This is a publication in list format, rather than an integrated article. It is one of the most important concentrations of information you will ever read. If you are a thinking person, this publication will permanently change parts of your thinking, either from the points themselves or supporting material linked. We also have the legendary Imran Khan coming out of blogging retirement for a one-time-only appearance to provide his updates to his tens of thousands of fans, along with some other observations along the way in a dedicated section, since there are hundreds of thousands of people awaiting his sequel to his magnum opus article.
There is probably no human being alive that will fully agree or fully disagree with this entire article (and we certainly don't fully agree with each other). Each of our opinions are exclusively our own. We aim to evoke all possible emotions with near simultaneous combination, as well as to observe the effect of combining so many audiences at once. This publication is going to change the trajectory of society itself in small but distinct ways.
By Kartik Gada :
1) The Economy :
a) There is no subject that affects more people, yet has so little written about it, as the exponential, accelerating trend in economic progress. It affects everything, yet under five people (including me) have written anything substantive about it in the last 12+ years.
b) Half of all economic growth that has ever happened, has happened after 1998. This, too, is only if one takes the suboptimal metric of GDP as the measurement. If asset price growth net of inflation is taken as the metric, then half of all economic growth that has ever happened, has happened after 2010.
c) The US Federal Reserve, and by extension the entire profession of Macroeconomics, is so completely out of date in terms of how technological forces have changed their assumptions, that what is blindingly obvious to people outside of their ivory tower is still submerged by their denial. There is no other field where the establishment is this out of touch with changes in their own field, and thus no field with a higher 'egghead' quotient. Major historical turning points often follow the collapse of such an existing stronghold of outdated orthodoxy.
d) The US Federal Reserve still thinks Quantitative Easing was to be a temporary program, and that the 'normal' Fed Funds rate is around 3%, despite nearly a decade of being wrong about this. In reality, the Fed Funds rate will eventually be nearly 0% permanently, and QE will also be permanent (and at exponentially rising levels) in order to simulate the effect of negative interest rates. There are already $16 Trillion worth of bonds with negative yields, and either this figure will rise or the level of worldwide QE will.
e) The Federal Reserve, with their army of 600 PhDs, has been exposed as not even looking at metrics they have touted in the past, such as the yield curve and the CPI inflation rate. It was revealed that they base their decisions on just one metric, which is the unemployment rate. They think that when the unemployment rate goes below 5.0% and then 4.0%, high inflation is imminent (just because that happened in 1969, long before technology was a significant part of the economy), so the Federal Reserve raised rates despite no evidence of inflation and in complete violation of their own states priorities regarding the yield curve. 600 PhDs is thus no better than having one PhD (which apparently is worse than having zero PhDs), when the only thing they can ever imagine is tinkering along the edges. They are the ideological successors of the 1900-era engineering establishment that insisted that heavier-than-air flying machines are not possible.
f) It is extremely easy for even a teenager to understand what ivory tower Economists with their PhDs don't, about why very low unemployment combined with QE has still not caused inflation. In 1969, when so many people had jobs, they bought houses and cars, which are materially intensive to build, and so shortages led to bidding wars among buyers. But now, if just 2% of one's consumption is software (vs. 0% in 1969), that is enough to offset inflation since software has no material component so can never run out of supply or experience inventory or distribution mismatches. It is that simple, but the Economics profession has memorized too much 1969-era material to retool their thinking.
g) Economists who devise policy do not interact with actual entrepreneurs and investors, except in highly orchestrated, limited ways analogous to how visitors at the zoo look at the confined animals for a few minutes per exhibit. That is why they need an army of PhDs to figure out what a small restaurant owner already knows about the minimum wage law. The US would be in astronomically better shape if the Federal Reserve were instead run by a council of randomly selected small business owners, rather than Economics PhD eggheads. Plus, the business owners would not even have to be full-time at the Federal Reserve; they could just conference into a weekly conference call and cast their votes on monetary policy changes each week. Again, this would deliver vastly better results than the thousands of full-time, taxpayer funded staff at the Federal Reserve.
h) Industries where the positions of power are the most hereditary are entertainment, politics, academia, and asset management via private funds (Hedge Funds, Venture Capital Funds, etc.). For this reason, these industries are prime targets for technological disruption.
i) It has been statistically verified that all humans are connected within approximately six degrees of separation. What is even more evident is that almost all private wealth and decision-making authority regarding that wealth is connected within three degrees of separation. This will not change, as power is inherently zero-sum in a way that money is certainly not.
j) The best economic system, that creates the most prosperity for the greatest range of people, is a free-market system that employs regulation to contain industries that profit in correlation with misery of others. This is where America has lost the plot, as the words I have underlined above are crucial, and are not seen from either side of the debate. Every industry wants to grow, and there are industries that grow by spreading more misery (cancer management, the military-industrial complex, prisons, tort law, social media, opioids, high fructose corn syrup, big pharma, tax code complexity, etc.). The primary role of regulation is to contain this specific category of industries within a free-market system, as there should never be too great of a perverse incentive to profit from the misery of others. Once that is regulated and monitored, the free market system is the best one by far.
k) It is a tragedy that job searches take longer today than they did 35 years ago, despite the presence of email, the Internet, smartphones, and more. This is an example where technology has completely failed to improve the productivity of a process.
2) The ATOM :
a) The fundamental thesis, that QE-type programs to effectively 'print' money will no longer cause inflation due to the technological deflation that offsets it, continues to be proven true. Most of the 'inflation' scaremongers have gone silent. Meanwhile, the ATOM publication has been read by over 400,000 people.
b) Even the US Federal Reserve, painfully incurious about changes to the field of macroeconomics, has been forced into compliance (albeit still without the updated understanding to navigate the modern economic landscape). They have already been forced to reverse most of their ill-conceived 'Quantitative Tightening'.
c) As of 1/1/2020, $24 Trillion is worldwide QE has already been done, and about $200B/month of additional QE is being added to that total as we speak. Almost no US or European economist circa 2012 thought there would still be any QE going on at all by now (and that it would have in fact been reversed). Rather, the number will be permanent and keep rising, as per the ATOM fundamentals. There is no 'peak' QE, contrary to the chart (chart from Yardeni.com)
d) The ever expanding frontier where low-tech gets converted to high-tech (as defined in the ATOM publication) now is underway in dozens of individual industries and product categories at once. Many industries that were full of people who were not interested in technology have discovered, to their chagrin, that technology was nonetheless interested in them. Refer to the Carnival of Creative Destruction.
e) The ATOM component of the world economy will rise from slightly under 3% today to about 6% on 1/1/2030. That is a huge increase, making the amount of technological disruption happening in the world at that time far higher than is the case today.
f) The list of economic and technological practices and beliefs that people in the future (i.e. post-2035) will find odd about the early 21st century :
i) Back in the 1830s, when artificial refrigeration did not exist, transporting insulated blocks of ice from Boston to Calcutta (over 10,000 miles by sea) was a profitable business. Lest you laugh at this, the practice of transporting hydrocarbon fuel from the Persian Gulf to Houston, Texas is equally absurd in terms of future technology, and will be seen as such by many people already alive today.
ii) That the United States allocated millions of acres of land to retail shopping, over six times as much per capita as other Western countries, and greatly resisted the natural market forces to correct this distortion. This led to a weird, uneven cityscape in many major American metropolitan areas.
iii) That 1.2 million people a year being killed in automobile accidents was considered normal.
iv) That there was a widespread belief that automation would create mass unemployment.
v) Every myth about scarcity fails to manifest, yet that does not stop such memes from emerging and being promoted by small-minded people. Everything from 'peak oil' to 'QE causes inflation' turned out to be wrong. As of 2020, we can no more experience a lengthy acute shortage in a need met by a material commodity than we can run out of atoms.
vi) That young people allowed themselves to go into debt to the tune of years worth of their future discretionary income, because employers required this just to gain a credential that allowed access to the middle tier of the employment market, even if the experience from a University degree has little to no bearing on success factors needed for an entry-level position (or at least did not contain skills that could not be learned elsewhere for free).
vii) That inflation was still a fear, and that it took so long for the ATOM set of ideas (i.e. transferral of taxation away from humans and onto technological deflation) took so long to be implemented, despite how obvious the solution was in hindsight.
viii) That a lengthy and expensive credential was considered to be a pre-requisite for participation in middle to higher tiers of the workforce, despite that credential doing very little to increase suitability for workforce participation.
ix) That there were such things as kidney dialysis, and kidney transplant wait lists, under which millions of people suffer daily.
x) That we taxed human output, without realizing that we could fund government by taxing the output of automation instead.
xi) That celebrities were paid vast sums of money to 'endorse' a product they don't even use, and that consumers are persuaded by this.
g) The smaller, less conspicuous examples of technological deflation and the resultant productivity enhancement are nonetheless immense when added up to a cumulative whole.
i) Video-based instruction is immensely valuable. The number of online videos that teach a viewer how to change the battery, brake pads, spark plugs, etc. of your specific car is impressive. These videos are far easier to follow than text-based manuals, and might reduce what may have been an expensive and inconvenient visit to a mechanic to under a fifth of the cost. Note that it is also easy to order the exact part you may need, which was not very easy before. The same goes for video instruction for cooking, filling out government forms, etc.
ii) The shift of consumer software consumption from buying boxed software in a retail store to downloading it online is immense. Everything from all the transport involved in stocking the store to the customer traveling to and from, to the ease of international distribution, to removal of the retailer margin, comprises a huge productivity gain all around. Note that GDP is calculated in a manner that does not reward this sort of productivity gain except in a very delayed and indirect way.
h) Automation always creates more jobs than it destroys, as long as the government does not make it too difficult to be an entrepreneur. Any job automated means the employer is saving that money, and new businesses that could not have broken even before now can. Despite years of scaremongering about net job loss from automation, the US unemployment rate happens to be at a 50-year low.
i) People don't realize how much automobiles have improved. For example, in the early 1980s, the Corvette was heavily featured in television and films as an impressive sportscar. The 1982 Corvette had just 200 Horsepower, comparable to compact sedans of 2020 which have thrice the fuel efficiency. The 2020 Corvette has over 500 Horsepower in the base model, with premium models exceeding 750. Lifespans of cars have risen, and the need for maintenance has fallen (we no longer see those rainbow oil slicks in parking lots as was common in the 1980s).
j) The sheer quality and quantity of educational information available online for free is a sight to behold, making ignorance far less excusable than before. As just one example, if you want to become knowledgeable about history, astronomy, and paleontology in a short time, view the linked videos, pausing frequently to look up topics on Wikipedia. A further tool of astronomical literacy is Celestia, which is also free. You can achieve a great leap within a single weekend. Speaking for myself, knowledge that took me thousands of hours to acquire in my youth (including begging my parents to take me to the library to check out books and return the old ones) could now be acquired in under 1/20th of the time and at lower cost. The savings worldwide are even greater when you account for the fact that most countries don't even have good public libraries.
k) The four-pronged disruption of the automobile experience was detailed in a prior article, and I maintain that 2032 is when we will see most people eschewing car ownership to use self-driving Ubers, that are fully electric, and lead to a vast repurposement of defunct strip mall and parking lot land into something considerably more high-tech.
l) The Sovereign Venture Fund is about $2 Trillion of virtually 'free' money available to the first country that does it. The general concept is to capture the entire world's technological deflation for domestic benefit, before another country does it. After that, some agreement of division may have to be done, but the first $2 Trillion is 'free'.
m) I estimate that we will experience a Technological Singularity (and hence an Economic one) in 2062 ± 8 years.
n) The ATOM is not Modern Monetary Theory. That is just socialism of another form, and makes no mention of technological deflation or the exponential rate of change. The ATOM set of ideas is something far more advanced, and is to MMT what a Model T is to a 2020 Lamborghini. Read the ATOM FAQs here.
3) Human Progress :
a) Inequality is not what you think it is. It has more to do with whether you were born in a sufficiently advanced era relative to your skillset and persona.
b) The UN Human Development Index (HDI), either by accident or by design, never adjusts up the cutoff above which a country is considered 'High' prosperity. In 1980, there were barely a dozen countries in this category, but now, over 120 countries exceed the definition of what in 1980 was considered 'High Human Development'. That includes countries traditionally not considered prosperous (as they were not until very recently), such as Mexico and China.
c) Sub-Saharan Africa, and problematic pockets such as Haiti and Afghanistan, are among the very few countries that will still be 'poor' by 2030, at least as per the 1980 definition.
e) This chart (from hdi.globaldatalb.org) about Human Development by sub-national entity is very informative. Will the inexorable prosperity curve hack down the remaining pockets of poverty, or are some places just too far gone?
f) People tend to assume that whatever they have seen in the middle 40 years of their lives is going to be permanent. Young people who have not yet entered this phase tend to overestimate the rate of change, while older people who have passed through this phase insist that all technological progress is overrated and no other societal factors will change. Both are incorrect.
g) "Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck.” - Robert Heinlein
4) Astronomy and the Space Age :
a) One of the great coincidences of our existence is that the Sun and the Moon have about the same apparent size when viewed from Earth. The Sun is 400 times greater in diameter, but is also 400 times further way. This makes perfect solar eclipses possible.
