  23. i think the liberal/fat chick association is just a side effect of conservatives just being more judgmental, and liberals being less judgmental in general. extremes notwithstanding of course.

    Like


  24. While the SMV of the women a man gets is almost certainly more directly tied to his own SMV than anything else, it seems completely reasonable and likely that liberal men are disproportionately low-value than conservative men.

    While there is a liberal elite that contains their alpha males, the ranks of liberalism is mostly beta, as constantly asserted on this very blog.

    Like


    • If you have success with women, you know it does take some money to date them (and hide them from each other and pay some to leave early) and, that every one hundred dollars the government takes away is less one really cool romantic getaway weekend with a babe. I can’t see how liberal men are OK with progressive taxation.

      Like


      • The alphas substitute status within the intelligentsia for money. The betas just follow along because that’s what they do.

        Like


  25. Liberal guys get more hot,young chicks because they are natural assholes…

    Like


    • Before they get a job, when they are benefiting from not having to fund their own student loans and those of the coeds they shag. After they have a job, they are natural betas if they are OK with being taxed to death in order to subsidize a wild sex life for young males and females still in college.

      Like


  26. Here is a seemingly arbitrary disgust/purity reaction in my part:

    When I see a girl playing guitar, there is a skanky vibe I pick up on. But when a girl is playing piano, I get entranced by watching her hand move over the keys gracefully.

    Like


  27. The term liberal, to me, has always been very confusing. Liberal seems to imply acceptance of all, but I haven’t experienced many liberals who accept conservativism, whereas conservatives are often forced to accept liberal ideas. So, which group is truly liberal? Conservatives.

    Like


    • The essential difference in the intellectual classes between liberals and conservatives is that the liberal believes in the dominance of the rational mind(lets eliminate the liberals who want free shit). They are not more open to ideas at all, but that the ideas they have come from some sort of thought process. They are subject to the change more because of the prevailing conditions that they believe exist. They will abandon traditions as being outmoded readily like say resistance to homosexuality, but will have little tolerance for people who do not recognize it like they do.

      The conservative has a faith that the existence of something is the result of some process beyond our immediate understanding. That is why they have more respect for faith, or perhaps they have less respect for human rational thought which is the camp I fall into. Selective pressure is usually more reliable than our ideas. The liberals often assume that what they are discarding is some arbitrary social construct, so they toss around the bricks on a whim, unaware it is some key stone. Picture the equatorial liberal who thinks fur is just a fashion in the north.

      Like


      • I’ve never heard it presented like that before. Thank you!

        Like


      • I’ve never heard it put exactly this way, but it makes sense.

        Like


      • Liberals are also called progressives and there is little else but the human mind involved in progress away from conservatism that I can think of. Its thought vs tradition. However take your pick from Schopenhauer who thought that the brain was a slave to primitive impulses or Twain saying that man was the most morally corrupt and had one gift above the other animals, but not merely as much as his estimation of it.

        Since I think its nature that sits as judge to our flimsy designs, where the gods tumble the Achaean walls as they please, I believe that the human brain is good for a day trip and nothing more. Way too much faith in our progress those liberals have. And then the dumb ones just want free shit.

        Like


      • There’s a lot of truth to this. Of course, sometimes faith and authority are wrong. Sometimes they’re right.

        Like


      • I would say conservatives have a better grasp of the limitations of rational thought. Most ideas that you folks want to implement are not good ones.

        Like


      • Roughly speaking, “conservatives” are Aristotelians; “liberals” are Platonists. In the modern sense of those terms.

        Like


      • on July 16, 2012 at 8:13 am Art Vandelay

        You can pretty well draw a line from Plato to Hegel to Marx, at least if you agree with Karl Popper.

        Like


      • “The liberals often assume that what they are discarding is some arbitrary social construct, so they toss around the bricks on a whim, unaware it is some key stone.”

        +1

        Like


    • Its a deliberate attempt to confuse people to conceal progressives’ Marxist motives. A liberal is actually closest to a Libertarian. What we call Liberals are actually progressives, who are actually Marxists, as progressive is another attempt to hide their true intentions.

      Like


      • The US began as the classical “liberal” movement with many ideas coming from the Scottish enlightenment. So yes, a liberal then was to rebel against the monarchy.

        But Marx was very close to libertarians and in many ways exceeded their principles because he was against the monopolization of the means of production. Marx said nothing about centralized planning of product which is very much a progressive idea. Centralized socialist governments are nothing like Marxism.

        Conservatives seem rather blind to the very active government they support in regards to property rights which go well beyond the product of one’s efforts but also includes planting a flag and claiming the land for England. . There is no usufruct with so called liberty loving conservatives. How can absentee ownership of unimproved land be anything but from a centralized authority?

        So again conservative are not for less government, otherwise they would repeal laws on drugs, prostitution and property laws which are extremely intrusive.

        Like


      • Okay. And how do you define Libertarian.

        Like


      • I’d say the Reason magazine editorial staff come pretty close. Essentially a Classical Liberal, one who believes in incremental improvement through pragmatic observation, application of science, and, maximizing personal freedom. These definitions are inexact, I’m afraid.

        Like


      • Well, I appreciate the information. I really should know more about it.

        Like


      • Don’t worry your pretty little head about the matters of men, love.

        Seriously.

        It’s hard to get a quorum of virtuous citizens from among the pool of men, much less homogenize our politics for the mass consumption of women. This rankles a modern girl’s sense of entitlement, sure, but the problem will have to be addressed all the same.

        You really shouldn’t “know more about it.” A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. It is best to be humble in one’s limitations, and you are halfway there with your confession of ignorance. Now don’t go spoiling that all-powerful humility by reading up on the latest energy bill or Fast and Furious scandal. You have no idea of the futility.

        Do you really care who runs the sewers? Do you really care who is elected dog-catcher? We have devolved into a politics of pettiness because women felt they needed to get involved. If and when men regain the exclusive franchise, we will stop trying to micromanage nationwide school lunches, prescription drugs, and workplace behavior, and concentrate on those few, broad areas where politics truly apply, as signified in the original Departments of State, War, Treasury, and Justice.

        Consider this. We have a cabinet-level department today called “Housing and Urban Development.” It is run by corpulent black women. The founders would have been disturbed, then baffled, then horrified. This sassy snap-snap ghetto queen of a Federal Department almost single-handedly plunged the world into a half-decade of economic chaos that, if unchecked by men in politics and finance, will consume free enterprise in America, Asia, and Europe until mid-century, with war to come in bursts.

        It’s not that curiosity is bad. Women should be generally conversant in all manner of subjects. But the chemistry has become so volatile that we must begin emergency quarantine between matters of import and matters of frivolity. The house is burning down around us. It is no time to talk about replacing the curtains with more fashionable ones. When sanity is restored and peace regained, female specialties are even more important than the masculine arts. But crises are men’s time.

        In peace there’s nothing so becomes a man
        As modest stillness and humility:
        But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
        Then imitate the action of the tiger…

        It has gotten to the point where the harmless flattery of the female intellect has become absurd policy at odds with reality and in danger of annihilating us. So forgive my bluntness but the ship is sinking, get the fuck on the lifeboat and don’t make me slap you.

