Never Forget

Never forget the mathematical equation that brought us into this era of our Brave New World Order...

2 Jet Planes + 3 Towers = 666

I used to think like everyone else that considered themselves a well-informed, thoughtful voter and enthusiastic supporter of our so-called participatory Democracy...that anyone who questioned the mass media narrative and the grand illusion broadcast on the tell-a-vision was a crazy, conspiracy theorist, anti-American "truther."

I've come full circle in the 12 years since that dreadful day. Anyone who believes the official story and considers any questions or evidence contrary to the mainstream mass media narrative as "crazy conspiracy theory" is a gullible fool that watches too much TV.

Never forget, WTC-7 is the rosetta stone for exposing the truth of the Government's and mass media's lies.

Thousands of lives were sacrificed 12 years ago so that the former land of the free and home of the brave could be transformed into our current fascist surveillance police state. Never forget, as we watch it metastasize and expand it's scope of power and control over all our lives.

The Huxley-Orwellian Dystopia is here, and 9/11/01 was the day our shadow government decided to step out from behind the curtain and assert their power in plain view of those who chose to open their eyes and see the truth of what and who they are.

Law EnFORCEment

RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!

From the time I was 14, when I was inducted into a life of crime, I've had many opportunities to interact with the uniformed officers of the Honolulu Police Department. I was an outlaw, a scofflaw of the most mediocre and common sorts. A juvenile delinquent who managed to avoid an overnight stay in a jail cell simply because of the judgement calls exercised by the HPD officers that apprehended me while I was in the act of defying the local laws and ordinances of my State.

As a Gen X'er, breaking curfew (10pm) to drink alcohol in the community parks and at the beaches with my pal's was a rite of passage. Everyone who "partied" in high school did it. Including most of the Cops who upon reaching adulthood and their chosen vocation, now found themselves breaking up the kinds of parties they themselves attended when they were growing up.

Most of these officers were cool. "Alright kids, dump out your beers, pick up your rubbish and get out of here."

Most times, we kids complied with no back talk and showed respect. We knew they could arrest us if they chose to, and that they were cutting us a break. But we heard tales of other kids who showed no respect, and found out exactly what HPD could do if they so chose to when they caught kids drinking. One kid in my school got beat up by the cops after swearing at the cops for  breaking up their after-hours party at the beach park. He then got arrested, resulting in the cops finding the drugs in his pocket. He eventually ended up in Juvie-hall, and eventually got taken out of his home by social services and had to live in a State half-way house until he was 18.

But most times, HPD was cool.

When I was a little older, I got my first car....but I did not have my driver's license yet. I got pulled over in a neighboring town with 3 of my friends in the car. We had been drinking a little beer (but not drunk). None of us had a license. (Told you I'm a scofflaw!)

As I was under 21, even .01% blood alcohol content is considered a DUI/DWI in Hawaii. Not only did I not have my driver's license, neither did any of my friends. No registration or insurance either. The cop that pulled me over could have literally changed my life dramatically at that point with an arrest and DUI charge. Instead, he told me to pull my car over onto the side of the road, and told me he'd drive us all home and that I could come back with a licensed driver the next day to get my car.

This is what the cops were like back in the late 80's and early 90's in Hawaii. It was much like small town Sheriffs in the old days. They exercised discretion and treated the citizenry like people. They realized that the law was excessively draconian if it were to be applied with zero tolerance or consideration of each situation.

Those where the good old days, when I had respect for most Law Enforcement Officers I encountered.
 
Things are different now.

Several months ago, I got caught breaking the law. I was using my cell phone while stopped at a red light. I didn't see the cop car behind me, and they turned on their lights and beeped their siren to catch my attention.

Fuck.

In the State of Hawaii, it's a $149 ticket for using your cell phone while operating a motor vehicle.

But, hey, the cops are just doing their job right?

Except things have changed. I've gotten pulled over before for speeding. Running a red light. Failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign...hey, I already told you I've been an outlaw since I was 14!

Sometimes I got a ticket. Other times, I got a warning and let go. In all cases, the cop usually treated me with respect and didn't condescendingly belittle me or act like an asshole on a powertrip.

But THIS time, for the unconscionable crime of using teh cell phone while driving, I had TWO officers approach my vehicle in a hostile and aggressive manner. While one officer came to my driver's side window and demanded my license and paperwork in a condescending and demeaning tone and manner, his partner stood on the passenger side, with his hand on his gun, ready to draw, as he intently scanned my car with a hostile look on his face, looking for any possible reason to arrest me.

For the first time, the officer looking at my paperwork and interrogating me, began to ask me potentially self-incriminating questions in a manner as if I were a defendant on the witness stand being cross-examined by a Prosecutor. Did I have a firearm in my car? Did I have any illegal drugs? Open containers? Where was I going to?


This sort of traffic stop is something I recognized from the standard operating procedure as depicted on the Tell-A-Vision in locales like the inner city ghettos and major Metropolitan areas of the country.

First time I ever saw that here in Hawaii.

After I got my ticket and was on my way, I talked to some HPD officers that I know personally, asking about this new procedure, and if in fact the cops were actively looking for any reason to arrest me?

Yes, this is the new normal here in Hawaii. No longer are the cops given much leeway in using their own judgement. They are trained to ENFORCE THE LAW, instead of the formerly common practice of maintaining law and order in the community by policing with judgement and discretion. Cops can now get in trouble for letting people go with just a warning.

There is a difference in the two approaches. With things progressing like that here in Hawaii (the land of Aloha!), I can only imagine how much worse it is getting in other areas of our Brave New World Order.




With this new understanding of the new normal of law enforcement here in Hawaii, I found this post from Eric Peter's Autos blog timely and an important reminder to all of us Sheeple, beholden to teh Authoritah of those who carry a gun and a badge and a tax collecting "ticket" book. These are things you should always remember when you get stopped by an officer OF THE LAW:

* Never forget: Cops are not your friend; they are not there to “help” you. They are there to bust you. Don’t make it easier for them. Make it harder for them.

* Never forget that cops are legally permitted to lie to you. Take nothing they tell you at face value. Assume their intentions are malignant.

* Never forget that a cop is a law enforcer. He is there to enforce the law – any law, every law. It doesn’t matter whether the law is reasonable – or whether you’re a nice guy who doesn’t “deserve” to be hassled. Cops are paid to enforce the law. Period.

* If stopped, keep your window rolled up almost all the way; leave just enough of a gap to allow you to hand the cop your license/documents. If he “asks” you to roll it down, politely decline. Whenever a cop “asks,” it means you do not have to comply. If they order you to do something, then you must do it. But force them to make it clear you are being ordered to comply – “Is that an order?” – and are only complying under duress and not of your own free will.

* Be civil – not slavish. A cop is not “sir.” By so addressing him, you feed his inner bully and Rule Number One for dealing effectively with bullies is to not let them think you are a pussy. Simple – and curt – “yes” and “no” answers will get the point across without being directly confrontational.

* Never make the mistake of responding directly to a cop’s purposefully leading questions – which means, all of his questions. If the cop says, “Do you know why I stopped you?” You tell him, “I suppose you will tell me your reason.” If he says, “Do you know how fast you were going?” You say, “I’m sure you have an opinion.” If he asks whether you’ve been drinking, you remain silent.

* Never concede anything that could be construed – will be construed in court – as evidence in support of whatever charges are leveled at you.

* Never admit to anything – ever.

*Never attempt to excuse anything you may have done. Be silent. Shrug. But do not make excuses. Do not offer an explanation. If you do, you’ve just handed the cop exactly what he wants most – a tacit admission of guilt, which in court will become the basis for establishing your legal guilt.

* You have to give them your ID and insurance info – if you are operating a motor vehicle on “public” roads.  It is “the law.” But you do not – yet – have to tell them where you’re going, where you’ve been – or anything else. If asked, shrug.  State – politely, calmly – that you won’t be answering any questions.

* Ask – repeatedly – whether you are free to go. It’s an excellent stock answer to cop questions.

* If you have a concealed carry permit, the cop probably already knows – having run your license plate info through the computer in his car. Still, it is good policy to tell him, even if you are not legally obligated to do so (it varies, state to state). This is a psychological tactic which shows you (in the cop’s eyes) to be “cooperative” without your actually having complied with anything that’s against your interests. It may help defuse the situation – important when guns are involved.

* Never consent to a search. If a cop asks for permission, he is asking permission. It means he hasn’t got legal probable cause – yet. Do not give it to him. Politely tell him, “I do not consent to any searches.” Repeat as necessary.  If he searches you/your vehicle anyway, you may have a legal basis for challenging the admissibility of anything found. But if you gave your consent to the search – and not objecting is the same as consenting – then anything found as a result of that search can and will be used against you in court.  

* Record the interaction. Higher courts have consistently ruled it is legal to do so, irrespective of what the cop tells you (see point made above about cops lying). There is no expectation of privacy in public. He can record you – you can record him. Use audio and video. If the cop “asks” you to turn off the equipment, politely decline. Merely state you are recording the interaction in the interests of everyone’s safety.
Just like they do to us.

 All of these are excellent suggestions. The only thing I would add, would be to temper any of these with your personal situation. If you're pulled over in a public location with plenty of witnesses, all of these forms of compliance without self incrimination are probably safe and may get you out of the stop without even a ticket.

