September 29, 2016

Lester Holt, House Negro, and Hillary Clinton conspired to literally rig the debate against President Trump. Watch this short video and see if you don’t agree.

Heartiste and Female Porn

August 23, 2016

Heartiste has an excellent post on how we ignore the effects of “female pornography” today, and how destructive it is on female behavior. Go read it here, and then come back for my comment on it below (which I also left there):

My comment:

Absolutely true. And people have noted this for a long time. I was even going to write a post about this, well done beating me to it, Dark Lords!

I would add that Netflix/Lifetime/Law & Order: SVU-ing of TV has made it all the worse. Not only can she read it, she can watch it streaming, in huge “binge watching” chunks till bed on weeknights and all on the weekends while recovering from her hangover and one-night stand. Eight to ten hours of pure nonsensical fantasy. What an impact on her psyche!

In Victorian Times, one of the signs of a woman with mental/emotional problems was if she read novels—especially “French” novels. Occasionally, you’ll see feminist websites today pass around and laugh about lists of the “signs” of “female hysteria” from that time—-which included novel-reading, obstinacy in obeying their father, and desire to wear pants.

Looking back, however, from a 21st century red pill point of view, it’s clear those “signs” were spot on. A quarrelsome woman knee-deep in exotic fantasies via market-fiction, wanting to wear non-feminine or  non-wholesome clothing, and rejecting her father’s authority—what are those except signs of a broken woman today, who will be riddled with tattoos, piercings, one-night-stands, and tagged with a future as a miserable single mom?

Some 19th Century serious novelists were up on this. In Anthony Trollope’s The Eustace Diamonds, one of the ways he signals that the main female character is of low moral quality is that on Sundays, instead of going to church, she stays in bed all day reading novels. This leads her to her having a very bizarre book-inspired fantasies that she gradually thinks will become real—that a “corsair” (i.e. a pirate) will come, kidnap her, and take her away to exotic lands and become her lover. That main character’s solipsism  is positively Becky Sharpe-esque.

Also, as to Jane Austen—Austen was actually partially mocking the romance-genre of her time, as she herself was quite conservative on social issues; for example, she was critical of the young  British prince of her time being foppish and unserious and a party-boy.

Austen’s mocking/parody tone was much in the same vein that Don Quixote began as a mocking of the chivalric romances popular in Cervantes’s time. Austen’s  novels had a satire in them that hasn’t come down—having her be a representative of romance today is a little bit like having Mel Brooks’s History of the World, Part I become known in about a century as a work of serious historical fiction.

A Word of Caution Come Election Night 2016

August 3, 2016

During the 2012 election I lived in a Negro enclave. As usual, it was a crime-infested Negro enclave. Man, these poor Negroes can’t catch a break, crime follows them everywhere, and their neighborhoods are always ruined, no matter where they go!

Anyway, although losing in the polls and facing an incumbent, I thought Romney had a chance come election night. And then I realized—if Obama lost, this Negro ghetto was gonna burn. Bad.

So, on election day, I got out of that neighborhood and stayed the night in a much less NBA-American-occupied locale.  And, even though Obama won, I’m glad I had that thought—better safe than an “unidentified youth’s” victim.

That’s all to say that, at this point, the Negroes think they get absolute say in who gets to be president, thanks to their sanctification by the culture and Obama’s wins. So when Trump wins, I predict ghettos will burn as Negroes riot and murder in a massive chimpout, with or without the encouragement of BLM (who will definitely be encouraging the attack).

So to my brothers saving money by living in or near the parts of town where BET is popular—come November 7-9, perhaps you should take a trip somewhere a little less watermelon-ly and little more kale-ly.

In fact, since Trump’s gonna win, and Negroes love the weekend, you might want to take from November 7-14—Monday to Monday, a whole week—and take a nice vacation far out of town, locking everything up behind you, perhaps taking many valuables with you.

Just sayin’. MAGA, my brothers.

