Reader whorefinder zeroes in on the reason why late-stage ruling elites mired in corruption and decadence are coincidentally so freaking gay.
Gays are defective men, and their effeminacy leads them to value and excel in very female traits. What’s more, gays excel past women in these traits because their retained testosterone naturally makes them more competitive than women. Gays like careers where licentiousness, flashiness, graft, catfighitng and backroom politics rule the day, and not ones where team work, tangible-goal meeting, merit-based advancement and self-sacrifice are valued.
Politics in decadent cultures is all about social manipulation and not about accomplishment. In non-decadent cultures, politicians assess which general conquered effectively; whether the police are keeping crime down. In decadent cultures, politicians assess whether they will get a payoff for favoring a certain bill; whether they can make another rival look bad; and whether they can get away with it.
Hence gays will excel in a decadent political climate. Hence why D.C.’s politicians and power players are very fag-heavy.
Hadrian was the exception rape!
A great insight to which I would only add that low T heterosexual men also excel in decadent political climates marked by constant elite infighting. The same female instincts that motivate gay men appear in abundance in the low T man as well.
The solution to American decline is…. more T. Higher testosterone, whether exogenously administered or included as an intrinsic part of the shitlord package. Trump is a virile man with the visage and slash and burn rhetorical skillset of a shitlord. If anyone can un-gay DC, and America at large, it’s Trump.
Related, a study of people’s natural feelings of “homophobia” — or what should more precisely be termed homoaedia (“disgust for homosexuals”) — found that it’s an emotional immune system response to the often-correct presumption that gay men are untrustworthy, disloyal, and unreliable when the group needs to be defended against outside threats.
Perception of Gay Men as Defectors and Commitment to Group Defense Predict Aggressive Homophobia
Homophobia encompasses a variety of attitudes and behaviors with distinct causal paths. We focus on aggressive homophobia, a propensity to feel anger and express aggression toward gay men. We investigated the conjecture that homosexual males might be seen, in recent Western cultures, as defectors from collective group defense. We predicted that consistent with a functional motive to punish and deter free riding, the perception of gay men as defectors would motivate aggression toward gay men. We also predicted that individuals with greater commitment to group defense might show more aggressive homophobia (as these individuals have more to lose from the defection than individuals who are not committed to group defense). Study 1 showed that aggressive homophobia correlated positively with the tendency to implicitly associate gay men with defection from group defense. Study 2 showed that a tendency to punish homosexual males for a theft correlated positively with commitment to group defense. The findings suggest that coalitional psychology might contribute to explaining the existence and quality of certain kinds of social stigma.
The part I bolded is interesting from a post-America vantage point. Very homophilic urban shitlibs — masculine careerist shrikes and low T effete hipster men — have, to borrow a Sailer phrase, leap-frogging loyalties to people and races far beyond their neighbors and racial kin. This remote defense of genetically distant groups is perfect for liberals who prefer to signal their virtue rather than act according to their claimed virtues (by, say, raising their family in the ghetto). The shitlib thus lacks the instinct for in-group defense, and when he is roused to group-defense does so for the benefit of outgroups, and often for extremely antagonistic outgroups. This muted if not altogether missing disposition to ingroup defense is reflected in the typical shitlib’s nonchalance toward the disease and disloyalty threats that homosexuals present to the group.
In other words, the same reason shitlibs don’t much get worked up over elite betrayals and the demographic destruction of White America explains why they don’t feel much concern about homosexual subversion and defection. It’s stunted shitlib amygdalas all the way down.
On this topic of justifiable disgust, I frequently come across assertions by shitlib sociologists that disgust per se leads to the ostracism and “dehumanization” of homosexuals, minorities, women, etc ad nauseam, and that if people just stopped feeling disgusted the tikkun olam utopia would be achieved. But this claim always struck me as an ass-backwards rationalizing of a studiously manicured false leftoid equalist worldview.
Disgust is not itself a stimulus; disgust is the emotional reaction to a negative stimulus. The leftoid inversion of this reality presents hilarious logic traps when examined critically by analogy. Dog shit serves as a useful mindgunk cleanser. Does our natural disgust at the sight of dog shit “dehumanize” and “other” the shit, or is our disgust a reasonable reaction to the smell and appearance and disease-carrying threat of dog shit? Naturally, the latter. We evolved the disgust response to protect against curious ingestion of dog shit or playfully smearing our faces with dog shit.
The same is true of homosexuals. People, especially those enmeshed in strong local communities, know instinctively that homosexuals are disease and disloyalty vectors, and they react with the appropriate and natural feeling of disgust when flamboyant gay homosexuals attack their senses. It’s why Kaine has triggered so many disgust reflexes; physiognomy is real and gaypedoface physiognomy is about as disgusting to normal people as a toadstool sandwich with arsenic sauce. Or Michelle Obama’s traps.
The contrarian asks, “If disgust is so useful, why did evolution select for shitlibs with high disgust thresholds?” My answer is that disgust inhibition is probably associated with increased creativity. If there was an environment in the past that greatly rewarded creative people, then that could, generations later, result in a larger proportion of the population suffering from an underdeveloped insula region of the brain (where disgust is manufactured). But the pendulum always swings back; our current petri dish culture of shitty aesthetics and shitlib eagerness to wallow in filth long ago reached the point of diminishing creativity returns. Now that the leftoid filth is threatening to swallow us up and destroy everything our ancestors worked to create, evolution will strongly select for the re-emergence of a shitlord phenotype/genotype to bring balance to the force.
But if the reproductive and cultural selection pressures for a Shitlord Ascendance are too slow or weak, then we will run out of time to wash away the grime. System failure will have to proceed if a truthnbeauty rebirth can happen.