But if you get stopped by a cop in a deserted area with no witnesses around, it would probably be best to cooperate to some extent with the cop in order to avoid getting them angry and provoking them into acting above the law, protected by the thin blue line.


You never know which kind of cop just pulled you over. Some are law abiding, respectful and well intentioned. Others...not so much.
 

Divided & Conquered: Tea Baggers vs. Occupussies

Never forget that any and every political movement, protest, action or manifesto that gains any sort of attention, will ALWAYS be channeled into the two-party dialectic. It is the primary way of keeping We the Sheeple perpetually at each other's throats and distracted from our overlords who continue to use and exploit us for their own benefit.

The template is simple.

"Right" - Against Big Government, For Big Business
"Left" - Against Big Business, For Big Government

Every single iteration comes down to a "right" or "left" person attacking the other side's "For" or "Against" argument or defending his or her own side's "For" or "Against" argument.

Trapped in this template, none of them ever realize that in fact the real problem can be essentially summed up like this: Big Government and Big Business are inseparable. They are in an incestuous, symbiotic relationship in which both entities serve each other at the masses expense...and the masses never wake up, because they are too focused on opposing one side or the other, that they never notice that these two "sides" are nothing but charade.

Take, for instance, a recent Taki mag article, 99% Wrong.

Note the author, Jim Goad, essentially derides the Occupy Wall Street protestors as communist/marxist libtards, who are "99% wrong."

So what in the name of Friedrich Engels is all this about, anyway?

As with the Tea Party, Occupy Wall Street is a big circus tent hosting a hodgepodge of disparate recurring themes—many that appear sensible, many that sound wacky, and not all of them reconcilable. But whereas the Tea Party agitated largely against Big Government, the bogeyman here is Big Money—specifically corporations and “the rich.”

Thus, the OWS protests are channeled into the "Left-Right" dialectic and immediately marginalized. The anti-Left People's Cube website labeled them Occupussies.

The Tea Party agitated against "Big Government" while supposedly stood for defending "capitalism" and opposing "socialism" that supports Big Government. Except defending "capitalism" in our current status quo essentially means defending corporations, who buy cartel monopoly powers from the Government under the guise of "Regulations.

Now the Occupussies agitate against "Big Business" while supposedly defending "liberalism" and "progressive politics."

This shit never ends. In this way, 99% of the people who pay even marginal attention to the media coverage of either event, immediately adopt a set of attitudes, ideas and beliefs regarding the movement - no need to waste anymore thoughts on who, what, when, where or why these protests may be happening.

The Tea Baggers are just greedy, upper class rich folks that don't care if the poor die starving en mass, while the Wall St. Occupiers are dirty hippy socialist commies who don't want to work and just want the Government to tax the wealthy to pay for everyone's basic living expenses.

But more and more people are waking up to the scam.

Here's one commenter, 1RW, over at the Taki mag, who gets it, and points out the truth. He or she avoids contributing to the continuation of channeling the debate into the two-party dialectic:

Yes it does have to do with big government, because big government creates big regulations, which favor big business. They favor big business because a multi-billion dollar corporation can have a standing army of accountants and attorneys, and other compliance officers to make sure regulations are followed and taken advantage of. A hundred thousand dollar business can't.

Also big government creates treaties like NAFTA and WTO which favor big business because they can offshore labor, rendering american labor too expensive, because americans have to live like americans.

Finally, when big business drops the ball, big government apparently bails them out lets them continue with their financial shenanigans. Or have you not been paying attention?

1Rw missed one nuance here: Big Government favors Big Business, because Big Business finances the politicians campaigns.

Other than that, protesting Big Business is no different from protesting Big Government.

They are essentially two sides to the same Fascist coin.

Feminst Satire

Things are going pretty bleak for me on the financial front...not good times for me in the current Obamageddon economy that is going to one day be looked upon as The Great Depression 2.0...I'm late on my rent, I'm faced with taking a pay cut or being laid off, and I'm filing for bankruptcy. Let's just say I needed a bit of humor to cheer up the spirits a bit today.

I just checked out The Onion for the first time today in quite some time, and I found a hilarious satire about domestic violence shelters that I think the MRA/MGTOW readers and bloggers could certainly enjoy:

No One In Women's Shelter Able To Cook Decent Meal

Despite having no other household responsibilities to occupy their time, none of the residents of the Cleveland YWCA Battered Women's Shelter can prepare a decent hot meal by 6 p.m., sources at the shelter reported Tuesday. "If it's not burned or under-seasoned, it's the same goddamn thing they made yesterday," said group counselor Devon Martin, who doesn't work all day long in the shelter's therapy sessions to microwave his own leftovers. "Without mastering this important life skill, these women will never be able to leave the shelter. It's not like they got anywhere else to go, anyway." Although records show the shelter houses more than 100 battered women, there is some speculation that this number may be exaggerated, as hardly any of the laundry bags left in the hallway get taken care of.

After having a good laugh, I decided to check out the archives and find if the Onion had other pieces making fun of feminism...

Here's a great one, making fun of the feminist's tactic of continually blaming "the media" for the problems of little girls self esteem: New Homely Doll To Improve Self-Image Of Young Girls

"While we still value our classic Barbie franchise, we understand the need for dolls that offer an alternative body image," Mattel CEO Robert Eckert said. "And that's why we've created Plain Pamela. She's drab, she's dumpy, she's nothing to write home about, and she's going to make the girls of America feel like beauty queens."

Added Eckert, "Relatively speaking."

DOH!

Here's another gem, a two part point/counterpoint column about young American women abroad...

Point - European Men Are So Much More Romantic Than American Men

I just got back from a semester abroad in Europe, and let me tell you, it truly was the most magical, amazing experience of my entire life. The French countryside was like something out of a storybook, the Roman ruins were magnificent, and the men, well, European men are by far the most romantic in the world....

...European men know the most romantic little cafés and bistros and trattorias, candlelit places where you can be alone and drink the most fantastic wine. They tell you what's on the menu and what you should try. (If it wasn't for a certain young man in Milan, I never would have discovered fusilli a spinaci et scampi.) And the whole time, they're looking deep into your eyes, like you're the only woman on the entire planet. What woman could resist a man like that? Then, after a moonlit stroll along the waterfront and a kiss in the doorway of their artist's loft, you find yourself unable to—well, I'll leave the rest to your imagination.

I'll never forget my magical semester abroad. One thing's for sure—I'm ruined for American men forever!

Ruined for American men? You don't say...many American women don't even have to leave the country, and they're already been ruined for American Men by the cultural zeitgeist and feminist brainwashing they've been subjected to for their entire lives!

On to the counterpoint:

Counterpoint - American Women Studying In Europe Are Unbelievably Easy

I'm a 25-year-old carpenter living in Rome, and I don't mind telling you that I get all the action I can handle. I'm not all that handsome or well-dressed, and I'm certainly not rich. In fact, my Italian countrywomen could take me or leave me. But that's just fine, because Rome gets loads of tourist traffic, and American co-eds traveling through Europe are without a doubt the easiest lays in the world....

...For dinner, I usually take them to some cheap little hole in the wall, someplace deserted where not even the cops eat. American girls think candlelight means "romance," not "deteriorating public utilities," so they just poke their nipples through their J. Crew sweaters and never notice that there's no electricity. Just as well, because Roman restaurants aren't exactly the cleanest. After a bunch of fast-talk about the menu, I get them the special, which is usually some anonymous pasta with spinach and day-old shrimp, and whatever cheap, generic, Pope's-blood chianti's at the bottom of the list.

By this time, they're usually standing in a slippery little puddle. Going in for the kill, I walk them past one of Rome's famous 2,000-year-old open cesspools. Then, as we open the door to my shitty efficiency, I kiss them on the eyelids so they don't see the roaches, making sure the first thing they see is the strategically positioned artist's easel I bought at some church sale. That's usually all they need to see and, like clockwork, they fall backwards on my bed with their Birkenstocks in the air.

I mean, they're hardly Italian women, but we have a saying here in Europe: Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

LOL!

Here's another great one, Women Now Empowered By Everything A Woman Does

According to a study released Monday, women—once empowered primarily via the assertion of reproductive rights or workplace equality with men—are now empowered by virtually everything the typical woman does.

If one were to watch nothing but Oprah, The View, The Lifetime Channel and Oxygen network, it would be hard to make a case that this piece were simply satire...

Some of the empowering actions of the modern day Empowered America Women:

Shoe Shopping:

"Shopping for shoes has emerged as a powerful means by which women assert their autonomy," Klein said. "Owning and wearing dozens of pairs of shoes is a compelling way for a woman to announce that she is strong and independent, and can shoe herself without the help of a man. She's saying, 'Look out, male-dominated world, here comes me and my shoes.'"

Eating Energy Bars:

"Unlike traditional, phallocentric energy bars, whose chocolate, soy protein, nuts, and granola ignored the special health and nutritional needs of women, their new, female-oriented counterparts like Luna are ideally balanced with a more suitable amount of chocolate, soy protein, nuts, and granola," Klein said. "Proto-feminist pioneers like Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony could never have imagined that female empowerment would one day come in bar form."

Dressing like a slut:

...today's feminist asserts control over her biological destiny by wearing a baby-doll T-shirt with the word "Hoochie" spelled in glitter.