        Matt

        Like


      • Finally, all my nautical training pays off! Can I at least get a kiss goodbye? Go do your manly duty, but I shall be very displeased if you drown.

        Like


      • we will stop trying to micromanage nationwide school lunches, prescription drugs, and workplace behavior, and concentrate on those few, broad areas where politics truly apply, as signified in the original Departments of State, War, Treasury, and Justice.

        this.

        x1000.

        Like


      • on July 17, 2012 at 9:17 am Original JB

        Reason magazine editorial staff do not come “pretty close.”

        They are beholden to PC pieties hence any talk of “application of science” is highly restricted in scope. In other words, they are as out to lunch with regard to biorealism as any proggie.

        In essence they are the other side of the coin to Marxists – utopian economic determinists. Materialists. Feh. Just feh. And the disproportionate obsession with legalizing drugs leads one to think it isn’t so much “libertarianism” as “arrested adolescence.”

        Like


      • Words mean what people agree on them to mean. In America, a liberal is a soft social democrat (in Europe you would call them center-left, or even center-right given the political center of gravity over there). Most American liberals would like society to be organized like the Nordic countries and populated like the UN. There is a problem here, of course.

        In Europe, a liberal is a free-market enthusiast who believes in freedom of speech, religion, sex, etc. In America, this is a libertarian. I can think of no examples of a libertarian society in practice (though some might argue the Internet qualifies).

        Like


      • Thank you.

        “I can think of no examples of a libertarian society in practice (though some might argue the Internet qualifies).”

        What a fascinating thought! A last vestige of freedom. A truly international forum.

        Like


      • Think of the resources that would be saved if not only schools, but government went online.

        Like


      • Sure, but there are various reasons things that work online don’t work off. Most of us need jobs, for instance.

        Like


      • Actually, nowadays here in Europe – or this corner – a liberal is someone who is all about free market and doesn’t care for rules. It’s more about economics. Actually, here, the liberals usually are more socially conservative.

        I used to allow people to call me a liberal. But now that my African “house maid” earns twice as much per hour as a government contracted nurse, I want liberals to be damned.

        Although I’ve already told my mom to fire the housemaid and contract two nurses to take care of me and the house…

        Like


    • on July 14, 2012 at 9:04 pm Peter Falker

      I don’t give a shit about liberals or conservatives. I just wanted to tell you that I think you have a really nice ass.

      Like


    • The term liberal, to me, has always been very confusing.

      It was deliberately made confusing. That’s why I avoid using it as much as possible. I prefer using some derivation of “leftism.” And the left destroys certain enemy philosophies by redefining words.

      “Liberal” means a prejudice for liberty and an acknowledgment of the individual’s rights against the state, whether that be king or majority. The term properly understood ceased to apply to our politics with the demise of the Whigs, and the slow adoption of “progressivism” by the Democratic Party in the 20th century.

      Libertarianism, like any ism, fetishizes one facet of a philosophy, and so they cannot be the modern equivalent or the proper heirs of classical liberals like Locke and Smith, as they pretend to be. Their obsession about liberty devolves into license/relativism and makes a hash of any consistency in thinking. Libertarianism is essentially “philosophical” cover for any self-proclaimed “freethinker’s” random slate of policy preferences, which necessarily contradict their comrades’ own pot-luck-dinner of an agenda.

      Today’s true liberals take refuge in the Republican party, in the form of the WSJ/Reason Magazine crowd (“Free Minds, Free Markets”). Because our founding institutions in this country are liberal and small-r republican, conservatives are conserving liberal — and by now, venerable — institutions, like the Declaration and the Constitution.

      So, you have liberal conservatives on the right, European-style social democrats on the left, and “libertarians” consigned to permanent runt status for lack of philosophical coherency. Clear?

      Matt

      Like


  28. Cool logic bro.
    There is a big difference between being empathetic and being attracted to someone. According to your logic liberals are more attracted to the physically and mentally disabled as well.
    Someone who has more education, a higher income, is less religious, and has less children is more likely to be: what?
    Use some Bayesian Updating
    Liberals don’t date fatties, we make it easier for them to get fatter and create institutions to trap conservative men with these fatties. Pretty subtle humor imo.

    Like


  29. on July 13, 2012 at 4:45 pm The Specimen

    Conservatives are fooling themselves about their ”self-reliance” and ”moral values” just as much as many urban dwelling SWPLs are fooling themselves about their ”tolerance” and ”egalitarianism”.

    Like


    • All that shows is that conservatives and fat people live in the South.

      Correlations don’t always run together. Education and conservatism both correlate positively with income, but education correlates negatively with conservatism.

      Like


      • “education correlates negatively with conservatism.”

        Something I’ve been trying to point out, without saying those exact words, for the couple of months I’ve been on this site. Thanks.

        Like


      • Let’s see some references that aren’t self serving. I also believe any correlation that exists is pretty weak. that said, Its educated people who have forgotten how to work but feel entitled to micro manage the lives of others. Laissez faire doesn’t place them in the center of the universe and therefore they oppose it in greater numbers.

        Like


  30. Relevant because DISGUST is missing from this list.

    ‘When Men Don’t Want Sex”

    http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/24/when-men-don%E2%80%99t-want-sex/

    A WTF quote:

    “New research suggests that female sexual response depends on the quality of emotional intimacy and overall relationship satisfaction. That means that when a woman feels comfortable and secure in her relationship, she’s likely to feel more sexual desire – to the point where curling up on the couch in sweats and a T-shirt is more of a turn-on than donning some sexy lingerie.”

    I’ve never felt “more” sexual desire when laying on the couch in slovenly clothing. Not sure where this is coming from.

    If I ever get to the point where I am lounging around in sweats and t-shirts instead of underwear or tight pants, I hope my husband chastises me so that I never do it again. If you feel compelled to let yourself go in that way, it is a slippery slope to other disgusting actions.

    Speaking of disgust – I was at a popular amusement park last night. Nowhere else will you find such a large array of tattooed greasy fat fucks.

    Like


    • My sister is working for a female prof right now who relies solely on the “latest research” for her teaching methods, rather than trail and error like any normal person would. My sister was chastised for using some method which she knew worked, because the prof said “new research suggests” that it doesn’t. This prof, besides being a complete idiot, is a morbidly obese sow.

      Like


    • “fat fuck” can be funny when a guy uses it.

      You’re a female, watch your effin mouth.

      Like


  31. Conservatives who don’t incorporate hypergamy and bold anti-feminism in their ideology are as deluded as liberals.
    That’s why you meet many conservatives who do stupid shit like marrying single moms, or banging fat cows.

    Like


    • What about liberals who do that stuff? I have personally met hundreds. Disprove my statement , Boy Genius. I believe our host would disagree with you. Did you get your allowance cut off or something? Dad a conservative? Christian girlfriend not giving you any pussy? You talk out of your ass and deal in idiotic stereotypes of places and people you have likely never been to or met.

