Category: Uncategorized

Chrissy outdoes herself

Lest you wonder why female “conservatives” and the so-called Mama Bears inspire so little confidence:

Domonique Ramirez, this year’s Miss San Antonio (preliminary to Miss Texas, Miss America) went to a photo shoot. She was supposed to wear her outfit from the San Antonio pageant. Well, it didn’t quite fit anymore, and the pageant let her know it was unacceptable…. Miss Ramirez slapped a temporary restraining order on the organization so they couldn’t take her crown away. A judge will decide whether she is fit for the crown or not. Isn’t that awesome? Seeing this kind of strength in a young woman is so refreshing. She’s fighting back and standing her ground, which I find incredibly brave. She’s becoming a role model, which is exactly what the Miss America Organization brags about.

If this pageant wants to permanently damage the youth of our country, mission accomplished. If they really want to help these girls then they need a better strategy. You don’t tell a teenage girl she’s too fat, unless you want her to have an eating disorder. If they thought she was becoming obese, sure, step in for the sake of her health. Offer her the benefits of working out if you want her to get in shape the healthy way. Tell her it helps reduce stress. They should want her mental health to be calm and collected for the nerve-racking interview. Tell her it will give her stamina to get through the long days. But never make it about her looks. That’s just crazy.

The organization threw her further under the bus by stating she has been late to appearances and has been defiant. I call that BS! It’s ludicrous to think adults would lie about a teenager just because they never could make it as Miss America themselves. They’re delusional….

Some know-nothings have argued that Domonique signed a contract. She promised to abide by these rules. Get over yourself. She’s a teenage girl, and to make any woman sign a contract like this is outrageous and unrealistic. This rule is ridiculous and shouldn’t even exist.

So apparently this is the position of the so-called conservative media these days: don’t tell fat girls they’re fat, run to a judge anytime you fail, and don’t expect women to abide by a signed contract. Now, if women can’t be held any more accountable than children by virtue of their sex, how can anyone possibly justify their right to vote?

I do wish Fox News would hurry up and hire Chatterfield already.

Dumbing down and dreaming on

I feel quite confident in stating that the scenario suggested in the cartoon has NEVER EVER happened in the entire history of Man.  Barely any men understand quantum physics; the number of women who not only understand them but are prone to discussing them on a girls night out can probably be counted on a woodworker’s hand.  As for Plato, I have yet to meet a single woman who has actually read the entire Republic outside of the one hopelessly nerdy girl in my senior year Classics class who once read a poem in public that was, we were reliably informed, written “from the point of view of me and a lizard”.  In the various debates over Euthyphro over the last two years, I’m not sure if a single woman has even commented on the matter of the pious and the gods, much less whether Socrates was justified in his artful redefinition of the terms in mid-dialogue.  Women’s book clubs don’t discuss Thucydides and Dante, much less Bohr and Alcibiades, most are devoted to novels from the Oprah list as evidenced by the helpful discussion guidelines provided at the back of those books.

There are three reasons that women play dumb on occasion.  The first is because they are insufficiently attractive to attract men that they can look up to intellectually.  Note that the author, who is an aged 3 at best, admits that the dim boyfriend to whom she refers was only the second man who had agreed to go out with her when she was in her 30s.  It wasn’t her brains that were the problem there.  The second reason is because women understand on some level that most men prefer less intelligent women.  This is not because men are intimidated by smart women, (think about that claim for a second, are they intimidated by male nerds and geeks?),  but because intelligent women tend to be a quotidian posterior pain.  Intelligent, educated, middle-class women are extraordinarily annoying because they seem to feel the need to constantly reaffirm either their intelligence or their education by pointlessly challenging those close to them over the most trivial minutiae.  The fact that a more intelligent man can effortlessly slap down those challenges doesn’t mean that he wants to waste his time doing so, especially when it interrupts his train of thought.

