In der news.
I remember hearing the hags gossiping back when I was a child. Talking about a young woman freely dating lots of men, the hags were complaining – “how does she expect to get married if she’s giving it away for free?” Consider the implications of that and then wonder no more as to why I classify marriage as a form of prostitution – albeit one in which men are typically defrauded.
An analogy may be as follows. A dog can be trained to obedience by giving it treats every time it does the right thing. Then, at some point, the owner expects the dog to obey commands without getting the treats. Very well – but what happens when the dog is smarter, stronger, and more capable than is the owner? What happens when that dog demands the treats that it is owed and starts getting restless when such are not forthcoming?
Lest you think the dog analogy inappropriate I actually remember overhearing the word “treats” being used by a woman as a promise to the boyfriend/husband, etc. for his patient behavior at family gatherings. All of that was quite educational for the young Sallis, who saw and heard everything and has forgotten nothing.
See this. Lots of female hand-waving and gaslighting in the story, but ignore that for a moment and consider the “sex strike” as a tactic – virtually always used by women against heterosexual men. When one ignores the aforementioned hand-waving and gaslighting, the only rational conclusions are:
1. Men, and only men, are interested in sex for its own sake.
2. Women’s “interest” in sex is in its utility to control men, as well as for reproduction, using men as sperm donors when milady feels “the biological clock is ticking.”
3. If both sexes valued sex/physical intimacy the same, then the idea of a sex strike would be ludicrous and self-defeating, as it would harm the striker as much as the strikee.
4. This demonstrates the reality of sex relations and sexual power dynamics. Women have something men want (badly) and they’ll leverage that to control men as much or more as one controls a working dog.
Considering the justified stereotypes of:
1. Male incels and female hypergamy.
2. Married women having a perpetual headache (unless they need a sperm donation for pregnancy).
It would seem that a “sex strike” is an empty threat. What’s the difference? And the minority fraction of men who are alpha male bad boys are going to find some (high quality) women wiling to have sex with them (oh the hypergamy!) regardless of any sex strike, so no worries there. Thus, milady has painted herself into a corner on this one.
See this.
You’re not a person. Girls aren’t people. They are soft and pretty and cute and cuddly and warm, but they have no feelings. I was handsome before my face spoiled, but that didn’t matter. I always knew that girls weren’t people. They’re something like robots. They have all the power in the world and none of the worry. Men have to obey, men have to beg, men have to suffer, because they are built to suffer and to be sorry and to obey. All a girl has to do is to smile her pretty smile or to cross her pretty legs, and the man gives up everything he has ever wanted and fought for, just to be her slave. And then the girl—” and at this point he got to screaming again, in a high shrill shout—”and then the girl gets to be a woman and she has children, more girls to pester men, more men to be the victims of girls, more cruelty and more slaves. You’re so cruel to me, Veesey! You’re so cruel that you don’t even know you’re cruel. If you’d known how I wanted you, you’d have suffered like a person. But you didn’t suffer. You’re a girl. Well, you’re going to find out now. You will suffer and then you will die. But you won’t die until you know how men feel about women.
How to realistically deal with the Women Question (WQ)? On a long-term level, if we are going to solve the race problem, and establish the “ethnostate” – an outcome of which I am frankly skeptical but one that all of the grifters tell us is “certain” – then we can establish a society that solves sex problems through restructuring society, education, law, etc. to favor traditional monogamous marriage and family formation and to disfavor working women, easy woman-initiated divorce, etc.
What can we do now? First, we need to push back against White Knighting in the Far Right, and I have been doing so at EGI Notes and at Gab. If more people speak out, the better the Dissident Right milieu will be for men.
We can support mainstream political and social trends favorable to men. For example, the Trump administration’s Title IX reforms were very good and long overdue; unfortunately, these were reversed by the Biden administration (that Spencer supports).
On a more personal, individual level, I would advise men to be the best man they can be within the limits of their abilities and characteristics – physically fit, educated, successful with respect to career, financially as well off as you can be, not afraid to express strong opinions, acting with confidence and not being a beta male simp. Be a man that is desirable to the highest quality women available (yes, I know “”high quality women” is sort of an oxymoron, but we are talking about relative quality), and then demand that those women behave in an appropriate manner. If milady doesn’t meet your standards, then MGTOW. But you need to be in a position where you have leverage to bargain in the sexual marketplace.
And if any White women go the mudshark route, then they are not anyone worthy of you anyway.
Now, as regards artificial eggs and wombs and the sexbots – this may be technically feasible at some point but, realistically, not likely to be acceptable from a societal standpoint. So we can focus on the more realistic things above.
First, see this. In case leftist FOX blocks the link:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/la-mayor-bass-calls-root-out-right-wing-extremist-police-signals-lowering-bar-new-recruits
Second, see this.
Is anyone going to tell her that the proposed LA policy is illegal in California?
See this. And the link:
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/these-51-big-businesses-target-conservatives-heres-what-you-can-do-stop-them
When I read outrage porn like that, I note that they never ask WHY the entire fabric of American society is aligned with the Left. The answer, which they do not want to address, is that the inept grifting Right has ceded one battlefield after another to the Left without even putting up a fight. Academia was dismissed as “pointy headed intellectuals” and today rightists even promote the idea that their followers should not go to college at all. The mass media was always “the liberal media” – as if that was part of the natural order of things and nothing could be done about it. “Big Government” was a dirty word for the Right and became synonymous with the Left, with rigthtist enabling. For decades, the Right smugly assumed that Big Business, Military, FBI, local law enforcement were all “our guys” – until they weren’t, and with the Right doing nothing, those institutions were fully captured by the Left. And after all of that, there are still “small government constitutional conservatives” like Pence who decry the use of state power by those very few people on the Right, like The Meatball, who push back in even the mildest terms. So, I’m tired of the outrage porn about The Hegemony of the Left that fails to explain how and why it happened.
