Freaks and Geeks

I’ve often said there’s a kernel of truth in every crazy idea the academic Left has crapped out.  Here’s one the feminists got right:  Modern technology imposes impossible beauty standards.

Now, I most certainly do NOT mean “swimsuit models make girls anorexic;” “porn turns men off normal women;” etc.  I mean that apps like Facebook, Tinder, OK Cupid, etc. have skewed everyone’s mating expectations, with bad results for everybody.

Skim Chateau Heartiste for the gory details, but the upshot is: Since women are mainly driven by ego-inflation, and since any halfway presentable girl can get scads of attention from doofy hornballs just by posting a cleavage shot, Plain Janes quickly convince themselves they’re hot stuff, and so only the Fifty Shades of Gray guy will do in real life.

8tOhpEu

Meanwhile, men have been indoctrinated since birth by their let-your-freak-flag-fly feminist teachers (BIRM at least 3x) to believe that the whole “M’lady” fedora-tipping act really works in the brave new social media world:

He white-knighted for you on the Internet, so please for to make with the sex.

She thumb’s-upped your thumb’s up of her cleavage shot, so you’re thiiiiiis close to true love!

Which brings me to this.  I can pretty much guarantee you that the “lesbian trapped in a man’s body” a) isn’t a lesbian; b) knows full well he’s really a dude; and c) would’ve found himself a girlfriend back in my old high school.  No, not because I attended some fantasyland campus, but because I matriculated back in the Jurassic, when the only people who had heard of the Internet were using it to argue about Star Trek and/or exchanging missile schematics with other Defense Department contractors.

While most of us were vaguely aware there’s a big wide world out there, it was entirely theoretical.  Ever seen one of those movies from back when, where the kids all swear that the minute they turn 18, they’re on the first bus out of this lousy one-horse town?  That was really a thing back then… and so was the way the movie ended (for all but the sensitive artistic protagonist): Everyone still stuck in the one-horse town, working shit jobs and making do.  We’re social creatures by nature; inertia is the strongest social force; “making do with the society you have” has been mankind’s default since we first figured out agriculture.

Admittedly my high school was larger than most one-horse towns, but no matter how much of a dork you were, you had at least one peer.  And since they knew the social value of bullying back then, the bonds between peer groups were quite strong.  Short of actual, Elephant Man-level disfigurement or florid psychosis, then, you could find a friend or two (even Jeffrey Dahmer had high school buddies, for pete’s sake).  Math being what it is, chances were good that at least one of those friends was of the opposite sex, and — teenage hormones being what they are — chances were high that one thing would eventually lead to another….

Nowadays, though? Fughettaboudit.  Your “lesbian trapped in a man’s body” has neither the incentive nor the opportunity to go out and make a friend in the real world.  Not to get all Baudrillard here (speaking of another Lefty with a kernel of truth in his metric tons of bullshit), but for folks like this, the Internet’s “virtual reality” is far more “real” than actual Reality.  When you can instantly get in touch with a worldwide community of folks who’ve arranged their entire lives around their socio-sexual hangups, why not embrace it?

Sure, you’ll be miserable in ways nobody stuck making do in their one-horse town will ever understand, but at least you’ll be permanently disfigured by surgery and hormone “therapy”….

 

Can SJWs be Fixed?

I’m inclined to think not, though there may be room for hope.

The evidence that yes, SJWs can be fixed: Russia, Romania, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and especially Poland.  These people were subject to the full horrors of both Communism and Russification, and look at them now — if I’m forced to leave the US (which, given the way things are going, is shading to “probable”), Warsaw and Budapest are among my top destinations.  When the Soviet Union fell, these places seemed doomed to Third Worldery forever.

Further evidence: The former East Germany.  Yes, Germany as a whole is cucked, but 30 years after reunification one of the Iron Curtain’s stalwarts is a productive part of an economic superpower.  30/70 nurture/nature, remember?  They may have been fucked-up-by-Marxism Germans, but they were still Germans.  The majority of SJWs are fucked-up-by-Cultural-Marxism white Americans… but they’re still white Americans.  I hope.

