Sexually twisted freaks

It’s not your imagination. There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with SJWs:

When she arrived at the house on Memorial Day in 2011, Anna didn’t know what D.J. planned to do. His brother, Wesley, was working in the garden, so she went straight inside to speak with D.J. and his mother, P. They chatted for a while at the dining table about D.J.’s plans for school and for getting his own apartment. Then there was a lull in the conversation after Wesley came back in, and Anna took hold of D.J.’s hand. ‘‘We have something to tell you,’’ they announced at last. ‘‘We’re in love.’’

‘‘What do you mean, in love?’’ P. asked, the color draining from her face.

To Wesley, she looked pale and weak, like ‘‘Caesar when he found out that Brutus betrayed him.’’ He felt sick to his stomach. What made them so uncomfortable was not that Anna was 41 and D.J. was 30, or that Anna is white and D.J. is black, or even that Anna was married with two children while D.J. had never dated anyone. What made them so upset — what led to all the arguing that followed, and the criminal trial and million-­dollar civil suit — was the fact that Anna can speak and D.J. can’t; that she was a tenured professor of ethics at Rutgers University in Newark and D.J. has been declared by the state to have the mental capacity of a toddler.

My favorite part is when she makes up how she “valiantly resisted” the speechless retard’s persistent seduction attempts. So brave. Thank you for this.

This was her mitzvah and her tikkun olam. She was helping to repair the world.

Any time you hear someone tell you they are occupied with “healing the world”, you know you’re dealing with a psychopath with a twisted mind.

Anti-GamerGate bias in the media

That’s not exactly a surprise. What is a little surprising is the way in which so-called journalists at The Guardian couldn’t even bother to hide the fact that they were taking sides from the very start:

The Guardian put out a piece of trash journalism, calling for the rest of the media to stop giving positive coverage to our consumer revolt. You see, when the SJWs start getting their asses kicked, like GamerGate has been doing, their go-to response is to change the rules of the game. So, they put out editorials designed to shame the few non-biased colleagues they have into not covering us objectively. I can guarantee you that Ricky Camilleri, of HuffPost Live, has gotten a lot of shit for even doing the segment on us yesterday. That’s how they control the narrative.

Earlier this evening, I was provided with an internal email from the technology editor of The Guardian, Jemima Kiss. She thought she was sending it to her staff, but instead unknowingly sent it to an associate of TheRalphRetort.com. After reading it, you can see that we never had a chance with her, or The Guardian. They’ve had their minds made up for quite sometime (at least as far back as Sept. 23rd).

If I had to guess, I would imagine there are many more emails like that, stretching back even further. She shows a clear disdain for our consumer campaign. I don’t think such a woman could ever be impartial. Outright dismissing our claims as “idiotic?” That’s not how a professional journalist is supposed to behave.

This is a cultural war, people. Show them no mercy and give them no quarter. They’re not going to play fair-and-balanced, so they don’t deserve even a modicum of restraint from us.

Notice how they actually brought in Leigh Alexander, of all people, to explain to their reporters what #GamerGate was really about. That’s like bringing in Charles Manson to talk about Sharon Tate.

Learning to talk

As a general rule, it’s a terrible mistake to take your lead on communication from actresses:

“Woman in a Meeting” is a language of its own.

It should not be, but it is. You will think that you have stated the case simply and effectively, and everyone else will wonder why you were so Terrifyingly Angry. Instead, you have to translate. You start with your thought, then you figure out how to say it as though you were offering a groveling apology for an unspecified error. (In fact, as Sloane Crosley pointed out in an essay earlier this year, the time you are most likely to say “I’m sorry” is the time when you feel that you, personally, have just been grievously wronged. Not vice versa.)

To illustrate this difficulty, I have taken the liberty of translating some famous sentences into the phrases a woman would have to use to say them during a meeting not to be perceived as angry, threatening or (gasp!) bitchy.

“Give me liberty, or give me death.”
Woman in a Meeting: “Dave, if I could, I could just — I just really feel like if we had liberty it would be terrific, and the alternative would just be awful, you know? That’s just how it strikes me. I don’t know.”

“I have a dream today!”
Woman in a Meeting: “I’m sorry, I just had this idea — it’s probably crazy, but — look, just as long as we’re throwing things out here — I had sort of an idea or vision about maybe the future?”