(To be fair, most intelligent people of both sexes are difficult compared to the norm, the significant difference is that women find the difficulty to be attractive due to their hypergamous nature.  Men just find it difficult and don’t want to deal with it.)

I found her cited example of a mispronounced word as an indication of a lack of intelligence to be more than a little amusing.  In fact, those who mispronounce words on a regular basis are probably more intelligent than the norm because it indicates that they are learning words from reading them rather than hearing them.  The writer has confused ignorance with intelligence; to the extent that a mispronunciation indicts anyone, it indicts the social circle around the mispronouncing individual who have never used the word around him.  The assumption that “Arkansas” would be pronounced in the same manner as “Kansas” is a perfectly reasonable one, especially for an Englishman who is no more likely to know the difference between the two than the average American if it is Leicester or Worcester that is found in the East Midlands.

And the third reason is that women play dumb as an excuse to get out of things they don’t want to do.  Figuring out how to program a remote or change a tire isn’t difficult, but why bother when you can simply get someone else to do it for you?

So close

I have to admit, I enjoy it every time I happen to see who keeps RGD in #2 on Kindle, as was the case again today.

Celebrating Egyptian democracy

Apparently we’re all supposed to be horrified to discover that dangling a chicken over a swamp full of alligators may end in the devouring of the chicken. In Mala Fide is visibly unmoved over the reported “sexual assault” of Lara Logan:

You send a chick into a situation like the one in Egypt, you might as well hang a sign around her neck that says “FREE FUCKTOY”. I don’t care how many disaster areas she’s reported from, how many awards she’s won, it was going to happen eventually. Christ, even Anderson Cooper, that twinkle-toed pansy, couldn’t handle the heat on the streets of Cairo. What the fuck did Logan think was going to happen? Did she really think that the teeming, America-hating, angry, sex-starved crowds of men she was surrounded by wouldn’t view her as a tasty treat? Is she THAT clueless about the non-Western world? Or did she truly think that her crew of yes-men could protect her every time she touched down in Surprise Sex Country?

Obviously what Miss Logan needed was a phalanx of armed American amazons to protect her. On second thought….

“In 2003, a survey of female veterans found that 30 percent said they were raped in the military. A 2004 study of veterans who were seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder found that 71 percent of the women said they were sexually assaulted or raped while serving. And a 1995 study of female veterans of the Gulf and earlier wars, found that 90 percent had been sexually harassed. The Defense Department shows much lower numbers, but that is because it only counts reported rapes—and, as the DoD admits itself in this year’s annual Pentagon report on military sexual assault, some 90 percent of rapes in the military are ever reported at all. Nonetheless, that same report showed that in 2008, reports of assault increased by 8 percent military-wide, and by 26 percent in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.”

Rather than pursue the obvious solution and keep women out of the military, the social engineers who have succeeded in getting so many women raped by men who are specifically trained to overcome their societal and moral taboos about not killing other people is to attempt to remove those who refuse to abide by societal taboos from the military. So, it should be interesting to see what their proposed solution for Egyptians rape-mobs is.

But the most interesting thing about the Logan incident is the way it is a metaphorical lesson on the choice facing Western women between three different futures: a) a return to traditional Christian culture, b) rape and the brothel, or c) submission and the burqah.

The decline of fantasy

I found this back-and-forth on the decline of modern fantasy into nihilism to be quite interesting. I’ll probably weigh in with my own thoughts on the matter when my turn comes around again on Sunday, so check out the discussion between Leo Grin, Joe Abercrombie and others at the Black Gate:

The other side thinks that their stuff is, at long last, turning the genre into something more original, thoughtful, and ultimately palatable to intelligent, mature audiences. They and their fans are welcome to that opinion. For my part — and I think Tolkien and Howard would have heartily agreed — I think they’ve done little more than become cheap purveyors of civilizational graffiti.