.png){kind=link}
c) Humans will not be visiting space en masse at any point in the near future. At the moment, even 58+ years after the first humans in space, the number of people in space at any given time rarely, if ever, reaches double digits. Space exploration by Artificial Intelligence is quite literally millions of times more cost-effective, since an AI does not require air, water, or a large living space, and can survive in a far wider band of temperature, pressure, gravity, and radiation than a fragile human. Sending humans into space entirely fails any cost-benefit analysis for any presently envisioned application. We are still very far from a time when there are even 1000 humans in space at once. Instead, we will soon send thousands of AIs housed in smartphone-sized hardware into space in all directions, which will gather thousands of times more scientific knowledge than we currently possess about space.
d) A sphere of 10 light years in radius from the Sun has a volume of 4189 cubic light years. This sphere contains only about 8 solar masses, so that the average density of this space is under 0.2% of a solar mass per cubic light year, or barely two Jupiters of mass per cubic light year. The same density exists if the radius of the sphere is extended to 20 light years (52-54 solar masses will be the ultimate total once all objects are fully searched). Even this is space that resides well within a galaxy, for intergalactic space is far more sparse than this.
e) The distance between the Sun and the nearest star system is over 26 million times the diameter of the Sun. Nonetheless, the Sun is still easily visible from that distance, indicating how luminous stars are relative to their surface area. Note that the diameter of the Milky Way galaxy is another 22,000 times greater still.
f) Telescopic power is an exponential technology, and rises at a square root of Moore's Law rate, or about 26% a year. This is because if the diameter of a pixel is halved, you need four to occupy the area that was previously occupied by one. Video game graphics improve at the same rate for the same reason. I pointed this out in 2009, and since that time, the number of exoplanets discovered has increased by about 11x, and the number of Near Earth Objects (NEOs) has also increased at that rate. Due to this trend, the next decade will reveal many wonders, ranging from another 40,000+ exoplanets to more precise mapping of dangerous NEOs to more direct images of the surfaces of stars (another thing that has never been photographed until very recently).
g) Because of the rapid advance in telescopic power, don't worry about an asteroid hitting the Earth. It is not the 1990s anymore.
h) Despite the ongoing improvement in telescopic power, my 2009 prediction that we are unlikely to find any evidence of Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence more advanced than us continues to hold. The Accelerating Rate of Change makes it far less likely that there are a large number of civilizations more advanced than us (although there could be many less advanced than us). I predict that we will still not have found any evidence 10 years from now either, or even by the 2063 timeframe depicted in the Star Trek franchise. See below for how 'First Contact' may actually happen.
5) Evolution and Biology :
b) The Hans Moravec chart to the right is badly in need of updates, was way too ambitious, and failed to account for software as the bottleneck that core processing power cannot blast through, but nonetheless depicts not just acceleration of biological intelligence, but the convergence of that into computing (again, my estimate is 2060-65).
c) The evidence of catastrophic extinction events from eons ago still exists today. The largest extinction event ever was 252 million years ago, before which the dominant life form on land was amphibians. Over 96% of all species went extinct, and live recovered in a different direction. Hence, there are only three kinds of amphibians today, and most are under 1 kg in weight. Similarly, the second largest extinction event ever (and the most famous) was 66 million years ago. Reptiles were dominant before then, but evolution went in the direction of mammals and birds. Reptiles today are only found in four types, and most are relatively small. Reptiles suffered less of a regression than amphibians because the scale of the extinction event that struck when reptiles were dominant was a bit less severe.
d) Evolutionary convergence is an amazing indicator of the deeply embedded 'software code' of life. There were instances where sharks (fish), ichthyosaurs (reptiles), and dolphins all evolved into uncannily similar shapes millions of years apart. On land, ankylosaurs (reptiles) and glyptodonts (mammals) similar evolved into nearly identical sizes and shapes eons apart. Pterosaurs (reptiles) and bats (mammals) are yet another example. Certain physical forms are optimal for certain means of movement, but that the same shapes appeared millions of years apart in creatures that don't share common ancestors unless one goes extremely far back, is remarkable.
e) As per point a) above, this software has a very obvious exponential recursive mechanism built into it. While recovery from the aforementioned massive extinction events took 10 million and 3 million years respectively, if a similar event were to occur now, it might take a very small amount of time for a rebound to complete itself.
f) Brains are expensive. Human intelligence is due to a brain that consumes a large portion of human nutrients and energy, and thus comes at the cost of having thin skin, small and weak teeth and nails, and low physical strength. A human would fare very poorly in a fight with an animal of similar size (such as a leopard, wild boar, small alligator, or small bear). Even a smaller animal such as a chimpanzee or grey wolf can easily defeat an adult human male. We have survived only because intelligence gave us teamwork and the ability to make increasingly more effective weapons. This is also why all intermediate stages of proto-human between the intelligence levels of humans and chimpanzees died out long ago; they were outcompeted from both above and below.
g) Evolution is ongoing and accelerating. I consider new technologies that speed up educational outcomes and cognitive capacity to be part of the natural trendline of accelerating intelligence.
h) As stated above in 4(c), we may never have a large number of humans living in space. As AI is far more suited for space than humans are, perhaps the endgame of evolution on Earth is for AI to spread outwards into space. Perhaps contact between extraterrestrial intelligence only happens between two AIs that encounter each other, and then communicate at the base Assembly Language (or Quantum Qu-bit) level.
6) Historical Observations :
a) Laws, once passed, are extremely sticky. It may surprise you to learn that France still executed convicts on death row via guillotine as recently as 1977, and the law existed all the way until 1981. Similarly, 'anti-miscegenation' laws existed in Alabama until 2000.
b) It takes time for a technology to mature (even if this process continues to accelerate in the modern era). Vikings reached North America by 1000 AD, but their colonies failed, and they even abandoned their Greenland colony that existed for 500 years. By the 16th century, the powers of Western Europe had the colonization template down, and were able to take over most of the two continents in the Western Hemisphere. For the British Empire, this was so refined and efficient by the late 18th century that despite having started very late in Australia, they were at a point of such turnkey implementation that they could create a fully functional colony in a very short time.
c) The British Empire was the greatest demonstration of a late-mover advantage of all time. Iberians landed in the Americas and in India long before the British, but their empires declined when the British were ascendant. Hence, the British were the ones to ultimately take control of land that eventually became the United States and Canada, and became the ones to colonize India. Furthermore, the Chinese, Spanish, and Dutch all could have (or in some cases, did) land in Australia centuries before James Cook in 1795, but as the British Empire had the science of colonization down to a turnkey level by that point, while also controlling resource-rich (at the time) India, they were the ones to become the dominant culture of that continent (New Zealand was always going to be colonized by whoever controlled Australia first).
d) Every atrocity imaginable has happened in Europe within the last 100 years. Despite the high degree of civilization today, everything from genocide to state-conducted beheadings to chemical weapons usage to widespread cannibalism has happened in Europe in the last century. This fact can be interpreted in glass-half-full and glass-half-empty ways.
e) Few realize how quickly the economic center of gravity is converging back to the East.
f) When Europeans first landed in the Americas, the natives had not invented the wheel, metallurgy, boats that were capable of ocean voyages, or the domestication of any riding or draft animal. They were thousands of years behind Eurasia.
g) The Queen of the United Kingdom has been an exemplary monarch for 68 years. Because of the unusually long duration of her reign and her sterling conduct, people have forgotten that there is a debate beneath the surface about the continuation of the monarchy itself. When the Queen passes, calls for an end to the monarchy will resurface immediately. The monarchy will not end since it generates too much tourism revenue, but it may shrink. It is excessive for adults further down than third in line to get to live in opulence at taxpayer expense, as anyone further down than that has absolutely no chance of ever ascending to the throne in the modern age. Expect the list of opulence privilege to be shortened considerably when succession occurs.
7) India :
a) India is about to surpass China as the most populous country in the world (India already has vastly more young people than China). When the mainstream media notices this, the resultant media coverage will create a number of secondary effects. India is woefully underprepared for the spotlight.
b) If you are interested in visiting India, there is a tremendous amount to see (among the highest of any country), but I still do not recommend that anyone visit India as a tourist before 2025. There are too many aspects of the experience that lack the benefit of basic modernization as of now, but may be substantially improved by 2025, as India is in the process of skipping an entire generation of technology. Also, as with any trip to an unfamiliar location, be sure to watch a few recent travel vlogs first.
c) A tremendous amount of valuable science, philosophy, and art has been produced by India. But almost all of it was over 300 years ago. Recent contributions are scant.
d) A variety of 'experts' keep saying India will break up into smaller pieces, but this has not happened since 1947, even as the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia did in fact break up instead. On the contrary, India has achieved what the EU has completely failed to - create a giant nation by unifying a variety of smaller linguistic and cultural regions. In fact, India has thrice the population of what even a united EU would have, and has to deal with poverty that the EU does not have.
e) Much has been written about how the British Empire strip-minded India of every valuable resource, while others write about how British institutions benefited India. I have evaluated both sides in detail, and have concluded that British colonization of the Indian Subcontinent was a wash to a slight negative, but certainly not a huge determinant of India's long-term trajectory. What is for certain is that the poverty India still has in 2020 is certainly not the fault of the British who departed in 1947. Indians need to get over that. Note that India's diaspora, which resides almost entirely in countries that were parts of the British Empire at various times (making it easier for Indians to succeed there), remits $90B/year back to India as we speak (with another $35B/year remitted to Pakistan + Bangladesh, which were also part of British India until 1947). While these remittances didn't become significant until 2000, it nonetheless comprises of something that is directly connected to the footprint of the erstwhile British Empire.
f) There is a certain pervasive and inescapable toxicity (biological, chemical, and psychological) that exists in India, which leads to even wealthy people born there to end up much shorter, physically weaker, and less attractive than a person of the same genetics would be in a better environment (see 'Indian Americans' below). This pattern is pervasive, and, again, affects wealthy people all the same. As evidence, observe how poorly India does at the Olympics, vs. the fact that Indians born in the West have a much higher proportion of top-tier athletes in their ranks. More subjectively, the average Western-born Indian woman would place at about the 85th percentile of looks among young women from prosperous backgrounds of the same age in India. There is little awareness of this, and even wealthy Indians have too little exposure to the outside world to even notice (or otherwise choose to nurture a denial). But this comprises a massive and preventable wastage of human capital.
g) India has the second highest amount of arable land in the world, and the highest in the Eastern hemisphere. Yet, it is not a net food exporter, a status that would not only boost its economy, but make it entirely secure from any military aggression. Lest one say that India has too many people to be a food exporter, The Netherlands has the same population density as India, and a much colder climate, yet is a huge food exporter. This lack of vision (among many others) will continue to keep India in a state of relative destitution for some time to come.
h) Despite moderate economic progress, India still ranks in the 120-129 range out of the 185+ countries in the world in terms of any prosperity metric, which is the same approximate ranking it had 30 years ago. Alas, it is not going to break into a ranking better than 110, let alone 105, in the foreseeable future, contrary to what many Indians have self-deluded themselves into thinking. India is a growing economy in absolute terms, but in relative terms, not so much. Economically, it is not in China's league by any stretch, despite the fact that China's per capita GDP did not surpass India's until 1993.
