HBD as a precusor to violence…

Alright, we all know HBD is pseudoscience, so why does the alt-right hold on to this as a core belief of their topsy turvy “ideology?” My hypothesis is this, if they can say a certain group of men are less than human–and with the alt-reich, it is men that are the target of their racism. Well, if they can say that, then the next step is for them to convince society that these men do not need to be treated as human beings and can be hunted down and murdered without reprisal.

Do you really think that when some scuzzball like Dickie Spencer talks about a white eth-No-state that he would hand a guy like me a million bucks to relocate anywhere I wanted?  He might not explicitly say it but we all know whats more likely to happen is that I would be forced to leave my place of residence with the business end of a shotgun in my face.

Look at what Dickie’s NPI lapdog, Jagoff Donovan writes:

“Violence is the gold standard, the reserve that guarantees order. In actuality, it is better than a gold standard, because violence has universal value. Violence transcends the quirks of philosophy, religion, technology and culture. People say that music is a universal language, but a punch in the face hurts the same no matter what language you speak or what kind of music you prefer. If you are trapped in a room with me and I grab a pipe and gesture to strike you with it, no matter who you are, your monkey brain will immediately understand “or else what.”  And thereby, a certain order is achieved.”

Big Bubba, er, Jack Donovan finishes this dozy with:

“It’s time to quit worrying and learn to love the battle axe. History teaches us that if we don’t, someone else will.”

You really gotta be disturbed when these liberals who care about you less than the fetus that got aborted yesterday tell you that guns are bad.  You gotta worry when they tell you that you shouldn’t be armed.  Just mossy on over to Stormfront, you think those guys don’t visit the shooting range? You think those guys don’t sharpen knives without fantasising about slicing open human flesh? If you believe the lies that liberals tell then you probably actually believe feminism is about “equality.”

Another “Dating Advice” Canard Exposed: “Emotional Groundwork”

Over at Omega Virgin Revolt, a horrid article by fraudster Harris O’Malley aka Dr. Nerdlove is being ripped apart.

“There’s a very common issue I see among guys who’re looking for a girlfriend: they’re just not ready for one yet. Many guys go full-tilt boogie into finding themselves a girlfriend as soon as possible without having laid the emotional groundwork. As a result, they don’t find themselves a relationship so much as a girlfriend-shaped disaster of Hindenburg proportions.”

Notice how he never defines “emotional groundwork.”  Is this reading 300 romance novels?  Is this Seeing a therapist?  Apparently it can be whatever O’Malley wants it to be to browbeat a low status man.  Has Warmachine done “emotional groundwork”?  Has Hugo Schwyzer?  Remember, both these individuals have almost murdered women.  They have no problem attracting women but they are not morally superior to dateless men or men who struggle in negotiating relationships.

Just so things don’t get conflated, I’m going to discuss singles who can’t get dates for a second..

Now imagine a woman whose face was severely disfigured in an accident.  She is unable to find a mate.  She might lament that men are superficial.  She might even say that she is “perfectly nice” and her dogs love her.  No one would accuse this dateless woman of having a moral failing but instead feel bad for her situation.

It seems to me that O’Malley intentionally puts it back on the man with an ill defined term as if it was a moral failing on his part.  This is done to hide the fact that female mate selection can be a brutal and capricious process.  Women will select men based upon what they find attractive, not necessarily on anything related to his character.  We can observe morally failing men such as Warmachine having great sexual success.  A dateless man can be there for any number of reasons such as being a race that women don’t find desirable, being short, being bald, being shy, etc.,etc.,   Nerdlove is as condescending as a trustafarian telling a poor person that they would work two jobs to pull themselves out of that situation.  Of course, the trustafarian never even worked one and disregards common sense logistics on why it may be difficult or impossible to work two jobs.  Nerdlove condescendingly uses “emotional groundwork” to put it back onto the man why he is needs to “make himself better.”  It is up to him to survive the female selection process and if he somehow stumbles onto a woman who wants a relationship with him, well it must’ve been all those novellas from the 18th century that “helped develop his empathy” and laid the “emotional groundwork” ™ –I’m being sarcastic here if you couldn’t tell.  The more likely explanation is he finally met a woman that somehow might’ve not seen certain traits of his such as being short or of an unpopular ethnicity  in the same light as other women he approached.

