Loony Louise Mensch

Looks like @RussianEmbassy and one of its Putinbots @EmperorHubris got caught out there. Luckily I grabbed the deleted tweets cc @FBI @GCHQ pic.twitter.com/cokGW7SgQj

— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) March 13, 2017

This syphilis-steeped ex-shiksa is so fucked in the head I almost…ALMOST…. feel bad for the very public humiliations she’s visiting upon herself. Her inevitable downfall into social pariah and cat lady madness is worth at least two buckets of popcorn. I hope she takes all her old-ass Trump-hating spinster fans down with her into the abyss of mental illness.

Read Full Post »

Female Privilege

A hilarious social experiment unintentionally blew up in the faces of the shitlib academics who ran it when it busted their cherished shibboleths about male privilege and misogyny. An actor and actress were recruited to replay the Presidential debates between Trump and thecunt, except the actor played as thecunt and the actress as Trump, ostensibly to confirm the biases of the liberal academic audience that only anti-woman sexism caused thecunt to lose the election.

Unfortunately for the self-congratulatory libs, their egos were stroked against the grain.

Salvatore says he and Guadalupe began the project assuming that the gender inversion would confirm what they’d each suspected watching the real-life debates: that Trump’s aggression—his tendency to interrupt and attack—would never be tolerated in a woman, and that Clinton’s competence and preparedness would seem even more convincing coming from a man.

***

“I’ve never had an audience be so articulate about something so immediately after the performance,” Salvatore says of the cathartic discussions. “For me, watching people watch it was so informative. People across the board were surprised that their expectations about what they were going to experience were upended.”

Many were shocked to find that they couldn’t seem to find in Jonathan Gordon what they had admired in Hillary Clinton—or that Brenda King’s clever tactics seemed to shine in moments where they’d remembered Donald Trump flailing or lashing out. For those Clinton voters trying to make sense of the loss, it was by turns bewildering and instructive, raising as many questions about gender performance and effects of sexism as it answered.

***

We both thought that the inversion would confirm our liberal assumption—that no one would have accepted Trump’s behavior from a woman, and that the male Clinton would seem like the much stronger candidate. But we kept checking in with each other and realized that this disruption—a major change in perception—was happening. I had an unsettled feeling the whole way through.

***

We heard a lot of “now I understand how this happened”—meaning how Trump won the election. People got upset. There was a guy two rows in front of me who was literally holding his head in his hands, and the person with him was rubbing his back.

Male shitlib academics are such nancyboys.

The simplicity of Trump’s message became easier for people to hear when it was coming from a woman—that was a theme. One person said, “I’m just so struck by how precise Trump’s technique is.” Another—a musical theater composer, actually—said that Trump created “hummable lyrics,” while Clinton talked a lot, and everything she was was true and factual, but there was no “hook” to it. Another theme was about not liking either candidate—you know, “I wouldn’t vote for either one.” Someone said that Jonathan Gordon [the male Hillary Clinton] was “really punchable” because of all the smiling. And a lot of people were just very surprised by the way it upended their expectations about what they thought they would feel or experience. There was someone who described Brenda King [the female Donald Trump] as his Jewish aunt who would take care of him, even though he might not like his aunt. Someone else described her as the middle school principal who you don’t like, but you know is doing good things for you.

Anti-reality: Male privilege.
Reality: Female privilege.

Feminists and Globohomo poz dealers want you to believe in the anti-reality of MUH MISOGYNY, when the reality is that female privilege is the incessant undercurrent of culture, derived from the fundamental premise that governs all social organization and policy: women are more reproductively valuable than are men. The Fundamental Premise — namely, the biological reality that the sexes are innately different in reproductive capacity and in the psychology that must flow from that reality — explains why, for instance, thecunt actually would have done WORSE on election day if she were a he, and Trump would have done better if he were a she.

Female privilege is getting a boost for being a woman, which is exactly what thecunt got, given how her core natural constituency — smug liberal academics — hated her male version.

The opposite of male privilege — male privation — is closer to what Trump had to overcome; a plain-talking, aggressive, masculine man will frighten away a lot of sensitive shitlib snowflakes, whereas a female version of himself would have lowered his natural antagonists’ defenses and rendered them more open to his message.