8) Indian Americans :
a) Indian Americans are the most successful nation-categorized ethnic group in the US by household income, bar none. This is atypical, as it is commonplace for immigrants from poor countries to underperform in the United States as well. There is no other example where the diaspora in the US has anywhere near as large a gap with the prosperity of the original country. As this fact is not yet widely known, when it becomes such, many things about US and international geopolitics will adjust in surprising directions.
b) It is often claimed that the Indians in the US are the 'cognitive elite' of India, but that is not quite true. Why would that be more true of India than of China, or Russia, or Brazil, or Pakistan? In my experience, the Indians in the US come from the Top 20% of India, ranked by intelligence, but not weighted towards the Top 1% by any stretch, as is sometimes claimed by those who want to minimize Indian-American success. Many of the wealthiest Indians in the US are owners of hotel and gas station networks, rather than elite white collar professionals with advanced degrees.
c) Note that Indians are not recipients of affirmative action in the US, contrary to default perception, since they are an Asian ethnicity. In fact, Asians (Indians included) are increasingly discriminated against in areas like admissions to elite universities, for fear that these Asians might become the majority of entrants. Indian-Americans would be 20% of incoming freshmen at the top universities, despite being just 1% of the population, if there were no affirmative action.
d) Despite this success, foreign-born Indian Americans have a relatively low assimilation index in the United States, at least in terms of measures outside of economic success. They are quick to limit their socializing to not just other Indians, but others from the same sub-ethnicity if enough of those people are to be found in their town. For this reason, the generation gap between US-born children of Indian immigrants and their parents is among the highest of any ethnic group. Of course, the assimilation rate of the US-born 2nd generation is the only one that matters, as the foreign-born parents eventually fade out.
e) Complicating the identity crisis of Indian Americans is the fact that in the United States, the words 'Indian', 'Caucasian', and 'Asian' are all used inaccurately. Native Americans are called 'Indians' because Columbus thought he in fact landed in India, which is where he wanted to reach in the first place, since it was the world's largest economy at the time. It is amazing that the most economically successful ethnic group still resides in a blind spot of categorization that the other 99% possess.
f) I am disgusted to see some Indian-Americans trying to cash in by packaging themselves as 'anti-white' propagandists. This is extremely unwise and entirely without justification, since white Americans and Canadians are the least racist white people on Earth; Indians wouldn't be so successful here if most whites were racist towards Indians. Plus, Indians partaking in this are appropriating the real historical oppression of African Americans and Native Americans by doing so. It is far better to be seen as a 'model minority' than a 'hostile elite' (the only two choices available given the low assimilation rate of Indians), particularly when one can point out, with full justification, that these individuals are free to leave and go to India rather than complain over here. They are also abusing the fact that to Americans, India is the second most favorably perceived non-Western country and most favorably perceived country in the world among those without an advanced economy. Furthermore, the aforementioned types of Indians tend to get onto trends that are already peaking and in decline, and are a reliable indicator of such.
g) Ian Grillot is an all-American hero who risked his life to save Indian immigrants amidst a murderous hate crime. Fortunately, Indian-Americans honored him and raised a $100,000 reward for him, and I want to make sure he is recognized for years to come beyond just the Indian community. For Indian-Americans reading this, the next Ian Grillot might save your life, while an Indian who writes anti-white articles is, conversely, fostering a sentiment that endangers both your physical and financial well-being.
9) Interpersonal Interaction :
a) Vastly inaccurate accusations are almost always projection on the part of the accuser. They dislike certain aspects of themselves, and have to channel this outward rather than undertake the more difficult task of self-examination. The appropriate response is not to defend yourself, but immediately counterattack by pointing out the projection.
b) Sadly, whenever there is an altercation, most people don't care who 'started it'. If someone attacks you and you defend yourself, most people will say that both parties are at fault. This goes back to ancient human instinct from pre-historic times, where the 'winner is always retroactively in the right'.
c) People who debate via anecdote rather than through data-driven facts tend to not be very successful in life, as they will often miscalculate probabilities and make poor decisions.
d) Avoid dealing with people who use the word 'asshole' with significant frequency, even if the people they describe are deserving of scorn. Such people tend to have poor character and counterproductive habits. Ironically, the same is not necessarily true of people who partake in moderate use of the word 'fuck'.
e) Children of wealthy families have more confidence, as a byproduct of their privileged upbringing. This often is interpreted as proof of competence. Be wary of assuming that such competence exists, because it usually does not.
f) Anyone who yells at people in a weaker power position (i.e. when the yeller faces no real risk), with little provocation or over trivial matters, is someone who is not merely a coward, but someone who never achieves anything of significance. Avoid such people in all business and social matters. If your parents treat you this way, and if you are old enough, take steps to keep all contact to a bare minimum. You have no obligation to receive abuse when your time can be spent elsewhere. Put a higher price on yourself and your time.
g) Similarly, be very skeptical of people who go on gratuitous power trips. Most of the time, this is a subconscious attempt to distract away from how little substance is actually behind their act, and the insecurity they languish in as a result. This is common among people who hail from high-profile families, but themselves have little to no talent or brainpower.
h) Avoid people who are committed to misunderstanding you (negatively). Any energy spent on them will be a waste. Cut your losses quickly and quietly, and interact elsewhere.
i) The two most powerful words in the English language are "Make me". If someone demands that you do something, this will give them an ultimatum to either escalate immediately, or they will never be in a position to irritate you again. Despite the chance of short-term conflict, using these two words intelligently can save you a lot of time and expense.
j) The sons of exceptionally wealthy and famous fathers tend to have very easy lives as long as the father is alive (assume this to be age 50-55 on average for the son). This is because people proactively do favors for the son just to earn the goodwill of the father. Note that this is a force the father has no power to obstruct, no matter how much he taught his son to be humble. After the father passes, people who were proactively doing favors for the sons suddenly discontinue such favors, and the son is left to flounder as this is the first time in his life, at age 50, that he has to experience the world of everyone else; a world that is no longer so easy. The son will not be able to pinpoint what exactly changed, and often cannot adjust to this status demotion at this late of an age. Steer clear of these implosions, as they are not pretty and there is collateral damage (e.g. an entire inherited business might get run into the ground, with all employees laid off). Only sons with similar talent levels as the father (very rare) are exempt from this. Think about examples of this sequence of events you may have observed, and take steps to avoid any proximity to the next one. This does not apply to daughters with the same precision.
k) Limit any professional interaction with people who dress below the standard than is appropriate for a setting, or otherwise put insufficient effort into their personal appearance (unless they have already received major accolades for exceptional research or innovation). This is indicative of unsuitability for a professional collaboration, even if the person is a pleasant person in general. There are plenty of fools that are quick to point out that 'XXXX tech billionaire dresses poorly'. Usage of such an example indicates that a confusion between the concepts of 'because of' and 'in spite of'. Sartorial excellence is still valuable in this world.
l) The best people to associate with are those who :
i) Don't treat those who are (or are perceived to be) lower-status people badly just because they can do so without accountability.
ii) Possess a wide range of knowledge about seemingly disparate subjects, and have mastered skills or subject areas you wish to excel in.
iii) Are continuously working on several aspects of self-improvement, and seem to be getting results.
10) Slice of Life :
a) To help society the most, do what you do best.
b) A fire hydrant might be used for a three-hour period every 50 years, or less than 0.001% of the time, on average. For this reason, it is illogical for there to be a rule that cars cannot park in front of it, particularly when this reduces the available parking in an urban setting by several percent. Fire hydrants in urban areas should be retrofitted with a rigid plastic or metal yellow or red flag that is 6-7 feet high, so that when that one day arrives, it is visible even if a car is parked in front of it. The parking situation in many cities can be eased somewhat immediately, and the city can get more parking meter revenue that will swiftly pay back the retrofitting cost.
c) Americans spent $80 Billion in real estate commission fees in 2019. Despite the presence of companies like Redfin, it is amazing that this has not been technologically disrupted through a LegalZoom-type service, or through more advanced smart contracts on distributed ledgers, rather than an unjustified percentage fee. Particularly for homes above $1 million in value, it is certain that the buyer and seller have common professional contacts on LinkedIn. There should be a service where common contacts vouch for the transaction, observe the signing, register notarization in a smart contract, and collect at $1000 fee for their two hours of trouble. This could greatly lower the transaction costs, which in turn will enable more transactions. If Linkedin or another company pursues this idea, I expect a small royalty fee.
d) Why do cars have only one type of horn sound, instead of two? There is a big difference between a desire to communicate a polite "if you could move, that would be splendid" vs. a "MOVE, YOU ^&^%$(X%!!!", so automobile horns should at least have two choices of sound in order to differentiate between the tone intended by the horn honker. A lot of road rage incidents could be avoided. If cars adopt this idea, I expect a small royalty fee or lump sum payout.
e) Why is a 'good' hotel merely the most expensive one? If anything, the value per dollar declines as the price of a hotel rises. It is unfortunate that being more expensive is equated with being 'good', when the true metric ought to be value per money. This misconception plagues many consumer goods.
f) The United States is still forming. The mean center of population has drifted over 1000 miles westward, and now resides in Missouri. The fact that the Federal Government is so far from what is now the mean center of population is the source of many problems, including many seemingly unrelated ones. We should consider, at the 250th anniversary of our founding in 2026, moving the Federal Government to somewhere near Southern Missouri, with the understanding that it could move again in 50 years time if the population center drifts too far away from there.
g) The United States is still forming. Interracial reproduction was taboo even in the 1980s, with almost none of the most popular television programs of the time depicting any significant interracial romantic relationship except when that itself is central to the plot. Over 30% of second-generation Hispanic and Asian Americans intermarry (mostly with whites), and 20% of babies born in the US are mixed-race (not counting the fact that most Hispanics are already mixed-race), and that number is rising quickly.
Now, without further ado, I step aside and make way for the man that most of you came here for. I do not endorse any of his political content or views. The fact remains, he can somehow manage to get more traffic for a single article than many bloggers get from a hundred articles. The legend returns...
By Imran Khan :
Today is 1/1/2020. I have long since stopped blogging, and am coming out of retirement for just this one article, because I committed to it 10 years ago when I wrote one of the most famous Internet articles of all time (mentioned in the New York Times a few times), and thousands of readers are expecting the sequel. I was quite moved by the number of men who said the article changed their life for the better, or were brought to tears by it (which is extraordinary for a written article). Many women are fans of it too, as they recognize that I am trying to help everyday women as well, since they are equally the victims of those who oppose gender realism. The article itself has outlasted almost all of the links in it.
While I was born in America, I have expatriated out of the United States to live in one of the Middle Eastern countries that is popular among expats, and where the state and society still wants family men. Unlike most of the Western 'red-pill' movement, most of my knowledge about the truths of gender realism is from my Islamic faith, and has been common knowledge to many Muslims for centuries (and is readily present in the Christian Bible too). I just am someone who can translate these scriptural concepts into words that an American/British/Canadian audience can grok instantly. I am not the same Imran Khan who is the 67-year-old current Prime Minister of Pakistan.
11) The Misandry Bubble :
"Women, Children, and Pets are loved unconditionally, a man is only loved under the condition that he produce something" - Chris Rock
a) The Misandry Bubble, as predicted in the article itself on 1/1/2010, became the manifesto of the anti-misandry movement, and thus an influential defense of human nature itself. It has been read by over 1 million people to date, and the Reddit(s) that cite this article as such have over 300,000 members. Due to this, we are definitely past peak misandry as of now. While most of the blogs linked in the original essay have been deleted or even deplatformed, the readers and contributors have diffused and burrowed deeper into the Internet, making the truths exposed more widely known than they otherwise might have been.
b) As predicted exactly 10 years ago :
i) There is still no organized Men's Rights movement, in terms of protests, lawsuits, petitions, etc. In fact, there are individuals who pretend to be Men's Rights Activists just to get donations from mistreated men desperate to fight back, but who have no intention of doing any activism. Any activism that actually damages the misandric apparatus is quickly reversed. Don't give them any of your money or any other form of endorsement.
ii) 'Sexbots' are still no closer to reality than they were in 2010, but VR Sex is all but here. As explained a decade before, this benefits even men who don't use it, as it corrects the imbalance in the marketplace. Yet, there are still technological ignoramuses who fixate on the prospect of 'bots' that will not arrive in the near future because there are too many product design obstacles. This includes the campaigns by (very unattractive) women to ban these 'imminent' sexbots, and thus are oblivious to the far more imminent technological and social disruption of VR substitution. The rise of aggressive new STDs, with women as carriers, are an additional force advancing VR Sex.
iii) The Four Horsemen of Male Emancipation have all advanced, but the fourth advanced the most. Observe how huge of a move there has been by men to avoid marriage (both consciously and subconsciously), and how apps like Tinder have served to organize all women for efficient 'on demand' usage by the top 20% of men, ensuring that these women are made permanently unsuitable for marriage on account of having had 20, 50, or 100 prior sexual partners.
iv) In the US, the departure of young men from marriage is causing a predictable panic among women and 'social conservatives', who just cannot tolerate men acting in accordance with their own self-preservation. Demands for more government coercion will be next, and expect the most oppressive ideas to originate from 'social conservative' Republicans, rather than radical 'feminists'.