"Don't tell this bitch what to do," said Kari Eastley, 24, a participant in the Oberlin study and, according to one of her T-shirts, a "Slut Goddess." "I wear what I want when I want, and no man is going to tell me otherwise. We're talking Pussy Power, baby."

Accessibility to empowerment (this one is real good!):

Klein said empowerment is now accessible to women who were long excluded.

"Not every woman can become a physicist or lobby to stop a foundry from dumping dangerous metals into the creek her children swim in," Klein said. "Although these actions are incredible, they marginalize the majority of women who are unable to, or just don't particularly care to, achieve such things. Fortunately for the less impressive among us, a new strain of feminism has emerged in which mundane activities are championed as proud, bold assertions of independence from oppressive patriarchal hegemony."

This particular piece saves the best line for last...

...You Go Girl!:

Only by lauding every single thing a woman does, no matter how ordinary, can you truly go, girls."

LMAO

Here's a piece that makes fun of a topic we are all very familiar with...the modern feminist idea that women must achieve success and fulfillment through becoming a wage slave to a corporation rather than having a family and being a homemaker:

Report: Women Increasingly Choosing Dead-End Careers Over Dead-End Relationships

"Technical and repair professions with zero prospects for advancement are no longer viewed solely as the realm of males," Detweiller said. "Women have proved that they are just as adept as men at frittering their lives away in soul-crushing vocations,"...

..."There is nothing that says women can't experience the manifold of crippling defeats life has to offer," said Elizabeth Mooney, a 46-year-old career counselor. "A woman shouldn't feel as though she has to forfeit her chances of raising three disappointing children with a man she doesn't love simply because she chose to squander the best years of her life working as a career counselor."

Though a greater number of women have decided to waste their fleeting youth toiling away in unrewarding jobs, other statistics have shown that a growing faction are embracing the more traditional alternative of slipping quietly into a painless death with a handful of sleeping pills and a bottle of Gordon's gin.

Now that was a much needed dose of humor!

I swear, some of the Onion's editors and writers must be MRA's or MGTOW's....

Expanding the Taxonomy of Male Classifications

Eveybody's favorite Christian Libertarian anarchist blogger, Vox Day, recently posted about Roissy and his practice of classifying men into the Alpha/Beta dichotomy.

VD wrote a pretty good taxonomy that definitely expands on what many critics of game and Roissy have always pointed out as Roissy's ideological weakness in using only two definitions of male behavior on the spectrum of male value in the sexual marketplace's hierarchy.

Before I present Vox's list, I do want to note that I think Roissy's focus on a Alpha/Beta dichotomy is useful as an intro for people who have never heard of "game" in the first place to gain a solid understanding of the differences in male behavior and demeanor.

Vox's expanded taxonomy seems to be a pretty good breakdown that accounts for all of the variations people always seem to question Roissy about. Roissy's comments are often filled with queries about behaviors such as "Is this "beta" or "alpha?" Am I a "greater beta" or a lesser alpha." Etc.

Perhaps Vox gives us a more useful taxonomy here:

Alphas - the male elite, the leaders of men for whom women naturally lust. Their mere presence sets women a-tingle regardless of whether she is taken or not. Once you've seen beautiful married women ignoring tall, handsome, wealthy, and even famous men because that ugly old troll Henry Kissinger walked in the room, you simply can't deny the reality of Alphadom. Example: Captain Kirk, Big from Sex in the City. Suggestion: Do you see a scoreboard? Right, so relax already!

Betas - the lieutenants, the petty aristocracy. They're popular, they do well with women, they're pretty successful in life, and they may even be exceptionally good-looking. But they lack the Alpha's natural self-confidence and strength of character. They're not leaders and they're not the men to whom women are helplessly drawn. Most men who like to think they're Alphas because of their success are actually Betas. Most Betas won't change their game because they don't really have any need or reason to do so. This is probably the easiest social slot in which to find yourself, since the Beta enjoys many of the benefits of Alphadom without being trapped in the Alpha's endless cycle of competition. Example: Brad Pitt Suggestion: Have some compassion for the less naturally fortunate. Try to include them once in awhile.

Deltas - the great majority of men. These are Roissy's Betas. Almost all of you reading this are Deltas despite the natural desire to believe that you are a brave and bold Alpha snowflake notwithstanding. Deal with it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a Delta, it's just a simple statistical and observable reality. The sooner you accept the truth about yourself, the sooner you will be able to control your unconscious inclinations and modify your behavior in a manner that will help you achieve your goals. I've gone out of alphabetical order here because delta symbolizes change, which most Deltas are capable to some extent. Hence the synthetic alpha instruction set known as Game. Example: Probably you. Suggestion: Never forget that there are plenty of girls on the girl tree.

Gammas - the obsequious ones, the posterior puckerers, the nice guys who attempt to score through white-knighting, faux-chivalry, flattery, and omnipresence. All men except true Alphas will occasionally fall into Gamma behavior from time to time, this is the behavior and attitude that Roissy is attempting to teach men to recognize and avoid. The dividing line between a Gamma and a Delta is that the Gamma genuinely believes in the Gamma reality to the very core of his soul whereas the Delta is never truly comfortable with himself when he behaves in this manner despite being thoroughly indoctrinated in it by his culture. Example: Probably you if you've found yourself complaining about your lack of female companionship over the last two years. Suggestion: Remember that the statement "all are fallen" applies to women too. She isn't any more naturally pure or holy or ethereal than you are.

Lambdas - the gays. They have their own social hierarchy. They can fill any role from Alpha to Omega, but they tend to play the part rather than actually be it because the heterosexual social construct only encompasses the public part of their lives. Example: Neil Patrick Harris. Suggestion: Straights will be more tolerant if you keep the bathhouse behavior behind closed doors.

Sigmas - the lone wolves. Occasionally mistaken for Alphas, particularly by women and Alphas, they are not leaders and will actively resist the attempt of others to draft them. Alphas instinctively view them as challenges and either dislike or warily respect them. Some Deltas and most Omegas fancy themselves Sigmas, but the true Sigma's withdrawal from the pack is not a reaction to the way he is treated, it is pure instinct. Example: Clint Eastwood's movie persona. Suggestion: Entertain the possibility that other people are not always Hell. The banal idiocy is incidental, it's not intentional torture.

Omegas - the losers. Even the Gamma males despise them. That which doesn't kill them can make them stronger, but most never surmount the desperate need to belong caused by their social rejection. Omegas can be the most dangerous of men because the pain of their constant rejection renders the suffering of others completely meaningless in their eyes. Omegas tend to cluster in defensive groups; the dividing line between the Omega and the Sigma is twofold and can be easily recognized by a) the behavior of male Betas and Deltas and b) the behavior of women. Women tend to find outliers attractive in general, but while they respond to Sigmas almost as strongly as they do to Alphas, they correctly find Omega males creepier and much scarier than Gamma males. Example: Eric Harris Suggestion: Your rejection isn't entirely personal. Observe the difference in your own behavior and the way the Betas act. And try not to start off conversations with women by sharing "interesting facts" with them.

Got Game?

Well, it looks like the "Great Game Debate" has wrapped up over at A Voice for Men. Rather than weigh in on the various points and counter-points made, and throw in my own opinion on who I think "won," I think I'll take a different approach, and go over my initial introduction to "GAME" on teh interwebz.

Fair Warning - this one's gonna be long.

My entire support of this thing referred to as "game" has never been about "teaching guys to get laid" or how to "pick up chicks." I support the continuous, ongoing discussions of this topic, because it does help many men open their eyes to the realities of how the human mating game works.

Before the advent of our current Brave New World Order, much of what is considered "GAME" was simply advice older men gave to younger men who reached the age where they found themselves suddenly attracted to members of the opposite sex.

Thanks to a generation shaped by sexual revolution, re-defined gender roles, and the pervasive influence of a mass media culture, many males are left clueless about how women think, how women's sexuality works, and even what masculinity is.

For some, discovering these online discussions in forums and blogs regarding "Game," they usually have a moment of clarity. The proverbial light bulb that goes off. Understanding and awareness dawn on the formerly befuddled mind.

Suddenly, given the insights gained from studying this theory, many men realize how and why events and relationships in their pasts turned out the way they did, where they went right, and in most importantly, where they went wrong.

One of the first online sources that I encountered Game theory, was the articles written by an author and shooting instructor by the name of John Ross. I found his online archives (that covered a whole range of topics) about the same time I found several obscure "PUA" blogs that discussed this thing called Game. I immediately saw the connection of what Ross was discussing in his articles and what the PUA bloggers like "The Reality Method" were talking about. This was around 2007, a good year before I ever even heard of Roissy in D.C.

Ross was never a self-proclaimed "guru" or "pickup artist." Just a real guy, who had a Father who steered him in the right direction when he was a teen. He was essentially a "natural." In none of his writings did he write the word "game" or "pickup artist" or any of the other lingo many of us are all familiar with now. But everything he wrote about was describing the use of "Game theory" applied in real life.

His first article in which he addressed the topic, was based on some advice he was trying to give to a young man in an online forum for gun shooting enthusiasts. The young man had met an attractive girl he wanted to ask her out on a date to take her the shooting range, and he was asking for advice from the forum members on how to go about it. Ross weighed in with his advice, playing the role of advice columnist, in a piece entitled: Women, Teasing, Tests, One-itis, and Hope

Keep in mind, he wrote this in 2003.