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
Woman in a Meeting: “I’m sorry, Mikhail, if I could? Didn’t mean to cut you off there. Can we agree that this wall maybe isn’t quite doing what it should be doing? Just looking at everything everyone’s been saying, it seems like we could consider removing it. Possibly. I don’t know, what does the room feel?”

As with most erroneous conclusions, the fault is in the assumptions. “You will think that you have stated the case simply and effectively” is where the problem is. Where the writer, and the actress before her, are wrong is in believing that their feelings about how they have stated the case are conclusive.

In all communication, the primary responsibility lies with the person talking, not the person being addressed. If people regularly misinterpret you, the fault is almost always your fault, not theirs. If women “speaking their opinion” are often perceived as angry, then, assuming they are not angry, it is obvious they are inadvertently or unconsciously sending out signals that are easily misinterpreted as anger.

The problem, I suspect, is that many women have zero self-confidence. That’s why about 50 percent of all individual female products are sold on the basis of claims that they will improve the buyer’s confidence. (The other half concern divulging the secret of an envied woman’s success in looking prettier than the buyer.) And what most people lacking in self-confidence do when they are trying to state their opinion or speak up for themselves is either a) apologize in advance in the manner demonstrated above or b) overcompensate and come off as angry.

It’s absurd to say that women are speaking in this way out of fear of being perceived as Terrifyingly Angry, they are doing so because they are Ridiculously Insecure.

The fact is that if you have to steel yourself and work yourself up to simply stating your opinion, or worse, do so just to cite a straightforward fact, you are almost always going to come off badly. Your behavior and expression will not be consistent with your message. Most of these women who think they are just stating the case simply and effectively would be shocked if they saw a video of themselves doing it and saw their furrowed brows, angry facial expressions, and heard how their voices were raised as if in anger.

Compounding the problem is that the natural solipsism of women combines with that lack of self-confidence so they make it all about themselves. Note how many “I” references there are in the three examples above: nearly four per example. Just to be clear, the normal male response to this rambling “I just feel that I think I should be able to express what I feel is the right thing to do” is “who the fuck cares?”

Women are also more inclined than men to see criticism of an idea they have expressed as personal criticism and react angrily to it. Does someone telling you “that’s a stupid idea” make you angry and feel personally attacked? Well, then you probably ARE angry and your speech and facial expressions accurately reflect that.

Now, I’ve been in more than a few business meetings with women, and certainly some have spoken in a way that I would describe as “Oh Sweet Darwin, get to the fucking point before we evolve into a new species and all of this becomes irrelevant”. But plenty of them speak normally, without either anger or apology, and I’ve noticed that those tend to be the more competent women. No drama, no theatrics, no uptalk, just normal, straightforward communication.

Just talk. It’s not that hard. Stop couching and overcompensating and trying to frame, and foreshadow, and pre-convince, and talk. If you think X, say “I think X.” That’s it. That’s all you have to do. You don’t have to apologize for it or get upset if someone comes back with “I think X is stupid, I think Y.” You think what you think. They think what they think. It’s not a sin or a crime to disagree.

Entering the Gorilla Mindset

I’ll be talking with Mike Cernovich, the author of Gorilla Mindset, in an hour. It should be a good interview, as I’ve learned a lot from him about social media and how to leverage the hatred that is directed at one by the other side.

In some ways, he is the anti-Scalzi. He’s from a poor background in California too, but he had a father who helped him grow out of the gamma mindset and not only become a man, but an independent man. Like Scalzi, he is very, very good at self-marketing, but unlike Scalzi, he doesn’t need to lie, and spin, and misrepresent himself to do it.

One of these days I’ll have to explain to him the deeper symbology of the third eye, but tonight will not be that night. If you haven’t read the book yet, here is a detailed review of it.

Turnabout is fair play

German daily documents anti-migrant hate speech on Facebook

Germany’s top-selling Bild daily Tuesday documented racist vitriol against migrants posted by Facebook users in a double-page newspaper spread, as pressure grows on the social network to eliminate hate speech.

A day after thousands of anti-Muslim PEGIDA protesters and anti-fascist counter-demonstrators rallied in the eastern city of Dresden, Bild published dozens of anti-migrant rants under the headline “The Pillory of Shame”.