v) The grassroots backlash against corporate misandry is now powerful, swift, and international. Gillette's ill-conceived decision to vilify its core customer just so that a few mid-level agitators could outdo each other's displays of misandric flamboyance caused an $8 billion loss for the company. The 'Get Woke, Go Broke' phenomenon continues to manifest.
vi) Similarly, extreme 'feminist' displays of narcissism peaked with the 'ShirtGate' episode, where a major event in human scientific progress was hijacked by some of the most petty, anti-civilization 'feminists' ever (with creepy 'male feminists' piling on). The episode continues to be referenced as the epitome of 'feminist' ugliness and anti-enlightenment as few incidents encapsulate everything wrong with 'feminism' so completely. The army of people who rushed to the defense of the abused scientist, on what should have been the greatest ever day of his career, was heartening. Revealingly, nothing quite so absurd in terms of 'feminist' abuse of a non-political person has happened since, as this really was the straw that broke the camel's back. If you want to pinpoint an exact incident and week where the Misandry Bubble peaked, November 14-21, 2014 was it.
vii) GamerGate was a similar cultural tremor, also in late 2014. It comprised of men who were minding their own business opting to fight back against excessive 'feminist' demands that they stop their recreation to spend more time producing resources for ungrateful 'feminists' to parasitically consume. The gamers found that 'feminists' are so unaccustomed to being challenged that they could only respond by demanding that other men defend them. Few men volunteered for this thankless task other than some 'male feminists' and cuckservatives (see Section 19 below), and now 'feminists' are too hesitant to harass gamers further. This, too, is a major victory, and a template of what works against misandry.
viii) There was a secondary 'last gasp' peak of the Misandry Bubble on May 9, 2016, about 18 months after the primary peak described above. There was a video posted on the PragerU channel by someone named W. Bradford Wilcox, which claims that men can only become 'real men' if they make unreciprocated sacrifices for women under legally binding government contractual documentation. PragerU/Wilcox has never made any equivalent video demanding that women make sacrifices to meet their obligations to society, and they never will. This incredibly and cartoonishly dishonest video proves that 'conservatives' want socialism just as badly as leftists, except that they specifically want a 'chivalrous' socialism that bears no resemblance to traditional marriage, where only men are forced to be net payers, and women are net recipients. The overwhelming downvote ratio and negative comments on this video was among the greatest 'Streisand Effects' of all time, since it provoked a number of anti-misandry advocates to publish rebuttals, which got so many views, even years later, that many men who were not even seeking to become redpilled, learned the truth by exposure to the rebuttals. Mr. Wilcox is thus now widely and deservedly known as 'Wilcucks', is considered the very personification of cuckservative misandry, and if you doubt that physiognomy is real, look at his face. To this day, Wilcucks has a cushy University sinecure where he is paid to misrepresent the cost/benefit analysis of marriage to men to further the cuckservative vision of slavery-centric socialism, so if you want to give him a piece of your mind, find him on Twitter at @WilcoxNMP. Provoking him will further strengthen the Streisand Effect that he continues to generate, and is thus the highest bang-for-the-buck activism you can do. See 'US Conservatism' below.
x) 'Feminists' like Hanna Rosin have gloated that 'men are obsolete', and display an exceptionally poor understanding of what the real market forces are as they attempt to make their case. Such intellectual dust mites seem to not realize that about 90% of the world's people don't live in Western Protestant countries. These individuals have gone quiet of late.
xi) Melinda Gates' videos about the 'pay gap' and 'women in tech' have just about the worst ratio of upvotes to downvotes in YouTube history. This indicates that the silent army of informed men is orders of magnitude larger than it was a decade ago.
xii) By contrast, parody accounts that portray 'feminists' with great accuracy have over 400,000 followers.
xiii) Powerful documentary films, including those made by courageous women, have been produced and viewed by a large number of men, and more men are adapting to avoid risks. Other documentaries have exposed the $50 billion divorce industry for what it is.
xiv) The distinction between Marriage 1.0 and Marriage 2.0 has been mainstreamed. This is putting an end to the cuckservative scam that claims following Biblical marriage involves signing a government document, removing all fathers' rights, and eventually replacing the father with forced, USSR-style wealth transfer.
xv) Even Wikipedia, an organization notorious for remaining in denial about why almost all contributions to Wikipedia are and always will be by men, allows mention of the fact that the human brain is hardwired to treat women more favorably than men to reside on Wikipedia.
xvi) The Tea Party swiftly and predictably failed, since blue-pill cuckservatives were giddy about women getting involved. But once in, women disallowed any talk of cutting government spending that goes to women (which, of course, is most government spending). Expecting women to fight for small government is like expecting government employees to fight for small government.
c) Other Misandric Facts :
i) In World War 2, of the 300,000 Americans who died, 16 were women, so about 20,000 men died for every woman who died. In the VietNam War, of the 58,000 Americans who died, 8 were women, so about 7,500 to 1. This was in a time before 'feminism' and a time when many soldiers were drafted, when the narrative insists that women had far worse lives than men. The Female Imperative (FI), also known as Gynocentrism, transcends all centuries and all cultures, as it is biologically hardwired.
ii) In the Protestant West, men are overwhelmingly net tax payers, while women are overwhelmingly net recipients of government spending. These countries have decided to exempt a large portion of the female population from contributing anything of value to society. Expect the flow of international emigration/immigration to reflect this incentive structure, stressing it in both directions, as this becomes more widely known.
iii) Men continue to be sentenced far longer for the same crimes (which even the Huffington Post admits).
iv) This table from Prof. Mark J. Perry pretty much lists all of the statistical facts about how men have it worse than women (click to enlarge). 'Feminists' won't understand the table since innumeracy is a pre-requesite of 'feminism'.
v) The fact that almost all transgender people are male to female rather than the other way around is another indicator of which gender is treated far better by society, and which direction the government mandated wealth transfers flow in. They are merely responding to incentives.
vi) The victims of the Isla Vista shooting amounted to 4 men and 2 women. Yet, the shooting is described as 'misogynist'. The shooter was a staunch 'male feminist' for many years, who actually hated pickup artists since they were succeeding where he was not.
vii) 26 of the 27 deadliest mass shooters were fatherless. Again, remember that 'feminists' and conservatives are both responsible for this situation, as most of the laws that subsidize single motherhood are the inventions of conservatives from the reddest of red states.
viii) There is a growing trend of 'feminists' murdering their young sons, which other 'feminists' approve of as a form of 'post-birth abortion'. The justice system is quite lenient on such women, indicating the cultural momentum in favor of this trend, which portends to the future horror of 'feminists' unilaterally deciding to murder other people's little boys, and facing minimal consequences from the judicial system.
ix) Some boys are beaten to death by their mothers for refusing to dress like a girl (as decided by the mother).
x) Some 'feminists' openly advocate for killing all men, face no penalties for saying that under their real names, and have no curiosity about how the inventions that built modern society even emerged. While this will obviously never gain any traction (who will do the killing?), it is yet another indicator of a mind free of any accountability, as well as how utterly uneducated 'feminists' are no matter what credential they possess. Note the implicit assumption that civilization just 'happens', which has common elements with the 'women in tech' extortion racket explained below.
xi) It is standard media protocol to never mention the father of a child in any news story in which a child features, unless the father can be portrayed negatively. This is hard to notice, but keep an eye out for this absence of mention.
xii) In many cases, shaming language is all they have. Refer to the catalog of anti-male shaming language, which has useful responses for each.
d) Radical 'Feminists' :
i) Radical 'feminists' are wired to protest an advanced society at every imaginable level. If you doubt this, read the links archived here and here. If, part way through, you are too disgusted to continue, that proves my point.
ii) In my youth, I was puzzled as to why all societies Western and Eastern once had a practice of identifying certain women as 'witches' and exiling them from society. Contemporary radical 'feminism' explains why this mechanism existed as a societal immune response.
iii) The scarcest valuable in the entire world is female beauty (as measured by how much money and attention the scarce examples of this attracts). Nonetheless, 'feminism' has induced many formerly attractive young women to deliberately and irrevocably destroy their appearance, and with it, the prospect of living a life where they could have wanted for nothing had they followed a basic life script that their grandmothers would have considered to be normal.
iv) 'Feminists' are often extremely racist. They usually get a free pass on this due to the extreme feminism-favoring structural biases across our society. But their racism is always just under the surface, and bursts forth when any person of color fails to obediently agree with any and all aspects of feminism.
v) As Glenn Reynolds often says, you could make a rock-solid case for Patriarchy just based on what 'feminists' insist about the fragility of women.
e) Predictions :
i) While neither gender will ever be technologically obsolete as human beings, and it is quite evil to even hope for such a thing, the fact remains that to the extent that technological progress will reduce the power of one gender relative to the other from the current state, women have far more to worry about than men. This will be particularly true for Western women who work in types of jobs that don't seem to exist in great numbers outside the Protestant West (i.e. make-work jobs), and who think that becoming a wife and mother is less prestigious than a corporate career.
ii) The Nigerian romance scam will continue to prey on divorced women who secured a huge financial windfall, in a brutal manifestation of how market forces find a way around government social engineering. Another benefit of marriage is that it is far harder to scam a couple than an individual. Story after story of how women were scammed out of all of the money in their control, which is often a six or seven digit sum, continues to emerge. So now, because of the woman's selfishness (if her money was obtained through divorce), neither the husband nor her are in possession of their money.
iii) Comedians who used to make fun of misandry, including more than one type of misandry, have recently been threatened into silence. But evidence is emerging that comedians will fight back with vengeance, sending thousands of 'feminists' into futile therapy (since 'feminists' can't fight back via comedy due to zero talent in that area). Bill Burr's old anti-misandry bits are quite good, as are those of Aries Spears. The late, great Patrice O'Neal should be remembered for his courage.
iv) There will never be any 'feminist'-themed reality TV shows that garner significant audience viewership. The very premise itself is an oxymoron of 'fried ice' proportions.
v) VR just has to fix the nausea/eyestrain problem, and make the hardware lighter and wireless. These seemingly mundane refinements are all it will take for millions more women, higher up in the looks scale, to suddenly get far less male attention for reasons they can't discern. As said above, this could be within 24 months.
vi) While franchise after franchise of entertainment property has been ruined by a 'feminist' edition that explicitly seeks to overturn the central premises of the franchise, they have not been able to destroy one of the oldest and most successful ones : James Bond. Over 58 years and 25 films (including a non-Eon film), the age gap between the actor playing Bond and the female lead averages about 17 years, with a 47-year-old Bond and a 30-year-old actress as averages. 'Feminists' will continue to move mountains in a campaign to destroy this or even demand that Bond be played by a woman, but will fail. This franchise matters due its highly international fan base, and thus sells tickets in countries where 'feminism' is not the official ideology.
vii) Governments that used 'feminism' to create a welfare-state voting block will start to quietly and methodically trim down the resources diverted to women. They can get the same women to keep voting for the same parties even after they reduce the money diverted to them, now that they have them in a state of complete indoctrination and dependency, and since these women are not producing any new taxpayers/voters. Why overpay for a vote block that can no longer leave even if you cut them off?
viii) Outsourcing of jobs will continue to affect women more than men, since the indirect costs associated with hiring women in the West are pricing women out. Remember that base salary is only a fraction of the cost-of-doing-business equation. I am currently making big money in facilitating the outsourcing of service jobs from US and UK women to English-speaking Filipino, Malay, and Pakistani men and women in the Persian Gulf country that I operate in, where I pocket part of the difference. A large part of the difference is the 'litigation premium' associated with hiring women in the US, UK, Canada, etc.
ix) As US cuckservatism experiences its final death throes over the course of the 2020s, 'feminism' will continue to weaken as well, with few understanding why the correlation between the two is so tight.
f) But did the bubble fully pop, even if we are past peak misandry? Unfortunately, not fully. The reason for this is that 10 years ago, it was inconceivable that we would not have another recession within the next 10 years, as the next recession will surely destroy many types of 'feminism'. The money-printing from the Federal Reserve allowed government spending to continue past a point far greater than old models could have predicted (no one thought the US could get to $23 Trillion in a National Debt without a crisis). My co-blogger above favors this money-printing and wrote a whole book about why, but I dislike it, since it enables far more government spending, which of course goes mostly towards women, particularly women using the money to create 'feminist' outcomes for themselves that could not exist without government spending. So a recession is the necessary trigger for a full pop. That does not mean we wish for a recession, as that will harm innocent people, but there is no doubt that in each recession, the most undeserved net recipients always bear the force of the correction that a recession brings. The question is, how long can printing stave one off?
g) Here is some eye cleanser (more here) that you may want to refer to as you keep reading.