A Different Take on Ted Cruz’s Non-Endorsement of Trump at the Convention: More Bad News, It’s a Pincer Move

July 21, 2016

So Ted Cruz didn’t endorse Donald Trump last night at the Republican National Convention during his speech. He left the stage to boos from the convention. It was the biggest topic in the news today. And, according to “reports”, Cruz was “refused” entry to the suite of major donor Sheldon Adelson’s afterwards—and his own former campaign manager turned on him.

Many uncucked people –i.e. the Alt-Right–are viewing Ted’s actions as proof that Ted Cruz is a “Gamma”, and did it out of spite and hatred for Trump. They saw it as a childish temper tantrum of epic, career-killing proportions. They believe this is the end of Cruz as a serious candidate (for Republicans at least).

Many cucked folks–e.g. the #NeverTrump nitwits, The National Review fags, the Beltway Right—are celebrating in the streets, taking Cruz as their man, hoping to run him in 2020–because he proved how “moral” he was by refusing to endorse Trump. Run Cruz as an outsider within the party!

Let me offer a different, more sinister, WAY more conspiratorial, way more paranoid hypothesis than either of those–one that relates to Trump’s EPIC FAIL in choosing Cuck Pence as VP.

I think Cruz did it as part of a  larger cuck /donor plan to sink Trump. And that everything we heard and saw and was reported was planned by a whole lotta folks.

They are planning a Pincer Move.

Let me explain.

The smart donors know that Trump’s running on populism and has got momentum. They’ve seen him mow down moneyed opponents before. They hate his immigration plan, but understand that opposing it openly will kill careers. And they know Hillary is very beatable come November.

So they stopped opposing Trump and have started to ingratiate with him. They’ve met with him, listened to him sell himself, nodded their heads—and all the while planned to stab him in the back. And they’re going to do it via a Pincer Move.

The Inside Game: Get People Close to Trump

They got Trump to fire Corey Lewandowski, his successful campaign manager. Then give him cuck workers and aides.

They convince Trump–against all sanity–to pick a cuck VP “to assuage the base.” They assure him that Cuck Pence will be a loyal yes man. They just don’t specify to whom. And then convince him to hire other cucks—like a cuck from Goldman Sachs as his Treasury Secretary.

The Outside Game: Set Up a Viable Outsider

Set up a Republican as the “opposite” of Trump. Someone with the ability to be president. Someone who can swing at Trump and gain “maverick” credentials with the Leftist media, but still keep the party intact if he became leader.

You know, like getting Ted Cruz to go on national TV during the Republican Convention and refuse to endorse Trump, setting himself up as the Republican Anti-Trump. And then plant reports about how “party insiders” and “donors” are furious with Cruz. Cruz is now the outsider! He’s a maverick!

The Squeeze: The Pincer Move Activated

Set up Trump for a scandal.

Doesn’t have to be a big scandal at all. Remember, Watergate was nothing more than Nixon trying to get information on his political opponents. After all the hullaballoo, Nixon only got caught doing what every other major political figure had always done. Heck, they’ll probably plant something if all else fails.

But the scandal itself doesn’t matter; what matters is how much fake outrage the media can generate. The media is reliably leftist, so they will over-promote any Republican scandal. What will make it a NATIONAL SCANDAL is when Republicans begin to “call for investigations” of the fake scandal.

Meanwhile, Trump’s new “loyal friends”—i.e. those cucks who weaseled their way close to him—one by one start to “question” Trump’s actions and/or leak information to the press to make the whole thing more damaging. Every week, a new big name cuck-ally of Trump –almost by design–turns up on the news saying that this requires investigation.

And who  leads the assault on Trump during the scandal?

Why none other than the “unimpeachable” Ted Cruz, former Texas Solicitor General, and “maverick outsider.”

Cruz will go out of his way to have the Tsar’s secret police, a.k.a. the FBI under  James Comey, investigate the matter while Cruz hammers Trump in hearings and on TV and on the Senate floor.  Why Scummy Comey? Because, according to Cruz, if Comey recommends prosecution, it must be true, because Comey refused to go after Hillary Clinton.

After all, Comey has “unimpeachable integrity.”