      Like


  32. This whole question is moot. Obesity transcends self-identified politics.

    The reasons behind obesity are more physiological and (especially nowadays) the result of a particular community’s mores.

    For example, here in Los Angeles, an incredibly liberal city, obesity is almost nonexistent, because of the year-round availability of fresh vegetables and the immense emphasis placed on physical fitness for the camera and stage. (The few fatties here are Mexicans recently arrived, and their fat is probably physiological.)

    On the other hand, Chicago, another largely liberal city, is one of the fattest in the nation, most likely due to their savage winters and long-standing beer-and-brats-and-deep-dish food culture.

    Michelle Obama is doing a good job, however, of politicizing it — getting those swing-state undecided mothers on board with her eat-healthy campaign.

    Still, I’ve found that obesity is one of the few safe go-to subjects that I can talk reasonably with right wing lunatics about. That bodes well for the future. If we can all get behind a few good solutions, the next few generations should shrink down to normal weight again.

    Like


    • When I was in a Houston suburb for a couple of weeks, I noticed that there were absolutely no sidewalks anywhere. You absolutely must have a car. I went out to take a walk a few times like I normally do, and was constantly having to hop over curbs and ditches and dodge traffic pulling off the roads. It became blatantly obvious to me why so many people are obese. As they say, walking or biking burns fat and saves money, while driving burns money and saves fat. (That plus the high-fructose corn syrup plague, among other things.)

      Like


    • I lived in the Los Angeles area for decades.
      Ever driven by a school? The mass of obese
      teenagers is shocking. Blacks, whites, browns, girls,
      boys. Plenty of fat all around. There may be statistical
      differences, but that is not the point.

      Thor

      Like


      • kids are getting fatter and fatter with each generation. we can thank shit food and video games. 30 years ago when i was in grade school, we still had shit food (the early years of the ill-conceived ‘low fat’ movement), but because the video games back then couldn’t be played for more than 10 minutes at a time before boring the fuck out of us, we burned off energy with physical activity.

        do they even have phys ed in schools any more?

        in the not too distant future, humans will look like the ones in wall-e.

        Like


      • One of the problems is the movement to ultra-safety. This is driven by many players, starting with governments, going on to any entity that fears a law suit (almost everybody sane), including schools etc. And parents are hounded by safety-promoters. So the result is helmets for everything, jungle gyms that are two feet high etc. BORING!

        So the only “safe” exciting thing to do is video games. And the parents etc lay the foundation for life-long obesity – now that ‘s safe or what?

        Thor

        Like


    • So why are Right wing people lunatics? Not ignoring negative feedback does not make one a lunatic. I would say that would be following one’s reason.

      Like


      • You do realize that 75% of social spending goes on administration costs of distributing the modern day corn dole. The social justice issue is really about state jobs for the greatest number of people. We’d be better off cutting every citizen a check, but you guys would want to include all of Central and South America too. Why do you want to subsidize asocial behavior?

        Like


      • Not ignoring negative feedback does not…

        Brother, until today I had not failed to never witness a quadruple negative. I say bravo.

        Like


  33. “If I see even a tiny superfluous fold on a chick’s belly, I get my whiteboard pointer and poke the offensive fatty deposit a few times, until she takes the hint. Protractors and tape measures are often utilized to emphasize the teachable moment.”

    I kind of doubt it. If you did that to any of the girls I know, the reactions would range from slapping you across the face to just drawing away and complaining for the next ten minutes about what that creep did to them. You would not be getting to do it more than once.

    Like


    • I think he meant a girl he was already involved with. It’s a wonderful way to weed out future manatees.

      Like


  34. Working in theatre, I’ve noticed a trend between liberals and conservatives.

    The liberals I work with are of two groups. The majority are feel good liberals that totally eat up the ‘inner beauty’ diatribe. They’ll date the land whales, push for women’s plays to get done (seriously, look at this new works festival here. http://www.athenaprojectfestival.org/pip.html#synopsis And then they wonder why women’s plays don’t get produced and men’s do.), and in general just push the feminist agenda.

    Then there are the dandy’s. Skinny men who, while you’d think they’re effeminate by their clothing, are completely able to flip the script on any woman and push her down by the sheer size of their ego. It’s a minority group, largely composed of the rare, in shape, straight actors. Some directors can do it. Theatre Carpenters can pull chicks, but they’re actually much more conservative, built, masculine, and don’t put up with people’s shit. Anyone else usually falls in the first group.

    Conservatives seem to be more average on, well, average. Instead of the extreme ends, they’re able to pull numbers matching their own, instead of diving into the pig stalls for an evening of hog wallowing.

    And anyone with game rises above.

    Like


  35. since fat girls are terrorists, and liberals support terrorism, then it only makes sense that liberal men are more likely to bang fat girls.

    Like


  36. Argentina is a great example, they are on the extreme end of tolerance. Which socially is wonderful, everyone seems to get along, enjoy each other, take care of each other. In a big city like LA people on the street will help you to get to where you are going. There is absolutely a price to this..good people make for good government right? No it is the exact opposite, tollerant people make for horrible government. So as far as I can tell you pick one or the other..do you want good social life or do you want good order? They seem to be mutually exclusive. I had to laugh when people would ask me if high school was really like in the movies, with the popular kids and the geeks. In Argentina everyone just gets along.

    Like


  37. Disagree. Southern states are by far the fattest in the country. They also happen to have the most conservatives.

    OTOH, big cities are liberal and very fit. DC is 90% liberal and its the fittest city in the country. How do you explain that Heartiste? I think you focus too much on the few fatties and miss out on all the slender young girls in DC.

    Like


  38. What a ridiculous post.
    But to answer your click bait posting, since you usually do at least a decent job, I have a conservative friend and he has porked 3 fat chicks this year. But he is a fat ass too by my standards.He is also about to get married (I just recieved the invite today, by coincidence) to a chubby, yet pretty, blonde (only white will do, of course) who has a child who is half hispanic from a dude that banged her back when she was hot.
    I’ve also toured almost the entire US, and let me tell you.. you want fat? go find some southern white people (everything is big in Texas- especially the people) A diet of meat, potatoes and mayo, with a side of fat tends to do that.

    Like


    • I live in Alabama and most of the women here are slender. I’m in Oklahoma for the first time too, as I write this and was pleasantly surprised at the women here. Most are attractive and slender too. I see land barges, but the trend seems to have peaked.

      Like


      • alabama is one of the most obese states in the u.s. i guess you should be thankful you haven’t seen the women that are contributing significantly to the statistics.

        Like


      • They live on the other side of the railroad tracks. I was talking about white women. I call them LABs- Large, Angry Black women.

        Like


      • I get the feeling it’s more class-based than race-based. In the South, poor whites and blacks get fat because, hey, Southern food is tasty and fattening, and poor people have poor impulse control and decision-making abilities (which is why they’re poor).

        Once you get up to the richer side of Southern, though, you find an entire class of young ladies who all want to be Scarlett O’Hara. And that suits me just fine, because I want to bang Scarlett O’Hara. It’s a shame I don’t look good with a mustache.