12) Female Psychology and Aptitude :
a) The female brain does not connect cause and effect as easily as the male brain does. Women cannot easily predict the effect of a decision more than one step ahead. For example, a woman's legal, state-backed ability to unilaterally take away children from their father means that the paternal grandmother also loses access to her grandchildren due to the power that the former daughter-in-law has. Yet, there is no organization, however small, of paternal grandmothers protesting against default daughter-in-law custody. The cause and effect dots are just not connected in the female mind, and so they cannot see how a law that 'helps women' simultaneously can harm a different group of female relatives. If you doubt this, try explaining this to women, and see for yourself how difficult it is for them to connect cause and effect.
b) Women are not immoral. They are simply hardwired to side with whoever is winning, as this evolutionary trait helped women survive in times of conflict, and thus evolved for good reason. Keep this in mind in order to be on the right side of this unstoppable force, rather than on the wrong side. Don't argue against this, just adapt to it while other men remain clueless and bear the costs.
c) In every single country polled, women knew far less about civics or political science than men. The gap was higher in countries that squandered the most resources towards 'feminism'.
d) If you ever hear that something would improve if women ran it, there is a prominent example of where this experiment has been conducted. The US public school system has transitioned from male leadership to female leadership over the last 30-40 years. Over this time, quality has fallen as costs have risen. This period has also seen the rise of rampant sexual exploitation of minor students by female teachers. Similarly, the rise of women in top positions in higher education has coincided with the steep decline of the cost/benefit equation of college degrees.
e) Virtually all works of fiction marketed to a female audience consist of an alpha male with a harem of women (of which the reader erotically fantasizes of being part), and the alpha male abusing lower-ranking males and the women in his harem. There is no improvement in the human condition or any wondrous new concepts. This is the type of society women prefer, for biologically-derived reasons. A free-market system where a self-made man can rise to the top is emphatically not what women prefer, as it is hard to predict which man as 'lottery ticket' will outperform others. An oligarchal/aristocratic system is one where the men on top today will still be on top 10 years later, making it far easier for women to select who to get impregnated by. Of course, societies of the type that women prefer are not where anything new gets invented, so human progress stalls (see 'Fabric of Humanity' below).
f) 84% of women cannot pass the US Army's basic fitness test (while only 36% of men cannot pass it, despite the spreading 'soyboy' malaise). Of course, the conclusion drawn by the 'male feminist' journalist is that the test has to be changed. It is certain that if female combat deaths began to approach anything close to 50%, the same 'journalists' would complain about how misogynist it is for women to be in the military at all.
g) When Sweden tried 'feminist show shoveling', the results were predictably shambolic and required a massive expense to correct. Yet, other countries continue to repeat the same experiment with predictably consistent failure, at the altar of 'feminism'. In a similar vein, a 'feminist' bookstore went out of business, and the owners blamed men for not donating enough to keep the ill-conceived enterprise alive.
h) Amazon created an AI hiring tool to present candidates without bias. Amazon assumed that this would lead to more female candidates, since they entirely swallowed the fiction that women are oppressed in the job market. On the contrary, it highlighted fewer female candidates than before because it is in fact men who are facing adverse bias, which led to Amazon discontinuing use of the tool rather than question their 'feminist' narrative. Small companies and non-Western companies should use the tool, since it clearly does work. More importantly, as AI is used in more and more decision-making processes, the equalization of how people are treated will remove a lot of FI-derived privilege.
i) Much is written about Women's sports. Lost amidst that is coverage of how even endeavors that have nothing to do with physical ability and have no barrier to entry nonetheless have almost no women among the high achievers. Under 2% of Chess Grandmasters are women. Almost none of the top Scrabble champions are women. Lastly, why are 80% of Olympic medals won in Equestrian events won by men? Women should be equal in at least Equestrian and horse racing, should they not, particularly given that lower body weight in a jockey is an advantage? Or are horses sexist towards human females too? In fairness, this is only partly due to innate inability. The second factor is that since a woman's social status is not boosted by such accomplishments the way a man's is, fewer women choose to pursue these areas, which is an entirely rational choice once one declines to be a pawn for 'feminist' fight-against-nature objectives. #GenderRealism.
j) Women are far less capable of comedy than men are. Take any improv environment (such as the television program 'Whose Line is it Anyway'), and the talent gap is conspicuously evident. When a 'feminist' who married one of the world's richest men hires female comedians to propagate a myth about female oppression, the utter lack of either humor or facts (or good looks) is jarring.
k) A data analysis of millions of student reviews of college professors reveal that male professors are more brilliant and humorous than female professors, while female professors are widely described as rude. This is telling since over half of the students submitting these evaluations are female, so this is not 'misogynist'.
m) The more society changes its laws to give women what 'feminists' say women want, the more unhappy women become. Relatively few women truly understand how women think, and 'feminists' are never among these few. See also : point a) within this chapter above.
n) The most fail-safe business opportunities of our time are ones that market to women with a) the reassurance that none of their life choices were ill-considered and no negative outcome was ever their fault, and/or b) the fantasy of living vicariously through some fictionalized ideal that is enjoyed by under 0.01% of women. Use this fact to your advantage, even if you are a woman. Most of the wealthiest self-made women built business empires around selling these messages to average women. A lot of 'red-pill' men whine about misandry, when they could be using this valuable knowledge for lucrative business purposes.
o) Whenever women enter a profession in large numbers, the status of the profession falls in the eyes of both men and women (especially women, because of hypergamy).
p) Women are far less able to separate television from reality than men are, because their view of reality is governed by emotions that television can easily control. This makes women more prone to poor life choices based on a fictional portrayal of that life choice.
q) If 'the future is female', then women ought to be generating the majority of technological innovation and groundbreaking scientific research. In reality, women contribute only a very small fraction of all work towards useful scientific and technological advancement, and arguably obstruct more than they advance. The future is certainly not female.
s) The reason the tech industry vexes these 'feminists' so much is because their hindbrain cannot process why money is appearing in the hands of men they find insufficiently attractive. This short circuits their biologically-hardwired understanding of the natural order from the realities of prehistoric times, so they see their urge to seize the money for themselves while destroying the livelihood of these men as restoring the natural order. Since technology would no longer progress if 'feminists' gained too much power, in tech terminology, one can fairly say that their brain-vagina interface is obsolete.
t) If a woman has a sincere interest in and talent for technology and wishes to pursue a career in a technological position without any special treatment (about 10% of women, almost all of whom had fathers who were scientists or engineers), she will have no greater encourager than me. However, the push by 'feminists' to force women into the technology professions (which the 'feminists' themselves had no aptitude for) is particularly cruel, as they are forcing young women into a field they are not interested in, which is a terrible disservice to one's entire sense of professional being. So much for being 'pro-choice'.
u) Even I thought it was only quantitative or analytical subjects that women were unsuited for, but it turns out there are even demands for Greek and Latin to be made easier so that women can pass the classes, which they are apparently unable to do at present.
v) The 'It's not about the nail' video is an exceptionally accurate depiction of female psychology. Men, if you want to infuriate a woman who has a problem but refuses to fix it, nothing will make her angrier than if you helpfully state "What you need to do to fix your problem is....". The blue-pill male brain cannot grasp why a direct, swift solution to the problem at hand is the last thing a woman wants to hear, but men who have had sex with a lot of women are in table-pounding agreement. If you want to make the woman attracted to you and very aroused, intersperse a mixture of teasing, disinterested indifference to her problem, and rare, unpredictable instances of empathy in your response to her situation. See 'Game' below.
w) The word 'mansplaining' itself is an admission by 'feminists' that they cannot permit facts and logic, which 'feminist' premises can never withstand. A related point is that there are still many 'feminists' who cannot spell the most important word in their vocabulary, with 'mysogynist' or 'mysoginist' being typical. Many of these 'feminists' have consumed $500K+ of educational resources paid for by the taxpayer and/or their fathers, yet are still functionally illiterate. Do you know how many rural girls in a poor country can be given basic (real) education for $500K? See 'P1W' below.
y) Just view this video from CNBC of women who think they are making a persuasive case about the existence of the imaginary 'pay gap' but are really demanding that they be paid for time they are not working. They truly have no idea why an employer would create a job in the first place. In a similar vein, there is a version of Monopoly that pays women more for achieving the same milestones, yet is marketed as being more fair, not less.
z) The 'fair sex' is actually the unfair sex. Most women truly do not want the bottom 80% of men to have the same basic rights as the top 20% of men. Virtually no men believe that a woman's human/legal/property rights should be contingent on her attractiveness, but women do believe this about men. Central pillars of the justice system of any advanced society are in direct conflict with how women think right and wrong should be decided.
13) The Fabric of Humanity :
a) In the Misandry Bubble, there was a section of how the fabric of humanity will tear under the strains that the growing obsolescence of the human brain regarding the Female Imperative (FI) places on our systems of governance. 'Feminism' is just a modern manifestation of the FI that was hardwired into the human brain from the beginning. The Misandry Bubble was similar to other economic bubbles.
b) Women, as the scarcer reproductive resource, were naturally and justifiably seen as more valuable to human survival. If half the men in a tribe died, the number of babies born would still be the same. But if women started to die, the number of babies born would correspondingly go down. Plus, since infant mortality was 50% of more, this resource allocation was justified.
c) For the first 99.9% of human existence, material prosperity was low and human expendability was high, so funneling all resources to women correlated directly with the survival of children, and additional accountability was not necessary. This was the right priority at the time, and the correlation was tight. Only recently has this correlation decoupled, which is why the hardwiring of the human brain, where both men and women put the well-being of women ahead of those of men and even children, still persists.
d) Women now use only 10-20% of their reproductive capacity, with many using zero. Yet, the unquestioned diversion of resources to women (including those too old to have children) remains the same. This is not to suggest that women should return to the old days of high birth rates, but that the instinct to divert the majority of society's resources to women no longer serves its original purpose. Since baby production rightfully declined to replacement levels or less, the resources diverted to women should proportionally reduce as well.
e) Hence, instead of helping children, this money now finds its way to women who spend it on themselves. Thus, we see endless consumer products geared towards women, and a shadow state designed to transfer all costs and consequences away from women. Resources that should be going towards children instead find their way into luxury goods that men don't want (about 90% of the items in any department store).
f) Beyond just consumer products, this appears in the National Debt. Since most government spending is a direct transfer from men to women, the National Debt is a part of that resource misallocation. In the 10 years since I wrote the Misandry Bubble, the US National Debt rose from $12 Trillion to $23 Trillion, almost all of it representing a transfer to women. Now that the Federal Reserve has kept on printing money, the correction of this misallocation is delayed.
g) In addition to VR Sex as a corrective technology, 'feminists' are already complaining about how Artificial Intelligence arrives at 'sexist' conclusions, since the data it studies is gender normative, and there is not enough money in the world to inject the massive artificiality of 'feminism' into every photograph. Since an AI has no reason to comply with impractical demands, the invisible hand of the Female Imperative will erode when AI diffuses into millions of small decisions across the economy.
h) This is a stark demonstration about how a major aspect of the human mind is obsolete. When this resource misallocation corrects (as all resource misallocations do when enough time passes), it will be among the most turbulent events that humanity faces. The fabric of our previous humanity will be torn asunder. What emerges after that may be very different, but resource misallocation away from people moving society forward, and towards people who contribute nothing to societal advancement, will no longer be the status quo.
i) For this reason, simply being aware of the FI, unlike the others who cannot notice it any more than they notice the air they breathe, puts you in the echelon of those who have evolved the furthest from obsolete human evolutionary psychology. Anti-misandry is thus the most advanced level of socio-political awareness to date.