And Comey obeys his masters and dutifully find that Trump’s “crimes” are so egregious that they “dwarf” Hillary Clinton’s and “require” prosecution. So much for “letting the voters decide”, eh boys? (Comey later ends up with a nice eight-figure job working for a Soros/Adelson subsidiary.)

And who will be the last person to turn on Trump publicly, in an “et tu, Brute”?” moment, and call for his removal from office?

None other than Cuck Pence.

Trump gets impeached and thrown from office on the technicality of the scandal. Cuck Pence takes over and deep sixes the Trump immigration and border plans.  Amnesty is granted to everyone, the wall is stopped, and money is cut from border patrol. We get flooded with the third world. Game over, America.

And who does Cuck Pence appoint as the new VP, per the Twenty-Fifth Amendment?

None other than Ted Cruz, the loyal, honest, principled, moral attack dog, who stood up to Trump when no one else would. And no one notices that Sheldon Adelson never stopped donating to Cruz, or how George Soros donated to all cucks present.

We’re being set up.

Trump Has Lost My Faith By Nominating Mike Pence

July 16, 2016

I’ve lost faith in Donald Trump’s candidacy because of his nomination of Mike Pence as VP.

Pence is a cuck.

So either Trump isn’t serious about his promises on immigration, border control, and crime….


Trump is serious, but seriously deluded, and when he tries to implement his policies by deporting immigrants and closing the border…


A “lone assassin” will kill Trump, Pence takes over, announces that “hate never wins”, and quietly scuttle all of Trump’s policies. And then amnesties 20 million Mexican and Syrian “refugees”, at his masters’ demand.

I’ve said for a while that Trump’s VP had to be assassination insurance. Pence is the opposite.

I’ve lost faith. Time to move to the mountains.

Fucking WordPress: A Response to Dick Whitman on Heartiste’s Post

July 9, 2016

Fucking WordPress. Keeps eating my response to Dick Whitman’s comment on Heartiste’s post here: https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/07/08/a-neg-fit-for-a-hottie/

So I’ll post it here.


First, Dick Whitman’s comment:

O/T but this is an interesting piece on the rise of “sugaring” (aka prostitution) among SWPL-type chicks.



Now, my response:

A few points:

1. Magazines/newspapers do articles like this every once in a while, about how “sugarbabing” is “growing”. Note the lack of hard stats—a dead giveaway that this wasn’t the result of any serious sleuthing. “Trend” pieces in magazines and newspapers are notorious for being based on nothing more than clickbait and a few people the author talked to. Notably, the authors are often pranked by their subjects, or else are fooled by a stealth PR campaign.

2. These are the same magazines/newspapers that wholeheartedly believed the Duke Rape Hoax, the Haven Monahan Hoax, every single sob story told by blacks about being victims of racism, and that George Zimmerman hunted down Trayvon Martin and shot him in cold blood. In other words, these magazines and newspapers have little credibility.

3. Now, more to the point: I’ve predicted that prostitution and its related ilk will become more socially acceptable in our society so long as men continue to outnumber women.

Currently, due to our lack of wars, lack of dangerous jobs, and our increases in food,medicine, and hygiene, we’ve seen the number of men in our society–especially among the younger generations—grow to outnumber the women. Usually, men die off at a greater rate than women in a society, so human development usually produces more men than women to compensate. However, thanks to our peaceful, productive society, this excess breeding in men isn’t dying off. So instead of a nice balance of men to women, we’ve got too many dudes around.

The result is the growth of female power, as they have the in-demand resource. Contrast this to a society just coming out of a large war, where the population of men is decimated: 1940s-1950s America. There, the remaining men could call the shots on how women acted, and so we got a lot of sweet, feminine behavior by a lot of submissive, good looking broads.

In extreme circumstances—where men vastly out number women—women can actually just sell themselves as hookers and still get men to marry  them later. The Old West had such a lopsided ratio of men to women that women would whore themselves out for years, and then, long after they were damaged goods, find some sad sack cowboy to marry them up.

