Tuesday, February 22, 2022

Pet Mania Exposed!

Why you love poop so much! 

AKA: The terrorism of dog moms and fur babies: Why your love of animals is part of a misanthropic post-modern market oriented anti- human society. 

I didn't feel like doing all the necessary research to find out when dog mania started in the USA, but it wasn't that long ago that "dog mom" behavior was considered bizarre enough to get you mocked on television.

Remember when Paris Hilton was  ruthlessly derided for carrying that little Taco Bell© dog around in her purse? Now the whole damn world acts just as entitled as she did. Behavior once considered eccentric even for the rich and spoiled is now copied by average people. These average people turned pet enthusiasts bring their dogs to the grocery store, they bring them to restaurants, and to my astonishment, I've seen people walking around the mall with them. Why do pet lovers assume we all share the same affection for these creatures in public spaces?

It's because so many people are substituting pets for human interaction. Now that so many millennials have opted out of having children pet ownership rates have climbed out of control. But you can't blame pet mania on just being too poor to have kids. According to one source "The pet-ownership rate is even higher among those with a college education and a stable income—the same people who are most likely to delay marriage, parenthood, and homeownership beyond the timelines set by previous generations. Dogs, long practical partners in rural life or playmates for affluent children, have become a life stage unto themselves."

I don't know who needs to hear THIS, but if you own a pet your house is FULL of poop!! 

   All pets do is shit in your house. 

I get it pet defender, I'm not supposed to be worried about poop because cats get a specific box of rocks to shit in. But no matter how careful you are, no matter how many precautions you take, no matter how few "surprises" kitty leaves you on the living room floor, your entire house is still contaminated with fecal matter. 

Think about it. That cat shits and then rubs it's ass everywhere. They jump on cabinets, furniture, beds. They climb, walk on, and investigate every crook and corner of your home. Cats do all this right after they've covered their fecal deposits with litter. They kick dust infested with feces straight into the air. Delightful, right? Now do you think that the poop just sticks to the kitty litter? No. The poo also sticks to your cats paws and fur. Thus, fecal matter gets transmitted all over your home. 

All you need is to live in a home with carpetless floors to realize how easily kitty litter gets spread. Walk around without socks and you will invariabley feel the crunch of dirty, fecal infested matter on the bottom of your bare feet. Not only does feces gets spread all around, but random fur balls roam the hallways like tumble weeds in the Old West. 

Look you can sweep the floor 24/7, but all that means you are doing is spreading that feces laced kitty litter around your floors. Pro tip make sure to cover your toothbrush unless you enjoy brushing your teeth with poop infested dust. 

I can already hear your objections, I KNOW you think YOUR home is clean. You meticulously scrub the floor with Clorox®, you change the litter box constantly. You bathe your cat daily. But you are wrong, and fooling yourself. Your home smells. If you have a cat or dog in the house any new visitor will know it. Trust me. I came from a petless environment and as soon as I entered my new home with animals, the offensive smell of animal was the first thing I noticed. You don't smell your animals because you have become desensitized to the smell. But the impurity is still there. Most of your petless friends are simply to polite to tell you about it. 

I'm not. 

For those who think I'm being  dramatic, sensitive, or just plain wrong, ask yourself this  question... would you let a homeless man shit in a box in your bathroom as long as he kicked some sand over it? Would you be cool with his barefeet walking over your kitchen counters? Don't worry, he's a very clean homeless man, we bathe him every few weeks, and whenever he shits he licks his feet and hands clean. I don't think you would. But you will allow your animals to run around like that. You'll even let your dogs and cats slober all over everything. Including licking and kissing your mouth, you disgusting zoophiles. These animals also bring in flees, bugs, shed their fur, vomit, and relieve themselves through out your home constantly. Yet many of you pretend this is perfectly acceptable condition to live in. 

It's probably worse in carpeted homes. Basically you get all that shit soaking into your carpets in between vacuuming. Remember your kids are eating and playing on the floor. That's bad parenting. You are infecting those innocent children with bacteria. 

Mind you these same pet owners are the kind of people who BRISTLE at the idea there are no cart wipes available to them to disinfect the cart handles at the grocery store all because 30 years ago they saw a Dateline 'investigation' about bacteria on grocery carts that's never  been empirically confirmed by science. But science or logic isn't something most pet owners are familiar with.*

*After cleaning the cart they place their filthy animals in the carts to contaminate it for the next customer. I won't mention how the standard response from these average minded folks confronted with evidence that contradicts their love of pets respond fallaciously by moving the goal posts. 


If you aren't convinced by a cesspool of feces to get rid of your animals, then at least consider how dangerous animals are. 

Where this blog to catalog the gruesome images of dog attacks made everyday, then this blog would feature nothing other than X-rayed images of a Pit Bulls stomachs indicating where the chewed off digits of newborns end up. 

Cats cannot be trusted. 

And we haven't even gotten into the mind control that cats have over people by infecting them with a toxic virus.  Doctors reccomend against owning a cat if you are pregnant, or have a low immune system. Beware, you can literally risk your life by housing a pet. 

It's well known that the taxoplasmosis virus causes rat brains to go haywire by making them unafraid of cats. Could the virus also effect human brains? There is enough evidence to be worried. Taxoplasmosis has been linked in humans with schizophrenia, bad driving, crazy cat lady syndrome, risky choices, and much more. 

I think we've all met one of those  hypersexual grandmas who feeds 12 stray cats. They refuse to bathe and spread around the cat urine that's been soaked in to their adult under garments by pissing themselves on busses. Frankly, it's an insidious public health crisis that no one is talking. More than a third of all people have been infected with this virus which causes men to secrete extra testosterone which in turn can lead to risky and violent behavior in men. All of which allows the government to police the behavior of males far more closely than would otherwise be permissable. And risky violent male behavior gives credence to animal lovers when they promote ideas that animals are equal to or better than people. 

The Science of the Necrophillic Character Type as analyzed by Erik Fromm

Look, I know as soon as I said Necrophillic Personality Type to you, that I lost most of you. You figured I was just being disgusting by advocating sex with a corpse. 

You couldn't be more wrong. I'm borrowing a typology from Erik Fromm. Someone you should have remembered from your Sociology 101 class, or when you studied for the MCAT. 

Didn't study for an MCAT? How about at least a GRE? No? Then honestly what are you doing listening to this podcast? I can't sit here and explain every little thing for you. From now on, I'm gonna require a minimum level of education from you. Maybe I should send you a reading list? Oh, who am I kidding? None of you can take time away from your busy schedule of video gaming and gooner masturbation to read anything more cumbersome than a joke from your bubble gum wrappers. So I guess as usual the onus falls on me to teach you since I took Soc 101 and I've read all of Erik Fromm's books. 


Strictly speaking I'm broadening the concept of the necrophilliac personality type and combing the necrophilliac orientation to explain just how the social structure of the USA could form such a vile character type and what the formation of such a personality implies about our shared social structures. 

Fromm descibed the Necrophillic Type to include: "one who is attracted to and fascinated by all that is not alive, to all that is dead; to corpses, to decay, to feces, to dirt." [My exphasis] 

Only a Necrophillic character type could ignore all the poop and fecal matter distributed by your "animal companions." Indeed it's a wonder how little society acknowledges this fecal problem. Is there a virus contaminating dog feces as well as making humans oblivious to feces? Proof? Have you seen the cognitive dissonance that becomes engaged by an animal lover's brain when you discuss the feces littering animals do to neighborhood yards or the putrid smells found in pet homes? You can literally hear the sound of the brain cells colliding into each other trying to cover the negative tracks of pet ownership (that is if you can hear anything over the incessant barking.) 

So far our analysis has been descriptive only. We have sought to show you that pet ownership is dangerous. Dirty. And disgusting. But there is more. 

The Sick Society 

Pet mania isn't just an annoying fad for non-pet lovers, it's a serious sign there is something wrong with society. 

The Necrophillic diagnosis can be applied to individuals, but it can also be used to diagnose societies. Fromm believed that you could use this classification to differentiate between sick and sane societies. Of course to call a society sick we must understand what it takes to have a Sane Society. Fromm would define a sane society thusly:

[It's sane if it meets the] 'Needs and passions which are specifically human... the need for relatedness, transcendence, rootedness, the need for a sense of identity and the need for a frame of orientation and devotion. ...[man's] destructiveness as well as his creativeness, every powerful desire which motivates man's actions, is rooted in this specific source... '

For nearly two centuries philosophers and social scientists have been warning Western people that our societies no longer provide the ground for these human needs. As Durkheim comments "the individual, free from all genuine social bonds, finds himself abandoned, isolated, and demoralized. Society becomes a disorganized dust of individuals."

As Durkheim rightly points out we are all now a "disorganized dust of individuals" an isolated individual hidden within the Lonely Crowd.  Modern society no longer meets our human needs, so we must turn to a hodge podge of fabricated relief that allows us to live with these defects without becoming insane. [This is the cause of neurosis.] 

