Friday, August 20, 2010

More too.

Mediocre stuff here. It isn't long for this world.

When a fem deems you rational /acceptable... It comes under the point I made about a dog humping the leg of politeness. The dumb beast can't separate niceness from weakness; she can't tell whether we are "rational" or not-- she lacks the processing power for congenital reasons. Therefore if she thinks we are rational and not "[wimmin] haters" and stuff she means she finds us non threatening. [As such, she will continue to hump.]

Some strains are simply incorrigible and need to be "put down". Even though I am a big proponent of "it's all nurture syndrome", some strains needing to be put down is simply the easy truth. At the very least, in order to make an omelet (ie the future utopia[tm] where we think-all-things-through including nurture syndromes), we need to break a few eggs.


You can't see it the other way. It is female supremacy in its most quaint (and dangerous) form. Princess and the pea.


females cheat rampantly. And they do lots of other things to hurt their mates in relationships. Why doesn't feminism advocate fault based divorce again if the females are under siege in marriage? (ahem, cricket, cricket.)

And "burdensome" is relative construct. The princess complained about a pea 13 mattresses below but it was not really a burden; and babies cry for free milk on instinct. Alas so do wimmin.

And the "current economic welfare of the west" is a huge, huge topic. To just say "it can't exist without wimmin getting these privileges" is balderdash. Number one we don't need this giant "economic welfare". So therefore even if disenfranchising wimmins hurts the west, big deal--GOOD. And number two most of the social expenses of the "economic welfare of the west" are female based; so fewer "independent" females generating western economic welfare equals fewer payoffs to "independent females". Duh. And most of the non social expenses--ie infrastructure and military--are here to make it safe for "independent" females and protect the west from anti feminist enemies.


"...Mothers raise their sons to be creatures that they themselves would not be attracted to if it wasn't their son and rather just some prospective lover…"

This "the product of my female labor belongs to me the female creator" is another empty horseshit thing to say which the cunts and their society have no intention of applying consistently.

Mother raises children badly often and therefore should be prevented from doing it whethee their "property" or not.


I find the single fem environment horrible to the psychological health of male children and the school system also.


A bad vibe she has is: "[the pussy is given out for free these days: be happy [ie don't complain]]"

She is a female supremacist who believes males are dufuses to be manipulated _with impunity,_ controlled and owned.

And ya know what: she is right! After centuries and centuries of western males culling each other based on movements where anybody who was better is vulnerable to ousting, we are left with a culture led by males who are bonobo-like infantile numbskulls and females who are tuned-in, en-fanged top-down above it all types.

(These dames are like me in reverse actually; but I'm a rare throw back _and marginal._ And also these above it all females lack real scope of thought which I have [haughty snort]; they are only wise when it comes to social manipulation of the infantile gitdom that is the west. They don't actually understand anything deep or profound; nor are they self aware.)


Adoption is often no good. (Trust me I know. My mother is an adopted creature.) Parents need to sense their children; not just feed them and house them. It is one thing to foster a foundling or orphan. But to make more of them --just pretending that the creature will be raised right and their won't be unique problem snowballs multi generationally setting in --is ABSURD.

If all people were clones--aptitude and character wise-- and if parenting was done according to a schematic list (of dos and don'ts in detail) which achieved predicted outcome that could be tested for then maybe adoption and other surrogacy programs could work.

You know what happens when a dumb(95-100), needy labor class German woman (happy to just finally have any "bundle of perfection that can do no wrong") adopts an approx 130 ish IQ manipulative colicky girl?

Hell on earth.

Hopefully I can give you a little taste of Hell before you all die natural deaths. And I do mean that. That's called consequence: something most need to learn first hand.


{I actually do not always hit the target for the same reason a lion doesn't get a tommy gazelle--it's all chase but little meat: we are two different planes of creature.}



A mounted aristocracy took over most of north Eurasia in the last 6000 years, as the horse was domesticated. (Some might have found horse proto-domestication as far back as the early teens; Spain. But maybe not ridden. Eaten, like Finland's reindeer?)

Tunics"[barbarians]. "Togas"[civilized]. Kilts [Barbarians Mk 1].

Only worn in conservative (ie old fashion) ceremonies.


Penguin Books 'atlases of history' from when I was younger and still gave a fuck about book 'learnin.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.