The evidence against: Since many of the Eight Regular Readers are sci-fi fans, let me quote Dune: “When a creature has developed into one thing, he will choose death rather than change into his opposite.”  That’s hyperbole — and feel free to unleash your nerd rage when I declare that Frank Herbert had a clunky prose style — but a man will certainly endure a hell of a lot of easily avoidable suffering rather than change something fundamental about his identity.

For a mostly benign example, look at what it took for the NFL to start losing fans.  For as long as I’ve followed football — several decades now — I, like everyone else, have been griping about it.  “These rotten overpaid so-and-so’s, why, you can’t even come within two yards of Tom Brady without getting flagged.  Joe Namath once played through three concussions and a broken leg….”  And yet, it took Roger Goodell all but personally pissing in fans’ corn flakes to finally get them to cut the cord.  And “football fan” is a very minor part of most identities….

The bigger the stakes, the more it takes.  For SJWs, “being an SJW” is the most important thing in their lives.  It might be the only thing, really, when you come right down to it.  Everyone knows that “a Liberal ____” is a Liberal first and a Christian, sci-fi fan, gamer, whatever a very distant second, and if the fatwa comes down from Soros et al, they’ll change their deepest so-called convictions in a hot second.  Look at how many times e.g. Jesus has changed His mind on some pretty fundamental stuff.  If they can flipflop on that in order to stay Liberal in their own minds, what won’t they crawfish on?

Short of actual peine forte et dure, there’s only one method I can think of that might fix SJWs: Appeal to vanity.  The actual content of the SJW catechism is, as we all know, subject to change without warning.  The only thing gluing it all together is the certainty that they are Better Than You for “believing” what they do. Make that the appeal.

I’ve had some deep personal experience with this.  Going from belief to atheism is easy, and monstrously flattering to one’s ego.  Everyone, everywhere, has been lying to you all these years!  All those authority figures you always suspected were wrong about everything actually are wrong, about the biggest, most important thing in the Universe.  And you saw right through them.  Going the other way, though… that entails admitting you yourself were wrong wrong wrong — and all those idiots you spent all that effort mocking were right — about the most important thing in the Universe.  Talk about humiliating!

We need to pitch our appeal to Reality as “seeing through the lies.”  That part shouldn’t be so hard — after all, everyone in authority now is an SJW.  The hard part will be Reality’s logical consequence: That you, you mouth-breathing redneck fundie, have been right about everything all along.  But SJWs are nothing if not masters of crimestop, and “failing to perceive logical entailment” is one of the main techniques of crimestop.  Get ’em all pumped up about how smart they are for seeing through the lies their professors have been feeding them, and with any luck they’ll skip right over the part where they agree with Donald Trump.

For the Record: Plasticity

My last post For the Record (TM) stated my totally unscientific opinion that human behavior is about 70/30 nature/nurture.  Here’s what I think of that 30%:

That’s a LOT of plasticity.  Humans can be enculturated to embrace many things, even seemingly universal taboos like cannibalism and incest.  The New Soviet Man is nothing compared to that.  And though he’s nothing like what the Commies thought he’d be — Communists are the Washington Generals of politics — he’s real, all right.  In fact, you probably interact with him every day:

Read anything on social life in the old USSR, and you’ll immediately be struck by how closely Soviet apparatchiks and SJWs resemble each other.  Their complete indifference to truth, their shamelessness when caught lying, their willingness to ruin anyone for imagined slights, their overwhelming smugness, their pretensions of superiority, it’s all straight out of Komsomol.  It’s all part of a worldview that is consistent, logical… and totally alien to normal people.

Genetics has nothing to do with that.  It’s all culture.  It’s like training an attack dog — it takes a LOT of work to make a standard-issue Man’s Best Friend into a killer, but it can be done…

…. and, as with vicious dogs, the damage is probably permanent.  But that’s a rant for another day.