14) Advice for Young Women :
This section will get plenty of hate, even though none of this advice is unusual by the standards of anyone's grandmother, or any contemporary women outside of the Anglosphere West. But I hope I can save thousands of young women from ruining their lives by listening to either 'feminists' or cuckservatives.
b) Men prefer slender, pleasant, debt-free virgins without tattoos, short hair, piercings beyond the earlobes, or 'feminist' indoctrination. Anyone who disagrees with this needs to first start persuading people in non-Western countries to change their minds about their preferences. The good news for immigrant women is that they have to do very little to out-compete American/British/Canadian women who have chosen to drift away from this description.
c) Put another way, an attractive young woman who deliberately worsens her appearance, or even allows herself to become fat, is analogous to a young man who inherits $10 million and squanders it. Female weight-gain is described as a 'fatocalypse' or 'fatastrophe' for good reason.
d) If you are young and heed a) and b) above, it has actually never been easier for an average young lady to get married to a good man and have a career. All you have to do is resist the social pressure to make bad (i.e. 'feminist') decisions. More simply, if you have a grandmother who never divorced your grandfather, almost all life advice she gives you is going to be better than what you will get from 'modern' sources.
e) Candace Bushnell, who achieved one-in-a-million career success, still admits that she regrets putting career over having children. Think about that, and consider that she could easily have had both with better management of her life.
f) Getting involved in 'feminism' will, among other drawbacks, make you far more accessible to predators, both male and female, since it is an ideology accustomed to immunity from accountability. Yet another reason to steer clear. Be wary of organizations that say they are not 'feminist' but still espouse the same beliefs, as they are havens for predators all the same.
g) A woman can only have sex with one to five men before irreversibly damaging her chances of bonding with any man. This may be unfair, but blame mother nature. More importantly, every traditional culture in the world was fully aware of this, and structured society to prevent this from being a frequent occurrence. This is also why marriage traditionally happened before a woman turned 25 (and often a few years sooner than that).
h) A single mother (not a widow) will always suffer catastrophic damage to her future romantic prospects. Almost all men who have any options would prefer to marry a woman who does not already have children. On top of that, pickup artists know that single mothers are ideal for tactical practice and one night stands, after which they can focus on the women they actually want relationships with. If you think the 'child support' payment stream is free money, remember that it ends after the child comes of age, and the now-adult child will eventually demand to see an accounting of if it was, in fact, spent on him/her. If you have more than one child, the chance of at least one demanding to see how you spent the money is even higher. Don't get pregnant out of wedlock (and don't divorce your husband if you have a child with him), just because you see a wealthy celebrity do it.
i) Any woman who wants to be taken seriously as a professional must dispense with any belief in, or mention of, the imaginary 'pay gap'. This myth has been debunked so many times (including by many women), and fails the standards of basic logic and financial literacy so totally, that it is often an effective filter that helps separate intelligent women from 'feminists'. Most employers, including female employers, will not hire a woman who they suspect truly believes that there is a 'pay gap' that the government must rectify. This is the absolute last type of person anyone wants involved in their business.
j) The careers where women have the greatest aptitude gap in relation to men are the math-heavy careers (Quantum Physics, Astrophysics, Engineering, Economics, etc.). Science-oriented careers where women may underperform by far less are Biology, Pediatrics, Optometry, Organic Chemistry, etc. To go into a career in which female talent is the least competitive relative to that of men (even if extreme levels of scholarships and other affirmative action are available) is the mental equivalent of competing against men in a strength-heavy sport (such as boxing or NFL football). Don't risk your precious happiness and self-esteem just to be a pawn that exists for the edification of 'feminists' who themselves did not choose to pursue any of these fields. Refer to the 'Women in STEM' cartoon above.
k) An attractive woman, in this day and age, can actually earn money by starting a YouTube channel of her doing what makes her attractive. This is done most easily if the videos are of an instructional nature (which, of course, makes more women attractive by learning from the videos). The number of women who earn money from fitness, yoga, cosmetics, fashion, and dance channels on YouTube seems to be very high. The creators earn money by upping their game, while the viewers learn from them. This market is not saturated at all yet, so more women should be encouraged to enter the market and produce their own channels. If a woman has too inflated an assessment of her appearance, subscribers fail to arrive and she gives up, ensuring a swift and fluid meritocracy at global scale. This practice and flow of funds makes 'feminists' livid. Expect them to make some headway in shutting down these income streams for attractive, self-made female entrepreneurs in their tireless quest to uglify the world, and expect there to be a backlash. YouTube/Instagram could be the battlefield where attractive women team up against 'feminists'.
15) Beta Males (and lower) :
a) Despite the vast amount of valuable information available online, and the fact that The Misandry Bubble is widely seen as the manifesto for a movement that now involves millions of men, there are still hundreds of millions of men who are painfully clueless about these basic facts. Before the Internet age, being this ignorant was excusable, but now, the solution to most problems a man faces is available within seconds. Thus, if a man in 2020 onwards gets into trouble by way of entering into a situation he could have avoided through the knowledge available online (such as getting married in an Anglosphere Western country), our sympathy for him should be limited. Men getting in trouble today from situations they entered into 20 years ago are a different matter, but the gradient of sympathy and level of self-learning expect of the man adjust proportionately.
b) For this reason, any moderately attractive unmarried woman can set up social media accounts and keep posting photographs of herself, while hiding any boyfriend (but informing him of this if they are steady). Then, whenever a major expense arises (such as a traffic ticket), she can appeal to her beta male fans to cover her expense. If a woman has sufficient fans, she will get at least one volunteer. The woman should thank the volunteer publicly on her social media, thereby encouraging future donors. In the mind of the beta male, his financial donation actually inched him closer to romance with her (even if he is thousands of miles away), while in reality, the woman felt no such urge towards him. It is not unethical, since no contract has been entered into; it is a donation. More importantly, there needs to be more of an unofficial tax on betatude. Anita Sarkeesian (who isn't even attractive) received $158,000 from beta dupes just to produce 12 videos that most people could produce for free. I can't blame her for harvesting the beta males who were begging for it.
c) Technology industry billionaires are among the most 'beta' men around. The pattern of a famous eleven or even twelve-digit technology titan, who is neither old nor ugly, ending up with a very average-looking woman with no impressive talents is now an infamous cliche and popular Internet meme. Some of these women don't even take the husband's last name. Others gloat about how they make their whipped centibillionaire husband acquiesce to petty, impractical demands, even when they already have staff on payroll to do these mundane tasks. Even worse, the current richest man in the world has an extramarital affair with a woman who is nearly 50 years old, and makes the most needy, cringeworthy, maladroit overtures to her, due to which she rejects him. These overspecialized nerds have singlehandedly devalued the very status of being a multi-multi-billionaire by doing far worse with women than a financially broke bartender, musician, or photographer the same age. There are certain ineptitudes that money simply cannot cure. No wonder the 'women in tech' racket has successfully extorted so much. Similarly, in defense of average women, I don't think the majority of women are gold-diggers outright, since there are clearly some men who attractive women don't want no matter how much money they have.
d) US 'conservative' men are even worse, for they have gone to great lengths to package their cringeworthy woman-worship, often accompanied by new anti-male, socialist legislation, into a pretense of being 'heroic' and 'chivalrous', in order to beg for gratitude from women. They have, of course, failed shambolically in their pursuit of this pathetic goal, while exposing the fraudulent claim that they stand for personal responsibility and accountability. See more about these 'cuckservatives' below, and how to transfer costs onto them.
e) As disconnected as I am from the American dating scene at this point, I have been told there is a new word, 'sneating', to describe women who misrepresent interest in a man just to get free restaurant dinners and gifts. While some women brazenly gloat about this, this is another example of where we should no longer have sympathy for beta males. 'Game' advice, available for free on the Internet for the last 20 years, has always maintained that a man should never, ever, be suckered into dinner or other expenses for women they are not already having sex with. Few elements of the different schools of Game thought are so unanimously consistent as this rule. If beta males are still so incurious as to not access this widely available information, they deserve to be a payer of the unofficial tax on betatude.
16) Game :
a) Game advice has become highly commoditized across the Internet, which is to say that there is no need to spend significant money to learn some valuable skills. This ought to have caused a wholesale increase in male competence, but as discussed both there and in the Misandry Bubble, about 80% of men cannot grasp that success with women is a learnable skill. When I point out that women are attracted to just the top 20% of men, Game is the tool where you can swiftly enter the top 20% (individual results may vary). Don't worry about too many men learning Game, as that situation is not even on the horizon.
b) Of paramount importance is to always leave them happier than you found them. Any other application is unethical.
c) What 80% of men cannot grasp, 99% of women cannot grasp. If women understood what women are actually attracted to and could view it with the necessary detachment, they would be encouraging men to learn at least the LTR-oriented elements of Game. Remember that despite overwhelming privilege due to pervasive 'feminism', women are unhappier than ever before but cannot figure out why.
d) While few men can or want to be outright pickup artists beyond a 'bucket list' of experiencing 15-25 attractive women, there is obviously immense value in mastering a few basic skills of Game. Making Game second-nature is inseparable from having exceptional communication, persuasion, and rapport skills. As we have seen above, this will provide you with powers that money simply cannot buy. It applies even to platonic relationships with women, as Game principles applied platonically can ensure women at work decide that you are one of the men who should be allowed to earn a living, and they will cut you more slack at performance review time.
e) There are a lot of 'Game denialists' out there, who are often admitted permavirgins, but still insist that only the top few men who have an exceptional combination of looks and money are having sex with all women. The real reason for their denial is because they have convinced themselves, for pain-avoidance purposes, that their failure is due to not winning the genetic lottery. To now provide proof that some aspects of success are within a man's control is something they cannot accept after all that self-deception, as it would mean they wasted the last few decades of their lives. Do not waste even one minute debating them, since that is a minute you can instead spend on your own betterment.
f) Courage isn't quite what people think it is. A soldier who marches towards certain death does so partly because of courage, but partly because his commanders brainwashed him into seeing his own expendability as normal. The same soldier cannot approach women in the grocery store and strike up a pleasant conversation that escalates towards attraction, despite zero risk of any physical danger. The man who can approach women in the daytime at will and consistently generate attraction in them ranks very high in the courage hierarchy.
g) You haven't fully formed as a man until you have done 100 daytime approaches. That in fact means that most men have not fully formed. After you do this, all subsequent approaches become easy and you will effectively have a superpower compared to most men (and will be able to outperform even tech billionaires on this front, I hasten to add). Doing 100 daytime approaches, and keeping a record of each result in order to identify patterns, is going to make a distinct and permanent change in your life. Don't give up even if you get nothing out of the first 50, 70, or 90. Doing 100 means doing 100. Your attractiveness is rising along the way (provided you are keeping a spreadsheet record to identify patterns and adapting to them), so the best outcomes will be towards the end of the 100.
h) Study Russell Brand's style of interaction with women. Obviously don't escalate in any and all venues as he does (you're not a celebrity), but at least try to emulate as much of this style as you can for usage when it is appropriate. This is not the only type of Game, but he is a true master of that particular type.
i) Teach the women you are having sex with to make their beta orbiter men cover various expenses. There are many such 'blue pill' men, especially if cuckservative, who are practically begging for the privilege of covering the expenses of women who are having sex with other men. Their contribution makes this system possible, so I say let them pick up the tab, and have the woman verbally thank them for it (so that they pay next time as well). They want to pay, even for women having sex with men other than them, as they have convinced themselves that this is 'chivalrous', so give them what they want, I say. Everybody wins!
17) Democracy :
a) Democracy is merely dictatorship by whoever controls the media. The media can also persuade a significant percentage of people to fill their entire lives with politics, and then tell them what politics is, to the extent that these people are entirely programmable on demand. Do not be in denial about this.
b) Decoupling voting from taxpaying is unsustainable by any society. Only current and past taxpayers above a certain cutoff should have voting rights. The premise that the weak will be disenfranchised is greatly exaggerated in relation to the inexorable trend of non-taxpayers voting themselves more money. This error will be corrected in time.
c) A society where comedians are not permitted to make fun of obesity, homosexuality, bossy women, and effeminate men is a society that will soon become joyless on every level.
d) Women who marry with few to zero prior sexual partners will merely copy their husband's political opinions verbatim. 90% of the time, this creates a net improvement over a single woman's political opinions in terms of views compatible with societal sustainability. This was one of the reasons marriage was invented. It is also the reason marriage is being deliberately destroyed by Western governments.
e) A lot of American 'conservatives' are irretrievably convinced that capitalism and democracy are inseparable, since for them, the Cold War coincided with the best years of their lives. In reality, the two have no correlation, and, over time, potentially an inverse correlation. The premise that 'democracy' should be installed by force in the Islamic world, that too as decided by US 'conservatives' who don't even understand their own country and the effects of late-stage democracy, was an epic combination of arrogance and ignorance.
f) Whatever form of 'Democracy' is functional, what is certain is that the framers never intended for Presidential campaigns to last almost two years.
g) In America, your local Mayor, Police Department, and City Council have more direct impact on your life than the President of the United States. But the media has to fill thousands of hours of volume, so they have forced people to think about Presidential politics to an extreme degree. This is not what the framers intended back in the late 18th century.