Our defects alienate us from our selves, they alienate us from others, so much so that the alienated person finds it almost impossible to remain by himself, because he is seized by the panic of experiencing nothingness. In addition capitalism through the Market Society has further imprinted upon us the need for the constant avoidance of pain, lonlieness, and fear through the consumption of goods that offer relief from its manufactured needs. We avoid feelings of estrangement in these societies through the reified consumption of those things. 

Nothing could be more emblematic of this process of reification in personal relationships than the modern dynamic of Tinder best expressed by the following quotation from Erik Fromm: "Love is often nothing but a favorable exchange between two people who get the most of what they can expect, considering their value on the personality market." I'm sure that sounds just like dating to you, my millennial friends? 

When individuals are this estranged its no wonder they no longer connect humanely with each other. A market system designed to squeeze profit from everywhere devalues the effort that connecting with others requires. But alienation is a horrific way to live. So we do the best we can to cope. We buy the unconditional love of a pet. We consume the adoration of it's unsophisticated mind. We alleviate our boredom, lack of emotion, and the loneliness of our lives through sublimation; transfering and projecting anthropomorphical feelings of devotion to our animal companions. 

We have so anthropomorphised our pets today that it is considered the height of ethics, philosophy, and morality among unsophisticates to confer upon canines a superior status over humanity. Out in the public square I hear the refrain constantly. We prefer our animals to you. In the 1800's such an utterance would have you placed in a madhouse. Full panopticon style. "We better  watch that guy!" People would say. Imagine telling those long ago liberals that dog sanctuaries are now better funded than homeless shelters, that entertainment sources would showcase grizzly atrocities of humans for fun, but would outlaw or self censor the equivalent images of animals. 

Even as late as the 1960's dog mania would have been considered insane. Sure there were movies like Old Yeller®, but no one would overhear you saying something so ridiculous as dogs or pets are morally superior to humans. Nor would organizations promote ideas that we should prefer the company of a pet over a Human. These ideas would have been shot down and labeled as neurosis as quickly as they were suggested. And it would have been immediately recognized for the misanthropy that it is. That's why earlier society slandered the crazy cat lady. We called her crazy because we knew full well what she wanted was a husband or at least some human connection. 

What could allow such an obvious neurosis like dog mania to go mainstream? It is the mistrust and estrangement bred within our market societies that allows such ideas to take hold? Not only does that market system seek to atomize and separate us, it seeks profit from the billions of dollars Americans spend on animals. Pet mania has convinced too many of us to spend recources on not just food and shelter for these creatures, but for toys, playthings, and all kinds of extravaganzas which further feeds our inclination to humanize these animals. 

No human society that offered a higher purpose or fed our spiritual selves would devalue the life of other humans so easily. A biophillic orientationed society would prevent other humans being treated as nearly a means to an end, or as an impediment to our selfish goals. Instead we'd seek  rewards found through human interaction. 


I know so many of you profess to care about your animal companions. You go so far as to purchase pet food that's made to be sold with the "people food." You find this trend to be cute, I find the trend to be quite disturbing. It's another way the culture  equalizes animals and humans. PETA and other animal rights activists  take advantage of this trend to push their pro animal, vegan, anti- human, and anti-science agenda. 

And while the pet enthusiasts pro animal agenda can count many victories in our culture they have done a terrible job teaching their new converts how to interact with their animal companions. When asked pet owners will admit to things like not being able to control their animals, and observations of distress that their lifestyles cause their pets. 

Take for instance how bored most dogs are. Dogs are pack animals who look to their leader for direction, but most owners are gone for hours a day at work. Even when the owners get home they rarely have time for directed play or time to satisfy the animals curiosity or desires. Owners lament the dog walk, sometimes offering to outsource this vital activity. They witness their pets insatiable need to stare and hover around their human 'parents.' Dog distress is a highly searched term on Google largely because no forethought is used by humans to help them decide if having a companionship is appropriate for the pet. 

Humans take little time to decide why they want a pet, usually it's just an effort to allievate their boredom, their loneliness, their emotional needs. Very little concern is given to the animal. Will it have proper food? Distraction? Will my absence affect this highly social animal? Does my dog or pet have a function or service it can ground its being into? The answer is invariably no. Even where service animals are found, one can see how the training has broken their spirit. Have you ever looked into the eyes of a service dog? They look miserable. Training animals to ignore their social instincts and work all day kills the natural joy & ignorance that nature has bequeathed on these stupid beasts. 

Instead of a blissful and natural life pets serve greedy, needy, and desperate people. And when they become a burden to those people they get disposed of it. The result, millions of feral cats and wild dogs are euthanized and the rest roam our streets causing untold damage. Many of these orphaned street pets end up attacking innocent pet free people. 


Whenever I inquire into the mind set behind pet ownership, pet owners respond with how much they love their animals and hate people. They list a set of behaviors that pets (but especially dogs) provide to them that could best described as bootlicking behaviors. Pets have absolute loyalty. Pets provide unconditional love. Pets are subject to my whims. It seems that what most pet owners are looking for in their interaction is the opposite of what they'd find in humans. Humans require reciprocity in relationships. But the average pet owner is tired of taking other's feelings into account. They want easy love they can turn on and off. They want nothing to be required of them. Feed a dog and it will show you far more loyalty than any person will. When asked to choose between their pets and a human stranger in danger a shocking amount will side with their animals. 

The reason we admire dogs so much is that exhibit the the same characteristics that will be beneficial in upcoming dictatorships: loyalty, bootlicking affection, unconditional affection. 
Pet maniacs despise the complexity of human interaction. They view complexity as a negative. Pet owners desire something predictable and easy. Pet owners desire constant affection and attention. And prefer the option and to shut the door and retreat from the relationship when it suits them. They enjoy the literal boot licking of pathetic creatures attempting to win their favor. Pet maniacs despise being forced to engage in human interaction. Pet maniacs actively hate humanity. Their contempt is unsurprising from my psychodynamic analysis. 

Pets provide stability and relief from a chaotic system. Where there was fear a pet can provide companionship . Where there is chaos a pet can provide calm. Pet Mania infantilizes the owners emotional states the same way an authoritarian strongman strokes the fearful needs of the masses by offering protection and safety within the collective. It's no surprise to me to see the rise of pet mania during a time of increasing unease and authoritarianism. 

What can be done about pet mania? 

What can we done about this predicament? Is there hope to cure a society as sick as ours? We can start by promoting further instances of the biophillic over the necrophillic orientation. We can promote political causes that allow for the productive powers of humanity to improve. We must dispose of the post modern attacks on rationality which question the nature of objectivity which allow everyone's opinion to be considered equally. 

In our daily lives we can speak up against attacks on the unique place that humans have in creation. We can't allow proclamations like animals have greater or equal moral worth to humanity to go unchallenged. We must display our disgust when animal rights activists compare the suffering of people to be subordinate to the plight of their animal brethren. The next time you hear one of these sickos suggest they'd rather spend time with an animal over a human, or how they don't trust humans that don't love animals you should shout them down. "You are the problem, lady. Your terrible behavior is the reason society is in collapse!" 

Further more, you could join my boycott against Titos® Vodka. Titos® advertisements brag "They are the vodka for dog people.®" Their slogan is: They support pet prosperity and rescue.™ 

Titos© supports animal life but somehow it never occurred to them that consumption of their product has deleterious effects on humans, they'd rather set a goal of prosperity for pets (whatever that could mean) than set a goal to limit the harm their addictive product makes in human society. Titos© could be promoting harm reduction by donating to charities for humans, but instead they chose to take the profits they make from harming people and divert it towards the prosperity of pets. That's literally the definition of species suicide. On a personal note, I just don't trust drunken dog owners. I've been attacked by too many dogs let loose by careless people to give them a benefit of doubt. 

In addition to our daily interactions non pet lover's should show compassion and kindness to other people. Our kindness will be a helpful example to pet lovers that it is humans that are capable of supreme sacrifices and reflective selfless behavior towards others. We must build loving families communities that bring out the best in all of us. 

Anticipating your objections:

I am under no illusions that given the prevailing orthodoxy of dog mania found in our culture that many of you reading this essay will find my ideas preposterous, or perhaps feel defensive because of them. My positions, no matter how clearly stated are likely to be misunderstood. 

When ideas like pet mania are shared by the vast majority of people they aquire a self reinforcing power with little need to justify themselves. But just because a majority has entrenched a dangerous idea within our community does not mean those with heterodox views should be silenced. Indeed what is required is exactly the opposite. 

I won't be able anticipate every objection that will be advanced against me, but I will attempt to millitate the silliest of your objections and the most preposterous of the fallacies you will offer. 

The easiest objection to anticipate is the weakest of all arguments that will be offered against me. I anticipate that most of you will attack me with what philosophers call the ad hominem or the personal attack. 