Imagine an unemployed person seeking work.  They send out lots of resumes and eventually get a few interviews.  The first couple of interviews don’t go very well, the interviewers snidely ask “Why have you been out of work for SOOOO long?” Eventually the job seeker hits the jackpot so to speak.  The interviewer is smiling and states you have experience with XYZ, I don’t see that much these days and we really need help with that.  When the “outta work” question arises the interviewer doesn’t reply snidely but says, “Oh, so that means you would be able to start immediately.  Um, I mean after a suitable job offer has been presented and the background check completed.”

Now was the job seeker a moral failure for being jobless or just someone who was trying to navigate a changing economy? Did they do this mysterious “emotional groundwork” that Doc Condescending spews? Remember how no one would consider the woman mentioned above as a moral failure.  However, society and especially feminists deem men in similar situations with those terms. This whole “nice guy” thing is predicated on dateless men being moral failures for having troubles in navigating dating and relationships.  Dateless men can observe the world around them and decide how they want to interact with it.  Some men may face discrimination and not be able to overcome it (and bullshit advice like Dr. Nerdlove’s does nothing but obfuscate the matter.)  For example a man of a race women don’t desire, what is he to do?  Move to another part of the world or bleach his skin? These men are not receiving a supportive message that their lack of success in dating is not a moral failure.  Those in society who keep on presenting that message that these men are morally failing are invested in gaslighting low status men.  I believe that they want these men feeling guilty when no crime was committed so that they can control these men.

Going Abroad to get A Broad IS NOT going your own way…

….each time I check so-called MiGTOW spaces, those places seem to go further down the sewer……one common trope is “going abroad to get a broad.”

…how the fuck is this going your own way????

They will say things like “asian womyn are traditional and submissive.”

“They haven’t ridden the cock carousel.”

“They haven’t been ruined by feminism…”

yadayadayada…

And they will often have links to fraudsters like Captain Capitalism and Steve Sailer on the sidebar of their blogs…

From my point of view doesn’t seem very manly to travel for women be that wives or hookers.  Or is that hooker-wives?The whole point of Going Your Own Way is to VALUE yourself as a man….

Hucksters like Aaron Sleazy and Rookh Kshatriya just want to sell books and they don’t care if their “product” is damaging to low status men.

Freedom of Speech and the hypocrisy of the right wing….

Okay, we’ve had “libertarian tough guys” telling us it is “the right wing” that stands up for free speech.

Milo Y kept on saying horrible things ™ and his supporters kept telling us that it’s only right wing comedians who have the courage to make challenging critiques of society.

Right wingers kept on telling us that it was those gawd awful lefties that try to shut down free speech, go on purges to get people fired and all that fun stuff…

Now, the shoe is on the other foot…

You have likely heard of the recent Kathy Griffin scandal….

https://dissention.wordpress.com/2017/05/31/the-genius-of-kathy-griffins-intentionally-inflammatory-photo-shoot/#comments

So, why aren’t the “libertarian tough guys” defending her?  After all, it’s supposed to be about “ideas” and not which side of the fence you sit, right?  After all, didn’t they say the thing that made Trump gr8 was his refusal to kowtow to political correctness?  Isn’t it a comedians job to push boundaries and test the limits of common decency (even if they admittedly go to far?)

Here’s Mr. Where’s the Beef, or was that ‘Roids, Joe Rogan….

 

Notice how his towel boy says, “Everyone would flip out if it was O’bama.”

Well, uncle Ted went there….

but he called the comparison “apples and hand grenades….”

So “libertarian tough guys,” which one is it?  “Freedom of Speech” or “I need muh safe spaces?”