Soiling the building blocks and well-known tropes of our treasured modern myths is no different than other artists taking a crucifix and dipping it in urine, covering it in ants, or smearing it with feces. In the end, it’s just another small, pathetic chapter in the decades-long slide of Western civilization into suicidal self-loathing. It’s a well-worn road: bored middle-class creatives (almost all of them college-educated liberals) living lives devoid of any greater purpose inevitably reach out for anything deemed sacred by the conservatives populating any artistic field. They co-opt the language, the plots, the characters, the cliches, the marketing, and proceed to deconstruct it all like a mad doctor performing an autopsy. Then, using cynicism, profanity, scatology, dark humor, and nihilism, they put it back together into a Frankenstein’s monster designed to shock, outrage, offend, and dishearten.

Longtime Ilk may recall that I touched on a few of these themes in an essay entitled CS Lewis and the problem of religion in science fiction and fantasy, which was published in the 2005 anthology Revisiting Narnia by BenBella Books.

Alpha to Omega

DW has created a quiz on the male socio-sexual hierarchy. So go ahead and take it, all you precious male snowflakes, and report back on how astonishingly alphasexy you are!

I do note that lambda was somehow omitted, but I suspect most lambdas can readily figure out where they rank. For example, if your answer with regards to question four would have been You were in the mall a week ago with a bunch of friends. Are you: “The one giving/getting a hummer in the men’s room”, then it really doesn’t matter what your answers to the other questions happen to be.

I’ve been intending to put together a quiz of my own at some point in time and I’ll eventually get around to it, but this is certainly entertaining for starters.

Mailvox: on the Tea Party

TF writes in regarding his perceptions of the movement:

I am a Viet Nam veteran that came home in Dec. 1970 with a burning question in my mind? “Who is running our country?” About 1975 I started on my quest to answer that question. I can’t tell you how many hours I have spent in libraries trying to find information about various subjects. I have read excerpts out of the Congressional Record of the United States, I have read volumes of books, etc etc etc. At the risk of sounding like a big mouth I am very well read and understand more then most. I have attended several Tea Party rallies in the state I live in and found that most of the people there were there for answers. They saw enough about what was going on in the Government to make them scared. Some were more informed then others but ALL OF THEM had their eyes and ears open like no group I have been around since I started on my quest in 1975. To me that’s the big deal. A lot of people now know enough to know that they need to find out more and that it’s time to really stand up and do something before it’s too late. I disagree with you that the Tea Party played no part in the recent election. How much of a part I won’t try and portray because usually any event was a combination of several factors that caused a change but I can say the Tea Party has played a part and the people now have their eyes open. I just hope they stay that way.

I do too. And I think it is entirely correct to say that the Tea Party had a powerful effect concerning which Republicans were nominated and subsequently elected, but it defies both belief and electoral history to argue that it made any difference regarding the size of the Republican victory. That was entirely a function of Democratic missteps and subsequent unpopularity, in fact, one can even reasonably argue that the Tea Party cost the Republicans a few seats such as the Nevada Senate seat. But it is totally nonsensical to attempt to argue that the Tea Party matters because a) it elected “good” Republicans who nevertheless b) vote with the exactly same results as the previous “bad” Republicans.

PD doesn’t assert that I am wrong, she merely hopes that I am. So do I, for that matter:

Thank you for your bold article. I have considered myself a Tea Party Patriot from the first day. I fully admit I am no Mensa member, but I would like to point out that many of us Tea Party folks, as homey as we are, have been calling on our representatives to defund ALL foreign giving – even Israel, under Jeffersonian and common sense principles. I fully agree that all foreign wars should cease and desist immediately, foreign bases should be closed and our military funded to secure our national borders and prepare for attacks on Americans at home. I disagree with the US being the policeman of the world and if a country needs our help they should hire it. We could use the extra income from wealthy countries like S. Korea. I have called for the abolition of unconstitutional programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security starting in generations like mine that have time to plan for that eventuality. These ideas are not foreign to the Tea Party people, but we do know that they are foreign concepts to those in DC and there is a great mistrust of even those we sent to DC. I hope you are wrong that this grassroots movement will die like so many others. I hope that it is the rudder that turns the ship of US destruction as it sails toward DEMOCRACY (if it has not already arrived), then on to socialism (where I fear we already are) and onto the final destination of Communism. I say Heaven Help US, for there is not other help that can effect a true change.