You do not trust humans who dislike animals. Instead of addressing my arguments you will argue that what what you have read here amounts to nothing more than the idiosyncratic hypotheses of an animal hater. I fully admit this. I am an animal hater. If your leg had been bitten and nearly severed from the bite of a vicious attack dog you'd probably carry a grudge too. But it matters not whether I'm an animal lover or hater. What matters is the truth of my claims. It is simply irrelevant to the matter whether I like animals or dislike them. In fact, you may be surprised that my argument actually takes pity on pets when subjugated by humans in the form of service animals, or when stripped of their natural place in nature. 

Despite those fallacious attempts to smear me, my proposal to diagnose insanity on this society because of pet mania is hardly idiosyncratic. It was the great Sigmund Freud who first proposed the idea that societies can be sick in his essay Civilization and it's Discontents. 

Others will take issue with the Necrophillic diagnosis that I have assigned to pet lovers and the necrophilous orientation that I say governs market economies. Despite being covered in feces and so obviously oblivious to your worship of animal life over human life. And despite the market economy's reliance on it's mechanistic form of orienting society. It was the Frankfurt School of critical theory which first argued how capitalist formation and domination is realized through the reification of social relations a by product of the mechanization of instrumental reason. 

The fact that so many of you will make these errors does not make your errors to be truths, and the fact that millions of people share the same mental pathology of pet mania with you, does not make  you sane people. Your mania has made you insane and you need a cure. It was the goal of psychodynamic theory to rid the world of neurosis, and there was no better practitioner of psychodynamic theory than the man I base my conjectures on, Eric Fromm. 

So it will be up to you fellow human to shake off and mitigate the economic forces that push and control you, that have stripped you and humanity of its connectivity and a frame of orientation. 

It will not be easy. Once we have removed the opiate against the socially patterned defect of pet mania, the manifest illnesses of alienation will make their appearance. Pet mania may partially fulfill some human needs, but neurosis is the consequence. Acquired pet mania  strips basic humanity from those inflicted with it. Neurotic pet lovers then project their broken humanity onto  others. 

In our insane world basic human needs no longer find easy fulfillment, so social insanity is the only result. Pet mania can only remain normalized as long as we live in this insane world of pet worship. I wish to rid the world of the psychosis of Pet Mania. Moving forward the only path to a Sane Society is living without it. I hope that you will join me in this fight. Your society's health depends on it. 

Thursday, February 03, 2022

Let's update today's hypochondria, with more hypochondria

It's cold out today. 36 degrees in Arizona is like the North Pole before global warming. I can't poop anymore. Little nuggets is all I get when I push. My new roommate's ex gf cats poop more than me. Of course... there are three of them.

Something is wrong with my fingers, so I researched the first signs you get after you've had exposure to asbestos. After looking at pictures of fingers I know I'll be dead soon. Dr. Google gives me 2 years max. I may be dead soon, but I still won't release my Manifesto to you. Not until I'm dead. The Manifesto has too much truth in it that y'all can't handle. Mostly it's about my 10 inch cock and how it's always ready to be manipulated and fondled. A floppy 10 inch cock that doesn't need to get hard to be a pleasing machine. My cock's ejaculate tastes like apple sauce and I usually spurt more than a  quart at a time. It doesn't stop me from continuing to orgasm afterwards either. I can ejaculate all day, non-stop. 

Let's not forget the rest of my symptoms like the pressure in my chest and my new cough. All that along with the intestinal  back pain I've been having. It's hard to get out of bed sometimes. Hard to sit. My urine is a dark yellow and is fizzy as fuck. Like all I do is eat protein.

I get up to pee 5 times a night. The diabetes has finally kicked in I guess. There's so much wrong with me I'm not sure where to begin at a doctors office. Doctors never want to hear you describe so many symptoms. They want to know what this visit is for. Just tell em one thing they can bill. One thing they can prescribe you for. 

Moreover; doctors never believe you when you describe what's wrong. Even after they have evidence. They never believe. Don't believe me? Watch your doctor when you talk to them. They just wait for you to stop talking and then proceed to give you the first thing that comes to their mind. They call that a professional diagnosis. 

No wonder robots are already better at diagnosing. 

Wednesday, January 26, 2022

The Futility of Living

The cancer is taking forever to kill me. 

There's an old woman coughing in to her hand next to me. She used to be a nurse, so she knows better. But that was 50 years ago. Probably before the germ theory of illness transmission was taught. After she's done coughing she applies a red quilted cloth mask to her face.

I'm contemplating all the evil women who tried molesting me as a 20 year old. They took Bob's Gold Star too. He should be angrier about that. 

I can't remember the last time I wrote to you angry. Mostly it's been about resignation. Which is something you don't like about me. How quick I am to give up. How nothing ever works out for me. No one likes that shit, including me. It engenders pity. And nothing is worse than pity.

So instead I'll get angry again. The old Romius T is back baby!!! 

Monday, January 17, 2022

Take the L in the New Year!

How much blood in your stool do you need to die? I'm not sure either, but I imagine I'm close. A red ribbon of death gets smeared into the toilet paper every morning after I visit the bathroom and if that's not a warning from your diety I'm not sure what is. 

I know a lot of you would be like, "better get myself an appointment with a doctor." But if you had my life you'd probably have the same reaction that I had which is, 'what's taking so long?' 

Like many of you I've discovered how shitty this life is. Unlike many of you, I've given up on this shitty life. I really can't understand why you don't. 

Granted many of you aren't exactly facing the same life as I am. But plenty of you have bodies that are shutting down. Plenty of you can't pay your bills. There are thousands or more that are homeless, addicted to drugs, and are just plain miserable every day and in every way. 

Now, I'm not advocating suicide. That's for a later post. I just can't understand why more aren't interested. 

Someone explain it to me. Is it because you never sit down and do any kind of rational calculus. When was the last time you were actually happy? Is the pain way more often than pleasure? Are you really afraid of going to hell? Do you just drink so much that you don't remember yesterday? I assume. 

Monday, December 27, 2021

I'm 51. Welcome to my America where everyone is a failure too.


I'm 50 now and I have no idea what I am doing with my life. Of course if you have been reading this blog for any time you probably figured that out already. 

After years of subsidy living in a condo that was rented to me at below market level the good times are over. I'll be looking for a new place to live in the worst rental market in years.

Truth is living by yourself is the fastest way to poverty in the new economy. And it's also impossible to room alone in the Phoenix area. Studios go for more than I make in a month and 1 bedroom apartments cost more than owning 3 trailer homes in Arkansas.

I may have to travel back to Palmetto (aka the palm ghetto) or live with some friends here and rent a room from them. Either way it's just more proof that I'm a loser. I have 20 year old friends that have their own house and car and sometimes I can't afford to uber home when I have groceries. I mean when milenial's figure life out before you, you've got some explaining to do. And the truth is I just don't have an explanation other than ineptitude. 

Now the only good thing about being a failure these days is that a lot of you are going to be joining me. The middle class is crumbling. And frankly, I can't wait to see you smug asshats who talked up the triumph of capitalism to take it on the chin. It's the end of the American Century™ and living standards are declining. Now is the time to give up hope. Just like me. 

Tuesday, September 07, 2021

I finally decide to write something about OnlyFans® girls.

OnlyFans® girls can suck my tits.

I finally decided to write something about OnlyFans® girls. Though not like the insults your dream imagery comes up with, where you see yourself gutting the bellies of pregnant women with garden shears. Watching as the embryonic fluid drains out of the fetus sack, the unborn clumsily grasp with their just formed stumps on the way down. Sometimes though they get stuck in the sack and you have to stick your hand up there and give 'em a yank, holding on to their tiny defenseless fingers like you're going to cross the street with them. 

"Little Billy watch both ways!" You'd shout!

"Watch out for the shears!" Would have been better. 

🎵 Killing in the name of...🎵

The funny thing about killing a fetus is that you never hear it scream. Which makes it easy to see how a fetus isn't that human to a feminist. Instead it just struggles to breathe and stares up at you blinking from the cold concrete floor with unknowing eyes. 

Now I know a lot of you folks reading those last few paragraphs are gonna turn around and get offended. Accusing me of writing something horrible. But I call hypocrisy! It's not like I'm one of you left wing hippy do-gooders going around promoting abortions. 

I mean what exactly do you think happens during an abortion? Kid gets a lollipop at the end? No. He gets a lobotomy when a fucking vacuum tube sucks in his skull. 
You liberals are always defending the indefensible and then getting offended at the slightest clap back despite protesting all along that what you really care about is 'free speech.'

Grow up you bastards. And learn how to take a joke. 

The surplus humanity 

Speaking of parasites. It was recently announced that OnlyFans® would be shutting down all their pay for play pornography on their website. 

If you've been on Tik Tok anytime after that announcement then you are witnessing a bunch of entitled 18 year old girls having a come to Jesus moment. Honestly some of the breakdowns are off the charts hilarious

Most of these women are agast at having to get real jobs and their true feelings about work & the entitlement they feel men owe them is shining through. 

What the Taliban gets right about women:

The proper question isn't what does the Taliban gets right about women (everything) it's what's to be done about women. 