For the Record: Nature vs. Nurture

As the “Alt-Right” or whatever we’re calling Our Thing* now descends further into its inevitable SJW-ish purity spiral, more and more people are going to start calling for “litmus tests” — they’ll assume that you believe X, and because of that, etc.  So I’m going to post a few things For the Record, to make it easy to throw me out when the time comes.  First up: Nature vs. Nurture.

Aside from the perfidy of Teh Jooooos!!!, nothing gets folks on this side of the aisle more worked up than “race realism.”  If you take this to mean “race is real, it’s heritable, and there’s a strong genetic component to behavior,” then I’m as “race realist” as they come.  Alas, lots of folks seem to have a specific IQ number in mind, with those below it getting relegated to Epsilon-minus Sub-moron.  Which is bullshit.

Consider the child prodigy.  Years ago I read a silly horror novel in which the Gary Stu character, a twelve year old boy, not only invented all kinds of stuff, but was able to talk Wittgenstein with his university professor uncle.  And he wanted to grow up to be a writer, of course — don’t they all? — and he knew ancient languages and…

The human brain simply doesn’t work like that.  There’s a large part of the brain that’s like a computer — add more power to the processor, and it can do more things, faster.  A kid with a turbocharged CPU is a prodigy.  BUT: Just as a computer can really only do one thing — math — so the child prodigy can really only ever do math (music is a subset of math; I bet that when he wasn’t writing operas, five year old Mozart was solving trig problems).

The other part of the brain, though, needs experience to work.  A twelve year old simply can’t talk Wittgenstein meaningfully, because philosophy is not math and no matter how much your analytics want to pretend that it is, one can only philosophize with words, which require experience to use properly.  One can be immensely talented in non-math fields, but it’s impossible to do adult-level work in them without actually being an adult.  For proof, I give you the Romantic poets.  No one denies that, say, Shelley was an exceptionally talented poet, but unless you yourself are a quick-witted, verbally precocious teenager when you read him, you’re probably going to bust out laughing at stuff like “The Masque of Anarchy” (there’s a reason they don’t reprint this one in college Lit. anthologies).  Shelley was one of the world’s most talented sophomores, but it’s sophomoric for all that.

My totally unscientific belief is that it’s about 70/30 nature/nurture.

 

*Since there’s no Mafia anymore, I propose we repurpose their old self-designation.  It’s Our Thing now.

Questions and Suggestions

I can’t speak for the other bloggers, but I’m a lazy bastard; it’s one of my more glaring faults.  In an effort to address this, I’m going to try to post here more regularly.

But I’m also not much of an original thinker — most of my blogging is reactive to stuff other people have said, questions raised, etc.

So I’m throwing the floor open to suggestions, questions, etc.  If you’ve got topic ideas, I’d love to hear them.  (See what I mean about being a lazy bastard?)

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, etc. to everyone.

“Read the History!”

E-migo Nate Winchester passes along the above-referenced piece of advice from a Leftist loon (BIRM).  Therefore, reading history is for retards.

But if you must read some, be sure it’s written by a non-academic, not published by a university press OR by a big traditional publisher.  If the author describes himself as an “independent researcher,” that’s usually best — this is usually a guy who scraped through a PhD program but can’t get an academic job, because he was outed as a conservative in grad school and the open-minded, extra-tolerant, diversity-uber-alles Liberals in the ivory tower have blackballed him for life.

Actually, it’s better if the guy doesn’t have a PhD, or a degree of any kind in the subject of History.  If you still respect degrees, you have no idea what actually goes on in the ivory tower.  I honestly can’t tell you want they DO learn there — and that’s after umpteen years in and around academia — but I can tell you what they DON’T.  The following list of things you’d think would be minimum qualifications for teaching history, that all history teachers are blissfully ignorant of, is far from exhaustive.  Read ’em and weep:

