Just Like Us: The Gay Marriage Lie

Commenter chris and myself have objected to gay marriage on grounds that heterosexual marriage is essentially an anti-cuckoldry social rule codified into law, and gay marriage undermines that social rule by importing homosexual norms into heterosexual marriage. (This is inevitable if gay marriage is the legal and cultural equal of heterosexual marriage.) The consequence of gay marriage and its attendant norms will be the end of monogamy and the patriarchal nuclear family, which will destroy the most important lynchpin of civilization.

Coming to the same conclusion, but from a different angle, is Quads, who writes succinctly about the ways in which gay marriage upends the traditional order honed by millennia of evolutionary trial and error.

Gays of yesterday used to understand that they were in some way broken. It wasn’t just that they had a sexual dysfunction, but that they were excluded from broader social life. They could never produce a family, they could never be part of the basic unit of society. They knew it and embraced it. This is no longer the case.

Society has changed. Its basic unit is no longer the family, where men and women each play a part, where knowledge is passed from one generation to the next. (That was too bigoted.) Now it’s the individual, a citizen who pays taxes and consumes goods and services, who is society’s basic unit. This is all it means to be normal — this is what the social revolutions of our time asserted. Everyone is identical — men, women, blacks, whites, asians —  and everyone plays the same social role. In this atomized context, where marriage and sex are private behaviors, then gays really are Just Like Us.

Today’s gays see themselves as normal. Any bigotry against them is just arbitrary and irrational, because they can do anything you can do. They work and pay taxes and consume goods, Just Like Us. And to an extent they are normal, they’ve marinated their whole lives in a culture of atomized individuals. Marriage isn’t a ritual, something with social significance, but just an achievement, like buying a car or getting a diploma. So any combination of private reasons — tax benefits or a fantasy of being “married” some day — is justification enough. Gays are Just Like Us, their money is as good as yours. Gays are Just Like Us, and they’ll believe this even as they get fisted by a stranger in the airport bathroom.

Just Like Us is a pithy phrase that encapsulates the conflict Quads mentioned between socially significant ritual and individually rewarding achievement. In a society increasingly breaking down into being defined by its least common constituent parts (ie consumerist cogs), the normalization of and rationalizations for gay marriage will necessarily have a corrosive effect on heterosexual marriage, subverting the social oversight dimension of marriage and substituting it with a shrunken hyper-individualistic quality which reduces marriage to a private consumer purchase with no implication for the wider society.

Gay marriage is an empty sacrament of accumulation — a rite of crassness — without a broader and deeper connection to family or society, past or future, and without the gravity of acting as an occasion and a commitment enforcing a collective rule which exists for the benefit of a larger social purpose than the kitschy gratification of deracinated and atomized consumerist impulse.

Mark my words, we will pay dearly for the folly of passively acceding to the gay marriage fuggernaut.

Grope-rah

Shitlibs are working themselves into another anal lube froth, this time over the prospect of Oprah running for president in 2020. A negression to the mean ousting orange hitler? Collective lib splooge!

So this is a good time to keep reminding them that Grope-rah was an enabler of Harvey Swinestein’s pervtastic predations. Groprah was in the thick of it, running interference for Harvey, and probably grooming young actresses for him with promises of access and fame. She may as well have been holding harvey’s dick over the potted ficus.

Every time shitlibs catch a whiff of a heroine coming to save them from Trump’s Reich, it turns out she’s as tits-deep in depravity and mendacity as the rest of their icons. The Fuggernaut will never have an ally or an hero who isn’t compromised by association with their ugliness.

PS Drudge is drenching his panties over Grope-rah. Maybe he should put up the red alert for real news, such as James Damore’s individual and class-action lawsuit against Goolag. The anti-American, degeneracy-glorifying, anti-White male tech monopolies are GOING DOWN.

Peak Hug

From the #MeTooPlease vault:

In wake of Matt Lauer’s firing, NBC reportedly cracks down on hugging, asks employees to tell on each other

[…]

The source also informed Page Six that “staffers have been told that if they find out about any affairs, romances, inappropriate relationships or behavior in the office, they have to report it to human resources, their superior or the company anti-harassment phone line.”

Since when did consensual office romances become sexual harassment? Oh yeah, since bitter aging has-been whores deemed it so.

Imagine the type of person who’d be willing and eager to snitch on a co-worker having an office romance. The caricature that comes to mind is a giant, walking pussyhat. Nasty Womanhood, Inc. The anti-sex schoolmarms are on the loose.

The mass movement of women into the workforce and its consequences have been a disaster for Western nations.

To take it to the next level, the source further claimed NBC’s new rules stipulate employees wishing to hug one another “have to do a quick hug, then an immediate release, and step away to avoid body contact” and are forbidden from sharing taxis home or, oddly, “taking vegans to steakhouses.”

We need a new word to describe the hysterically man-hating, anhedonic feminist dystopia that’s unfolding at a rapid clip in America. Gynarchy doesn’t quite nail it. Prisstopia?