        Seriously though, a dainty southern girl from a good family is about the best value you’re likely to get in the United States.

        Like


      • I would agree with that assessment.

        Like


      • Scarlett O’Hara married two men she didn’t love, was indirectly responsible for the death of the one she stole from her sister, was a horrible mother, exploited the weak, and, don’t forget, shot a man 😉 Still, she is a fascinating character.

        Like


      • Scarlett O’Hara married two men she didn’t love, was indirectly responsible for the death of the one she stole from her sister, was a horrible mother, exploited the weak, and, don’t forget, shot a man

        yes. she’s a woman.

        Like


      • Only a woman could describe such amoral, cuntish behavior as “fascinating”.

        Don’t mistake men’s “fascination” with merely a coarse desire to defile the haughty bitch.

        Like


      • But she also kicked everyone’;s ass and made them work to plant crops that first winter after the war. They all survived because she was strong willed and a leader, if a selfish one. She is a complex character and has her virtues as well. But very much a woman.

        Like


  39. On disgust and morality. Its actually a very feminine form of morality. Masculine virtues are judgement and reason. To decide your morality and laws based on emotion is as feminine as it gets.
    I can see the value of disgust as a way of determining your personal choices, but to base your morality on it is to base your morality the way women do- by how it feels, rather than on higher reason and intellect.

    Like


  40. All of the guys I know who buy into the two party bullshit system and identify as republican or democrat are betas that will kill their own mother for a chance at ANY pussy. Those of us that have standards are almost all openly fascist. Not enough data points for statistical significance, but still something to think about.

    Like


    • Fascism and republicanism are not necessarily incompatible. Both are against the democratic illusion anyway, and both seek to protect the most productive from the ignorant r-selected mob.

      The republican party could be a viable option if the religious zealots, the bleeding heart “humanists” and the female pedestalizers are thrown away…
      Oh wait, that would be a fascist party.
      Nevermind, carry on.

      Like


      • You two geniuses are about as knowledgable about the differences between small-r republicanism and fascism as a kindergartener is about particle physics.

        I’m a hard core constitutional conservative, a Tea Partier, a lifelong registered Republican, a Christian, and a veteran.  I grew up in a family of immigrants with wartime US Army service, all of them conservative anti-communists, all of them calm alphas.

        Fascism is an ideology of massive, intrusive state power, as is communism, as is modern American progressivism.  It is all of the Left. Don’t lump us conservatives in with the statists. We’re oil to their water. 

        Like


      • Hear hear. So many of these hipster wannabes just don’t get it.

        Like


      • With them, it’s all about antagonizing the “godbags” with the first stupid cliché that pops into mind. No basic grasp of history required.

        An omega strategy, if you ask me.

        Like


      • You are, of course, just another ignorant tool of the Jews running shit in the west. Go right ahead thinking that being a republican means that your candidate is any different than Obama.There is nothing ‘conservative’ about your party. It’s just neo-liberalism with a different name.

        Like


      • Yawn.

        Another anonymous antisemite who blames his tiny testicles on those wascally jooooooooos? Hmm. Must be a Tuesday.

        Like


      • Heywood and I are on the same page, and I amplify his thoughts. But it’s the gravatar that seals us as spiritual brethren.

        Like


  41. “Best insight into what motivates the ideologies: liberals love humanity but hate humans, while conservatives love humans but hate humanity. ”

    Then you would like Dostoevsky. A very Brothers Karamazov thing to say.

    “The more I detest men individually the more ardent becomes my love for humanity.”

    Like


    • A friend from Charleston, SC once commented about black-white relations: “Southerners hate the other race but say they love the individual. Northerners hate the other individuals but say they love the race.”

      And JFK had a good one when he called Washington, D.C. “a city with Southern efficiency and northern charm.”

      Like


    • I don’t know that conservatives “hate” humanity as much as they fear and mistrust it.

      Like


  42. “those who become dissidents are not necessarily those with the strongest minds, but rather those with the weakest stomachs”

    – Czeslaw Milosz

    Like


  43. Actually women’s bodies are naturally quite disgusting. Smelly, hairy (yes they’re naturally hairy), with unsightly folds, the female body is also utilitarian, with hanging things that serve purposes of food (gross) and shape that aids in childbearing (gross). Only a man clouded by the sexual instinct could call this creature “beautiful” in its natural state. With the aid of a lot of cosmetics and unnatural efforts the female body can be made presentable, like today.

    By contrast the male body is an image of power, energy, and strength and is aesthetic in its natural condition without cosmetic efforts. Few things are more beautiful or graceful than the body of a young athlete who exercises out in the sun. This is why the first beautiful statues are of men, and it remained this way for a long time.

    So the jab against gay sex is misguided, because it’s sodomy as such that is disgusting and unaesthetic, whether it’s practiced on a man or a woman. But to claim that lovers of beauty are especially attracted to the female form is historically false and aesthetically absurd. The vagina is possibly one of the vilest things in the universe. Going down on a girl makes many men want to vomit for a good reason.

    Frottage or intracrural sex between attractive, fit men with graceful bodies is the only aesthetic form of intercourse there is.

    Like


  44. on July 13, 2012 at 7:38 pm Simon Corso

    Like some others I don’t feel I fit squarely into lib/con archetypes. Individual perceptions and geographical differences being what they are, I’m not sure anyone does anymore.

    I’m pro-choice and pro gun.
    I’m pro business and pro-environment
    I’m a capitalist but I believe capitalism needs some restrictions.
    I want social programs that teach useless people how to be useful, instead of just throwing money at them.
    I don’t want our government giving tax incentives for companies sending jobs overseas.
    I live in a little blue college town, the capitol of a big red state.
    I feel that religion is the worst thing that ever happened to humanity. ALL religion.

    I don’t ride mopeds , I don’t care if my friends are watching or not.. and I don’t drink and drive. I don’t hate fat chicks for being fat, I just don’t feel any attraction to them, regardless how sweet their personality might be.

    I don’t know the BMI scale well enough to visualize its ratings. I date thin women ( Milla Jovovich is my ideal type , Kate Moss is not too skinny for me. ) usually white but I catch a case of yellow fever from time to time. Most the women I date are liberal or at least left leaning. A few I would classify as middle of the road. But I wouldn’t know where to meet conservative women if I wanted one .. Church ?… No thanks .

    There are the self-important in-your-face feminazi liberal landwhales here. The types that will accuse you of being rapist just for having a penis, but I don’t run in those circles either. I cross their paths once in a awhile and see them pulling their castrated beta-boys around on an invisible leash. I’m empathetic enough fell sadness and shame for such pathetic losers, even if they don’t have the sense to right themselves.

    Where I live, most conservatives are overweight, three toothed, 8th grade edumacated, trailer dwellers from the sticks that look like Larry the cable guy… and that’s just the women. The rest of them serve in the state government. So , from the perception of my “unique vista”, the disparity is based on SMV not political leanings.

    Like


    • Corso – you live in Austin, TX, yes?

      Like


    • I always figured the most alpha thing to do would be to make up your own philosophy. Or just not bother with politics at all.