Basic economics.  This is even more baffling when you consider that teachers are all Marxists.  Marx’s actual philosophy is a dog’s breakfast of Hegelian “Spirit” junk, but in practice he boils all human endeavors whatsoever down to economics.  No, not kidding — cf. Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the Statewhich btw is the foundation of the feminists’ claim they are the Most Oppressed People Ever (MOPE).  Given their obsessive focus on economics, you’d think they’d at least know a little bit about it…. until you remember that they’re all Marxists, and learning the first thing about economics entails learning that Marx was wrong about everything.  Read instead:  Thomas Sowell, Basic Economics. Sowell is overhyped for reasons that don’t need stating, but he really is a clear (if dry) writer who’s very good at boiling complex issues down.  Basic Economics is long, but you’ll only need to read it once.  If you really want to stick the quadruple axel, go for Ludwig von Mises’s Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis.

Anything military.  Another surprise, if you think the academic study of history has anything to do with how people behave — the only thing humans do more than shop is fight (and no war since caveman days lacks a significant economic component).  And yet, you couldn’t play a pickup basketball game with the number of history professors who call themselves military historians… and as for grad students, the less said, the better.  I remember bursting out laughing in the middle of a grad seminar; I couldn’t help myself.  When my furious colleague asked me just what was so funny about her theory, I replied: “logistics.”  She had no idea what the word meant.  Read instead: There are a zillion war nerds out there, and they all have blogs.  I guarantee you there’s something published somewhere that goes into excruciating detail about every single weapon, leader, tactic, and strategy from Og the Caveman to whoever is leading our current merry adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Guys like Brent Nosworthy write great overviews.

Basic sexuality.  The only thing humans do more than fight is screw, and… well, to be fair, this is what you’d call “opportunistic ignorance.”  When it comes right down to it, all but the actual blue-haired nose-ringers know there are only two sexes (and even the BHNRs wake up in cold sweats at night, suspecting it).  Problem is, asserting it pisses off the BHNRs, and there goes your career.  Also, claiming there are umpteen different sexes and genders lets you publish stuff that wouldn’t stand a snowball’s chance of seeing print if it relied on traditional academic standards like “evidence” and “coherence.”  Publish or perish.  Read instead: Sex Trouble, by Robert Stacy McCain.  He knows more about Gender and Sexuality Studies than most of the persyns who teach it… and he ruthlessly mocks it all.

Basic ecology.  Not stuff like “C02 feeback mechanisms.”  Not even stuff like “What is CO2”?  I mean questions like: “A whole bunch of North Africa that is now desert used to be the breadbasket of the Roman Empire.  What happened?  Legionaries in SUVs?  Or the opposite — they used to grow wine grapes in Iceland, you know.  Iceland!  Was that, you know, Viking pollution, or what?”  And hey, speaking of…

Basic biology.  One of the greatest — and dumbest, and most dishonest — pop-science books of the last generation was Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs, and Steel, which peddles a biological reductionism so extreme it’d make Mengele blush.  Papua New Guineans are really the smartest people on earth — he really says this — despite never making past stone tools and penis gourds.  It’s all environment, you see.  The Incas lacked domesticable animals more productive than the llama, so they never invented the wheel, and that’s why the smallpox got ’em.  I’m really not exaggerating too much.  IQ? Never heard of it.  Read instead: Primitive Culture, by E.B. Tylor.  Published in 1871, and I dare you to refute it.  Well, you probably could take a decent stab at it, Seven Regular Readers, but nobody I know with a Liberal Arts PhD would even know where to start.

And that’s why college is a big ol’ scam.  Whatever you do, don’t read the history.

I Have Seen the Feminist Future….

GERyouth4

I. Since nobody else is going to do it, I guess it’s up to me.  Dear feminists: You’re right.  Sex is about power.  Problem is, being feminists, y’all don’t understand sex, and you have no clue whatsoever about power, so the relationship between the two sails right over your rainbow-dyed heads.

Let’s start with Hillary Clinton’s favorite book, 1984:

Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.