18) The Two-Party System :
a) The afterparty is the one you want to attend. Both parties will cater to those who purchase their goodwill. The fierce rivalry is just theater to whip up the rubes and keep them divided. Any civilian (i.e. someone not earning a paycheck from the political system) who gets extremely emotional about the victory of one party over the other in US politics is a fool. Most children figure out that pro wrestling is scripted by the age of 12, but many 'adults' still can't figure this exact same thing out about the two-party system.
b) Much is written in America about how the two-party system is better than a multi-party system, such as how a small 'kingmaker' might get too much power in the latter. However, in the age of social media, it is evident that the two-party system is most easily reduced to the lowest common denominator by the new medium.
c) In any industry, if a duopoly of just two market participants existed, then one would expect both to deliver ever declining quality, as each tries to be slightly better than the other while both decline. If the political process now supports an entire profit-seeking set of industries that were not envisioned at the start, why would one expect a political duopoly to be any different?
d) As stated by GK Chesterton: "The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types — the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob."
e) A 'tough on crime' conservative is the police-state leftist's best friend.
f) Cuckservatives who openly root for the notion that California should leave the United States (as if the leftist advance that happened there is not also happening in Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado) are no better than Democrats who want to abolish the Electoral College. Each are trying to change the system since they cannot win on ideas.
g) I correctly predicted, nine years ago, that Republicans would not shrink the size of government. Okay, that was a pretty easy prediction, but the poll in that article indicated that there still were some hopers. But at this point, they don't even pretend to try anymore. A cuckservative's highest goal is to appear 'chivalrous' to women, which he thinks comprises of using the state to transfer resources from men to women without any reciprocal contribution from women. Under such a worldview, government spending can only rise. Remember, a leftist can get a cuckservative to support any government expansion (even something immense like the Green New Deal) by packaging it as something 'chivalrous'. Under that framing, a cuckservative always jumps up to out-left the leftist.
19) US Conservatism :
a) 'Conservatism' is a bizarre consciousness in the United States, the equivalent of which does not exist in most other countries at anywhere near the same scale. It is not an ideology, but rather the absence of ideology, contrary to what a conservative may claim. Most conservatives do not stand for any absolute standard of free markets, small government, personal responsibility, or 'traditional values'. The conservative merely wants to preserve selective aspects of the recent past, but never the more distant past. Hence, the conservative's view of an ideal society always drifts leftward, and the conservative finds himself advocating for what leftists were advocating a short while ago, while pretending to be doing the opposite.
b) Even more strangely, many staunch conservatives have no awareness of their own perpetual leftward drift. Furthermore, since the rate of change is ever-rising, the time period that they wish to preserve is less and less distant from the present. At this point, many conservatives merely seek to slow down (but never halt, much less reverse) any leftist advances, so are merely left-wing individuals without realizing it. They could not even conserve the definition of 'man', 'woman', and 'marriage', yet do not seem troubled by this retreat. Conservatives have even become increasingly shameless about groveling to 'feminists', yet believe that they oppose 'feminism'.
c) Hence, most conservative protests in the face of leftist advances are highly ritualistic, orchestrated, and always end in a predictable surrender, after which the conservative will actually work to preserve the very leftist gains that they were previously displaying token resistance against. For this reason, conservatism, as a political faction that outright seeks to be on the losing side, is not attractive to people who dislike losing. This, among other things, explains the extreme hatred some 'NeverTrump' conservatives have for President Trump, even if the former are ostensibly 'Republicans'. His 'so much winning' slogan alone goes against the very mission statement of conservatism. This also explains the big 'mystery' about why Asians and Hispanics don't vote Republican (at least, surrender-Republican). Why associate with a group that likes to lose, and is adept at ensuring they are widely hated from all sides?
d) For this reason, the pejorative term 'cuckservative' is startlingly accurate in describing the more surrender-loving, whipped subset of conservatives. Their strategy to brand themselves as virtuous by taking the 'turn the other cheek' philosophy to ridiculous extremes has failed spectacularly, as no one is fooled by their attempt to repackage extreme cowardice and needy approval-seeking as virtue. In fact, I am going to take it further and add the letter 'l' in there to create the new term 'cluckservative', as the element of cowardice has not been flagged enough yet, and they deserve further ridicule amidst the judgement of history.
e) As mentioned above, many cluckservatives actually wish that California would leave the United States (a 'Calexit'). While no man with an iota of self-respect or courage would want a piece of their own country to leave, what is particularly shameful about this is that California was, in fact, a 'red' state until 1988, and drifted leftward due to perpetual cluckservative retreat. Their premise that the removal of California from the US would somehow restore some past paradise in the other 49 deliberately ignores the fact that the same cluckservative retreat is already underway in Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Texas, and more. Should they all leave? Cluckservatives, hence, are the Neville Chamberlains of our time.
g) Therefore, don't ever let a cluckservative claim that they stand for 'family values', or that voting Republican is somehow evidence of being against government involvement to further 'feminism'. They have devised and engineered the wholesale replacement of marriage with the child support model, while denying that any such change ever took place. Even radical 'feminists' could not have designed a government artifact so precise and diabolical, as these 'feminists' don't interact with enough families to know how to so efficiently concoct the legislation that removes the father from the home, takes his income under threat of imprisonment, exempt the woman from any obligation to prove it was spent on the children, while still ensuring the father is still seen as evil. It takes a cluckservative to destroy the family.
h) Cluckservatives are the primary perpetuators of the claim that men are weak and lazy if they do not put female-centric goals, however untraditional and unnatural, ahead of their own well-being. Don't be surprised to learn that 'pro-life' cluckservatives are even more misandric, and less willing to hold women accountable, than Democrats. Every supposed principle that a cluckservative claims to uphold, such as matching authority with accountability, creating the right incentives, and the need for contracts to be enforced is jettisoned when the prospect of bashing men arises, and the cluckservative instead adopts the same arguments as a leftist advocating an 80% tax rate.
i) Hence, contrary to what they claim, cluckservatives are strident socialists, as long as one strict condition is met. This condition is that only men be net payers, and only women be net recipients within their socialist vision. Once this gender requirement is fulfilled, cluckservatives are indistinguishable from socialists and communists. See this infamous video again, and note its downvote ratio, for proof. Cluckservatives even love debtors prisons and quasi-slavery, under this gender requirement, as made possible by the grossly misnamed 'child support' system they have devised as a Trojan horse to replace marriage. This is very different from the tax on betatude that I favored above. Cluckservatives want to tax the best aspects of masculinity on an imputed basis to fund a system devoted to ensuring that single mothers are seen as paragons of virtue rather than welfare queens, and then express puzzlement when masculine generosity starts to become scarce in society. This is how cluckservatives end up harming everyday women too.
j) Cluckservatives are so fanatical about their demands that men other than them bear the costs of their 'chivalrous' fantasies that the Editor of the National Review (the how-to manual of cluckservatism) expects men to voluntarily die in a sinking ship even if all the women are already safe and the men could also escape with safety. Cluckservatives often outdo even 'feminists' in their lust for normalizing male disposability (as long as it is not them, of course). The rush into wars like 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' were also driven partly by this zeal to send young men to die so that cluckservatives could claim that they are 'chivalrous' for sacrificing your son, brother, boyfriend, nephew, etc.
k) It is common to see extreme Dunning-Kruger manifestations among cluckservatives amidst their displays of cartoonish 'chivalry'. For instance, take Jim Geraghty (pronounced 'Gay-ratty', appropriately enough), who married a single mother despite being a well-known public figure (i.e. he voluntarily self-cuckolded), and all but admits that he is threatened with divorce often. Yet he makes a bizarre and nauseating video that insists society considers losers like him to be the epitome of 'sexy masculinity' as he describes it. The infamous, full-time W. Bradford 'Wilcucks' insists that forcing government involvement in relationships is the key to becoming a 'real man', and has taken to hectoring A-list male celebrities to enter a government contract with women they have children with, while deliberately omitting extremely important facts amidst his 'advice'. These cluckservatives go to great lengths to assert that they are the most exemplary, masculine men around. Physiognomy is real, and a mere glance at the unmasculine, flaccid, untrustworthy visages of Gay-ratty and Wilcucks might make it difficult to suppress your laughter at the extraordinary Dunning-Kruger delusion on display. A Mount Rushmore of cluckservatism could be sculpted from Play-doh.
l) Cluckservatives whine about Democrat-favoring bias in the media, or being deplatformed by Democrat-biased tech companies, even though they tend to converge to the Democrat political position anyway. In their 20 years of whining, they did not create their own alternative media system of equal power. Whether it is because they don't have the collective expertise, are lazy, or prefer to play the victim is secondary. The reality is, they don't want it to be any other way, as per point c) above. Judge them by their actions (or lack thereof), not their mendacious words.
m) Mark my words, in the near future, a cluckservative will loudly demand that men enter a government marriage contract with MtF transgender individuals (i.e. they still have XY chromosomes) who identify as 'female'. The cluckservative will cartoonishly gloat about how much he is doing to uphold 'traditional marriage' without seeing anything odd about pressuring men to enter this arrangement. "So what if she was born a man? You will only be a real man if you marry her!", they will bellow. To be clear, I am not criticizing the transgender person (who is just being used as a prop), but rather the cluckservative.
n) If you are wondering why I am giving this much space to demolishing this already universally despised group, it is because it is on the brink of total collapse, and without the cluckservative anvil, the 'feminist' hammer will not be able to propagate nearly as much misandry. Cluckservatives are the pharisees of today. Many men have thankfully stopped following, and therefore a major realignment that ejects cluckservatives into the dustbin of history is imminent, wherein there is an opportunity to fill the vacuum with something better (race nationalism, another goddess-cult ideology populated by even less impressive men, and therefore no women, is not it, as it languishes in an even more primitive layer of the human brain and thus has an even higher 'loser quotient').
o) Lastly, remember to call them 'cluckservatives' and point to this SEO-optimized list for reference. That will cause a 'Streisand effect' that hastens their welcome demise from political relevance and makes misandry harder to propagate. If you question whether the Misandry Bubble has in fact partially popped, as predicted exactly 10 years ago, the ongoing implosion of the once-powerful phalanx of cluckservatism is a reliable metric that it has. If you are looking for a way to fight back against misandry, you will make much more headway attacking cluckservatives than attacking female 'feminists', since women already have a low opinion of cluckservatives. Remember to train women you are sexually involved with to get cluckservatives to platonically cover some of her expenses while feeling privileged to do so, as described above in 16(h).
20) Islam :
a) My religion of Islam is widely misunderstood in the West, by both leftists and chickenhawk cluckservatives. There are many variants of Islam, and many amalgamations of it with pre-Islamic cultures in areas that became Islamic. Yes, extremists are a small but significant percentage of Muslims, and moderate Muslims do not do enough to purge them. But this is because the average Muslim is politically unsophisticated and cannot see beyond supporting his own side, rather than a desire to kill innocent non-Muslims. Consider it to be an issue of low political and civic sophistication, rather than calculated malice.
b) If even 10% of Muslims were terrorists, there would be dozens of terrorist attacks per week the world over (including in the West). This, obviously, is not the case.
c) Muslim countries do not even have high murder rates. No Muslim country not in a state of war has a murder rate comparable to what is found in Latin America, the Caribbean, or Sub-Saharan Africa. The largest Muslim country, Indonesia, has a lower murder rate than most European countries.
d) Islam is winning the game of 'the future belongs to those who show up'. As I wrote in The Misandry Bubble, this takes just two generations. At this point, one of those two generations has already been created.
e) Of course Islam is right about women. Why wouldn't it be? Christianity is right about women too, except that Westerners no longer practice Christianity, they just pretend to by hollowing out Christianity and stuffing the shell with 'feminism'. I am surprised that it took until 2019 for such flyers to be posted, as I kicked off the campaign to do this way back on 1/1/2011, or nine years ago. Post more flyers!
f) Over two thirds of Westerners who convert to Islam are women, and the rate of conversions is rising. Mention of this causes the typical blue-pill cluckservative Republican's head to explode. This, however, is no surprise to anyone who understands female psychology (see 12(b) above). Islamic teachings do have principles in them that are repeated in what some people call 'Game', thus instilling a level of natural Game into Muslim men.
g) Contrary to the myth that cluckservatives try to perpetuate, the only Islamic countries that mandate burqas happen to be absolute monarchies, which are under 10% of Islamic nations. A hijab is not a burqa, and is usually not face-covering. By contrast, look at how many women voluntarily choose to wear it even where they don't have to. The fact is, the burqa is most zealously enforced by older women, not men, onto young women. See the SMV chart above.
h) Despite all this, I do not advise Western men to convert to Islam if your only goal is to escape misandry and marry a Muslim woman. There is far more to the religion than that, and it is not a religion for those who may regret having converted. Plus, you won't fool other Muslims about your true agenda. Believe me, I could make an obscene amount of money publishing a YouTube channel and how-to guides that help Western men convert to Islam, learn a bit of the Quran, learn a bit of the language of the country they wish to reside in, and expatriate to Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Malaysia, Turkey, etc. where they would have a high-paying expat job. But the locals just won't fully accept you, which will only become apparent years later. That is why it would be wrong of me to peddle that.