If this really is "the girl of your dreams" I have a few suggestions that don't have to do with what guns to bring, as others have given you good input on that score.

1. Maintain an air of quiet competence. People in general dislike motormouthed know-it-alls but are impressed when they see knowledge and skill at work. This is doubly true when the activity in question has the potential for danger if safety concerns are ignored.

Explain, don't lecture, and early on say something like "If I see you doing something dangerous I'm going to stop you immediately. You probably won't, but I'm telling you this now so you won't get upset if I raise my voice. I don't much care about your marksmanship today but I care a great deal about safe gun handling."

Inner game. Confidence. Dominance. Taking the lead. Demonstrating Higher Value.

2. Do not fawn over her. Pretty girls get this so much they lose all interest in the guys who kiss up to them. New mindset: You are LETTING HER join you in something exciting. I hope the invitation was "I'm going shooting this weekend--it's going to be perfect weather and there's a great range I use. If you'd like to join me I'll pick you up at 8:30, if you've got something to wear that you won't cry about if it gets a little dirt on it" (said with a grin.)

The concept of establishing frame. YOUR frame. Note his advice using a "neg," said with a grin. Cocky humor showing confidence and putting her in the position to qualify herself to you - if she's interested, she'll want to let you know that she's not like all the other girls that would "cry" if they got their clothes dirty.

When she said "yes," I hope you added "I'm assuming you're not one of those flaky women who thinks 8:30 means 'sometime before noon.' I intend to be at the range by 9:00."

More dominance. Reinforcing his frame. Showing leadership, and letting her know he has standards.

3. Pack up and quit shooting while she's still having a good time. Do not wait until her shoulder or hand hurts or she's tired.

4. After shooting, do not make plans right away to do something else next weekend, no matter how well you think things went. I cannot stress this strongly enough: DO NOT SELL TOO FAR IN ADVANCE. Not even if she rips your clothes off on the ride home. End your first date with her while she's still wanting more, and don't be too eager to plan the next one. This holds for future dates as well. And don't think of them as "dates," think of them as "I'm doing this and I'll let you join me if you behave." New mindset: Welcome to MY world.

Is this being "manipulative" or "putting up a false front" or "supplicating" and being a "pussy beggar?" Nope. All of this advice from Ross essentially boils down to a man developing skills and confidence - aka "inner game." None of this advice is based on trying to be something that your not to manipulate a woman into dropping her panties because you pulled a fast one on her. It's about displaying masculine confidence, assurance and social dominance.

5. Be prepared for a test. (Men call this a "shit test," which is a more accurate term, but from now on I’ll avoid the vulgarism for the sake of Internet decorum.) You may get such a test before you pick her up for the date, a phone call at the last minute telling you her best friend just broke up with her boyfriend and needs consoling, so she has to cancel. It may be an attempt to get you to do something different than what you planned. Do not accept this. Call her on any attempt to change plans. Make it clear such behavior is unacceptable. Be ready to say "Next."

Man. Too bad John Ross has a day job as a shooting instructor. He could make a fortune holding workshops or selling DVD's to gullible, hapless guys desperate to get laid.

Pretty girls have a different reality than you or I have. Their reality is that men almost always do whatever they demand. Believe it or not, the women are tired of this. The "test" is a way to cull out the mediocre males and find the ones with backbone. It's instinctive for women, because it works so immediately and so well. When you pass one test, you will get another, sometimes right away, sometimes later. This usually goes on as long as you remain involved with a woman, but as you keep passing her tests, they become less and less frequent. Be aware of this, and act accordingly.

This was the very first time I ever heard of this thing called a "shit test." Yet, as soon as I read this, I had that "light bulb" moment. I immediately recognized how this applied to my past interactions (and failures with women in relationships).

6. Whenever you find yourself wondering what to say or how to act, and wanting to avoid screwing up because you think this girl is THE ONE, imagine how you would treat the hottest babe in your zip code--who happens to be your little sister. You'd tease your little sister, right? You'd laugh at her and call her on it every time she tried to get YOU to behave the same way she gets all the other guys to worship her and do her bidding. When she was acting exceptionally princess-like, you'd tell her of your surprise that she'd wear such a tight skirt when it made her ass look so fat, or a hairstyle that made her ears stick out. Then you’d tell her you liked the way her nose wrinkled up when she got mad, and would she bring you a soda from the kitchen? If you don't think this works, you've never tried it.

More advice on how to neg. Note: No mention of wearing amulets, feather boas or eye liner.

7. Don't get "one-itis." Talk to EVERY girl that catches your eye. Tease them. Let others come shooting with you on other weekends (if they promise to behave.) Pretty girls have lots of options--it just happens. You can have lots of options, too, but it won't just happen. You'll have to see to that yourself.

The final advice - you have to take responsibility for yourself and maintain your state of calm, cool and confident masculinity, and not put a pretty woman up on a pedestal for worship...but tease her and treat her like your kid sister.

I found this stuff fascinating. At that point, in 2007, I had already been "MRA" blogging for a bit, and had fully immersed myself into the subject matter of the divorce industry; the travesty of single mother households and a welfare system that subsidized it; why feminists are sluts and ball busters; the rampant misandry of our system and culture; and all that other MRA topics we are all familiar with.

The MRA blogosphere was my first "Red pill."

Finding John Ross and a few PUA blogs were the next "red pill" I took.

Ross' follow up column to that initial advice gave me another "AHA!" moment of clarity, and it marked the moment where I first began to analyze my own life and my own relationship with my wife and began my personal transformation I eventually related in all those comments at Roissy's blog in 2009.

From Understanding Women & "The Rules" For Men

Judging from my email traffic, a lot of you are absolutely clueless when it comes to dealing with your wives, girlfriends, and women in general. I get more praise for the 7/7/03 column than all the other ones put together, and "Give us more!" is a common refrain. Okay, here goes. It's Women 101 at John Ross University and class is now in session.

Who knew he could've charged these men thousands of dollars by holding a seminar or selling them a DVD set...wait, did we even have DVD's in 2003? I don't remember....

Anyhow, his follow up article is so good, I'm reposting it in it's entirety:

1. Women process (and act on) information completely differently than men. Never forget this. Stop thinking of women as screwed-up men and start realizing that their minds were built from an entirely different blueprint.

Just as a hawk can discern details at distances that a man needs a ten-power scope to see, a woman is many times more capable than a man at reading the emotions of other women. (Women may be equally capable at reading men's emotions, but have never seen a need to.) Walk into a large party with a woman. You, the man, will see a bunch of people in a room, talking in groups of two to five. You'll see where the food and bar is, and notice any exceptionally attractive women in the room. That's it. Your companion, however, will be able to tell you which woman is angry, which one is lonely, which is happy, which is upset, which ones feel self-conscious, which ones are jealous, and (probably) which ones are having affairs and with which men. Your female companion will be able to accurately tell you these things within ten seconds of entering the room.

This ability comes at a price: Women are many times more sensitive than men to emotional pain. Imagine a man whose skin was so sensitive that ordinary contact was painful. Whenever someone shook his hand in greeting or clapped him on the shoulder in congratulations, it would feel to him as if boiling water were being thrown on his flesh. Now turn that disparity in physical sensitivity into emotional sensitivity and you'll get a good picture of a fundamental difference between men and women.

Men seldom if ever need to know what a group of other women is thinking, so they usually experience a woman's heightened sensitivity from the negative perspective. They hurt their wives' feelings without realizing it (just like the handshake in the above hypothetical) and then are baffled when their women are upset with them, often for days or weeks at a time, for seemingly no reason. (I'll discuss what to do about this later. Keep reading.)

2. Men and women have very different definitions of integrity. Men have integrity to their word, but because of the heightened sensitivity as explained above, women have integrity to their feelings.

Women base their actions on how they feel at the time. This means that if something no longer "feels" right, they won't do it, period. It infuriates most men when a woman "flakes" on them. ("Flaking" is the term that men who study this sort of thing use to describe when a woman who has eagerly made plans with them doesn't show up, or calls at the last minute to cancel because her girlfriend needs consoling etc. Roughly speaking, a woman's tendency to flake is proportional to her options and inversely proportional to her age, although I did meet one 38-year-old single mother of two with this habit.) Understand that the need to be true to one's feelings is an extremely powerful force with women. Look at the dominant theme in all romance novels: The woman is "swept away" by emotions too powerful to be denied, and has an affair when everyone knows she shouldn't. Another example is the adage "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." Even the former First Lady (according to the Secret Service) regularly threw things (lamps, etc.) at her husband when angry. Can you imagine a man doing this, instead of saying "Next"? The idea is ludicrous.

If you're a man, you probably do what you've agreed to do (help someone move, etc.) because you said you would. However, you wouldn't go through with your plans to help your acquaintance move if it had suddenly become a felony with a mandatory 10-year prison sentence to do so, would you? Of course not. Ten years in prison trumps a promise to move furniture. Well, that is the kind of aversion that women have to doing things that no longer "feel" right. Later I'll explain how to make this "integrity to feelings" work to your benefit.

3. Most women are much more rational than most men at the initial meeting. For all of men's complaints about "screwed-up 'chick logic'," it is men who unconsciously fall into a very irrational pattern of behavior when they first meet a new woman that interests them.