We’ve seen how the social acceptance of stripping and pornography has grown in the last 20-25 years, as has the acceptance of black males dating non-black women, as has the acceptance of women sleeping around pre-marriage. Why? Simple: as men have outnumbered women, women have realized they can call the shots and do more and more bad behavior and still find some thirsty dudes at the end of the rainbow to either “forgive” their bad behavior or, even worse, condone it.

(this is also why many women get tattoos today, get fat, and get ugly hair cuts and piercings–because no matter how ugly they make themselves, some beta bucks will wife her up and/or take care of her).

If we remain peaceable /productive, men will outnumber women further, women will demand that they be allowed to rent themselves out to men free of consequences—because despite being whores, some moron will still be waiting, hat in hand, to marry her later.

It’s sad that society’s own success makes it so miserable to live in.

TL; DR rape!

Three Things A Man Must Do to Prepare in the Next Year

June 5, 2016

There is a war coming. The animals are going to attack you. This is serious. You cannot stop it coming.

Instead, you must prepare. At the very least, do the three things below.

These three things every non-black, non-Muslim, Western civilized man needs to do within the next year–meaning the next twelve months—to prepare. To protect himself and his loved ones. To, in short, survive:

1. Seriously weight train: squats, deadlifts, and bench presses at the very least, 3x a week. You need to add at least 60 lbs to your max on each in the next 12 months; hopefully, you can add 100.

Strength will save you if you’re sucker-attacked. The weak will get culled from the strong. Add sprints, pullups, others if you can. 3x a week. no exceptions. You need to be stronger.

2. Join a combat sport. One where you get hit hard and often at least once a week. Boxing or (serious) kickboxing or full-impact MMA. Not merely wrestling or jiu-jitsu—I mean someone will punch you in the nose weekly. Where you bleed weekly.

(And none of those female-esque “boxing” classes where they punch bags and do Tae-Bo in midair but never get hit. Don’t be a fag.)

Why? Simple: people who are unused to being hit will freeze, like a deer in the headlights. Because you’re not used to it.

But if you’re in practice getting hit and responding in kind, you will not freeze if someone smacks you—and the first few seconds of an attack determine your survival. If you punch back twice as hard, the beating will stop, and the animals will stop their swarm. Remember: Hyenas attack wounded zebras, not angry lions.

3. Get a gun license, a gun, and practice. Once a month at least. Two hours at least. One gun, make it legal, make it legit, and practice, practice, practice. Get concealed carry permit if you can, and always carry. Take courses, clean it, and buy ammo. Even a tiny .22 handgun is worth it if you know it, own it, and use it regularly; experience with it will outweigh some dindu, some Aztec, or some muzzie with a bigger gun they can’t aim properly. Practice lethality; better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 (otherwise known as the Zimmerman Rule).



Do Sex Ratios Cause Feminism and the Scarlett O’Hara Effect? Introducing the Cunty Country Ratio

April 23, 2016

*trigger warning: I use the terms sex and gender interchangeably. Because sex and gender are interchangeable terms, bitches.

*The idea from this post—that sex ratios affect how women behave  in a society–has actually been explored in a real sociological theory: The Guttentag- Secord Theory. Hattip: The Tingler in his comments to my comment at Heartiste here. However, from what I’ve read, Guttentag-Secord reaches different conclusions than what I’m positing and seeing in reality (for example, Guttentag-Secord posits that more men than women will increase marriage rates and lower divorce rates, whereas I think it would decrease them, since women will have more options for mate resources from other, more desperate males).

RooshV published an article a few months back about how nightgame was dead. As part of  his argument, he posted several pictures he had taken of night clubs he had visited, and pointed out (via marking folks with blue and pink dots) how men vastly outnumbered  women at the North American nightclubs.

The pictures got me thinking: what if gender imbalance is what causes feminist behavior?

People respond to supply and demand. And a big fish in a small pond feels a lot better, ego-wise, than being just another fish.  Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven, and all that.

So why wouldn’t this apply to the sexual market place? Specifically, to female entitlement?

If there are more dudes than chicks at an establishment–such as a night club or bar– you notice how even the Plainest Janes cop a bitch attitude, become attention whores, act like princesses, and otherwise lose their femininity. The location suddenly becomes its own little world, mentally sealing people into it, and can warp  men there into thinking the chick who is a 5 is really a 6 or a 7.This goes double if the men are hard up or extremely horny. Instinct overrides logic.