This also clues us into why Trump supporters tend to be feminine women and masculine men; both groups are more secure in their healthfully polarized sexuality and thus unlikely to be put off by a male leader behaving as an unabashedly masculine man. Masculinized shitlib females and feminized shitlib males often feel threatened by men (and women) who are closer to the SMV ideal for their sex.

I was particularly struck by the post-performance discussions about effeminacy. People felt that the male version of Clinton was feminine, and that that was bad.

Generally, people are more accepting of masculine women than feminine men (the latter are bigger traitor risks to the tribe), but neither are loved. Sexual polarity was the God of Biomechanics’ first order of business, and that means we — all of us, whether or not we admit it in heretic-burning company — prefer our women feminine and our men masculine.

I was surprised by how critical I was seeing [Clinton] on a man’s body, and also by the fact that I didn’t find Trump’s behavior on a woman to be off-putting. I remember turning to Maria at one point in the rehearsals and saying, “I kind of want to have a beer with her!” The majority of my extended family voted for Trump. In some ways, I developed empathy for people who voted for him by doing this project, which is not what I was expecting. I expected it to make me more angry at them, but it gave me an understanding of what they might have heard or experienced when he spoke.

Recall, as uncovered by Jonathan Haidt in his research of the moral priorities of liberals and conservatives, that libs have a more constricted moral universe and are therefore less able to understand and empathize with conservative moral considerations. Conservatives in contrast have a broader and more soundly distributed moral spectrum of concerns that one might call “adult”, (as opposed to liberals’ “juvenile morality” that focuses almost solely on harm and fairness).

I don’t expect any of these eureka moments to crack the libshit facade. The typical post-America libocrite can accommodate levels of COGDIS that would’ve left his lib-lite grandfather a quivering lump of neuroses. No, the only solution to the currently toxic shitlib insanity is a return to the kind of existential pain that can’t be mentally eaten away.

Read Full Post »

The Day The Snowflakes Cried

This is an entertaining and topical remix of an old classic.

Artist: CHAD Prather.

The Chad Alliance is real.

Read Full Post »

The Four Types Of White Shitlibs

jackmcg had a really good description of the types of White shitlibs that populate post-America.

Been trying to deprogram liberals. Putting aside Jews and minorities (special cases), I see 4 classifications of WHITE liberals. Many have qualities of more than one (status liberals can also be dreg or empathy liberals), but there is usually a dominant classification that you can focus on.

Status Liberals – They want the most status for the least cost, which is very psychologically exploitable. They’ve been convinced through a rigorous propaganda campaign at schools, work, advertising, movies, etc. that being a liberal is high status and noticing differences between races is low status. Easy choice for them… just be a liberal and presto… you are now high status. These people can be smart and successful… but they are never as smart as they think they are.

How to turn them: Forget facts. They need to be convinced liberals are low status. Without taking over Hollywood its impossible to do this alone, these people are heavily warped. But you can do it on a micro scale. Press the buttons. Liberals = losers, over and over again. Remember, they think they are above manipulation, so the more subtle you are the better (thats how the other side brainwashed them in the first place.)

Dreg Liberals – Rejects of society who would be crushingly low status under a traditional, fact-based societal order. So they turn to lies of liberalism to lower the psychological cost of how unworthy they are.

How to turn them: You can’t. If you were able to successfully convince them of facts, the hit to their ego would be so big they might off themselves. If you get them to admit a fact that counters liberalism, they will have amnesia about it the next time you talk to them. Just avoid them. (This means unfortunately lotta women are hopeless and can’t be converted away from the liberal cult. Excessive cock mileage makes budging from feminism psychologically impossible for them.)

Empathy Liberals – Usually young daddysrich white women who have lotsa empathy to give due to their station in life. Has been manipulated their entire life into directing their empathy towards groups of people with no civilizational value.

How to turn them: Visual evidence of anti-white crime. Show them how Islam treats women. A white female Trump voter got pepper sprayed by antifa? Bookmark it and show it to empathy liberals. A true empathy liberal is the easiest to turn but they are rare. Scratch what you think is an Empathy Liberal and you usually find a Status Liberal or slut Dreg Liberal underneath.

Blissful Ignorance Liberals – These are usually young. normal, sane Fucking White Males with slightly above average IQ.This is your classic liberal-who-turns-conservative later in life. Taught liberal crap and only become conservative later in life when they see the taxes in their paycheck, or when they try to start a business and get crushed by regulations, or when they get mugged, or when their daughter looks at a black guy.