Facebook “agitators” posted xenophobic and threatening comments, which Bild urged the prosecutor general to investigate.

Tensions have grown as Germany has opened its doors to an unprecedented wave of people fleeing war and misery, with arrivals expected to reach one million this year, an influx that has seen Chancellor Angela Merkel’s poll ratings slip.

As Germany has seen increasingly angry street protests, attacks on asylum shelters and a knife attack against a pro-refugee politician last Saturday, lawmakers have warned that inflammatory speech can spur violence.

Turnabout being fair play and all, it seems to me that the German nationalists should keep track of all the anti-nationalist’s identities and document all their statements and actions against the German people too.

Just in case they might happen to come in handy one day, you know?

So go ahead, SJWs and anti-nationalists, by all means, post that “I hate my nation, invaders welcome” rant. No doubt it will prove useful to someone one day.

The irrelevance of college

TK observes that a university education is simply not relevant for an increasing number of jobs today:

I just spent some time with one of my oldest friends who did electronic maintenance in the army and afterwards designed PCBs. For the past 12 years he’s been driving a cab in San Diego and loving it.

Since since uber, et al., came to town, however, they have destroyed his ability to make a living wage as a cab driver (most uber drivers drive part-time, for drug and beer money (more true than not) and with a zero barrier to entry there are too many cars on the road now. Yay free market – I mean it. I think it’s great!). So he decided to get back into PCB design.

He spent the last six months updating his skills 100% online. In just the past month he contacted a recruiting agency and began setting up interviews. The other day while I was visiting him, from just his second interview, he was offered a job for $32/hr! After he passes his first certification in February he will get a significant bump in pay and when he passes his second certification in October his salary should move into the low six figures.

He is 54 and has been out of the field for 12 years and has NO college degree!

Yet he was able to bring himself back up to speed in less than 6 months using just the internet. His employers didn’t even care that his only formal training was in the army – 30 years ago!

You can always tell the difference between a job that requires real work and a pseudo-job that doesn’t. If they give a damn about university credentials, it’s the latter.

Strangling the golden goose

A few brave left-wing minds are looking around the wreckage of the West and wondering why it doesn’t look like the shiny sexy secular utopia of It’s a Small World they were promised:

THE West is suddenly suffused with self-doubt.

Centuries of superiority and global influence appeared to reach a new summit with the collapse of the Soviet Union, as the countries, values and civilization of the West appeared to have won the dark, difficult battle with Communism.

That victory seemed especially sweet after the turn of China toward capitalism, which many thought presaged a slow evolution to middle-class demands for individual rights and transparent justice — toward a form of democracy. But is the embrace of Western values inevitable? Are Western values, essentially Judeo-Christian ones, truly universal?

The history of the last decade is a bracing antidote to such easy thinking. The rise of authoritarian capitalism has been a blow to assumptions, made popular by Francis Fukuyama, that liberal democracy has proved to be the most reliable and lasting political system.

With
the collapse of Communism, “what we may be witnessing,” Mr. Fukuyama
wrote hopefully in 1989, “is the end point of mankind’s ideological
evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the
final form of human government.”
But couple the tightening of Chinese authoritarianism with Russia’s
turn toward revanchism and dictatorship, and then add the rise of
radical Islam, and the grand victory of Western liberalism can seem
hollow, its values under threat even within its own societies.
The
recent flood of migrants and Syrian asylum seekers were welcomed in
much of Europe, especially Germany and Austria. But it also prompted
criticism from a number of less prosperous European countries, a
backlash from the far right and new anxieties about the growing
influence of Islam, and radical Islamists, in Europe.

Western values only exist for Westerners. They are not universal and merely claiming them to be does not make them so. Physical relocation to the land of magic dirt doesn’t convert non-Westerners into Westerners just as moving to the New World didn’t transform the Puritans into Indians. It’s a simple and straightforward numbers game. It should not be a surprise, either, as ever since the Baby Boom was born, an increasing number of parents have been failing to raise their children as members of the civilized West.

The current invaders aren’t coming to America and Western Europe for freedom, democracy, or whatever other fiction the media is attempting to spin, they are coming to grab a share of the societal wealth that has been built up over the centuries. And by permitting them entry, the golden goose of the West is being gradually strangled.