This can go to extremes. At a comic book  convention, for example, the few women who go are usually plain to ugly, and yet, amongst a sea of desperate dicks, most of whom are socially awkward nerdy types, these women “blossom” into attention-whoring princesses: wearing revealing clothing, bitch flirting with the few top nerds, making beta orbiters do ridiculous things for them, and otherwise start thinking they are 10s. It might take those girls several weeks to come off the delusional high such a convention would cause upon their brains.

I call it the Scarlett O’Hara Effect. Scarlett was the most sought-after sexpot in Atlanta in Gone With the Wind, with dozens of rich, handsome suitors who pursued her for years, and so she was warped into an entitled bitchy cunt. Not even poverty, the destruction of her family, the burning of Atlanta, and Rhett Butler’s badass game could tame her ego after it had been inflated during her sexual awakening period. .

She was spoiled. Oh fiddle-dee-dee!

So if this kind of ego-warping via sex imbalance can occur on a small scale such as at a bar or a convention–and can inflate a woman’s ego to another level lasts for weeks afterwards–could this happen on a societal scale?

The CIA World Factbook lists the gender ratios of nations around the world. Notably, it appears that more males than females are born every year: somewhere between 1.05-1.07 males born to every female. Throughout most of world history, such an imbalance was necessary because of war, hunting, and other dangerous activities men had to do to keep civilization going. Sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive.

But in a society such as in the United States of 2016, dangerous jobs are rare, so much so there is a cottage industry of reality TV shows of “dangerous” jobs for the soft public to gawk at, like customers at a freak show. And the risk of invasion, slaughter, and enslavement are well-nigh laughable to most of the West. And our medical advances are keeping a lot of folks alive that just thirty years ago would have died.

So what is the result? Men in the U.S. are not being killed off at the rate they were in the past.Between the ages of 24-54,  there are 63,838,086 men to 63,947,036 women.   That is 0.998 men for every woman. The sexes are roughly equal in number in the prime dating market.

That  doesn’t seem like it would cause much in the way of problems such as feminism….except when you compare it to nations where, in 2016, we (as Americans) think the women are more feminine and less feminist and less cunty.  Suddenly a 0.998 ratio of males to females seems significant, because even a slight drop in the ratio of males to females correlates with better, sexier, more feminine women.

Countries Where Americans View the Women as More Feminine And Attractive Than American Women

Russia: between the ages of 24-54: 31,779,688 men to 33,086,346 women. That’s 0.961 men for every woman.

Brazil: between the ages of 24-54: 44,358,524 men to 45,111,178 women. That’s 0.983 men for every woman..

Japan: between the ages of 24-54: 23,764,421 men to 24,297,773 women. That’s 0.978 men for every woman.

Thailand: between the ages of 24-54: 15,675,425 men to 16,061,864 women. That’s 0.976 men for every woman.

Now, let’s look at countries where, from an American point of view, feminism is strong and/or the women stereotyped as bitchy and cunty (please get offended):

Countries Where Americans View the Women as Feminist and/or Cunty

Canada: between the ages of 24-54.  7,239,027 men to 7,041,886 women. That’s 1.03 men for every woman.

United Kingdom: between the ages of 24-54: 13,344,087 men to 12,873,234 women. That’s 1.04 men for every woman.

Argentina: between the ages of 24-54:  8,452,645 men to 8,489,476 women. That’s 0.995 men for every woman, nearly one man for every woman, nearly statistically identical (0.998 to 0.995) to the U.S. (And let’s not forget that, even though Argentinian women are viewed as being just as bitchy as U.S. women, they are viewed as being more attractive and fit and feminine in looks–which I  almost want to attribute to that .003 difference).

Such numbers, of course, don’t take local factors into consideration. For example, there might be a surplus of women between 24-54 in a specific city or town that would make them more feminine.