Upon meeting an attractive and perhaps interesting woman for the first time, most men behave as if they are thinking about...wait for it...marriage! Hollywood has bombarded us with "love at first sight" stories, but what kind of message does it really send to a woman you've just met that you've already decided she's the one? It screams pathetic loser who couldn't get laid in a women's prison with a fistful of pardons. "One-itis" is the absolute death knell to any person's chance with someone new. Women know this. Men, as a rule, don't.

There's an old saying that "To meet her handsome prince, a girl has to kiss a lot of frogs." Given that few American women age well or are financially self-sufficient, this adage is much more appropriate for men aspiring to marriage than it is for women.

4. What women say they want and what they actually do want are two different things. Men need to be keenly aware of this and act accordingly. The crap that women claim they want in the personals ads is exactly the kind of thing that would have the same women running for the nearest exit out of boredom if the men actually provided it.

Women want to feel attraction for someone, and attraction doesn't come from finding a man who is sensitive, or caring, or likes long walks on the beach, cats, and candlelight dinners, has a college education or a good job. Attraction isn't a choice. Attraction comes from that little shiver of anticipation of not knowing what's coming next, of not being able to pigeonhole the man she's with into any one category, of being just a little bit off-balance and not in total control.

5. Women read things into men's actions that aren't there. Accept that, and make it work for you, if possible. This phenomenon probably comes from women's heightened emotional sensitivity. It may also come from the need many women have for drama (and for some women, chaos) in their lives.

What the above things mean for you, and how to stop screwing up like you've been doing:

Dealing with a woman's heightened sensitivity: When a woman complains about a problem in her life (she will see it as "sharing," not complaining), never offer a solution to the problem. She doesn't want to fix it, she wants to relive it, over and over. Show sympathy but suggest that only another woman could truly understand what she's going through. This acknowledges women's superior emotional capacity. Depending on how you say it, it may send another unspoken message if the complaining was a test (and it probably was): You're trying my patience here. I don't fall for that BS. Watch it.

Integrity to feelings: If you can keep a woman in the state of feeling excited, anxious, off-balance, and emotional when she's around you, you can pretty much lead her wherever you want. An extreme example of this is the group of attractive young women who did anything they were told by a homely little runt of a man named Charles Manson. I'm not advising that you turn into a sociopath, but it's kind of fun getting the girl you met this afternoon to slip off her thong during dinner and hand it to you. Learning how to keep a woman's emotional state at the desired level takes a lot of practice and experimenting (which is fun) and can't be described in a one-page column, but here's a start: Women are attracted to Mystery, Uncertainty (not the same thing), Confidence and Arrogance when combined with humor, and believe it or not, Indifference. Observe the desirable women you know that are obsessed with their boyfriends and you will see that the boyfriends invariably exhibit these qualities, irrespective of whether they are decent guys or total jerks.

Gifts: Gifts can be good at eliciting emotions and even smoothing the rough spots, but don't make the mistake of giving the wrong kind. You'll go broke and not accomplish what you intended. Since women's emotions are so powerful, realize that all gifts to women have a soothing effect and "goodwill time frame" that is proportional to the emotion evoked. This has nothing to do with the value or utility of the gift, believe me. Whether you're in the early stages of a relationship or have been married ten years, never give expensive gifts, agree to extensive home remodeling that you don't particularly want, expensive trips, etc. in the hope that it will improve her feelings for you. If you do, you'll be paying for the expenditure long after your girlfriend or wife has stopped smiling at you for what you did. Instead, give little nothing gifts like a funny card, or a stuffed animal holding flowers, and say "I was thinking of you today." Do this at unexpected times. A week later (or maybe even the next day), the $12 stuffed Dalmatian with the heart-shaped spots will be forgotten, and your woman's attitude will probably (and understandably) be "What have you done for me lately?" But guess what? The same thing will happen a week after you agree to pay for her eight-year-old's private school tuition, which is a $120,000 tab over ten years. You do the math. The exception to this rule is if you decide to give an expensive, useful gift to a woman who needs it and who has been exceptionally good to you already. Few men do this. Men usually give presents, take women to expensive restaurants, etc. in the hope that the recipient will be grateful. THIS DOES NOT WORK. Expensive gifts should always be unexpected rewards. They should never be attempted inducements.

Testing: Reread my 7/7 column's comments on tests. Remember that testing will continue until one of you dies. Even if you break up, she will probably test you if an opportunity presents itself. Plan for this accordingly.

Flaking: The younger and hotter the girl, the greater the chance she will flake. Hotties and flaking are like alcoholics and drinking: If they can, they probably will. The only way to completely prevent an alcoholic from drinking or a hottie from flaking it is to create an environment where it cannot occur, like sending the alcoholic to live in the Saudi desert. To prevent flaking, only offer an activity if it is something you can do right now. Get her to do something fun and exciting with you right at that moment. If she demurs, end the conversation as quickly as possible and eject--don't coerce. When she stops you from leaving and says to call her so you can make plans, don't believe her, and call her on it. Tell her you like talking to live people, not voicemail. Tell her that maybe you'll offer something else if you run into her again. Unspoken message: Seize the day.

What if you absolutely have to plan a "date" in advance with someone you suspect may flake on you? When you make the plans, give the girl something specific to do, like to be sure she's wearing a silk scarf around her waist when you pick her up. Don't tell her why, but make sure she realizes that she has to do it, or you'll turn around and leave if she opens the door and isn't wearing the scarf. She will spend all her time before the date wondering about this, selecting the perfect scarf, etc. She'll be caught up in the mystery, drama, and anticipation (women love these things) and she won't be thinking that "going on this date doesn't feel right anymore."

Initial meetings: Follow the three second rule. You've got three seconds from the time you first notice a desirable woman to the time you say something to her. If you take longer than that, cross her off the list and move on, because she's crossed you off her list of possibles. Never work up your courage to talk to a girl that you've been looking at across the room for ten minutes. Women hate this. And for God's sake, never use some service to track down the girl you lusted after in high school or college. This is called stalking, and unless you graduated within the past 6 months, chances are she now looks nothing like the goddess you worshipped from afar. There are better women who don't have any bad preconceptions about you as close as the nearest Starbucks, Borders, Safeway, or QuikTrip. Unless you live in a remote area, pretty girls are everywhere. Always operate from a theory of abundance. There are more available women in your area than you could ever meet, but they're not going to come looking for you. Get out and chat up as many of them as possible. Most will turn out to be frogs. Expect it. (And realize your high school dream girl that you were thinking about tracking down is probably a frog.) You won't find a princess by convincing yourself that the one girl you've met in the last month is one. Meeting and dating lots of women gives you a much more accurate perspective and has the added benefit of making you more attractive to women, not less.

Dating multiple women: If you don't want a woman to think of herself as your one and only girlfriend, don't do things that would make her think that way. Don't call her every day. Don't see her three or four times a week. Be up front, and say "I think too many people get into exclusive relationships far too quickly, and it's not healthy. I wouldn't even consider having an exclusive relationship with someone I'd known less than six months." Most people, and women are no exception, will accept most anything if it is not a surprise. Don't lie and sneak around. If you see other women and she has a problem with this when she's only recently met you, she is NOT the one. Next.

Enjoy women for what they are, and don't imagine them to be something they aren't. It may sound harsh or negative, but real women are seldom like what we see in movies written by male screenwriters or read about in novels written by male authors. The cute waitress where you eat lunch may visually remind you of Meg Ryan (or whoever) in the movie where she played a waitress, but don't for one second imagine the real-life waitress to be as intelligent or interesting as the writers who gave Meg her lines. Flirt with the waitress and let her presence make your lunch more pleasant, but don't start going there every day and turn her into some fantasy of yours ("One-itis"). At best, you'll waste a bunch of better opportunities mooning around her at lunchtime, while she smiles at you but otherwise blows you off. At worst, she'll eventually accept your advances, and (since you were fixated on only her and had no other women to compare her to) you'll end up married before you figure out that aside from being nice to look at (for now), there isn't much else you really enjoy about her.

Don't be ordinary. Talk about your job, school, hobbies, etc? Forget it! If she launches into the same old questions, accuse her of husband-hunting, and tell her you're not ready for that. Be teasing and mysterious. Never give a straight answer unless it's "No." Women will complain that they "can never figure you out and it's driving them crazy." This is evidence that you are doing the right things.

Spank her. Spank her bottom lightly when she does something you don't like. Spank her harder when she does something good. I discovered this years ago and the worst results I've ever gotten were neutral. The best were volcanic. (I don't do this unless I know at least her first name, but that's just me--it's probably not necessary.)

When in doubt, tease. Keep the "Bratty Sister Frame" firmly in your mind (see 7/7 column). Call her on her girl-like behavior. If she mentions modeling, say, "Oh, you mean like a hand model?" Tell her that her long fingers remind you of E.T. If she's cute but her clothes are odd-looking to your eye, ask her if she got dressed in the dark. You get the idea.

Sex in long term relationships: If a good long-term sex life with one woman is important to you, never get into a committed relationship (such as marriage) with a slender woman unless she is genetically slender. 200-lb. women who have always been heavy are usually comfortable with themselves and have good sex drives. Former 125-lb. hotties that gain 75 pounds after saying "I do" often lose all interest in sex and are a very bad bet for the long haul. I know dozens of men who found this out the hard way. Conversely, no man I know with a fat partner who has always been fat (I actually prefer the word "plush") is dissatisfied with his wife or girlfriend's level of desire. The old admonition about taking a long look at the mother before proposing is sound advice.