In earlier times the physical inferiority of women forced their dependence on men. Ethically this led to the stunted moral development of modern women who reinforce their dependence on men through obsolete mating strategies like hypergamy and through the sexual selection of ultra masculine & aggressive males. These outmoded mating strategies only reinforce the tools of male domination. 

Historically men answered the physical dependence of women by taking on the role of protector. By becoming a provider or father. This dangerous and undemocratic response remains the patriarchial solution of the Taliban, but that solution is no longer compatible with modernity. Women no longer want men to control them or their bodies. And the ultra feminists insist what they really want is [true] equality. 

Ironically the tellos of history is nothing other than the male's attempt to teach the female (and its leeching offspring) to break free of evolution and become an independent and democratically autonomous creature. But shunting off hundreds of thousands of years female evolution is no easy matter. 

Today the female still remains dependent for it's existence upon the male gaze. We see this no place more directly than on OnlyFans® through the simp soliciting activity so called content providers use to procure resources. 

Re-framing male exploitation as female empowerment. 

The best trick the blue pill agenda™ ever pulled was convincing us that the exploitation of males doesn't exist. But in fact the symbiotic relationship evolution cultivated for females has from the very beginning allowed women to profit from male work, protection, and civilizational advancement. 

I know you liberals (aka Feminists) want to reframe pornography, prostitution, and sex work as nothing more than female empowerment. Females proudly announce their status as sex workers with the battle cry that sex work is real work. Though when not enjoying their girl power some feminists characterize sex work as nearly the sexual and mental abuse of women by toxic males. [All hetero sex is rape.] 

But let's get real. Prostitution, pornography, and sex work isn't female empowerment. Nor is it real productive work. Instead it is nothing other than damaged women taking advantage of the male sex drive. When men fall victim to their natural desires they can be extorted for money and recources by unscrupulous women. Onlyfans.com provides women with easy access to desperate men with fat pocketbooks. 

Now does the sex trade only harm men, or does it damage women too? Absolutely, sex work hurts women! Few women would be enticed into these activities if they had better options, or if they themselves weren't being exploited by (dark triad) men or if they didn't come from broken homes. 


Your typical OnlyFans® girl has been over educated with the wrong kinds of sociology. She's digested Dworkin and an infinite amount of Critical Theory. And yet... OnlyFans® girls are divorced from the material conditions that gave rise to these critiques. 

Most of us on the left have cheered the idea of Anti-Work and the development of class consciousness in the younger generation since the Great Resignation. But Generation Z's ideological thinking is Utopian. Divorced from the mode of production when pushed about their ideas they simply present a vision filled with hope for harmony & perfection. They lack empirical inquiry, they would prefer to to tell you how things should be, instead of how they are. 

Karl Marx warned against this kind of utopian thinking. None of the young people on Reddit or Tik Tok complaining about Capitalism have even worked long enough to be truly alienated from work. Unless you call adding your venmo to your Tinder profile work. Nowadays if a young person actually shows up to work they rarely make it through a first shift. 

And it's not because they are out organizing unions or protesting conditions, it's because these young women simply don't like the idea of the drudgery required by most work. They feel entitled to the comforts of workers who have toiled for years. They expect to be given only the most interesting jobs that somehow jive with their leftists values and ecological concerns. They are so bold as to ask why they should even have to work or make money to survive? As if they are immune from the struggle for survival that every other animal encounters in nature. 

These women are also angry because they somewhere they read an article or saw a news item on PBS that the 1% have gotten a bigger share of wealth over the last 40 years or so. They forget that none of that money was there's to begin with. They didn't create it. They've been coasting through life on the backs of institutions & their parents since they were born. 

So their experience in the economy is that most work is boring, but that's because they are new workers with no skills. Why would they be entitled to something else? Furthermore; they are jealous of supervisors and entrepreneurs who they think have it easy, because they've read that the boss takes all the money that  employees create. They've read how economic growth equals environmental degradation, but they've never encountered the argument that growth leads to prosperity. The kind of prosperity where young people question why work is even necessary. They've read how Patriarchy keeps women from being paid equal, but don't accept that working longer hours in professions that are dirty or dangerous might make them more money. They've heard all these left wing talking points without absorbing the counter arguments and they decide work really isn't really for them. Someone else can work. Someone else can build the society they take for granted. Instead they will beg for money or trade their sexual desirability for cash while they can. 

None of these women understand even the basics of economics and few have any practical knowledge of the world of work. They didn't grow up on the factory floor. So none of them understand what it takes to run a buisness or society. Many are simply lazy. None would ever volanteer to work the dangerous or physically demanding high paying jobs that society requires for functioning. Too few women build bridges or fix automobiles. An OnlyFans® girl doesn't understand what it takes to keep the lights on. And most of what they believe about how economies work is demonstrably false. 

Findom: The vicious Sociopathy disquised as a fetish. 

If you are looking for confirmation in what I have been telling you about leftists and women, then you need look no further than the so called fetish of financial domination

I first discovered this fetish a few years ago after watching a Vice documentary.  Financial domination is one of the growing bizarre and twisted forms of sexual interaction fed by the instant and ubiquitous access to pornography that conservative Christians warned us about in the 1970's. And frankly, nothing makes me sadder than a group of Christians being right about anything. 

So what is findom? 

The fetish is simply men giving money to young women in effect for doing nothing. The women (and it is exclusively women) who engage in this crime are the final embodiment of what's wrong in society and the ultimate expression of female evolution. 

It's not a kink it's a business filled with the dehumanization of men. 

Findom grew out of BDSM. It used to be the dirty little secret of high powered CEO'S or hard core kink folks. But with the merging of kink and social media findom has become a worldwide buisness. Few of the women who engage in the practice of findom on social media are actually sexually aroused by financial domination or any Kink at all, but aroused only by the quick and easy access to their expolited victims bank accounts. 

"Who are findom’s best customers? The addicts.  For some, being seduced into handing over your cash is a massive rush. In the same way that people can become addicted to porn, they can also become addicted to Findom.

Porn addiction is becoming addicted to sexual stimuli you’re watching on a screen. Findom is essentially the same thing. The difference is that this sexual stimuli talks back."

Arguments for the existence of the kink aren't very good and mostly don't exist. 

If you ever ask the practicioners of the kink for an ethical justification for findom they usually don't have any. When pressed someone will start the argument off with free will. It should be rather telling to you that they don't begin the defense of the kink by describing how much they enjoy the kink or want to participate in it, instead they rely upon the idea of 'consensual agreement.'

Only that argument breaks down right away. If you ask any findomme you will discover that they rate most of their customers as "time wasters" because most dommes just want the addict who is willing to fork over his life savings and then go bankrupt. 

Of course addicts can't give concent. No one really believes that a Crack addict is giving consent when they say they want to buy a drug, and no one admires drug dealers who take advantage of sick people who are addicted to things like heroin or crack. Likewise, no one should admire findommes who exploit the sexual perversions of men who are addicted to this fraud like scheme.

Without a logical argument for this perverse kink would you believe the dommes who take advantage of these men feel any guilt? Well when asked here's how one responded:

"When asked whether she ever feels guilty taking money from men, Maria replied: “I have never felt guilty taking money from men. I’ve experienced so much sexual harassment and assault in my lifeso many unsolicited dick pics during my experience in online sex work. I actually see it as reparations for the patriarchy."

The dangers of Findom. 

The dangers and consequences of financial domination are not just financial, they include many other areas including social, interpersonal,  one's health and wellbeing:

  • Lack of money / poverty
  • Inability to appreciate sexual intercourse or reach orgasm without fantasizing about submitting financially to ones Domme (development of a fetish)
  • Loneliness and social issues
  • Guilt and 'secrets'
  • Loss of job
  • Divorce
  • Bankruptcy
  • Valuable time wasted
  • Decreased academic/job performance
  • Addiction
  • Assaulted self-esteem
  • Depression and unhappiness
  • Poor, unhealthy lifestyle
  • A wasted life
Now I think the natural response to learning about this fetish is to deplore the men who partake of it. To be disgusted by their submission and to the often pathetic displays of cuckmanship that these groveling men display.  Forking all of your hard earned money over to anonymous women that you've never met just so they can laugh at how sad you are makes these men easy targets. Society doesn't respect these men & the women who abuse them don't even see them as human. 

But let's drop the term fetish here, it's better to use terms like theft or fraud to get a better understanding of the dynamic between these particular E-girls and their male victims. 

The financial dominatrix often uses tactics like threats or blackmail to force the victim to comply with additional requests for money {called tribute.} Many dommes take embarrassing screenshots of their interactions with their victims which often include compromising pictures that could be posted online to embarrass and humiliate said victims. 

Despite these threats many men make the heroic attempt to quit their addiction. But they arent out of the fire just yet. Many dominatrixes advertise to men about relapsing, going so far as to call the addiction good for you. That's like allowing crack dealers to host TV ads in recovery clinics about high you can get on Crack! Outrageous! 

Feminization & the destruction of the male gender. 