      Like


      • Like


      • Leftist politics is actually a pretty good hunting ground for a man with game, actually. Lots of women with an ideology that says premarital sex isn’t a bad thing. And you can use those extra IQ points to construct your own complicated interpretations of their silly ideas.

        Like


      • The lead singer for Against Me! is in the process of getting a sex-change operation. Yes, really.

        Perhaps relevant.

        Like


      • That’s not an alpha thing. That’s an IQ > 155 thing. Otherwise it’s incoherent horseshit.

        Like


      • Sure, but who cares? Your chances of winning elective office are miniscule anyway. And plenty of people get elected anyway.

        Like


      • on July 17, 2012 at 9:38 am Original JB

        Politics isn’t about philosophy; it’s about electoral strategy relative to time and place anyway. I think your own religion is actually more alpha than your own political philosophy – firstly, there’s little pretension to originality (there are only so many variants with different names for everything) and secondly there isn’t the need to falsify your core beliefs to achieve your ends.

        Like


  45. I think that making a link between liberal/progressive ways of thinking and having an impaired gag-reflex for that which is disgusting will become accepted wisdom. Because the concept is so testable!

    Like


    • on July 17, 2012 at 9:46 am Original JB

      The impaired gag reflex is symbolic of the progressive denial of the link between nature and worldly wisdom. It’s literally a brain malfunction – one does not need the traditional “left hemisphere” functions which progressives abuse and misuse to know that some things are wrong.

      Like


  46. Bilbo
    Leave Austin out of this. There are a lot of people in the world who are so in love with the place that there is nothing to be gained by even speaking her name.
    I have been known to drive for hours at high speed accross the desert in the dark just to get to watch the sunrise from atop Mount Bonnell.

    Like


  47. Disgust may have created female beauty, but there is a basic use of disgust that can only logically serve beauty in certain ways. That use is the preservation of health and life. When we are disgusted by rotten food, for example, it helpfully prevents us from eating it and getting sick. Or when we are disgusted by the gore of a car accident, it helpfully motivates us to drive safely. It can be argued that our disgust at the sight of excess female fat helpfully prevents us from mating with someone who is genetically predisposed to unhealthy weight gain, but there is nothing unhealthy about having a big jaw–in fact, I would argue it is a socio-evolutionary advantage that allows women to bite rapists more powerfully, among other things. To be honest, I have always been mystified by heartiste’s apparent distaste (a reaction that should be differentiated from disgust imo) for big-jawed women, not least because actresses widely praised for their beauty (Natalie Portman, Kristen Bell, Kiera Knightley) often have prominent jawlines.

    Like


  48. “It is only the man whose intellect is clouded by his sexual instinct that could give that stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and short-legged race the name of the fair sex; for the entire beauty of the sex is based on this instinct. One would be more justified in calling them the unaesthetic sex than the beautiful. Neither for music, nor for poetry, nor for fine art have they any real or true sense and susceptibility, and it is mere mockery on their part, in their desire to please, if they affect any such thing.”

    –A. Schopenhauer

    Women in nature have disgusting, ugly, SMELLY, hairy (yes, hairy) bodies. Only with the aid of civilization and cosmetics can women be made more or less human-looking and not horrid. The vagina is one of the most disgusting places in the cosmos, and it makes me puke to think of it.

    Like


  49. A leftist site I visited many moons ago had a discussion on bestiality. Many, if not most, of the members thought it should be legal. Perhaps they thought the government should not only stay out of our bedrooms but our barnyards too. Anyway, some members were raising objections, but all were rebutted (of course, those objecting couldn’t raise the argument that it was unnatural, since much of what the left advocates is unnatural. Case in point: homosexual interracial adoption, etc.).

    I concluded that even if I couldn’t find a logical objection to bestiality, or if my seemingly logical objection were rebutted, I would still oppose it. To me this isn’t strange. I think most of our views are the results of our instincts; our intellect just rationalises them.

    It’s weird, though, because I find water sports and sex involving faecal matter gross, yet I don’t advocate banning it apart from when it’s done in public. And to a lesser degree, I find it gross when watching a porno where one guy has been getting a blowjob and takes his dick out, revealing a glaze of jizz on the girl’s tongue, and another guy puts his dick in. But then sloppy seconds are a book by themselves. Even sloppy seconds after long periods of time aren’t ideal, but you can only ask for so much. This was reinforced the other day when watched a spider documentary. It showed the mating ceremony of 2 spiders. The narrator said “The male spider approaches the female’s web and pulls on a thread of her web. By doing this he can tell if she’s a virgin”. I thought “fuck, even the spider gets a virgin, but I can’t get one”. If by some stroke of incredible luck I found myself hugely rich and the desire of the world’s women, however, I would invite only the highest quality 17-year-old virgin ass into my palace.

    Like


  50. The Left-Right political configuration is the manifestation of female-male characteristics and societal roles. IOW, the Left expresses female concerns and the Right male concerns.

    Female political expressions relate to the social welfare state. Women are more “accepting” because they evolved dealing mostly with the in-group.

    Male political expressions relate to defense. Men are more “conservative” because they evolved needing to “discriminate” between out-groups for alliances, trade, and war.

    The globalist elites have done an effective job of separating the men and women of the West by encouraging a political system that puts men and women at odds.

    They redirect man’s desire and nature towards defending to fight wars for globalist, Israeli, and corporate interests (Republican Party role). They redirect woman’s desire and nature towards caring for others to push for forced integration and assimilation with the non-White world (Democrat Party role).

    A healthy system would maximize both natures and desires for the interests of the population (and not a globalist elite that puts its interests above all national and/or ethnic interests).

    Like


  51. off topic question for the phorum:

    Hyper-shy/awkward girls: how does one go about “gaming”/dating/fucking/building rapport with them…?
    General archtypes associated with this personality type?

    It seems that a shy girl would need to be paired with her extreme: the outgoing/extroverted guy type. Or would they more comfortably bond with an introvert?

    Like


    • I’ve never seen a good Game treatment of nerd-girl pickup, largely because most PUAs aren’t interested in them. But I’ll share my own experience. I’ve gotten a few into bed, so I guess I can say. Any actual PUAs with experience picking these up can chime in.

      In general, go easier on the negs. Negs are used by PUAs to break down the resistance of 8s or 10s, but girls with low self-esteem may just be turned off.

      Initiate everything. Take the lead. If you’re both introverted, nothing will happen.

      Apply small amounts of kino and watch her reaction. Advance or back off as necessary.

      The Hot Girl (frequently a 6 or 7, of course) at the Convention? Can’t say, I never bothered to fight off the hordes. I imagine they’re attention whores who’d be gamed the way most PUAs would tackle a normal 9 or 10.

      Like


    • Hyper-shy/awkward girls: how does one go about “gaming”/dating/fucking/building rapport with them…? General archtypes associated with this personality type?

      Like gaming elementary school girls. Get your inner Chester ChoMo on.