If you want to marry a rich girl: Rich women are no different than other women in that they are turned on by a man's passion for his work. Keep in mind that not just any kind of work qualifies. Women are attracted to artists, especially musicians. Rock stars don't get just high school groupies, they get rich actresses like Pamela Anderson and rich supermodels like Rachel Hunter and Paulina Porizkova. Singers in local bands do equally well on a smaller level. Women (including rich ones) go for other passionate artists such as actors, dancers, painters, and sculptors.* If you are a passionate artist, you're a good bet to snag a rich girl, who will likely be happy to support you and your passion. If you go this route, keep the rich girl interested by pursuing your passion WITHOUT going through all her money! Live comfortably but don't start to believe your own bullshit, getting her to fund your big (and inevitably money-losing) dreams of grandeur. NEVER let her dip into principal. If you do, be prepared to be thrown out on your ear. Any successful investment professional can tell you horror stories about rich women clients with artist husbands who cooked the goose that laid the golden eggs.

Maybe this will hold you clueless guys for a while. More later.

Man, he wrote this in 2003. As far as I can tell from reading all of his other articles, Ross didn't attend PUA seminars, buy Mystery's book or subscribe to David DeAngelo's newsletter. Yet every last piece of advice he gives here jibes with most of what we commonly call "Game Theory." Note: no mention of the words hypergamy or social dominance or manipulation. It's just straight up advice, the kind that used to be transmitted from older males to younger males.

As I later found out, Ross got his game advice the old fashioned way: from his Father.

I talked to Dad about how this girl made me feel when I looked at her. He smiled knowingly.

"Son, she probably won't look that way for long. She might, but don’t count on it. Enjoy looking at her for now. But here's some advice: If you want to do more than just look at her, then don't ever talk about her good looks or tell her she's beautiful."

"Why not?"

"Because everyone else is always doing that, and it gets old. Girls want a challenge, just like boys do. They don’t want the same old compliments, they want a challenge."

"I don't understand."

"When you play shortstop, do you want the boys on the other team to all strike out every time? No, that would be boring. You want them to hit the ball to you, so you can throw them out at first base. Maybe you'll bobble the ball, and the batter will get on base, but you want the chance to make a good play, right? If you tell a pretty girl she's pretty, you're not hitting the ball to her. You're not giving her any challenge at all. You aren't in the game. Get in the game. Hit the ball to her. Give her a challenge."

"How do I do that?" Dad grinned at me when he heard this.

"Tease her about something. Say something about her that makes her jaw drop, and then act a little surprised at her reaction. But always be calm. Don't ever be mean, but give her brain a little tweak, see how she reacts, and then do it again. You're good at thinking on your feet. When a fellow sees a girl he likes, he plays with her, only not with a bat and a baseball glove, but with words and body language and facial expressions. Do that with this Jenny girl. And never back down, no matter what happens. Never break eye contact with her while the two of you are talking—let her be the one to look away. Think about it." He saw my face register some comprehension, and he added another thought. "Don't worry so much about her. Make sure you have fun. Figure out a way to tease her. And have fun."

Many critics of "game" call "negs" and "cocky/funny banter" as manipulative, wrong, evil, dishonest, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Many people who seem to understand and support game are often troubled about using the term "GAME" itself, making it sound un-serious, or trivial, or whatever other criticisms they may use because they really just don't get what it's all about.

It IS a Game.

Like any other game, if you know the rules, know how it's played, and you can discern the many variations and permutations that can arise during the course of the game, you will certainly enjoy playing the game. Even if you end up losing, a well played game can be enjoyed despite coming up short.

Unfortunately, some people simply can't grasp the strategies and tactics, they never understand the subtle nuances of the action, and they simply write it all off as a waste of time. Others try to play, but don't have the patience or self-awareness or humility necessary to learn from initial failure. Game is not for everyone.

But the entire point of blogging, talking, discussing and writing about it, is to at least make some men wake up to something they never even considered in the first place - that there is actually even a Game going on at all.

It's a game called the human mating dance.

Nobody said you HAVE to play.

You are perfectly within your rights to take your balls and go home.

The Illusion of Choice aka DuhMockRuh$€¥

Promo for Global Bankster's Wars - Episode III: A New Hope

"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

There is nothing really new under the sun. The names may change, but the games THEY play are still the same.

Ever since the Institutionalization of Bankster Usury as the centralized organ of economic control over the nation, all of politics and the process of mass media campaigning has been nothing more than an elaborate game of charades...an interactive advertisement for the Company Store to keep we the sheeple plugged into and fully invested in maintaining the status quo of the system.


Consider the paraphrasings of these common maxims regarding history: "History is written by the winners," and "Those who fail to learn from the failures of history, are destined to repeat them." Oh, and let's not forget this one: "The definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior over and over again, each time expecting a different outcome."

"Official" history is written by the conquerors, so that they can prevent the masses of people from discovering the true causes of their past failures that lead to their historical defeat, so that they can continue to support and buy into the status quo of cyclical insanity that is our deliberately designed modern society.

And just what constitutes this cycle of insanity? Debase the currency, debauch the culture and corrupt the common morality to destroy the family and invite voluminous immigration of foreigners into every corner of the land to dispossess the citizenry of their birthright. Rinse and repeat as many times as necessary until the Global Tyranny is achieved. (Side note: I have sympathies for the rising sentiment of White Nationalist neo-reaction on teh Interwebz and in teh MAndrosphere, despite my minority heritage, as everything they are trying to prevent happening to their race, has already happened to those of us of Native Hawaiian descent. We've been conquered, marginalized in our own homeland and miscegenated into near extinction. THEY got the same plans for all you crackers.)

Never forget that the social engineers who have constructed our brave new world order are masters of manufacturing consensus and implementing gradual cultural revolution via the Hegelian Dialectic.

Thesis + Anti-Thesis = Synthesis.

Since THEY use the Hegelian Dialectic as their favorite option in their playbook, THEY know precisely how to reverse engineer (in the short term) so as to achieve their overall objectives.

Consider the case of the Brave New World Order's 20th Century Emmanuel Goldstein Lifetime Achievement Award recipient, good ole Uncle Adolph.

Pre-selection + hypergamy FTW!

Mein Kampf, was the perfect treatise for identifying the problems that plagued Germany in the first half of the 20th century, and it offered all of the counter-measures and solutions for fixing them. And lo and behold, once he gained power, he did exactly as he said he would and turned a moribund, demoralized, morally debauched and near bankrupt Germany into a Global economic and military superpower just in time to commence the next installment of the Global Bankster's World Wars Trilogy - Episode II. And what precisely is it that he did that he wrote about in that infamous tome?

1) Get rid of the usurious banking system and issue interest free currency backed by the goods and services provided by the German people.

2) Deport any and all immigrants (it wasn't just the Jews) not dedicated or compatible to upholding and promoting the National interests and the promotion of a common ethos and morality that upholds and promotes pride and patriotism in the culture and nation at large.

3) Get rid of all cultural influences that promote the destruction of the family and reinstill patriotic pride in a defeated and subjugated people.

One of the first thing's Hitler did upon gaining power, was to outlaw the Weimar Republic's bustling sex industry. The Nazis shut down all of the brothels, burlesque theaters and live sex shows and ordered all of the smut books and magazines burned once he gained power. Pictures and accounts of Nazi book burnings are always cited as the worst examples of Government censorship...but note that we were never told what books were actually being burnt and why. At least I never was when I was going through my own institutional education indoctrination.

Note a few of the guidelines for what books the Nazi's targeted for burning:

* The works of traitors, emigrants and authors from foreign countries who believe they can attack and denigrate the new German (H.G. Wells, Rolland).

* The literature of Marxism, Communism and Bolshevism.

* Pacifist literature.

* Literature with liberal, democratic tendencies and attitudes, and writing supporting the Weimar Republic (Rathenau, Heinrich Mann).

* All historical writings whose purpose is to denigrate the origin, the spirit and the culture of the German Volk, or to dissolve the racial and structural order of the Volk, or that denies the force and importance of leading historical figures in favor of egalitarianism and the masses, and which seeks to drag them through the mud (Emil Ludwig).

* Books that advocate "art" which is decadent, bloodless, or purely constructivist (Grosz, Dix, Bauhaus, Mendelsohn).

* Writings on sexuality and sexual education which serve the egocentric pleasure of the individual and thus, completely destroy the principles of race and Volk (Hirschfeld).

* All writings that ridicule and belittle the state and its institutions, or that attack or question its moral foundation.

* All writings that attack or attempt to dissolve the order of the community of the Volk and its moral foundation, specifically those against the race and biological requirements of a healthy Volk (marriage, family, etc.).

* All writings that ridicule, belittle or besmirch the Christian religion and its institution, faith in God, or other things that are holy to the healthy sentiments of the Volk.

So....the Nazi's burned all the books they identified and recognized as corrosive influences like liberalism, communism, Marxism, Bolshevism, atheism, cultural nihilism, as well as any attacks on sexual morality and Christian religion and faith in God, their culture and their National health.