There you have it, ladies.  Stripped of all its niceties, undisguised with pretty language, this is a man’s view of the world.  One either has power, or one does not have power.  If that sounds like something Michel Foucault took 400 pages of queasy neologisms to say, well, good — I guess you were paying attention in one class, at least, since Wymyn’s Studies is all Foucault, all the time.  (If Foucault sounds like cut-rate Nietzsche to you, even better — you must’ve gone to a college where they still have a passing acquaintance with the Dead White Males).

Civilization — as we all instinctively understood until compulsory college enstupidated it out of us — is how we channel men’s will to power to beneficial ends.

Sex is a byproduct of power.  Nietzsche said happiness is “the feeling that power is growing, that resistance is being overcome.”  (The applicability of this to the current groping plague is, I trust, obvious).  Thus, sex is just one of many possible discharges of the feeling of power.    Men with enormous amounts of power can, and frequently do, bypass sex entirely — look at the Catholic Church.

Now before you start going on about “institutional control of female sexuality,” ladies, it’s time for another home truth: Only people who aren’t getting any indulge in elaborate conspiracy theories about sex.

II. Speaking of, here’s a group who brings all this stuff together: The “Game” guys.  We all instinctively know that “mastery of Game jargon” and “actual sexual conquests” are inversely proportional.  Indeed, “Game” writers have been complaining about the dorkification of their thing for years now.  Pay attention here, ladies, this is important: This is how men compete.

Just as guys who can’t do a single chin-up and faint at the sight of blood know all the technical specs of futuristic small arms and call themselves MurderDeathLord69 in Call of Duty, so guys who seriously, un-ironically use terms like “HB8” have never seen a vagina in real life.  BUT: Just as no online commando would ever dream of joining the Army to show off his mad sniping skillz, no “Game” dork will ever leave his Mom’s basement to go talk to an actual girl.  That’s not the point.

Mastering the jargon is the point.  The sex — if by some miracle any should occur — is incidental.  Nobody could see it, even if it happened, but everybody that matters in your world can witness your sweet pwnage of some n00b who etc.  Grasp this (as John Conyers undoubtedly said to a White House pool reporter), and you’ll understand one of the only two things you’ll ever need to know about male sexuality and its relationship to power.

The second thing you need to know is: What happens when the competition stops.  We should all be thanking every god humans have ever believed in that you can’t win the Internet, because if you could, the competition would be forced out into the real world… and pretty soon you couldn’t throw a rock without hitting some goober dressed like this going through his “DHVs” and “negs.”

section break!

section break… ladies.

This is, in effect, what has happened with Hollywood, the Media, and the Left half of Congress.  Weinstein, Conyers, Franken, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, Louis CK, Garrison Keillor… these guys are topped out.  They’ve won.  They’ve achieved everything it’s realistically possible for them to achieve, and they know it.

Hence the groping.  It’s not droit du seigneur, any more than Bill Clinton’s many sordid escapades were.  Think about it:  Any one of these guys could have all the weird, perverted sex they wanted, for free, any time they felt like it.  I keep quoting that Nina Burleigh bint, because she was saying what every single reporterette in Washington was thinking at the time.  They’d all have been happy to blow Bill Clinton; he knew it; but he screwed around with a fat intern anyway.

The sex was incidental.  He got off on the power, on the discharge (sorry) of power, because that was the only “conquest” left.  Guys on the way up don’t do this — they’re too busy fighting tooth and claw with other men.  It’s only the has-beens who turn into gropenfuhrers (and/or adulterers, it’s the same mechanism, see here if you want it from a medical professional).

III.  So what to do about all this?  Men being what they are, all the laws in the world aren’t going to change this.  So long as there is an arena where status-striving is possible — and we humans are endlessly inventive, see e.g. the “Game” dorks competing to come up with the most spergy jargon — you simply can’t guard against this…

…. if the arena has both sexes.  Logically, then, we need sex-segregated workplaces.  I say we give the feminists exactly what they want: All-female workplaces, where there’s no chance of interacting with a man, however much of a “male feminist” he proclaims himself.  That would, of course, entail all-male workplaces, and y’all are free to speculate on the relative stock prices of each enterprise, but these are the sacrifices we make for Progress.