I think her mistrust is well-placed. And we should find out if Tea Party optimism will survive to live another day or if Vox Day cynicism will score a first-round knock-out relatively soon, as the Tea Party has now laid down a direct challenge to Republicans who are flirting with raising the debt ceiling.

The largest tea party group in America has come out forcefully in opposition to raising the debt limit, adding more pressure to House Republicans who can kill plans to permit continued borrowing by the federal government and thus mandate the most dramatic government cuts in spending in decades. Mark Meckler and Jenny Beth Martin, co-founders of the Tea Party Patriots, said in a statement, “Republican credibility as fiscally responsible managers of public resources is on the line” with the issue of the debt limit.

“In a matter of weeks, Congress will vote on whether to raise the nation’s debt ceiling,” they wrote. “The American people are united in saying ‘no,’ with recent polls indicating almost 70 percent of the American people opposed to this reckless action. Once again, congressional Republicans will have the opportunity to demonstrate to the American people that they are serious about bringing fiscal responsibility to Washington. Tea Party Patriots will be watching.”

This speaks well for the seriousness of the Tea Party regarding its core issue. It also sets the stage for a real test of the hypothesis that the Tea Party is capable of becoming a significant force in governing politics as well as mere electioneering. My assumption is that the Republicans will show about as much concern for the will of the people who elected them as they did when 70% of the American people opposed the banking bailouts of 2008.

A very heavy burtation

I dare you to watch this without laughing. Ironically, CBS’s Serene Branson still manages to make a more coherent case than the average Fox News contributor in this brief and intriguingly esoteric commentary.

Never show weakness

Not to women, children, or dogs, anyhow. Roissy tells the tale of a text message written in response to a blow-off:

I begin reading his reply in a trembly voice, imitating as best I can a lovelorn beta. Paraphrased:

“Ok, I’m sorry to hear that. I was hoping we could date a few more times and see where it goes. I think you are really great, and a very special girl, and I felt we had something between us. I definitely felt we bonded on our dates together. Remember that time playing pool? That was pretty funny. But oh well, if you need some time to yourself, I understand. If you ever change your mind, you know where to email me. I’m willing to give it another try if you are. Ciao.”

Look, guys, no woman ever needs any time to herself. With very few exceptions, women are not contemplative and few can even entertain themselves for any extended period of time. The expression is merely a conflict-avoidance device utilized to communicate a lack of romantic interest. The correct translation of “time to herself” means “time with men who are not you” and by “time” she means “until the end of it”. If a woman is genuinely attracted to a man, she will make time for him even if it means abandoning her children, quitting her job, or doing without food and sleep.

But a blow-off shouldn’t inspire this cringing, lachrymose attempt to convince a woman that she has made the wrong choice. “I definitely felt we bonded”… seriously? This is classic delta and all it does is convince her that she was right to blow off the weakling when she did and make him a figure of mockery and scorn. The correct response, as numerous Chateau denizens have pointed out in the comments, is nothing. Niente. No response. To lash back at her over nothing more than legitimate rejection would be gamma; this need to ensure the rejector that there are no hard feelings on the part of the rejectee is pure delta. The omega, of course, will vow eternal vengeance (to himself) and tell his fellow rejects about the ten different terrible things that would teach his rejector a lesson she’d never forget if he ever followed through on one. Which he won’t. There is no single appropriate alpha response, as the real alpha is already involved with at least one of her friends and will feel relieved that a potentially messy problem has sorted itself out again without requiring any effort on his part.

The sigma response, of course, is “????”