But overall they seem to support a hypothesis: bitchiness/feminism in women is correlated to if they have to compete for a man/ risk not having one. That is, if there is real risk that women in a nation will end up old maids because there aren’t enough men to go around—that no man might put up with their behavior–women will instinctively rush to curb their behavior and make it more pleasing to men.

In other words: the more options a woman has, the less willing she is to behave. Or: Thirsty Dudes Create Fat Princesses.

Ironically, this would mean that if feminists/lesbians truly want feminism to survive and thrive and rule the world…they need to start aborting females and select for a lot more men. Another way to say this: Queen Bees Need A Lot of Drones.

It would seem to be that there might be a Cunty Country Ratio/Rule: if there are equal or more men than woman in a nation, the women will be entitled bitches. If there are more women than men, women will behave and be feminine and pleasing. The more men than women, the cuntier the behavior. The more women than men, the more sweet and pleasing.

This also suggests that feminism is nothing more than a rationalization for cunty female behavior. Women get entitled because the number of males is equal to or greater than females, and then try to intellectually justify their bad behavior.

The Cunty Country Ratio/Rule  has an application to getting laid. If you’re thinking about traveling  to meet women, you should check to see what the ratio of males to females are between 24-54, just as you check a club or bar to see if it’s a sausage fest. The lower the over all Cunty Country Ratio–as with Russia–the easier it should be for you to meet an attractive woman who acts pleasant and feminine. Avoid, however, countries with high ratios—which I would say is a 1 to 1 ratio, or beyond. For example, I might avoid Saudi Arabia (1.15!) and China (1.04) like the plague, unless you think (1) your ethnicity would do very well there and appeal to the exotic; and (2) you would avoid getting tortured by the local governments.

A good rule of thumb for American guys seems to be finding a travel location with a Cunty Country Ratio of, at most, 0.98 males to females between the ages of 24-54. Overall for men from any nation, if you travel for coozy, look for a nation where the Cunty Country Ratio is at least .02  less that your home country.

Any higher and it gets too cunty to be pleasurable, because you’re either equaling or exceeding your own nation’s percentage of Cunty Cunts. Again, this doesn’t factor in local demographics, your status as exotic foreigner, your wealth versus the locals, your game, and your ability to speak the language. But it seems like a good rule of thumb.

The End of U.S. Civilization: Get a Whore

March 20, 2016

Tonight I witnessed a fat white chick choose a black subhuman over a civilized human being to go home with.

It was both hilarious and sad. A dichotomous situation from across the bar, and individual, yet so telling of our failed civilization.

It made a deep impression on my drunk mind, I know not why, even from across the bar: watching the substandard “woman” choose bestiality over a seemingly good, upstanding, beta man. Watching the beta’s disappointment when she made out with her chosen monkey was all too painful–though the loser was not of my race (yellow, not white), I felt a pinge and twinge in my civilized heart.

It was at that moment I decided that paid whores were all that was worth my sex drive. I would advise you men to do the same.

End of civilization rape!

Evil George Soros Funds John Kasich to Attack Trump And Disenfranchise Trump Supporters

March 16, 2016

Why is John Kasich staying in the race at this point, when he cannot win enough delegates to take the nomination before the convention?

Answer: George Soros.

Kasich is being funded by none other than Dr. Evil himself, George Soros:


Soros is the megalefty and megawealthly evil dude who is responsible for the Chicago riots against Trump (he funds Moveon.org and BLM, which have claimed responsibility for shutting the Chicago rally down). He put Obama in the White House (one of his biggest donors) and in fact promoted all the riots at Baltimore, Ferguson, and the Zimmerman death threats, as well as the BLM movement on campuses and the Occutards.

So why is a megalefty supporting an ostensible R candidate?

Well, Kasich is a cuck, of course.

But more importantly, Soros is keeping Kasich in to hopefully block Trump via a brokered/contested convention. If Trump can’t get 1237 delegates—and Kasich staying in might prevent that, by peeling off a few—then the Establishment Republicans can draft another candidate at the convention. Which is what Soros wants—a nice cuck to either lose to the D, or else be a cuck in the White House.

Trump scares even Soros. So much so he’ll help Republicans out.

Soros rape!