Given the decline in native birth rates and the lack of cultural cohesion and narcissism-promoting atomization of our porn saturated culture and complete lack of any sort of culturally enforced sexual morality or sanctity of marriage and family, the idea of cleansing our media and institutions of such corrupting filth doesn't sound so outlandish to my conspiracy-prone mind any more. I once thought (as I was programmed to) the idea of book burnings and censorship were the ultimate intellectual atrocity....but given where we are in the present day, I'm no longer so sure about that.

But that's neither here nor there, since there does not exist at present a single politician or party - including Trump - who is suggesting such a moral and ethical cleansing of media and entertainment today. 

Now, out here in the fever swamps of conspiritard land, many folks commonly accept that Hitler was an  actual double agent for the Global Bankster Conspiracy whose primary purpose was to lead Germany into total defeat and destruction.

Objective mainstream historians and military strategists and tacticians who have studied the end of World War II have always noted the insanity of Hitler's orders that were directly responsible for Germany suffering utter defeat. The commonly accepted explanations for his disastrous orders are usually attributed to drug addictions and/or megalomania-inspired denial.

I believe the idea that he was a double agent whose sole purpose was to engineer Germany's defeat and total subjugation to the Global Bankster Cartel is certainly plausible - especially when you consider the final outcome of his time as an actor on the world stage.

Now with Donald Trump, it looks to me like the same play from the same playbook is being called up once again. A populist political maverick espousing Nationalist sentiments and offering to reverse many of the aspects of the cultural marxists long march through Western Civilization.

In the scope of the grand narrative of controlled opposition and carefully revised history, figures like Hitler and Trump are the perfect pressure relief valves for the masses who are starting to awaken to the existential threats the cultural marxists, SJWs, leftist progressives and cuckservatives represent. As opposition grows for the support of systemic usury, cultural debauchery and promotion of immigration as genocide on a nation and culture, the best answer for those who have constructed this deliberately designed system is to co-opt and take control of the opposition and lead it where THEY want it to go.

For this purpose, Trump appears to fit the bill quite nicely.

Future CEO of USA Inc. 2016

I readily concede that I may certainly be mistaken in my assessment of the Donald. But the way the world seems to be going right now certainly seems to be aligning up for the the third and final act in the Global Bankster's World Wars Trilogy....and Trump playing the pied piper to channel the growing discontent of the increasing number of people who are awakening to the realities of our system and disillusioned with politics as usual, sure seems like a perfectly timed glimmer of hope to keep we the sheeple invested in the system and continuing to assent to our enslavement.

Now I have no evidence for this conclusion, but what I do have is a basic premise - you don't reach the level of wealth, fame and notoriety that Trump has in the past three decades without being connected and working with/for the highest echelons of the establishment. He talks a good game about immigration, deportation and restoring the economy...but has he bothered to address the root of all the corruption he is purportedly campaigning to fix?

As far as I'm concerned, until you get an honest to goodness, real deal politician running on a platform to end the Company Store's usury cartel monopoly, it's all just window dressings and bread and circus distractions.

If indeed those that count the ballots of the 2016 Presidential Election declare The Donald as the next President, look for the millions of sheeple being lead to the slaughter of World War once again. Throw in the fact that the Obama regime just announced that all teh Womynz are now eligible for all combat positions, and we now have the makings of an equal opportunity culling for both sexes!

Afterall, what better way is there for the Banksters 2Big2Fail to achieve their number one goal inscribed in stone - MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE - than another World War?


And on the chance that I'm wrong, and Trump is actually who he portrays himself to be?


In that case, I sure hope he has trustworthy and loyal personal security, because if he is legitimately running on restoring American Nationalism and derailing the plans of the power's that be, he'll be getting the same treatment as Lincoln, Kennedy and any other political figure that did things THEY do not approve of.

More MRA Reading: The War Against Patriarchy

When I first began this blog, I had been inspired by a number of MRA readings, and probably the most influential was Dr. Daniel Amneus' two books, The Garbage Generation and The Case For Father Custody.

At that time, I did a little more searching for other writings by Amneus, and found references to an article called "The War Against Patriarchy." However, whenever I tried to find it, any links or references I found for it never connected to the article itself.

After awhile, I forgot about it.

However, reading Rob Fedder's No Ma'am blog and his review of "The Case for Father Custody" the other day, I remembered that I never found that article, so I did another search for it today, and voila!

After reading it, I'm sure glad I found it! It offers the perfect synopsis of the main arguments he expounds upon in greater detail in The Garbage Generation and The Case For Father Custody. It can be read relatively quickly (compared to the two previously mentioned books -- it is a long article) and contains the main points, and is a great "introductory" reading to share with other people who are ignorant of what the MRA movement is all about.

I won't excerpt too much here...because if you haven't by now, you should definitely read the whole thing. Nevertheless, here's one cut that sums up the entire basis for Amneus' arguments:

The woman's primary contribution to the marriage is her willingness to share her reproductive life with a man and thereby enable him to have a family. The woman's willingness to make this offer and the man's willingness to make the complementary offer to love, honor, protect and provide for the resulting family are what make civilization and social stability possible. The condition of the ghettos shows what happens when the marriage contract becomes meaningless or irrelevant. The new law makes the woman's offer to share her reproductive life meaningless by declaring that she may renege on her offer at any time she chooses. It makes her a moral minor who cannot enter into a stable and enforceable contract upon which a man--and society--can depend. Granting the woman the right to renege on her contract makes the contract worthless and deprives the woman of most of her bargaining power in the marriage marketplace. It is hard to imagine anything more damaging to society--or to women.

Of course, those of us who are aware of the consequences like social chaos, generational poverty and increased crime and social pathology, correctly look at the state of affairs and realize that what Amneus writes is truth.

Then never forget that the feminists look at the casualties of the war against patriarchy -- the millions of divorces, broken homes, emotionally scarred children, alienated fathers, rampant promiscuousness, millions of aborted fetuses and a society coarsened and cheapened with rampant sexualization of our mothers, sisters and daughters -- and they call it "progress."

Yes, They Most Certainly Want You to Be Helpless

I ended my last post with: "Our educational system was designed precisely to condition our children into docile dependency and mindless conformity...the hallmark characteristics of sheeple."

I forgot to add defenseless and vulnerable...just like a sheep led to slaughter.

Reading this post by Talleyrand in which he notes how school indoctrinate students with the following values:

Don’t be a bully (also known as all violence is evil, even when you defend yourself, be a rat instead and go to the teacher authority figure)

This reminded me of an incident I experienced when I was in the seventh grade.

I used to get bullied all the time -- as I've written about before, I was raised by a domineering mother who constantly told me it was wrong to fight, that I should always tell the teachers/school people if I was being bullied or attacked, etc. In one instance, a particular kid used to bully me all the time, and one day I just got sick of it.

I didn't have the courage, knowledge or experience to stand up to him at that age, but when he tried to make me give up my seat on the school bus one day because he wanted to sit next to the window, I simply refused to move.

He began to threaten me, but I was angry and fed up with the bullying, and I just ignored him.

He jumped on me and began to pound on me relentlessly, and I never fought back. I just covered up and waited for someone else to rescue me.

Since this was after school, this occurred while we were boarding the bus while still on School grounds, and the lady bus driver summoned the security guards (who were always stationed at the bus stop area after school) to come onto the bus and 'Breakup the fight' (more like a one-sided beat-down of yours truly).

I will never forget the looks of pity and contempt from the girls on the bus (particularly the girl I had a crush on at the time), and disgust from my friends, as the guards grabbed me and the bully and escorted us off the bus. See, this was a "fight" so I had to be dragged to the Vice Principals office at the same time as the bully.

Needless to say, the bus driver came into the office and told the Vice Principal what had actually happened, that I had not fought back, that this kid attacked me, and I did nothing wrong.

The VP began to berate the bully, he began crying, and the VP literally walked over and began to pat my head and rub my shoulders. I don't remember what she said, but she gave him a 3 day suspension and a month of detention and told him he was not allowed to ride the bus home that day, they were going to call his parents to come pick him up. She than told him to go to the bathroom and wash his face.

When he left, she began to praise me for "not fighting" and for being a good boy etc. I don't remember her precise words, but it was praise. She essentially patted me on the back and reinforced the notion that I was a model student for "non-violence." She called my mom and told her what happened, and put me on the phone with her so that my mom could tell me how proud she was of me for not fighting back.

To this day, the memory of this event fills me with nausea. It's one of my primary motivations I've had in pushing myself to train martial arts for so hard and for so long. That sense of helplessness, weakness and impotence in the face of violence has hurt and scarred me far more than the punches the bully reigned down on me that day.

I was teased by many boys and my friends for weeks after that for being a "wimp" and a "pussy" and a "fag" for not fighting back. It was utterly disgraceful, and I wouldn't even look at, much less talk to the girl I had a crush on for months after wards. That was probably the biggest blow to my 13 year old self-esteem; knowing the one girl I was head over heels infatuated with, was there to witness my humiliation that day. While that boy never did bully me again (I think he got into a lot of trouble with his own parents for being suspended), other bullies knew an easy target when they saw one. The bullying on me over the next few years by others intensified and escalated. It only ended when I finally fought back against a bully when I was a sophmore in high school.

Knowing I was getting bullied mercilessly, my Father took me on the side one day -- well out of ear shot of my mother for fear she would hear him and yell at him for teaching us kids to be violent -- and he told me that the next time I got bullied, I should punch the kid right in the nose as hard as I could. Even if the bully proceeded to kick my ass, it would end my bullying problems, because bullies will only pick on kids that are easy victims who take it.