How to turn them: Like I said, with the right impetus they’d eventually slide towards shitlord. Your job is to speed it up and take them deeper than they’d ever go. Burst their bubble. Red pill them hard. Visuals are best. These are your best hope for real recruits to our side. Be prepared with status visuals, too.

The CH recommended MO for dealing with shitlibs — mockery and realtalk — is effective with varying impact on all of the shitlib types jackmcg lists. Some libs require more mockery, others more realtalk. The best attack is a combination of Rhetoric and Realtalk; hit the ego and the id simultaneously. Any shitlibs that can’t be turned, like Dreg Liberals, should be ostracized. Or at the very least their dreg liberal lifestyles shouldn’t be glorified and granted rights magically unearthed between two semicolons in the Constitution.

Read Full Post »

Da GBFM On Why Women Vote For Leftist Governments

Da gbfm and yours truly are on the same lollzolzy page. From Le Chateau, circa 2008:

The result of all this government largesse is the substitution of handouts for husbands. When provider males who are predisposed to marry and support a family are worth less on the market than they used to be they are slowly replaced by playboys taking advantage of the sexual climate. Women who have their security needs met by Big Government (in combination with their own economic empowerment) begin to favor their desire for sexy, noncommital alpha males at the expense of their attraction for men who will foot the bills.

Prediction: As women’s financial status rises to levels at or above the available men in their social sphere, they will have great difficulty finding an acceptable long-term partner. The men, for their part, will turn away from emphasizing their ability to provide as they discover their mediocre-paying corporate jobs are no longer effective displays of mating value. They will instead emphasize the skills of “personality dominance”.

And here’s da gbfm, this week’s COTW winner, explaining the well-known connection between women and leftism:

hey hertaistetsts!! dA after much study nd reflectionsz like PLATO, da GBFM figured sometinsgz outs eiculicd logicalz!!

why do so many women vote for leftist governmentsz?

because leftist govenerments enforce da Alpha fux beta bucks system at gun point!!

obammasz tellz womenz “if you vote for me, you can ficky ficy and butthext all da thugsz, and i will criminalize white mensz for complimenting your hair in the workplace, and send da police state to grab and sconfisce da BETAs tax dollarsz zlzzlzloo and give them to you and your bastard chcildrenz, if yo vote for mez and da obammsz kangz lozlzoozolzozo”

So true it hurtslzlzlzllolz. Eunucho-tyranny.

more gbfm poetry,

once upon a time
teh great reformes said things like
“a chicken in every pot”
and
“A car in every garage”
and
“A family in every home”
todya the eneeoocn berenankerkieisi say, “lotsas cockas in every buttholeelllzlzolooloio lzozozl”

…and in every public bathroom.

PS There’s now a study which has confirmed (years late) both the Heartistian and GBFMian observations of the postmodern sexual/marital markets.

As predicted by a simple model of marital decision-making under uncertainty, we document that adverse shocks to the supply of ‘marriageable’ men reduce the prevalence of marriage and lower fertility but raise the fraction of children born to young and unwed mothers and living in in poor single-parent households. The falling marriage-market value of young men appears to be a quantitatively important contributor to the rising rate of out-of-wedlock childbearing and single-headed childrearing in the United States.

Two cardinal results help to weave these many empirical strands together. A first is that trade shocks faced by the U.S. manufacturing sector—which employs a disproportionate share of male workers—reduce the economic stature of men relative to women. Consistent with this pattern, shocks to male-intensive manufacturing industries are particularly destabilizing to marriage-markets. A second broad result, predicted by our model and strongly affirmed by the data, is that gender-specific shocks to labor-market outcomes have strikingly non-parallel impacts on marriage-market outcomes. Male-specific shocks reduce overall fertility, but reduce it by less among teens and unmarried mothers than among older and married mothers, thereby increasing the fraction of children born out of wedlock and living in poverty. Conversely, female-specific shocks have more modest effects on overall fertility but reduce the share of births to teens and unmarried mothers, thus raising in-wedlock births and reducing the fraction of children living in single-headed households. These patterns are consistent with our model in which a decline in the quality of male partners makes single motherhood a more attractive option to young mothers, while a decline in female earnings potential increases marriage rates conditional on fertility. Netting over the effects of secularly falling male earnings and improving women’s labor-market conditions during recent decades, our model predicts a reduction in both fertility and marriage, a rise in the fraction of children born out of wedlock, and an increase in the prevalence of children living in single-headed and poor households. These patterns are evident in the aggregate data and, moreover, hold as causal relationships within local labor markets when we isolate plausibly exogenous shocks to earnings opportunities overall and by gender.