Now, since there are clearly a few quasi-aspies here of the sort that regularly drive the Chateau regulars mad with their inability to understand the concept of behavioral gradations, the injunction to show no weakness is a relative one. If you are covered in blood, surrounded by headless bodies, and holding a severed head in your hand, then you can safely shed a tear or two and permit a woman to read your diary of secret doubts about your courage and masculinity. Any perceived weakness will be tend to be outweighed in her mind by your manifest ability to wreak massive havoc and that delicious sense of fear and security it inspires in her.

Please note that I am primarily speaking metaphorically here despite the literal truth of the statement. Casanova can confess his fears of rejection without concern, (although quite possibly not without sarcasm), because the woman knows that if she rejects him he can and will find a replacement for her within days, if not hours. Your average delta – and this very probably means you* – not so much. In summary, the strong man can afford to be seen as vulnerable, but the average man cannot.

*Except you, of course. You are a unique and precious sigma snowflake.

Which reminds me. Pop socio-sexual rank quiz:

Omega: You have threatened to kill yourself over a woman. But you stalked her instead.
Gamma: You have thought about killing yourself over a woman. But you wrote about how she made you feel instead.
Delta: You have taken it seriously when a woman threatened to kill herself. She did not do it.
Beta: You have listened to a woman threatening to kill herself over your best friend. With some amusement. On more than one occasion.
Alpha: A woman with whom you were involved has threatened to kill you because you also had sex with a) her roommate, b) her best friend, or c) her sister.
Sigma: A woman has asked you to kill her during sex. You thought it was hot.

UPDATE: The Dark Lord explains the optimal response to a blow-off and why it is better than the alternatives. You’ll note that it is precisely the response I recommended:

#1: No response. (Credit: Gorbachev)

90% of the time, and in 90% of situations, this will be your best option. Radio silence is a failsafe method for causing reckless hamster spin in a woman’s headspace. You have got to understand a couple of things about women and breaking up.

One, women initiate most breakups. I have read it is on the order of 75-85% of all breakups. Women also initiate 2/3rds to 3/4ths or more of all divorces.

Two, women secretly get a thrill out of the power they wield as society’s de facto hypergamous dumpers. When a woman dumps a man, she wants to know she got to him. Though she will never admit it, the act of gettting to a man is a blissful ego massage for the typical woman.

Fortunately, deficits don’t matter

For Paul Samuelson told us so:

President Obama‘s budget, released Monday, was conceived as a blueprint for future spending, but it also paints the bleakest picture yet of the current fiscal year, which is on track for a record federal deficit and will see the government’s overall debt surpass the size of the total U.S. economy. Mr. Obama‘s budget projects that 2011 will see the biggest one-year debt jump in history, or nearly $2 trillion, to reach $15.476 trillion by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year. That would be 102.6 percent of GDP — the first time since World War II that dubious figure has been reached.

Neo-Keynesians such as Paul Krugman insist that the deficit isn’t a problem because of this line of argument, first presented by Paul Samuelson in his landmark 1948 textbook entitled “Economics”.

“There are also burdens involved in an internally held public debt like our present one, but the burdens of an internal debt are qualitatively and quantitatively different from those of an external debt. This is the first and most important lesson to be grasped, without which nobody can go far in understanding the economics of the public debt. The interest on an internal debt is paid by Americans to Americans; there is no direct loss of goods and services. When interest on the debt is paid out of taxation, there is no direct loss of disposable income; Paul receives what Peter loses, and sometimes – but only sometimes – Paul and Peter are one and the same person. . . . In the future, some of our grandchildren will be giving up goods and services to other grandchildren. That is the nub of the matter. The only way we can impose a direct burden on the future nation as a whole is by incurring an external debt or by passing along less capital equipment to posterity.

Of course, it is probably worth considering that the situation in 2011 is not exactly the same as the situation in 1948, as can be seen in the chart below.  Note the green line, in particular.