      Lots of misdirection and indirect fire, like talking to someone’s profile bounced off a couple mirrors. The direct attack makes her wither, panic, and flee. She has to gain not just trust in you, but trust in herself as a sexual being.

      Her shyness and awkwardness comes from either exterior or interior damage. The She’s All That cutie who is just waiting for some prinze to come take off her glasses is a figment of Hollywood imagination. We’ll presume her outward nastiness is not the reason for her social dysfunction. That means she has some interior dysfunction that has so far prevented her from growing into a full social participant. Once you figure out her secret trauma, you can exploit it. But that comes with the cost of her clinging/bonding.

      If she is truly cute but shy, she still has been hit on plenty of times, but her distortion field is massive and defenses mighty. Once you have infiltrated, you have to decide whether you want to molest the underdeveloped 12-year-old kid still inside her, or whether you want to help her grow out of it. The cuter a shy girl is, the more fucked-up her psychological trauma: if she wasn’t massively disfigured inside, her beauty would have naturally shaped her into a socialite. After a certain age, however, the internal ugliness begins to externalize itself (cutters, goths, tats, piercings, frumpy attire, neglected appearance).

      At a certain point, every game move becomes a question of morality. Game is power. Do you use that power to overwhelm and damage the vulnerable, then pick meat off the carcass? Or do you use it to make them into a woman worthy of your attention? Do you slaughter the cow for chow or keep her for milk?

      I’d suggest that once peppy young initiates get a couple kills under their belt they either become nauseated by the charnel gore or they become inured to it. In the former case, their attention turns away from destroying and toward creating. In the latter, they keep chasing more exotic and rare game — or addicts in perpetual pursuit of “the ultimate high.”

      Matt

      Like


  52. on July 14, 2012 at 2:42 am DonaldMcRonald

    In my personal experience, (just graduated college) the conservative guys do get the hotter girls. The conservatives in college are generally the frat guys and football players who the girls flock to.

    The stereotype of conservatives being uptight and liberals being fun loving is completely reversed in college. The conservatives are the laid back alpha guys who don’t give a shit about anything whom the girls love. The liberals are the uptight ones constantly protesting the slightest thing that may have hurt their feelings.

    Like


    • on July 14, 2012 at 2:47 am DonaldMcRonald

      I want to add that this is probably only true in upper middle class areas. Obviously, there are a ton of poorer conservatives dating hambeasts.

      Like


    • Everything you’ve said is right. Conservatives want to let rich people keep more of their money, so richer people tend to be more conservative. Rich men tend to be more alpha. So the correlation works at the middle and upper middle class levels.

      If you know you’re on the money-and-power track, you tend to lean to the right, for obvious self-serving reasons.

      But it’s hard to separate out SMV (which correlates pretty well with income for men) and politics. The question is, all other things being equal, do liberal men tolerate fat women more (ie, even when they don’t have to)?

      My personal experience is not really. Conservatives have other things that cause them to settle–I knew a Greek-American fellow who wanted a Greek-American woman (seemed perfectly normal to me, though he was embarrassed when I suggested it)–and uglier women are more likely to embrace religious conservatism because they have less to gain from sleeping around. Liberal men are awfully quick to invent justifications for not going after fatties if they have the option.

      And at the end, you know the old joke. A guy is offered three women to marry. One is an accomplished cook, another clever and entertaining, another rich. Which one does he marry? The one with the big tits.

      I’ve found that considerations of politics tend to vanish when the little head is involved. Has feminism ever stopped Democratic (male) politicians from sleeping around? If anything, they tend to get more tail because their constituency will forgive them.

      Like


    • That was my experience too, way back when.

      Like


  53. Interesting:

    http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2012/7-8/the-war-against-human-nature-ii-gender-studies-part-2#_ednref17

    The War against Human Nature II: Gender Studies (Part 2)

    “The third tactic is to deploy social technologies. These are devices, including rules, routines, architecture and ideologies, that regulate behaviour. The theory of social technology was developed by ethologists and political theorists and overlaps the sociological concept of “social control”. But unlike sociological approaches, social technology theory does not deny the existence of hard-wired behaviour. Social technologies manipulate instincts as well as learned behaviours. Among the earliest of these technologies were architectural structures that directed attention to a central point, obviating the attention-getting component of dominance. Examples include throne rooms, amphitheatres and temples. In these settings anyone, no matter how unprepossessing, who occupies the focal point, can attract attention more readily than others. The routine, low-key attraction of attention is a necessary component of established dominance hierarchies. It is a feature of the formal organisation. The latter favours women because it allows anyone of technical competence to acquire the powerful means of dominance that go with line office.

    Formal organisation is an assemblage of social technologies that negates the most powerful dominance behaviours. It has been argued that women are disadvantaged in bureaucracies because feminine attributes are subordinate ones.[18] On the contrary, femininity is most disadvantageous where men are unrestrained. Bureaucracy offers special advantages to women. Feminine interpersonal behaviour is most advantaged in environments disciplined by a degree of separation between office and person. Codes of courtesy are another social structure that inhibit dominance, because they target aggressive tactics.”

    Like


  54. Bestiality, IMHO, deserves a second look. The beasts rarely have any fat on their bodies and no matter what happens they will NEVER call an attorney afterwards.

    Like


    • Cows and pigs are smaller than some modern American organisms of human parentage I have seen at conventions.

      Like


    • on July 16, 2012 at 8:42 am Art Vandelay

      I agree with your first sentence. Bestiality could be the reason why some of the Blimps still get laid.

      Like


  55. Most conservative politicians wives are fat cows. Every guy I know, whether conservative or liberal will chug with a fatty here and there. In general conservatives are scared of everything, especially whales. So, maybe this ideology is better suited towards being a player. But since conservatives go to church they don’t really have a sense of who they are as people. They look to god to tell them what to think. Is that an Alpha? BS..I’m left leaning and I just chugged my first fatty last night, I had to try it..

    Like


  56. This thread is full of people *wanting* the above to be true, but I don’t see many indications that it actually is.

    I think this is because disgust and sexual attraction are two very different things. Honestly, only a small percentage of women are unattractive enough to actually *disgust* me. On the other hand, I’m only genuinely sexually attracted to women at the other end of the spectrum. There’s a huge protective gulf in the middle filled with ordinary-looking women who neither excite me nor make me want to puke, and I react to them pretty much as I’d react to a man.

    Like


  57. “But the utility of disgust is underrated by the neckbeard crowd.”

    Disagree. They feel disgust on an average basis like everyone else. They know to hide it otherwise they couldn’ t live with themselves or indeed get a fuck.

    Like


  58. These are actually pieces in whatever realm of experience you are in. Filtering the world in each of those lights creates the personalities that provide the benefits and flaws to society. Hats for some, permanent fixtures for others.

    Your ability to move through those phases creates good ltr material.

    Like


  59. This just does not resonate in SoCal. Women cannot afford to be fat. Their attitudes are terrible, but they are nothing if they are out of shape.

    You can be behind a woman and think she has a hot body, and then she turns her head and her face is all wrinkled because she’s 50.