As the male gets deeper into his addiction of findom he will pass through several stages of findom. 
  1. Fantasy slave 
  2. Media fantasist 
  3. Junior 
  4. Mature 
  5. Dehumanization 
  6. Celibacy 
  7. Feminization 
  8. Castration 
In conclusion, OnlyFans® is nothing more than the legalized exploitation of men and its logical personification in financial domination is nothing other than the extortion and destruction of men. 

Financial domination is an extreme sexual deviancy that portends the future. A lost generation of woke women who reject the traditional value of being a woman, who weren't taught the values of hard work, who devalue themselves and their sexuality as merely an exchangeable commodity (and probably their only one) who blame men for a system of control {the background radiation of patriarchy} that their own biology presupposes. 

These OnlyFans® girl fails to understand the fundamentally precarious nature of building a society.  They take advantage of what's been previously built and assume by magic that it will continue. Rather than assume the hard task of building these women prefer to sit around in their pajamas and eat Doritis® and have men send them money for the mere fact that they exist. What do these women bring to the encounter? They bring three or four step kids, a well punished vagina, and their soon to be fading looks. They use those looks to entice men. Then they brainwash and wallet rape them with the same false ideologies of female dominance and toxic masculinity that they themselves were inculcated with by the Blue Pill Agenda.™

Can there be any doubt why men feel betrayed by women? Why they are going their own way? Is there any hope for a society based on structures like these? Can we survive the ideological and sociological attempts at reframing our past, present, and future? I think not. 

In the coming days it will be the job of this blog and my podcast to expose to the world how left wing sociology & the various ideologies that have spawned from it have become dangerous to human life. It won't be easy my friends. These ideologies have become quasi-religious. They punish anyone with a differing opinion, because they assume all differing opinions are based in privilege or power. They will attempt to silence our investigation. But we will stand firm in our convictions. And we will let truth be our guide. Thank you so much for taking the time to read about how these concerns could ultimately lead to End of the World. 

Until next time my friends... take care of yourselves and each other. 

Romius T. 

Got findom? 

How to stop resources

Friday, July 23, 2021

The Unbearable Lightness of Being

My life sucks. It sucks so bad that it's inappropriate to wax philosophic about it.

Alas, it's even getting boring to complain about how much I hate my life. I don't know how many times you guys need to read this. I'm guessing you don't need to at all., and I don't blame you. It's the end of the world with the world ending in a whimper. Only at the upper end of the world status of rich countries we are just beginning to notice. 

I'm one of the richest people in the world by simply having been born into one of those rich countries. Which just goes to show you that there is no justice in the world. Most of the world can't afford access to clean water. But I never hear those people complain. Are all you really poor people just not on Twitter? 

You guys may not complain, but I like to complain.  Like how it sucks that all my basic needs are met. Pro tip to real poor people getting all the stuff you need only takes away a certain kind of misery. The kind of not happy I am could probably be changed with some Prozac.

But I won't do that. Nor will I change jobs, or do anything else to make my life possibly better. I guess unlike some of you, the genuinely happy I don't forsee the possibility of being happy. Anywhere or anytime.

There's a level of self deception that I'm simply incapable of engaging if I want to be happy. Don't get me wrong. My refusal to deceive isn't based on some high moral principle, but just because I'm incapable of seeing myself as anything but the loser I am.

That's not to say I never have fun.

Today, I told a conspiracy theorist who visits my store about my aliens, virus, and artificial intelligence theory and he was like, 'that's plausible.'

So yeah.

Also, I saw my niece and she seemed as depressed as me so I think depression is genetic.

Tuesday, July 06, 2021

Friend Zoned! Evolutionary Psychology & Mating in Humans: What the Red Pill Gets Right & And What it Fails to Criticize

When you've been ugly & unwanted your whole life you often get accused of being bitter towards the opposite sex. Today, if you express an opinion that doesn't celebrate or empower the female gender you then also get accused of things like being a misogynist. And if you dare to actually criticize women, or point out that females have certain advantages as well as disadvantages in life, well then you're considered worse than Hitler. Not only are your views not taken seriously, but you will be labeled as a hate filled asshole and pathetic. 

Want some proof? All you have to do is examine how society treats the red pill gang on Reddit, the MGTOW folks on YouTube, or the Incels from 4 Chan. All you will find there are ad hominen attacks. Men's Rights activists are seen as nothing other than a bunch of neck bearded, unkempt, basement dwellers who oppose female equality and abuse women online or in person. There's rarely any effort expended at grappling with the ideas that these men produce. One simply takes a statement from one of the more extreme bombastic members as a fact of how all men really think. You don't need to engage their ideas, all you need to do is make fun of a bunch of virgins that can't get laid.*

I'm sure it's fun to take a whipping stick to these guys, but you might be surprised to learn that what a lot of these social misfits are discussing is backed by science. The science of Evolutionary Psychology to be exact. 

I know what your immediate reaction is if you've heard of Evolutionary Psychology. Scientifically, it's just a bunch of just so stories. (3) Evolutionary Psychology is nothing more than a so-called science that uses broad stereotypes of human behavior to back up conventional and conservative thinking. Frankly, I've often accused EP of the same thing. I've discussed my distaste for evocative niche-picking with bored friends before. Now that I've had a change of heart, I guess I should apologize to Sandra Scarr for doubting her. 

While listening to a recent podcast from Sam Harris where he interviewed the famous evolutionary psychologist David Buss I was struck by the similarities between much of the conversation in the Red Pill Community and the conversation that Buss was having with Harris. 

Guys in the MRM [Men's Rights Movement] talk about how our monogamous society is returning to our slightly polgynous past. They warn society that the supply and demand of mates is out of wack and how this inbalance threatens society. They talk about hypergamy, mate selection theory, symmetry, the ugly guy syndrome, alpha males, orbiting back- ups and more. 

Now that either says something interesting about the conversation in the red pill movement, or it makes your opinion of evolutionary psychology even lower than it already was. 

The inspiration behind the interview in Harris' podcast was Buss' latest book titled: Men Behaving Badly: The hidden roots of sexual deception, harassment, and assault.  Buss discusses his book along with evolutionary psychology  with Sam. 

Immediately the conversation begins with Harris asking Buss about the controversy surrounding  evolutionary psychology. Why is evolutionary psychology so looked down upon? Buss defends EP by contending that much of the controversy around evolutionary psychology is a result of conceptual errors that people make about how evolutionary theory applies to humans. He even thinks that major text books make this same error. He points out how most psychology majors never take a course on EP. Remarkably he states that one can graduate with a PhD in psychology without ever taking even a single course on evolutionary psychology. 

Buss goes on to make several points about why he thinks critics don't accept Evolutionary Psychology. I've identified 8 possible points of controversy in evolutionary psychology. 
  1. Offends the religious right 
  2. Offends leftists 
  3. Critics object to even the possibility of sex differences between men and women 
  4. EP covers controversial topics like rape and abuse 
  5. Naturalistic fallacy
  6. Ignores the roll of culture 
  7. Proximate vs. Ultimate causes 
  8. Replication crisis & WEIRD crisis 
Before I get into his defense of EP I should note that Buss is not at all a Men's Right's guy. In fact his book was heavily criticized by many red pill adherents as being anti-male, partly because of his emphasis that males are responsible for the majority of extreme violence, his concern of the dark triad personality in men, and his insistence on covering sexual coercion and possible solutions. 

So let's talk about why Evolutionary Psychology might be controversial among people. The culture wars have not spared science. Many religious people object to Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. They don't accept a naturalistic explanation for human origins; therefore, they unsurprisingly don't accept EP's findings or framing (even if they could agree with the potential stereotypes of sex roles that spring out of the science.) 

On the left, we have concerns that finding a genetic basis for an attitude or behavior could keep us from adapting new behaviors or justify  discrimination against (usually) women. Secondly, many people on the left absolutely refuse to accept that any differences exist between the sexes. 

To illustrate I remember one conversation I was having with a bunch of my friends. You should know that most of my friends are highly educated liberals. Somehow the conversation came to upper body strength and I mentioned that on average men have greater upper body strength than women. 

I was instantly poo-pooed for saying that. I further articulated my point by explaining that our species is dimorphic - that is that men are physically bigger than women (again) on average. This fact (and I kept repeating that 'hey it is a fact') men are bigger and they have greater upper body strength was denied. My friends would shake their heads at me. Now normally this group's opinions are fairly consistent with scentific findings and research. I was flummoxed by their denial of a concrete fact. I think at one point I asked the women to stand up so they could see they were smaller than their mates. Basically, I was told I was just wrong and everyone wanted to end that conversation.


So you can see that even well meaning, highly educated, liberal, scientifically minded folks can break down over an issue like this. 

You can also see how some of these concerns melt into one another. Just mentioning sex differences was controversial. The discussion elicited strong emotional reactions from even the men that genetic differences could play a role here. 

I think that's because many of my friends were operating under the presumption that I was making a naturalistic fallacy. I think they were concerned that I was arguing that because men and women have naturally different sizes and strength that those size differences could allow men to dominate women and that would a a good thing because nature has built us this way. Of course that was not my argument. I simply made a statement of fact that I assumed we all agreed upon. 