My Dad's advice worked, I did get my ass kicked, but I did bust up a bully's nose pretty badly, and I no longer got bullied much from that day forward.

I just wish my Dad did not let my mother cooperate with the School system in making me a docile victim several years earlier.

Red-pill Reflections On Blue-pill Delusions

As the old saying goes, hindsight is always 20/20...and after a bit of rumination and introspection, I think this axiom is certainly true. Inspired by the blogging of Alkibiades and Talleyrand and their frequent posts over at Seasons of Tumult and Discord regarding their "red-pill" based observations of interpersonal relationship dynamics in their day-to-day interactions, as well as recalling their experiences from their pasts, I too began to think a lot about my own experiences and of those of the people I've known.

Looking back to my own relationships, and those of relationships of friends and family for which I have an intimate knowledge of their particular dynamics, I now realize that I have a much clearer understanding of why people ended up doing the things they did; why they took certain tracks in life.

When I was a young man in my 20's, I self-identified as a socially-libertine conservative Republican - i.e. basically a small government, anti-liberal - Rush Limbaugh listening - FOXNews watching - Republican voting - pot smoker. I always supported the Libertarian Party platform and candidates...but I used to buy into the lie that I HAD to vote Republican to fight the liberal - socialist Democrats. (8 years of the Dubya-led GOP and his "compassionate conservatism" certainly cured me of that particular notion.)

Nevertheless, one of the ideas I used to accept without reservation was the idea that the two parent family was inviolable - that screwed up people only came from broken households with absentee parental guidance or abusive step-parents...which is of course the right-wing view as promoted by the likes of Rush and Bill O'Reilly et al. So I was always puzzled whenever I thought about a particular family that I knew of. The Father was a retired military man, the mother, an Asian he married while deployed overseas. They married, and moved to Hawaii, and had two children, a girl and a boy. They were both in my peer group and we all hung out amongst the same clique in High School and the first half of my 20's.

The girl was known as 'easy.' Not exactly considered a slut...but she was the penultimate serial monogamy-polyandrist. She dated almost every single guy amongst our social peer group. While she wouldn't have one night stands or cheat on a current boyfriend, it was widely known that all you had to do was ask her out and take her on a single date and you would be getting some until either she broke up with you or you broke it off with her. In a 10 year period (from 15-25 I lost contact with them after that - but eventually connected with her again through facebook.), I would say she "dated" probably 35+ guys. I would say it's not too outrageous to guess the pattern continued in the last decade since I last saw her. The reason why I write about her story is because she dated 3 of my closest friends for extended periods of time (3-6 months...for her, that was extensive.) I saw first hand the relationship arc she went through with each of my friends. Of course I had no understanding at all about the dynamics that played out at the time.

Her younger brother was a definite wild-child, who constantly got into trouble, and eventually dropped out of school. He and I used to hang out occasionally, and would often deal with each other in terms of acquiring our favored smokable herbs. I've spent a bit of time at their house just hanging out with the both of them and I used to wonder how both he and his sister turned out so wild when they had such a stern, disciplinarian-type drill Seargent type of a Father. I often sat there while he lectured one or both of them.

According to my "right-wing" belief system at the time, I thought these kids were some kind of weird anomaly. Two kids from an intact family home, both living wild and self-destructive (but-oh-so-fun) lifestyles.

Now, I do believe I know exactly why they turned out the way they did (and why I too got into so much trouble in my youth).

I now understand that the simple existence of a two parent household, while important, is certainly not the be all-end all of raising children to have successful families of their own and to becoming thoughtful, contributing members of society.

See, I now know that their can be worse situations than single mother households.

Just because parents are not divorced, doesn't really mean that a home can't be broken. Funny, how I used to think to myself about how these two were so screwed up...but I never made the association with my own situation, and why I too embraced a self-destructive lifestyle in my youth.

Looking back with "red-pill" induced clarity, I now understand exactly why these two kids took a path of dysfunction (as I similarly did). Their strict, harsh, disciplinarian father had zero authority in his home. And while the Father would get angry and go into tirades and try to mete out discipline for his children...their mother always intervened, interjected and undermined any sort of authority he tried to assert.

If he grounded them, she would give them permission to go out the minute he left the house.

If he tried to take away their things, she'd give it back to them.

If he cut off their allowance, she'd just give them the money when he wasn't looking.

She spoiled them rotten...and he knew it. And he never stood up to his wife's constant campaign to render his authority meaningless. She wore the proverbial pants.

He'd yell at them, and she'd jump right in and defend them, no matter what.

When the school called because the boy skipped school three days in a row, the father would start to yell at him, and his mother would immediately get in between them defend her son from the Father's wrath. Same thing when he got arrested for possession of cocaine and acid. When he got arrested for reckless endangerment for his crazy driving. No matter what, these kids had no consequences for their behavior...because their mother enabled them and the Father never stood up to her and called her on it. The mother had utter contempt for the Father. I now see this kind of home environment can be just as bad -- if not worse -- for children as a bitter divorce or abandoned by a deadbeat. It was much the same story I went through myself.

Gaining an understanding of this dynamic that they grew up in, I also now realize why the sister was such a serial monogamist - the very minute her boyfriends started "beta-izing," she'd lose all attraction for him, and either dump them, or begin to act so bitchy and aloof, he'd dump her. In essence, every new guy she began dating, was a potential male figure of authority that on a visceral, instinctual level, she needed to respect. As soon as she couldn't respect them anymore, it was over. She was essentially rejecting any male that became contemptible...unconsciously, she just couldn't bear to see herself fall into the same relationship dynamic as her parents.

Now, of course, thanks to facebook, I see that she's a single-mother career woman, turned cougar.

Her brother ended up in jail.

My own home life was a bit different, since religion played a prominent role in my own upbringing...but my mother's contempt for my Beta-provider Father certainly affected myself as well.

I don't think my Mother ever realized how destructive she was to my sibling's and my own personal development. The bitter contempt she expressed for my Father whenever he wasn't around. "YOUR FATHER" spit out in disgust was the daily epithet we heard from her as she complained about him on a regular basis. He could never do anything right. Ever. Oh, he sure tried his hardest. But my Father's church-based, white-night chivalry ideals combined with a supplicating, "what can I do to make you happy" demeanor drove my Mother's innate hypergamous instincts haywire.

The funny thing is that my grandfather was the complete opposite. He was certainly an old school 'player.' Until he died in his late 80's, my grandfather was the kind of man that could easily dominate any conversation in a room. He was a "natural." He also had multiple affairs on my Grandmother when they were dating (supposedly none after they married...but I wouldn't put it past the old goat). I think my Father was raised to be a supplicating Beta by my Grandmother constantly telling him to not be like his own father. She took him to a woman-pedestal-izing "Christian" church when he was a young boy and made sure he would not grow up to be a womanizer like his own Father.

My mother used to tell us that our Grandfather was a "terrible" man. That he was "abusive." What I now understand is that my Mother was observing how my Grandfather used to "neg" my Grandmother, and how he definitively "wore the pants." My Grandfather was a very dominant man and my Grandmother was certainly submissive to him. My mother couldn't stand going to their house for the holidays. It would drive her crazy to see my Grandfather say something like "Where's my dinner woman?!" and my Grandmother would quickly get to cooking in the kitchen.

In my mother's 1960's college indoctrinated mentality, my Grandfather was a chauvinist pig and my Grandmother, an oppressed slave catering to his every whim. It wasn't until I was a grown man and I saw my Grandparents die, that I began to understand that they truly loved each other. My Grandmother respected my Grandfather...and he truly loved her. I'll never forget standing at her hospital bedside, watching my Grandmother grasp my Grandfather's hand and telling him she loved him with all her heart and thanked him for a lifetime together. He was utterly heartbroken when she passed away. This was a complete and total shock to me. I had been brainwashed by my mother to believe that they had a sick, abusive relationship...that what they had was not "love."

Only now do I truly understand exactly who it is that has a sick, abusive relationship.

As a young teen, hearing a daily campaign of revulsion and contempt from my mother directed at my Father destroyed my own self-esteem and my own self-image. If your Father is such a piece of garbage, why than I must be one too. I used to hate my father with a passion...and that hatred also turned onto myself. When I looked in the mirror and saw that face that resembled my Father's, my mother's contempt for that similar face, had programmed me to develop a great deal of contempt for my own reflection in the mirror.

I now realize precisely why I myself embraced a self-destructive lifestyle as a teen and young adult. When it comes to hard drugs, and thrill seeking, reckless and suicidal behavior, I've been there and done that. I didn't care if I lived or died.

As I grew older and gained a real understanding of these things, I also went through a period of hatred for my mother. I've gotten over that now. I've gone through a pendulum of emotions and attitudes - from blaming my Father to blaming my Mother. I'm simply now past blame and recriminations. I've settled on simple acceptance. It is what it is, and I also realize that there are other people that have had far worse upbringings to deal with than what I went through. I now realize that my Mother is not totally to blame for her contempt of my Father...that my Father simply does not understand how his supplicating, "nice-guy" manner of dealing with my Mom is the very reason why she's such a bitchy nag to this very day.

But I thank God I have taken the "red-pill" and see such things clearly now. When my own children grow older, I think I have the knowledge to give them a much better home life than the one I grew up in.