    Like


  60. on July 14, 2012 at 11:39 pm Rant Casey - BR

    “I mean, if you can pick up a steaming shit without flinching, maybe you shouldn’t have too much say in local zoning laws.”

    Hum.. yeah, it pretty much sums up everything.

    Like


  61. on July 14, 2012 at 11:47 pm Rant Casey - BR

    On a side note… geez… you anglos think a lot about useless stuff. How come the forefathers of utilitarism spend so much time in byzantine discussions.

    Like


  62. […] Chateau Heartiste – Wayne Elsie, Pacing, and Conversational Context, Questioning The Meritocracy, Universal Logo Of The Feminized Male, What To Do If A Girl Calls You Out. . ., Liberal Men And Fat Chicks […]

    Like


  63. Austin Texas has, on any given Tuesday night, about 150 live music venues open for ones enjoyment. It can be taken for granted that most of what you will hear will be that-which-has-not-been-heard-before. Austin bands are virtually incapable, on genetic grounds, of regurgitated lame versions of cover songs. They play what they wrote or they stay at home in the basement. It is unnatural to stay in the basement.
    There is no place on earth where obesity is less tolerated.
    There is no place on earth where low IQ is less welcomed. When I was an intern at the local medical center, every single orderly, janitor, or lab-tech had at least a Masters degree.

    The UT PUF keeps at least 1 billion USD in physical gold in its vaults at all times.

    Like


  64. Test for disappearing comments.

    Like


    • Strange… many of my comments seem to be getting lost. Are there perhaps key words that, when used, cause postings to disappear into the snows of Cyberia?

      Like


      • Kike nigger spic chink slant sheeny bitch ho honky

        Naaah, I think it just shuts off if you post too many times.

        Like


      • I hadn’t really been posting all that much… ah, well… some things must remain a mystery.

        Like


      • Those weren’t the words I was using anyway… the chateau is one of the few sites where censorship seldom, if ever, takes place.

        Like


      • The post of mine that refuses to print was addressing the father/married man envy hypothesis.

        Outhouse psychiatry at it’s you’re just jealous lamest.

        Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and rightful rancor is merely that.

        Like


      • Don’t worry about it. Honestly, posting too much on these boards is a sign of a beta.

        Go out and get laid. Or get drunk. Either way, it’s a better use of your time than stressing over a post.

        Like


      • This is not stress… this was merely a point of curiosity, since I had been posting here for several weeks already and never saw five or six posts in a row refuse to print.

        Use words properly, grasshopper. One can get laid, drunk, AND post several messages in the space of a day.

        Like


      • The post of mine that keeps disappearing is one in which I address the hypothesis of father/married man envy.

        To me, that’s just so much outhouse psychology, a lame form of the you’re just jealous meme, parroted mindlessly by those whose education seems limited to what they hear from the snarky comics on Comedy Central.

        Like


      • Yes, mine too.

        I posted links to an article by Haidt, and another one by an over-the-hill land whale eloquently expressing a woman’s disgust at the thought of screwing anything less than an alpha. I guess these comments were off-topic because they weren’t about the liberal/conservative issue.

        Like


  65. Disgust protects a tribe against being overrun by beastly invaders

    A very nice way to put it…

    Like


  66. on July 15, 2012 at 4:42 pm Laconophile

    Disgust = discrimination = hierarchical order

    Like


    • on July 16, 2012 at 8:47 am Art Vandelay

      at first sight I thought he might just have chaired one of the dreaded “death panels”.

      Like


  67. In NY, plenty of liberal guys have plenty of disgust for fat chicks.

    Exercise. Eat Organic. Stay Healthy. Go for a Hike. Ride your Bike. Don’t eat McDonald’s. Be Vegetarian. Or Vegan. Or Caveman. Go to Yoga.

    Fatness is of course, more prevalent in the Red states. Liberals, being smarter and more self-aware, are much less likely to eat themselves into a heart-attack than brainwashed red-staters who see eating Big Mac as a sign of American Freedom.

    Like


    • Liberalism is beta and feminist, and your only claim to intelligence is the liberal echo chamber of academia and the media which serves to (constantly) remind liberals how intelligent they are. Nevermind the fact that you fail at life and sit around whining about “the distribution of wealth”–wealth which you are not sufficiently intelligent or virtuous enough to produce on your own.

      You are pussies and incompetents who think the government can pinch-hit for your existence. Well I must be a right-wing libertarian wingnut (proudly), because I’m here to tell you that no one else can live your life for you, and you will be the first to perish when your worthless paper dollar collapses and all the cannibals of your welfare state come out from under the woodwork to devour you.

      Like


      • “Nevermind the fact that you fail at life and sit around whining about “the distribution of wealth”–wealth which you are not sufficiently intelligent or virtuous enough to produce on your own.”

        No, sorry. The other anonymous (both of you get handles, for Christ’s sake) wasn’t saying that at all.

        First, any student of American history sees that making money has ZERO to do with being “virtuous”. That’s patently ludicrous. In fact, they’re often opposed to one another.

        Second, you can make a lot of wealth and STILL be dismayed by how the system is rigged against poor people. It’s called empathy. That’s why rich people are signing the Buffett oath about giving away all their money before they die.

        Don’t underestimate the inequal distribution of wealth. It upends societies as efficiently and ruthlessly as anything else. For proof, see France, circa 1790.

        Like


      • So why do we continue to do all those things that undermine success of the lower classes with our social policy? Because it creates jobs for the state. The state has no interest whatsoever in sovling dependency because 75% of the money spent on it goes to pay for the jobs of those who administer the programs. Jason, you need to learn to think a bit more critically and learn to see beyond Disney sentimentality. This is not a matter of money spent, it a matte rof how well its spent and to what end. When your side is willing to admit this ruse of theirs, that all we need is a few dollars more is nothing but hot air to lobby for ever more money, I’ll listen to them. All we get for our investment is ever more subsidized failure. How many poor people do you know? Most Parlour Marxists know damned few.

        Like


      • People can be individually smarter and follow a philosophy that’s stupid in aggregate, particularly if they live in a bubble (as Charles Murray has so nicely demonstrated). A lot of SWPLs look at their friends and think turning the US into Sweden will work. And, honestly, if the US was just SWPLs, maybe it might.

        Similarly, societies with more betas are better to live in. Japan, Russia, and Africa: from most beta to most alpha. Which one is the most functional?

        Like


      • Dude, I grew up in Detroit, lived in the ghetto of DC. The underclass ain’t unknown to me. And I hate f—‘in Disney.

        Here’s a great article about why rich people NEED government to continue their exploitative ways.

        http://www.nationofchange.org/five-reasons-super-rich-need-government-more-rest-us-1342445298

        The article is neither liberal or conservative. It’s merely factual — and it especially points to growing inequality as a serious problem, aided and abetted by the (increasingly corrupt) government.

        THIS is what concerns me.

        Like


      • That’s something I’d expect to hear from a Tea Partier. Then why do you support the source of that corruption? How will being further exploited by public service unions,trial lawyers, ACORN, Feminists and the myriad special interest groups that feed the Democrat party, all demanding more regulation that benefits them most of all, improve our lot? It’s merely more of the same only harder. You fall for the honeyed pleas of the victims of planned failure.