Even if those problems didn't cause you to doubt the science in EP, science itself is having a bit of a replication crisis. A great deal of social science that has come during the past few decades has been potentially faulty. It turns out that generalizing from the so called WEIRD kids may not have been a good idea. WEIRD is an acronym that stands for white educated industrialized rich democracies which is where most researchers gathered their subjects, aka the rich white students in college from Western universities that they taught at. 

A number of newer studies have been unable to repeat the findings of earlier landmark studies. This calls into question a great deal of social science and has been a particularly thorny problem in current research. 

In the Sam Harris podcast David Buss responds to a number of the criticisms thrown his way about evolutionary psychology. 


Buss suggests that that the replication crisis in science is confined to Social Psychology. 

While I'll agree with him that Social Psychology was particularly hit hard by this scandal, it's hardly alone in Social Science. Buss goes on to argue that EP is exempt from those concerns because it's more likely than other social sciences to use large cross cultural studies in its research, so he doesn't need to rely on just college students for his studies. He also bragged that the findings of EP - specifically sex differences in mating strategies and mate selection are much higher in magnitude than normal social science findings & are highly replicatible.(2)

While he defended the general strength of EP as a science he does mention how one particular favorite theory in EP that received a great deal of reporting, (a finding that women prefer men with more physical symmetry and masculinity when ovulating) was having some difficulty replicating. 

I think Buss brings up this point because he has a different theory about mate selection. He calls his theory 'the mate switching hypothesis.' A bit later I'll talk about how I think his theory corresponds to the incel talk around male orbiters & the friend zone. 


Before we get to Buss' theory and it's connections with Red Pill activism we need to discuss a little bit about the basics behind Evolutionary Psychology. 

I know. I'll try and keep this short to avoid sounding too much like a text book! 

First, here's a list of differences between men and women that according to the book Human Diversity by Charles Murray who says he has discovered a number of non controversial ideas that relate to evolutionary psychology in neuroscience and genetics. 
  • Sex differences are consistent worldwide and tend to only widen in more gender egalitarian cultures 
  • On average females worldwide have advantages in verbal ability and social cognition while males have advantages in visual spatial abilities and in the extremes of mathematical ability
  • On average women worldwide are more attracted to vocations centered on people and men to vocations centered on things
  • Many sex differences in the brain are coordinated with sex differences in personality abilities and social behavior
Besides this list the evolved differences between the sexes also include a dramatic difference in physiology and a dramatic asymmetry in knowledge about parenthood.

To begin with physiological differences between the sexes include not just physical size, but the size of the sex cells. Males have small sex cells and females have large sex cells. These size differences foreshadow the drastic parental investment differences the sexes encounter. Women must physically allocate 9 months of parental investment while men may only donate a few seconds of a coughing out an orgasm. 

The second big difference in the sexes is knowledge of paternity. Women know with certainty that they are the mother.  A father on the other hand can only guess about paternity at least that was the case until the recent developments in DNA technology. 

Evolutionary psychology predicts different psychology and behavioral strategies based on those different adaptive problems in the sexes. The most important differences will be in mating strategy. The men's rights gang seems preoccupied by the different mating strategies of women and you could say they take it personally. 

Some basic facts on what men and women want from sex. 

Men seek novelty of sex partners. And typically have a higher sex drive. Historically it is believed by EP that humans are a slightly polygynous species. That is one male with multiple female partners. One reason for this was our ancestors often faced brutal warfare over access to females which often left the tribe with fewer available males for mating. (4)

IF men are willing to go to war for women, you can see why women typically underestimate male sexual interest in females. Another finding in EP is that males typically overestimate female interest in them. In one experimental study 75 percent of all men said yes to a possible sex encounter with a female stranger. Not a single female agreed to a random stranger asking for casual sex to them. 

Men and woman are built quite different. Men are typically attempting to spread their seed so to speak it makes sense then that successful men would presume female interest. Otherwise they'd never approach females. Likewise with so many male seekers it makes sense that woman are more discerning about the men who pursue them. 

Males that overestimate female interest and who pursue short term dating strategies combined with the dark triad of personality are the most dangerous types of men for women. Though many females simply mistake those men's aggressive approach with confidence, because dangerous men have traits that females prefer like risk taking, leadership, and charm. Dark triad men are often quite charming because they are willing to lie to prospective mates for short term sex. 

According to Buss MOST men aren't that dangerous, but when men with Short Term Dating Strategies come with the dark triad of personality type, that is (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopath) they can be especially dangerous to their partners. Dark Triad men typically have higher rates of stalking, harrasment, and violent mate guarding. When males and females seek long term partners their interests and likes are more aligned. 

Another difference between the sexes: men have evolved to care more about a woman's looks because youth and looks are markers for health and offspring viability. Women typically care more about resources, social status, or the personality traits that signify those possibilities that would lead to a male accumulating resources or social status like industriousness, risk taking, and charm. 

The differences in mating strategy can also explain how so called mating discrepancies appear in couples, like why young women date older men. It also explains most CBS sitcoms AKA the tendency for attractive women to date an uglier man. Those men may not be as mismatched as it would serve at first sight. Those men may have access to resources that the female wants that other men don't have. 

Male infidelity strategies

Male infidelity makes evolutionary sense as parental investment by the male can be very small. Adding sex partners for males in a quick sex act only increases the chances of his offspring surviving. Adding partners for females in general; however, does not increase a woman's chance at having more offspring. 

Men and women also care about different things in situations of a possible infidelity. In cases of infidelity women are more likely to want to know if the man has fallen in love with the other partner. They are worrying about the possibility of the male withdrawing resources or protection from her in favor of her rival. Men are more likely to worry about potential intercourse in female indefinitely because of the possibility of a confusing paternity. 

In general women behave differently in the infidelity as well.  Women fall in love with their partners when they commit infidelity, because women typically have an affair when they are unhappy in a relationship. The rates for women becoming romantically involved in their affairs are around 70%; whereas men typically do not focus on love and even take precautions to avoid the possibility. If men aren't unhappy in their extra marital affairs why are they having them? Some of the reasons include men having a higher sex drive than women and the males tendency to seek partner novelty. The higher sex drive and search for novelty are why men often have affairs even in perfectly happy unions. 


I spoke earlier of one explanation that tried to make sense of female infidelity. We will call that hypothesis the good gene theory. Traditionally, it was thought that women would only cheat on a partner who provided resources with a man that had a better genetic profile. Stay with the dad bod guy to raise the kids and cheat with the good looking bad boy. If you look at online forums you will see tons of incels who talk about how easy the symmetrical Chad's have it over the ugly guy incels like them. They berate themselves for not being good looking enough and criticize women for a double standard on lookism. They mention the 80/20 standard the idea that the majority of women try and get with the top 20 percent of men which leaves the majority of men without partners. This is part of the incel criticism of female mating strategies like hypergamy and polgyny. 

Buss takes issue with that theory in favor of his mate switching hypothesis which he says makes more sense of the data. 

Buss argues that female infidelity isn't powered by gene chasing, but by partner switching. "Females" he says "typically cheat when they are unhappy with the relationship whereas men will cheat even if they are happy in their relationship."


Mate switching also explains another problem red pill guys talk about the friend zone which involves beta males as "orbiters" around attractive women. Many red pill followers say women keep interested men around in the friend zone as back ups in case they decide to leave their current partner. Because men stuck in the friend zone typically infer {how to know if you are stuck in the friend zone} more sexual interest from their female counterparts than the females have for them the men often develop bitter feelings of resentment in the friend zone relationship. 

Women are typically unconscious of these ideas and thus interpret the anger or bitterness from their male counterparts radically different from the males. One simply need look at social media for how women view their orbiters as needy, demanding, and entitled. But of course if what women are doing is keeping all these hanger on's for the possibility of mate switching when they tire of their current sex partners, or use their orbiters to get companionship and resources without having to commit then the bitterness of being in the friend zone is more understandable. 

I see two theories that explain the friend zone. The first is what I'll call the deception theory. The deception theory is advocated by feminists who contend that men who've been Friend Zoned are hiding their true intentions. They aren't interested in being friends they want a romantic relationship and when they are called on it they become defensive and angry. 

Of course the deception can run both ways. Incels suggest that it's the women who deceive by dangling partnership and a possible romantic relationship to a male by being inappropriately intimate with platonic friends in order to secure a beta male's time, commitment, protection, and resources without having to provide a romantic relationship with the male. The beta male 'orbits' or hangs around the female in the hopes that she will decide to select him all the while knowing she's really playing him for a simp. She's not really interested in the nice guy, she wants an Alpha. 


We need to question if the so called 'nice guy' in the friend zone is actually being deceptive in the first place. For years women have been telling men what they really want from men is what I call the Alan Alda Complex. The Alan Alda Complex is a set of ideas about how men should behave & treat women, that is a new moral code on how men should behave towards females. 
  • Men have been told to be nice. 
  • Don't be toxic or aggressive 
  • Stop cat calling 
  • Be sweet 
I believe many men misinterpreted this demand by females to stop harassing women as a signal for a new strategy for males to gain female companions. In fact females do not want anything different from their mates. They still want alpha males. They still want to be led in relationships. What they really want is unwanted attention from inferior males to end and protection from overly aggressive, dangerous males. 