To begin restoring the West, straightforward steps are needed:

  • Restore Christianity to its foremost position in Christendom.
  • Drive back the Turk.
  • Replace representative democracy with direct democracy unhampered by judicial-branch vetoes.
  • Hard money.
  • End free trade.
  • Punish corporations that break the law with jail. “Jail” them by pulling their business license for the period of their sentences. A criminal natural person cannot work, so why is a criminal juridical person permitted to do so?

Good… and the conclusion would be?

Fredrik de Boer takes a few faltering first steps towards understanding the media:

People often think I instinctively hate political journalists and writers. This is not the case. I’m friendly with some, and a few I consider close friends. I dated a political writer and journalist for years. And I know many to be bright, committed, decent people. That’s why I find it so perplexing that the average professional political commentator is so deeply out of touch, and so unaware that they are. The only thing I can figure is that the professional necessity of being constantly plugged into the news cycle, particularly on Twitter, just gives people an extremely skewed vision of what politics means and is for most people.

What else to make of this piece by Jake Flanagin or this piece by Amanda Marcotte, both of which have the same absurd idea: that the biggest problem that Bernie Sanders faces, politically, is the online conduct of his biggest online fans. The biggest problem! A Jewish socialist from Brooklyn in the land of Reagan, and his biggest problem is a few dozen people on Twitter!

Let’s think about some likely Democrat primary voters. Like, say, a white woman who lives in the greater Cincinnati suburbs, who can’t get enough hours at her part-time job organizing records for a oral surgeon, and whose ex-husband can’t pay her child support because his only income is disability payments. Or a black bus driver in Maryland who’s worried about what’s going to happen to his pension in the next union contract negotiations. Or a Hispanic first grade teacher in Florida who doesn’t know if her school’s funding is going to get cut yet again. Or a retiree in Pennsylvania whose economic security is dependent entirely on Social Security and Medicare. Or a Laotian immigrant in the Bay Area who’s struggling to bring her mother into the country.

Now: which of these people, do you think, is going to vote based on the conduct of Bernie Sanders fans on Twitter?

See, that’s just it. They’re not “bright, committed, decent people”. They’re narcissistic, solipsistic, maleducated, and of barely above-average intelligence. They’re also snobbish, tribal, clueless about any subculture but their own, and possess less self-awareness than the average rock.

Spacebunny and I once had dinner with a pair of legitimately famous journalists. I mean, one name you would recognize and the other is on a first-name basis with Hollywood’s A-list. After dinner, she commented that she couldn’t believe how shallow their knowledge was. And that’s the dirty little secret of the media: they have a surface knowledge of many things and that knowledge barely scratches the surface.

Ask them about anything, from Swaziland to the internal mechanism of the Austrian Business Cycle and they will claim to “have heard of that”. In their world, this passes for fluency, if not perfect mastery. There are few things I enjoy more than addressing a journalist who claims to speak another language in that language. It’s like waving a cross in front of a vampire.

At least they’re empty

Swedes are following the German lead in burning planned refugee hostels:

An old school building in Onsala, south of Gothenburg, caught fire on Saturday evening. It was the third time in a week that prospective asylum accommodation has been badly damaged by a fire.

The fire was attended by 20 firefighters. The building, part of the otherwise demolished Furulidsskolan, was to be prepared to greet asylum seekers in the affluent area of Kungsbacka.

“Half the building has been damaged by fire,” said Mikael Lindgren, lead operator of the emergency services in Greater Gothenburg.

The cause of the fire is unclear but police will cordon off the area and carry out a technical examination when the emergency services have finished making the property secure.

The fire occurred just a day after a school, just south of Ljungby in Småland, was also destroyed by fire. The school building was to be used to accommodate refugees and had recently been decorated.

On Tuesday night a building in Arlöv in Skåne, designed for unaccompanied refugee children, was badly damaged. The centre was due to be open to the children the following day.

Two months ago, two other refugee centres were the targets of arson attacks. There have been a suspected 14 arson attacks on asylum centres since the start of the year.

I expect it won’t be long before we start reading about politicians’ homes being burned. It’s not like they can’t go live with the refugees they love more than their own people.