        Nonetheless, your father is a lawyer and you went to private schools, so you must at least be middle class. You have a father in the first place. That alone makes you middle class. The Great Society has destroyed or is destroying all those low cost means of inexpensive government created by little need for it in the first place, namely the intact traditional family and after debilitating the populace, the Democrat seeks to help them through helping himself. That is the racket being played here and we yokels who don’t support that in the first place are growing angry over it.

        Like


      • ‘“the distribution of wealth”–wealth which you are not sufficiently intelligent or virtuous enough to produce on your own.’

        You mean, wealth you aren’t willing to screw people over for. (ahem, JP Morgan, Citibank, Enron, etc, etc). It’s not possible to produce billions of dollars of personal wealth without shitting on someone else.

        Like


      • Anything remotely like a high tax rate doesn’t kick in until were above the $200K zone. My income is pretty high so I have direct knowledge of this. Seeing comments like this from presumed conservatives just triggers a “most likely ‘useful idiot'” response with me.

        The top 1% of income earners (sorry, I can’t help that the occupiers took the term, but it does have a real-world meaning) consume $3.5 trillion of our $15 trillion economy before the rest is left to distribute among the remaining 99% – that includes you.

        So, of this $15 trillion economy – your share starts at $11.5 trillion – you are LOCKED out of the first $3.5 trillion. Wake up.

        In China, this is called “corruption” and it is rightly worried that unhindered and combined with a stagnating economy, that corruption will destroy the Chinese nation-state and economy.

        In the US – we consider it legit, because it’s the product of accumulated decades of contracts that progressively siphon more and more of the GDP to the highest classes and protect that siphoning through law.

        It is law, not “productivity” that creates and protects the mis-distribution. The top 1% of families isn’t out their busting tail while the rest of us sit on our asses. They have structured the economy so that productivity shares are taken and distributed upwards.

        You never get the full wages of our own productivity. But go ahead, keep on your ideological blinders and protect the interests of the corrupt upper class. They don’t mind, and they won’t mind. They already threw you under the bus. “Free trade” without commensurate distribution of the profits of free trade to the labor classes decimated by it wiped you out. Already done. Keep defending them. Keep it up. Rand, Milton, Mises, blah blah blah Austrian economics I’m smarter than you stupid liberal blah blah blah blah blah.

        Like


    • on July 17, 2012 at 9:57 am Original JB

      The problem I have with the lib establishment is that – oh wait – they’re the ones that have fucked up the dietary guidelines in the last several decades! Eat carbs, not fat!

      The libs are guilty of worshipping their junk science/no common sense demigod, and then they blame the victim for their abuses.

      Like


  68. Why is the manosphere ignoring the 2012 election process? Are we all OK with Condi Rice as VP?

    Check out the Daily Female in the UK today reporting the findings of a womyn’s studies professor that say women have finally overtaken men in IQ

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2173808/Women-overtake-men-IQ-tests-time-100-years-multitasking.html

    Like


    • Anonymous

      Why is the manosphere ignoring the 2012 election process?

      BECAUSE there are many here who want to engage in the 21st century’s version of productive work: Talking about what manganinny thinks about the book our host didn’t read.

      Like


    • Why treat rumor as an inevitability?

      Let’s use some common sense. What does she add to a ticket? Foreign policy experience and “diversity”/race. What are her weaknesses? Zero political/campaign experience on ANY LEVEL (well, maybe she was HS president, I have no clue – any real world level), lack of desire to play the traditional hatchet man VP role and dubious political positions unpalatable to the base – plus she doesn’t tip any state in the election. Not to mention the “weird crypto-dyke spinster” whispering campaign the ever-tolerant progs would deploy to some success.

      In other words, her liabilities outweigh her assets, and the Romney campaign knows it.

      At least Rubio potentially tips Florida in addition to “diversity.”

      He really should be the manosphere pick, at least on a symbolic level. Ex-cheerleader hot wife raising his 3 kids is something you want to cram down the feminist gullet for the next 4 to 8 years. What would make them go more apeshit? Let them overreach in attacking a hot, feminine, fertile woman who chooses to be a real mom. I see nothing but tactical and strategic benefits to this scenario.

      Like


    • The GOP VP will be LA governor Piyush “Bobby” Jindal.

      Like


  69. @ anonymous

    If you ignore long term trends, and it is pretty easy if you focus on stuff like sports and hot chicks in magazines, for example.

    Because once you start wondering about where the current political trends are leading us, you can only conclude that the Tiber will foam with blood, if you understand me

    Tennis and formula one are my choices.

    Like


  70. Lol, related?

    Are Hungry People More Liberal?

    http://www.epjournal.net/blog/2012/06/are-hungry-people-more-liberal/

    “To look at this issue, Petersen and colleagues report a series of studies, one of which strikes me as particularly clever. They looked at data collected as part of the Danish National Election online survey which, because it was administered online, contained a field that indicated when the survey was taken. They looked at several hundred responses from people who took the survey between 11 and 12 – and so were between meals – compared to data from people who took it between 1 and 2 – right after, presumably, the respondent had eaten. Specifically, they compared agree/disagree responses on items such as, “Too many get social welfare without needing it.” After controlling for a set of variables – age, income, etc. – they find that, indeed, hungry people have more pro-welfare views. The authors replicated this finding in an additional survey using a similar method, and then conducted a third study in which they directly asked people how hungry they were, to see if they would find the same effects, which they did.”

    Like


  71. on July 17, 2012 at 3:29 pm Beer Monkey

    Republicans are fat. Southerners are more republican, more Jesus-loving, and more fat.

    Look, the Republican party is run by theocrats and plutocrats, so there isn’t really a true conservative party (they are honestly worse than the Democrats right now) viable on the national level in the US of A.

    Seriously, your average conservative megachurch is loaded with fatties.

    Like


    • True story. And your average hippie college is full of thin/in-shape women. Check out UC Berkeley sometime and you’ll know what I’m talking about.

      Like


  72. What happened to Mangan’s?

    Like


  73. I must have a pretty high threshold for disgust. After all, I am reading this blog.

    Like


  74. My cousin is a lefty of sorts, he married a manatee! Disfuckingusting!!

    Andrea, why are you reading it? does it give you tingles?

    Like


  75. on July 22, 2012 at 5:09 am Funcrusher Plus

    If males selected purely for attractiveness and things like female intellect were unimportant, then human beings would far more sexually dimorphic. The surprisingly prolific feminists probably wouldn’t exist and women would be stupid, shapely sacks of meat.

    Disgust is tied to violating cultural and religious taboos. I forget which study said this but the moral aversion and physical disgust are processed in the same area(s) of the brain. When you look at a “cow” and feel genuine disgust, you may as well be brimming with religious fury/fervor. Sounds about right.

    Like


  76. I’m truly enjoying the design and layout of your blog. It’s a very
    easy on the eyes which makes it much more pleasant for
    me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a designer to create your theme?
    Excellent work!

    Like