Chateau Heartiste, January, 2008:

So why are women now the eager instigators of divorce? What changed in the culture? Four things, primarily: the pill, easy divorce, women’s economic independence, and rigged laws that make divorce a good financial prospect for women. The four sirens of the sexual apocalypse together have created the perfect sociological storm where a woman has every incentive in the world to ditch a husband to follow the whims of her heart once his usefulness has been exhausted.

Female economic independence is the default setting when labor shocks adversely affect the economic and job prospects of men. Single mommery and alpha fux follows from that. The Trump phenomena is as much about working and middle class men striking out against an unfair economic and immigration system deliberately arranged to leave them behind as it is about beta males expressing their subconscious displeasure with the regressive, death match sexual market that has inevitably taken form as they have lost a chunk of their SMV currency.

Read Full Post »

Shitlib Face Of The Century

Felix Engelhardt is a huge open borders cucked-up lefty in German politics. But really, the story here is that face, which may be the consummate shitlib physiognomy, a perfect facial palimpsest revealing the libfruit worldview underneath. The chinless androgyny, the smug grin, the manletry, the skin pallor which hasn’t seen sun in years, the happy merchant hand clasp….it’s all there in a soyfed shitlib package that cries out for a punch.

I don’t know about you but my disgust threshold is triggered. This guy makes Pajamaboy, Matty Iglesias and Dylan Mathews looks like milk-chugging Chads.

Read Full Post »

Ranking White Civilizations On The 1-To-10 Scale

Society is a racial construct, and reader Heinrich creates a parallel with the HB (hot babe) 1-to-10 scale,

If it is true what many scientists say that culture correlates with genetics, what does it mean in the real world? Can we sum it up like this:

– pure white civilization: A dream, you do not have to lock your car, you do not have to lock your house. If you happen to lose your wallet, there is a fair chance that your door-bell we be rung, followed by the words “Excuse me Sir, is this your wallet?”. Having sex with a HB 9 is equivalent.
– white civilization spotted with little dots made of people who either admire the host civilization or are at least friendly towards the host: Minor disruption WILL occur, for example Octopus being dried in the student dormitory. The piano student’s honest apology, her demure smiling will make life quality peak at 6 or 7
– white civilization enriched with dots made of people who either oppose the host civilization or are mortal enemies: hell on earth. Goats are being butchered in the dormitory’s bathtub. No excuses, no apologies, no trust, death threats, civil war. Andrea Dworkin is your wife. HB0.

It’s funny cuz it’s a paler shade of true. HB9 White civilizations would be Scandinavia (until recently), enclaves within the nations of Continental Europe (Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Holland, Germany, France), rural England, and parts of America (New England, the northern plains). The problem is that these are HB9s with a bad case of BPD. Crazy ingenues who are busy importing drama into their lives. Very self-destructive girls, so leave them before they leave your country a wreck.

HB6-7 White civilizations would be Scandinavia (now), urban France and England, large swaths of Germany, Spain, Italy, Greece, Belgium, heartland (read: cucked) America. I’ll include the East European nations here too, even though they are not very diverse. EEs are by nature more clannish and corrupt so you’ll have to lock your car door. The EE women are HB9s and HB10s relative to worldwide womanhood, so they have that going for them, which is more than nice.

The HB0 White civilizations are urban shitholes in America, large swaths of California and the Southwest, the black belt parts of the South, the asian-skype dystopias emerging in the technopolises, the banlieue of France, the MENA migrant settlements sprouting up all over Germany and Scandinavia, and London.

I’m sure I haven’t covered all the possibilities, but you get the idea. HB9 Whitopias are a vanishing sight, while the FUG0s of White civ are proliferating. Sex with Andrea Dworkin, forever, with the lights on, is the future of White civilizations. *shudder*

Read Full Post »