The Alan Alda complex sweet guy is not a strategy for obtaining females, it's a demand for a new moral code on how to treat women. Males should understand that treating women in this manner will simply make them simps & won't make them be seen as viable mates. I'm not suggesting males become dangerously aggressive towards women or continue unwanted behavior towards women. But men need to know that if you are going to simp at be aware of what you will get from it. You will be friend zoned and taken advantage of. If you don't want to be Friend Zoned look towards the Men Going Their Own Way as your new moral code. Men shouldn't abuse women or give them unwanted attention, but don't need to provide unrequited love and resources either. 


When things do go wrong in a relationship it will usually be the woman that files for divorce. 80 percent of all divorce filings are by the female. 

Unsurprisingly again we find differences about why the sexes file for separation. Women file for divorce most often because of an economic indicator, for instance a job loss of their spouse. If a man loses his job he is basically asking for a divorce. Men's rights groups usually promulgate these stats with frequent warnings to men that "as soon as you lose your job your wife will leave you." You could say they are right. Job loss is the number one factor for why women file for divorce from men. The second is male infidelity. 

Women get divorced too and the main reason men file for divorce is infidelity. A woman's age increase is also correlated with divorce. The older the woman the more likely she becomes victim to a filing. Not unrelated when men remarry they tend to marry younger. The more marriages the younger the wife. By the third marriage men marry women 8 years younger than themselves. 

Step children & the abusive male 

The number one source of conflict in mixed (aka divorced and then newly wed families) is the presence of a step child in the home. The number 1 cause of death for step children under the age of 6 is being a step child. Women are 5x more likely to beaten when they bring children into another marriage. That's not to say it should be forgiven, but Sociobiology has a prediction and explanation for that. Some males simply don't want to invest resources into another father's children. One sees this in the animal kingdom all the time. 

Buss again makes a pain to point out that NOT ALL MALES are abusive towards step kids. Buss argues that his dark triad personality types who pursue STDS (cheaters in this context) make up the vast majority of abusers. They are serial abusers who harass, mate guard, stalk, and use violence against step children. 


Dangerous MALES are those that posses the three major characteristics of the dark triad which are: 
  • Narcissism: people with high egos and a sense of entitlement 
  • Machiavellianism: People who use others; they are liars, cheaters, and people who treat others as a means to an end. 
  • Psychopathy: lack of empathy. Men typically score higher on the index here than women. 
Modern environments may actually select for increased psychopathy, because many of the negative costs associated with these traits are no longer incurred like in traditional settings. 

For instance lack of empathy and using people would come at a high cost in traditional societies where most people knew each other. But modern environments allow greater anonymity moving from one big city to another big city. 

Internet dating 

Men can use dating sites that offer opportunity to exploit females who are looking for long term partners because dating apps facilitate short term hook ups. Men who use dating sites are typically looking for casual hook ups much more often than women with around 30 percent of all men on Tinder  being in a relationships or married. 

Dating apps introduce a number of other mate selection activation problems between males and females. Dating apps make the selection bias explicit because both women and men now have access to access thousands of mate possibilities instead of a few dozen in more traditional societies. 

Men with higher status and height (women have been surveyed to find men who are six feet more attractive -while men are known to fudge this) receive the highest response rates along with women who rate high on the attractiveness scale. According to EP most people shoot for mates that are 20 percent higher than themselves we find dating apps inadvertently reinforcing hypergamy (dating up) & lookism while inadvertently promoting a polygynous future. 

A return to polygyny 

Incels have been decrying the modern hypergamic trend for a while now. Incels tend to stress genetics and lookism along with superficial female behavior over other causes. 

I have suggested a different set of causes of hypergamy that include the break down of the middle class, loss of blue collar middle class jobs, the collapse of the industrial base which prevents large swaths of men from obtaining high paying jobs that could support a spouse and family.

I won't bore you with statistics about the colapse of male headed households, or how young people are having less sex, especially men. Young people lose their virginity later, have fewer relationships if any, and delay marriage and children (in fact without the addition of immigration the USA would not be at replacement rate for its population.) In addition to economic factors the break down of traditional values has freed women to start their own careers, seek out new family styles, and explore their sexual orientations all without necessity of finding a male. With these factors a return to polygyny and hypergamy seems highly likely especially given the easy facilitation of dating apps and the internet. A woman no longer has to find a male and settle down. She can have a child out of wedlock and depend on the government or her new same sex partner to provide for her. 

But there are long term problems for hypergamy and polygynous dating strategies.  They are an absolutely destabilizing force in society. The few studies about polygyny show break up rates near 90%. Polygyny also leaves a lot of young men without mates.  Men left alone at their height of their testosterone levels and given no purpose or promise to mate get bitter, violent, and throw away their lives to crime or wasteful activities like all day video gaming and extreme porn watching. 

What are some solutions? 

First we need to understand that sex difference denialism is unscientific and it actually harms women. EP provides predictions and explanations for problems we find in society between the sexes.  It even offers up solutions in some cases. 

For instance: Sociobilogical findings suggest that men and women perceive bad male behavior differently.  This has led many in EP to suggest solutions like repealing the "reasonable person standard" in the judicial system. Adding a more female centered regulation. 

EP also offers ways to protect women against sexual coercion. We shouldn't simply dismiss these recommendations as being anti-female.  Some of the techniques of EP are known to protect women:
  • Fear- women should be taught to listen to their natural fear of strange men.  Listen to your gut ladies. 
  • Body Guards-  One of the best techniques is for women to use trusted men and female companions to keep bad men away.
  • Tonic Mobility- We should all learn about tonic mobility as a pain prevention device and as an involuntary physical response to physical entrapment and not use it as an opportunity to blame the victim for inaction 
When asked about the question of polygyny directly, Dr. Buss hedged.  He said it was impossible to predict the future.  Basically he admitted that he didn't have a solution for the crisis. Someone in the talk offered up pornography as a possible solution for matelessness.  And one MRM creator the Better Bachelor suggests pornography as a replacement  for genuine relationships.  I don't think pornography is a solution.  It doesn't solve the problem of human companionship.  It's potentially addictive, I have talked elsewhere about the addictive and nightmare potential of extreme pornography.  Furthermore; I don't see how pornography addresses the coming under-population problem

Real solutions aren't simple. They would require a reorganization of society.  A universal basic income for starters that would allow the underclass some dignity.  Subsidies for child care and child rearing. And somewhat controversially I have suggested that we may need to keep some ideas from traditional patriarchal society. 

Evolutionary Psychology may not have all the answers, but it can be an important tool for understanding solutions to the ultimate causes for our adapted biological problems. We can no longer ignore it's research or it's advice. 

*(For a more sympathetic view of the Men's Rights Movement by a feminist see this documentary.)

(2) It should be noted that correlations in the social sciences are notorious for their weakness. See Charles Murray in the Bell Curve.

(3) A derogatory term for a hypothesis as it relates to EP and Sociobiology.

(4) Buss interviewed a group of tribesmen who suggested the only reason to go to war was access to women. They were astonished someone might go to war for democracy. 

Friday, June 25, 2021

Beauty Privilege & The Solitary Individual: The Coming Dominance of Female Centered Post- Patriarchial Society

If you're anything like me you spend most of your time alone at least all the time when you aren't being forced to socialize at work. If I could do my job remotely instead of in person and avoid all that human contact I would. The level of self isolation I prefer is that of a wounded animal that runs off to hide right before it dies. Let me die in peace, just don't consume my body.

I used think that my feelings on the subject of being alone were a bit unusual. But not anymore. The solitary individual is the new normal. Probably most of you who are reading/listening to this are single. And in the future at least 80 percent of you will be unattached.

Pretty privilege 

I was watching a Tik Tok video last night right before bed. I can't more strongly recommend against you doing so. I guess if you hate sleep and you enjoy feeling angry after watching stupid content from stupid people. 

In my case I watched a video where a chubby blonde complained about losing her pretty privilege. 

Oh, Boo-hoo

I don't know if it's the fact that I'm walking around with 5 more IQ points than you just ticking away like a time bomb, but sometimes I just have to explode at you with a rant. So here it is. 


So the video in question begins with a young woman in her mid 20's explaining that she has an eating disorder. During the pandemic she was away from her job and worked on controlling her disorder. She ended up gaining a lot of weight and becoming conventionally unattractive. Then she has a breakdown and cries uncontrollable sobs for herself on social media. 

Am I supposed to feel sorry for you? What because you're an unattractive emotional basket case who's beauty privledge got revoked? Welcome to the real world! The way you are being treated is the way the rest of us uglies have been treated our whole lives. You were just too pretty, too self absorbed and stuck up to notice. Thing is your beauty privilege protected you against the way most people behave around people, especially those they view as basically servants. When people go out to drink they want to be served. They aren't interested in the "the staff" as persons unless the servant can show them that they are not just a server. 