This would all be stupidly funny if it wasn’t dead serious, but tbh i’m not a fan of the hugging trend. Compulsory hugs between acquaintances phags up male friendships and desexualizes potential romances between men and women. Thanks, Shrillennials! But I think we’ve hit Peak Hug. Gen Zyklon is bringing back head nods, and with them, a return to electric sexual polarity.

It’s Time To Mock Credentialism As Foolish And Womanly

Credentialism is inherently shallow and effeminate, which is why college is now 60% female and the other 40% are uptalking soyboys who can only approach asian girls after pinky-sipping a flight of craft beers.

Culture messages have a big part in changing public attitudes, which changes social policy. Mocking the credentialist suckup diddle-jerk will help realign public perception toward a healthy skepticism and disdain of left-wing, post-America, anti-White academia, and drain their coffers while preventing fertilely fruiting women from getting pulled into the anti-natal vortex of degree whoring. More crucially, it will spiritually enliven our men who have been propagandized to view any life course not winding through a 4-year (now 6-year) college indoctrination struggle session as failure, and bring a renewed esteem to the technical crafts that are men’s forte.

A Trump trade policy reinvigorating manufacturing in the US will go a long way to diminishing the malevolent power of the leftoid academia menopausal complex.

The Two Stages Of Female Treachery

It has been fairly well-researched that women aren’t as committed to tribal loyalty as are their men. Men are defenders of their property; women are defenders of the social consensus. But there is a short window when, under threat from invaders or subversives, women will fight the usurpation of their men and their way of life. Via Brabantian,

[Anatoly Karlin] above links to Vincent Law’s article on this topic, and it’s worth sharing VL’s view in more detail, explaining the paradox of why Russian women are still nationalist but Western women are ‘refugees welcome’

VL reasonably posits that in female attitudes regarding foreign migrant invasion, there are

two parts – the early stage and the later stage

when a threat emerges, and the barbarians come to the gates, women do not just [immediately] run into the arms of the invaders

Initially, it is the women that will spur the men of their own tribe to fight to defend them. And that is what I believe is happening in Russia. The young Russian women feel the hot breath of the hostile tribe on their necks … so they spur the men to defend them.

Only after women sniff the air and see which way the wind is blowing, and when the situation becomes dire [i.e., the men are cucked and not fighting and defending] do they [the women] start hedging their bets, or engaging in open treachery to their own tribe. This is arguably the state of Scandinavia and much of the Anglo-Sphere as things stand now.

But beyond the Hajnal line, there’s still some fight left

Western women have spurred their men to fight, and they have shit tested them to gauge their willingness to fight…..but in the end, having found their men wanting, they threw in with the colonizing dirt world hordes, because if overrun by barbarians doesn’t mean their deaths (like it does for the men of the defeated tribe), they’re not going to risk their lives stopping the barbarians. They will instead spread their legs for the victorious alphas and be happy assuming the mothering position and helping form and police the new consensus once the dust and blood has settled.

Interesting theory, but have Western women ever, in significant numbers, spurred their men to fight against third world immigration and depredations? It seems like our women went straight from civilizational bliss to Globohomo shit testing and welcoming refugees, without so much as a moment spared for the thought of how their radical antiracism virtue preening would affect the well-being of their own men.

If the inheritor of the White races is Russia, I suppose that’s not all bad. At least the women will be slim and hot.

The Pumpkin Theory Of Female Choosiness

Happy fresh pumpkin is deluded about its shelf life.

Sad rotting pumpkin is deluded about its freedom of choice.

Corrective: A Great Patriarchal Pumpkin rising from the pumpkin thatch.

Money And Chicks, The Executive Summary

Anonymous comments,

CH is fond of saying that $$$ has poor return in terms of women. I suspect you need real wealth (>$10 M) and live a truly different lifestyle (weekend trips to st Barths, aspen, other global hotspots) in order for it to make any real difference.

Below the level of extravagant male wealth, money doesn’t make a huge DIRECT impact on women’s attraction to men. If a man has a nice car and condo, no economically self-sufficient careergirl will be wowed by that. The benefit of money comes from the confidence it instills in men, which women DO love.

Another anon has doubts about the efficacy of money to pull women,

I feel like a distinction should be made about “high-status men” in what context. My experience says that now “high-status” is almost completely determined by “hookup criteria” and not long-term considerations until chick hits the wall (but preaching to the choir).

If modren Western women are indeed switching to an r-selected reproduction strategy — i.e., focusing on short-term hookups that advantage cads over dads and chads over NOWAGS — then a man’s earning power will have a smaller impact on female attraction than it historically has had in more patriarchal (aka Regulated Monogamy) times when women weren’t paper pushing corporate whores who could afford their own mortgages and streaming pussyhat entertainment packages.

Of course, this will not end well for civilization. When the big bulging mass of beta providers realize they can’t leverage their provisions for a loyal young babe who isn’t saddled with a porn star’s sexual history, they will drop out of the mating market and make just enough to satisfy their immediate needs. Then after the fiat economy collapses from the disengagement of its most competent and conscientious men, there goes the female workforce it enabled, and we’re right back to the primordial patriarchy of young, chaste, dependent women locking down that beta provider while she still has miles of virgin road left on her hodometer.