Some people online really have a misunderstanding of the fundamental appeal of “Yockeysim” or even what its ultimate, fundamental thesis is about. Yes, there are some profound stupidities in Yockey’s work – the bizarre ideas about biological race (likely though a justified although completely misguided response to retarded Nordicism and Anglomania), his misunderstanding of basic science, a bit too sweaty about the JQ (although also mostly understandable), Hitler as “the Hero,” the anti-Eastern Europeanism but then also his pro-Soviet attitudes, and of course the knee-jerk Spenglerianism. I freely admit all of that. But to me, all of that is peripheral. I see the essence of Yockeyism as being strident pan-Europeanism (at least for Western Europe – we can now extend that to all of Europe) and the associated Imperium idea. Much of his description is nonsense and some of his short-term prescription is nonsense as well. But his long-term prescription is right on the money. And it is that – the essence of Yockeyism – which is why Greg Johnson ultimately rejects Yockey’s views and calls Yockey an “enemy.” Ultimately, Yockey’s “crime” was being pan-European, and taking Southern Europeans seriously as equal partners in the European project.
Since even a stopped clock is right twice a day, finally we see a worthwhile Counter-Currents article. And, really, if this was all a “hoax” then what was the point of Apollo 13? To make the “hoax” more realistic by faking error? And by doing it for “13” to emphasize the point? Conspirtards are…tards.
What Der Movement REALLY is about – Asian females all the time. Say what you will about WN 1.0, but at least those guys weren’t into yellow fever fetishism. I don’t recall Pierce posing with Japanese women. So, once HBD infested WN 1.0, that encouraged the transformation into WN 2.0, represented by the Alt Right. Now we have WN 3.0 – multiracial WN. I suppose WN 4.0 will be a full-throated promotion of alien mass immigration and miscegenation. WN 4.0 will oppose the System because the System will be viewed as too White supremacist.
See this.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ccp-government-intentionally-released-covid-19-over-world-chinese-virologist
OK, let’s follow the logic here:
1. Let’s say China did in fact intentionally spread the virus.
2. This is an act of war levied against the USA.
3. Some HBDers actively pushed the Chinese lie that the virus was an “American bioweapon” and so China must be absolved of all blame.
4. Thus, the HBDers have been supporting China in levying war against the USA.
5. Many people (more than two!) have read and thus witnessed the HBD comments.
6. Thus, by the strict definition of treason as outlined in the US Constitution, the behavior of these HBDers could be construed as treason.
7. There needs to be indictments and trials of the relevant HBDers for treason – if convicted, all penalties, including the death penalty, should be on the table.
Always interesting to observe how the reluctance of majority White populations for race replacement migration is not reflected in voting. There are many reasons for this, one prime reason is that it is never presented to the population in the manner. People vote for political parties and candidates that represent a spectrum of views, with immigration being one of them. Thus, Whites may vote for “Greens” because of environmental reasons, but get the immigration liberalism as a package. Voting for “Labor” or “Democrats” because of economic concerns, health care, abortion, or whatever, is often linked to open borders, even though people voting for those parties do not want open borders. On the other hand, immigration restrictionists often tie themselves to other positions that have nothing to do with immigration, but that are unpopular. Right-wing populism helps to link nationalist tendencies with other popular ideologies, instead of the typical conservative “small government, but tax breaks for billionaires” nonsense. Of course, also, politicians lie to the voters and the media also lie, and in some countries, speech laws make it illegal to actually campaign on a full-throated nationalist platforms (and the speech laws were bundled in with other ideologies, just as open borders were).
See this. Emphasis added:
Some even more peculiar results are obtained for an analysis that focused on Melanesian populations, leaving in only East Asian populations and a single European population, the French. Friedlander et al.’s purpose in presenting this analysis was to analyse the fine-scale relationships amongst the Melanesians whilst accounting for admixture. Our purpose here is to ask what the results imply, when interpreted literally, about the relationships between Melanesians, East Asians and Europeans. For all values from K = 2 to K = 9, the French population is inferred to be a mixture between an East Asian population and a Melanesian one (Fig. 5d, e). Only for K = 10 do the French form their own cluster and still have variable levels of admixture from East Asians (Fig. 5c). Throughout, interpretation of the ancestral populations based on where individuals are geographically today (Interpretation Protocol of Fig. 1) would only make these results more misleading, implying at K = 9 that the French are admixed between East Asians and Papuan highlanders.
Keep that in mind when crazed fetishists over-interpret genetic data.
See this.
The dissent highlights a challenge for the GOP. The party’s future may well depend on broadening its appeal beyond an aging, predominantly white base of support.
No one asks if the GOP can win if it loses the support of a fraction of that “aging, predominantly white base of support.” You see, there is a law of the universe – almost as definite as gravity or Sallis’ Law (the latter being one of the fundamental laws of physical reality) – that says that White folks MUST vote Republican. And since Whites are impelled by this universal law to go to the polls and vote GOP, there’s no reason to appeal to them. Of course, the Democrats have no reason to appeal to White voters either. No one has, actually – and, seemingly, no one does.
eginotes 
You must be logged in to post a comment.