No one cares about anyone else. 

The rise of self checkout machines and other automated services have desensitized us to interactions with our fellow humans. Given the choice most of us (especially the younger generation) would choose not to interact with other people. I know the only time I interact with humans is if they have something I want. Like you are either sexually attractive to me, or you have something I desire like food or resources and I can't just push a button to get them. Otherwise, whenever I encounter you, you are simply an obstacle in the way of me getting the stuff I want. It's not deliberate attack against you. Most of this in an unconscious mechanism working behind the scenes of our mental constructs. 

Unattractive women who complain about the way men treat them are actually just experiencing the world the way men are treated in it, and they are horrified by the  experience of being a man. 

If you are a sexually attractive woman you have something other men want. Even other women grant you some respect because they know you are a fierce competitor for attention and resources. Men treat women they are attracted to with special care on the off chance that the woman will respond in kind. 

The bartender wondered why she never received eye contact after she got fat. When she greeted customers she no longer got enthusiastic replies. People simply gave their orders. "Two Bud Lights, please."

It seemed no one was interested in anything about her except her looks. And somehow this suprised this woman. Strange that customers who meet you while you perform a service job take no real interest in you the person. Why? Because they believe you are there to take an order or perform a function. Unless you have some other special status people aren't going to bother to get to know you. When I ring up your groceries no one cares or even needs to know about my special interest in reading secondary literature on 19th century philosophers. And honestly, why would they? They just want their groceries and they want to leave. 

We all want to live alone and be left alone. 

The bartender insists that one of the reasons people are rude and cruel to her is people fat hate. Yes, fat hate exists. But that's not the only reason people ignored her. It isn't just class based hatred of the working staff. Though plenty of people are dismissive of working people. I believe the real reason is that people are slowly socially evolving to become less interdependent on other people. Which means people give less thought to others. The pandemic has intensified a trend that has been growing for decades. We all want to live alone and not be bothered. There's been a trend towards people living alone in the USA. About 15 percent of Americans now live alone and that number has doubled over the last 50 years. It would be higher too, if more of us could afford to live alone. Some experts believe this tendency to live alone is actually increasing poverty and reducing affordable housing.

All Women Have Beauty Privileges

Complaining about no longer having beauty privileges is ironic when you are a woman. As a man I would like to have the problem of being just an ugly woman. Because even ugly women have privileges that men don't get. Women are trusted by God to protect and dish out the vagina. Because access to vagina is so important to men, most men {aka straight} bend over backwards to be nice women. Women must put up with advances they don't want, leering, objectification, and a host of other ills that you'll find covered on more female centric women's studies classes. It isn't the purpose of this blog to cover those stories. Instead we cover the stories people don't want to cover. Like Lady Privilege.™

Since the times of men draping their clean riding coats over mud holes, men have given women Lady Privilege.™ Women get social status and acknowledgement that being male does not afford you.

We've all read the statistics on attractiveness and the studied the halo effect in sociology 101 classes, so I don't feel the need to explain too much here. But basically the more attractive you are the more money you make and the nicer people are to you. People also assume you have qualities that you may not posses such as kindness. The difference in how we treat the good looking vs the ugly is analagous to how women and men are treated differently. 

And in particular it is the solitary man that is treated poorly. A man without a wife or family is basically a loser that society has little use for. Think of the juvenile male elephant that has been thrust out of the pack. In the case of many juvenile human males we have thrust them not simply from eye contact or respect for their individual personalities, but from society. They are thrown to the streets to commit crime, or to the sad loneliness of the mother's basement where they dribble out hate from keyboards on 4 Chan and other forums of misogyny.


In a strange twist of fate my particular self is an exception to many of the generalizations I make about solitary men. Unlike my incel brothers, who are often virgins, I've actually had sex. If I pursued relationships, I could probably worm my way into the heart of some tired middle aged woman with her fatherless children in tow. Like most of the ugly, solitary, incels though I've discovered that human companionship is not worth it.

I bring being single up so much to get you to understand that the future is solitary for us all. That the men trapped in basements and jerking to the hub are your future too. The future contains sex robots delivered from Amazon. Work from home and pandemics that kill the poor and those that go outside.

You probably don't believe me about your future. Maybe you're female and you've always benefited from the advantages of being a carrier of vagina. Being connected to society. The attention. Even when it's unwanted attention alerts you to your value and the desire society has for you. 

You might think that as a nearly attractive woman you are protected against experiences of being left out of society. That only the basement dwellers with their unwashed hair, bizarre hentai porn addictions, awkward social interactions, and general undesirableness will be deemed unfit for society. 

But you couldn't be more wrong. 

As industrial economy continues its collapse and good jobs disappear, more men will drop out of work and then society. That means they'll become less attractive to women. Fewer women will find suitable mates. Women will act out of desperation  from the new dating conventions and rely on dating apps and internet dating where they will fall victim to Chad's who only want to use women for sex, and when burned women will use the promise of their promiscuity to attract simps they can take advantage of. 

As I have discussed previously, simping will become the new pimping.™ The few alpha males left will continue on as if nothing has changed. The mass of men will drift towards some kind of MEN GOING THERE OWN WAY. And many subordinate males will drift towards worshiping and empowering females. All of society is headed to female supremacy. The forces behind it are the Breakdown of Western Culture and Values combined with a devastating decline in male hormones resulting in men developing the Alan Alda Syndrome. The Alan Alda syndrome of being the nice guy will become accepted by society not just because the alpha male is dying, but because social structure will not allow anything else. 


If you're female you will be wading into the pool of hyper-hypergamy. 80 to 90 percent of you will chase the top 20 or 10 percent of men. Most of you will fail. You'll get knocked up and become single moms. Bitter and despondent you'll turn to the social contagion of bi-sexuality out of yearning for companionship or the seemingly endless plasticity of female sexuality. (Remember the monkey sex studies anyone?) Then you'll become disillusioned by females because nothing is ever good enough for women and your biological instincts will demand to be dominated on occasion by the stick of masculinity. Eventually most of these pseudo-relationships will wither and die. Most women will date sporadically if at all. 


But a few women will take on a number of subordinate males and form a new society. A number of intelligent entrepreneurs will aquire subordinated males and gather them in. They will board together. The males will be submissive. They will give all their income to the Domme of the House. 

She will continue to use sex work to earn passive income from OnlyFans® and offer Venmo in her bio on her Tinder app. And she will turn her subs to prostitution to make the rest of her cash. She will convince or force her stable of subs through hypno brain washing and orgasm denial into watching other extreme pornography that will only further her control. 

A recently discovered manuscript detailed exactly how one domme managed to aquire and control six sub males. She began by playing domination hypnosis recordings at night to her subordinate males at just under audible levels. The use of hypnotic suggestion planted the seeds to gain rapid mind control over her "stable."


The manuscript which reportedly was designed with the purpose to train young initiate dommes on how to set up a 'household' as a pretext towards setting up a new female dominated society. Just think 'Handmaid's Tale' but with women in charge. 

It begins with hypnosis and moves banally through things like edge masturbation. The dommes are instructed to keep the subs in a dark enclosed room with headphones on and a tablet playing porn. The edge masturbation sessions start at a few hours a day, but eventually will last the entire time the sub is not working or sleeping.  The sub will be induced by drugs like caffeine, alcohol, marijuana, or even harder drugs. Perhaps PCP. 

The EXTREME PORNOGRAPHY will cycle through all sorts and various kinds. But each session and each kind of video will have a specific purpose. 
  1. Edge Masturbation. Edging fogs the mind and delivers endorphins allowing the mind to be controlled.
  2. Findom and Femdom. Extreme pornography that teaches extreme pro female viewpoints. 
  3. Humiliation porn. Pornography that degrades and abuses the male breaking down defenses and ego. 
  4. Forced bi-sexuality and forced gender emasculation. Removal of masculine traits. 
  5. Ruined orgasm pornography. Porn that devalues male pleasure and the penis.
  6. Castration videos. Porn that ends with the male hormone gone. Sometimes includes the removal of the penis. 
After one has subjected their group of males to these brainwashing techniques the dommes control is complete.  Once women gain control of the family and household of subs it is only a matter of time that women gain complete control of society.*

As one can see by my sketch of a possible female centered future, complaints about Beauty Privilege from the point of the view of the formerly beautiful are nonsensical. 

First, asking for advantages that are  unearned and immoral is shameful.  Women can't lose the Beauty Privilege anyway because they always have it over men.  Women misunderstand the role of beauty and attractiveness in the games of dating that play between the sexes.  The hyper-hypergamy of modern times leaves most men alone and worthless, and the upcoming future will dissatisfy most women to the point that they will initiate a non-democratic female version of the handmaid's tale where men will be forced to shed their masculinity and worship women. Just another reason we need to ban women's studies; otherwise, we must surrender to the female wave that is coming for men. 

*I have detailed the society I would expect to come about on my twitter account through a work of fiction. I am unable to locate the exact tweet.