21) Post-First World :
a) People sometimes say that the US/UK/Canada is becoming like a 'third world country'. Aside from revealing how outdated their Cold War-era terminology is, this reveals how little they understand about either type of society. In reality, countries like the US/UK/Canada/Australia are spending all of their resources in an ill-conceived fight against nature itself. Very unnatural conditions that could never exist in a society less prosperous than these are being normalized through extremely huge expenditure. 'Feminism' is the biggest of these unnatural abominations, but many others are part of the new left. For this reason, it is more accurate to describe these countries as 'Post First World'. As an acronym, we can call that #P1W.
b) A P1W country, thus, has some aspects that match a poorer country, such as crumbling roads and unreliable electricity grids, and others that are uniquely present (and only possible) in a place where actual hardship is too far in the past for most people to remember, rendering them completely unmoored from any concept of what keeps a society running. Hence, taxpayer resources are spent in an unwinnable quest to fight nature itself, where preposterous resource misallocations to prop up bizarre ideologies are ubiquitous. Since too many non-taxpayers have the right to vote, taxpayers are treated as golden geese to be extracted from without remorse.
c) To give you an idea, P1W priorities are why, instead of having cities on the Moon and a cure for cancer, the West instead spent those trillions of dollars on subsidizing single motherhood/destroying fatherhood. Similarly, in a poor country, the poor people are emaciated and stunted, whereas in a P1W country, they are often obese, and those trying to 'help the poor' insist that obesity be normalized. History will not judge this era of these countries favorably.
d) If you ever get a chance to speak with a male park ranger in a P1W country, ask him how many times a foolish visitor (almost always female) reports to the ranger that a coyote had a dead rabbit in its mouth, or that a hawk killed a squirrel, expecting the ranger to intervene. A hallmark of a P1W society is a complete ignorance of nature, and how the ranger is meant to be the 'police' that prevents predators from 'harming' prey. Each of these women might have consumed $500,000 or more in educational cost, paid by taxpayers and her father, only to be this ignorant about what actually happens in nature, and this accustomed to a government employee existing only to intervene in every perceived problem.
e) In 2001, when the Taliban in Afghanistan destroyed the pre-Islamic statues of Buddha in that country, I was appalled that they could not see the value of preserving a historical treasure and only saw a history that must be erased because does not fit their 'contemporary values'. At least more enlightened Islamic countries were not doing the same (Egypt is not tearing down the Sphinx and Iran is not tearing down Persepolis). But would you like to know who is actually on par with the Taliban? In 2019, we see San Francisco deciding to paint over a mural of George Washington (and somehow charge taxpayers $600,000 for this). Cries among the US left to tear down Mount Rushmore grow louder each year. The British left also has an obsession with removing old statues of historical significance.
f) Almost all television and radio commercials produced in America today, if narrated by a male, have a male with an unusually high-pitched, androgynous voice that is nauseating to hear. By contrast, view commercials from the 1970s and 80s, which are available on YouTube. There is no androgynous-voiced man as a narrator in any of those.
g) Studies have shown that physically weak men tend to be socialists (we include cluckservative socialists in this group). These studies don't go far enough, because they stop short of revealing that women are socialists for the same reason. Ultimately, the likelihood of a person being a collectivist is inversely proportional to how well they could survive in the jungle for an indefinite period. A man who could manage that situation well (whether due to physical strength, resourcefulness, etc.) is less likely to be a socialist in our modern world. A woman attractive enough to get such a man to take her in and share his resources with her is also less likely to be a socialist, whereas women who are unlikely to attract such a benefactor tend to favor socialism. As far as we may think we are from prehistoric times, 'Jungle Survivability' is still the governing factor in what system a person favors. This is also why people who opposed socialism in their prime become socialists in their old age.
h) As I wrote on 1/1/2011, the regime that depends on suppressing information always loses to the movement that strengthens with a free flow of information. The ever-widening range of opinions that are being suppressed in P1W countries is an indicator of how far along they are toward correction.
i) I always found it funny how the people who have the most to lose if America converged to the rest of the world's median cultural norms and tolerance levels are the ones most actively working to weaken America. Perhaps 'self-extinction response' is a feature of their evolutionary hardwiring, as guided by nature, because nature wants everyone else to never stop adapting to threats.
j) While only a few countries are P1W countries, and have only been so for a short time (I would say 2006 was when the US formally crossed the P1W threshold), the outcome of this remains to be seen. Does it get swamped with the most hostile immigrants, or do the sheltered snobs who think they never face the consequences of their society-destroying beliefs finally reverse their positions when they personally start facing obvious costs (which could happen quickly once the cluckservative cannon fodder that shields them is depleted)? Can a P1W country correct course without a massive decline? This is the biggest question of the next decade.
k) And with that, I bid you, my 1 million+ readers, adieu. No more articles by me, as there are just too many opportunities in the real world to pursue as P1W societies correct/collapse, and I recommend you do that same. See you.....out there.
Comments Section : The comments are going to be epic, particularly when we see people who ignore 95% of the publication to screech about one point. It remains to be seen if conversations are even possible, or if excerpts of just one chapter are the basis for entire comment threads on other websites. As Typepad only allows 100 comments per page, a link to the active page will also be placed upfront.
Thanks for this! There is so much to ponder here.
On Imran Khan's piece alone, I didn't think anything could top the original Misandry Bubble, but you have outdone yourself here, sir!
Posted by: Leopold | January 01, 2020 at 12:41 AM
My god! It's full of stars!
Gems, rather. A lot of them!
That is an intimidating tower of jam-packed knowledge. It is going to be a month before I can vote in the poll. I already feel my brain being pushed further than it has been pushed in ages.
Posted by: Bowman | January 01, 2020 at 12:46 AM
Brilliant article, thank you.
But honestly you should pursue a future in comedy:
“Their Brain - Vagina interface is obsolete”
All time classic line. Brilliant..
Posted by: Palmasailor | January 01, 2020 at 02:42 AM
Have been anticipating this for quite some time. Really interesting piece by Khan. I plead with every man reading this to exercise extreme caution if you actually follow through and use game on any western woman. I shouldn't have to tell you why that is the riskiest behavior one can partake of in the west.
Posted by: Satoshi Nakamoto | January 01, 2020 at 07:15 AM
^^ Satoshi is talking nonsense, all men should learn game.
The situation is entirely the opposite, it’s much riskier go through life without understanding or using game, than it is to go through life understanding it and using it..
Learn game.
Posted by: Palmasailor | January 01, 2020 at 10:48 AM
Wow!
I already feel that I will learn more from this article and all its links than from all the school and college that I sat through and paid for.
I feel a ripple in the Force!
Thanks for exposing cuckservatives (pardon me, CLUCKservatives) for what they really are. I had a vague perception about this, but now it seems like a fuzzy image has snapped into focus.
Posted by: Kit Fisto | January 01, 2020 at 11:02 AM
Thank you for pointing out how there are fake MRAs who just phonies who bilked money from suffering men, without actually doing any activism. They are just the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of their niche. All they do is prolong the suffering of men already shredded by the system. Couldn't they find a different source for their marks?
The two most visible fake MRAs are Paul Elam, and the deceased Angry Harry. I hope there are no men still giving money to Paul Elam. I wonder how much he swindled.
Posted by: In Pain | January 01, 2020 at 01:51 PM
As good as last decade's article! Impressive!
Posted by: Bruno | January 01, 2020 at 06:57 PM
I've been waiting a long time to read this. The long awaited sequel to one of the best articles ever written. The inflation and deflation of the Misandry Bubble is something that occupied much of my attention. It was a force I knew was constantly at work in the background, even though its progress couldn't always be directly observed.
I must say that while the bubble hasn't burst yet, it is well on its way to doing so. In perhaps 5 years, thats when we'll finally see the 'snap', when the costs of feminism transfer away from men and onto women.
Posted by: TheJamesRocket | January 01, 2020 at 07:31 PM
was excited to read this but felt a bit disappointed.. no more real predictions just seemed like doubling down on the first article which i enjoyed.
one thing i totally didn't get was the whole "i'm islamic.. go have sex with women and have their orbiters pay for the expenses"
like does your religion tell u that that makes sense? i just don't really get how/why u would tout a religion and then say something so void of any integrity.. it just makes u and your religion look bad as you endorse premarital sex with multiple women (something u admit is bad for women) then you say orbiters want to pay for your trysts which is wholly untrue
Posted by: Jaims | January 01, 2020 at 08:17 PM
Jaims,
I think what he means is that there are so many manginas and whiteknights that transferring costs to them is pragmatic and necessary.
As far as casual sex, it is a 'when in Rome....' philosophy. He isn't saying everyone should comply with Islamic morals. When RooshV did a 180 from being a PUA to becoming a deeply traditional Christian, he was skewered by thousands. By contrast, I don't see anything very inconsistent between Imran Khan's writings 10 years ago vs now.
Posted by: Alcibiades | January 01, 2020 at 08:34 PM
Been waiting to read this for a decade.
Here's to the next recession!
Posted by: Tupac Chopra | January 01, 2020 at 09:35 PM
Jaims,
I don't agree. I see at least a dozen new predictions in the article (that too just Imran's half, and not just in 11(e)).
Posted by: Ira Rubenstein | January 02, 2020 at 10:18 AM
That is a looooong post.
"we may never have a large number of humans living in space."
Poppycock! Well, maybe you are right. But consider AI will be sent to colonize a planet - build habitats and industry. People will go when all the hard dangerous work is long done.
If there was a complete Lunar colony, built and ready for occupancy, and a safe transportation system to get there, are you saying 5-10,000 people would be convinced to go, out of a world population of 10 billion? How about a constructed orbital habitat with 100% earth normal gravity and every possible amenity?
Think of planets, asteroids, mars, the moon as simply undeveloped real estate. My guess is it will all get developed. the moon is the perfect place for heavy industrialization - imagine moving all aluminum and iron smelters off world, where we could care less about pollution. Unlimited free energy. The materials are delivered back to earth via electromagnetic cannon, heat shield, and parachutes. Along with all the gold, rare earths, etc, all refined and ready for use, we will ever need.
Posted by: Geo | January 02, 2020 at 10:38 AM
Great work. Sad to see him go, mostly because nothing much happened over the 10 years; it only crystallized. I agree that it was mostly due to the fact that the recession and big downturn in world economies still awaits us ...
That said, it is somewhat uplifting that people can sniff the BS, and maybe the can being kicked down the road will make people throw it all away when the economic crisis hits, as that is all that's holding the western [multicultural, failed] experiments together.
My only disagreement regarding just a few of his points (I agree I'd say with 90% or so) are the California one (let them die and then beg to get back in), and the Islamic points. But I'd expect that he wouldn't touch on how backward both of those topics are.
His explanation of Post First World is indeed, a gem. What he really gets at, and even understands this through many clear references in the piece, are that postmodern/first world/etc. really all mean "Post Christian."
After all, that's the value system that made for all of the prosperity and advancement that the world ever saw.
Can we correct the Patricidal ways, or must it collapse?
I fear it is the latter.
Posted by: Palamas | January 02, 2020 at 08:05 PM
Oh but they DID cast 007 as a woman recently!
https://geekspin.co/lashana-lynch-agent-007-james-bond-film-no-time-to-die/
Question for Imran and anyone else who wishes to chime in: How do you cope with the depression that (potentially) comes with possessing such a vast knowledge and understanding of such unpleasant truths about women and the current world around us?
Posted by: Monte Creesto | January 02, 2020 at 09:01 PM
Monte Creesto,
That is a different 00 agent. Not Bond (007).
Posted by: Bowman | January 02, 2020 at 09:04 PM
New Years Resolution: Document 100 daytime approaches.
Posted by: Serge | January 03, 2020 at 03:07 AM
"Sexbots are still no closer to reality than they were in 2010"
I know you're a VR shill but this is just intellectually dishonest.
Posted by: techprogressive | January 03, 2020 at 03:39 AM
Jaims and futurists-
I had about the same reaction toward the end as his writing shifted away from insightful assertions and supporting evidence to contrived denunciation, disappointment. It was the repeated attacks against Conservatism, particularly American Conservatism, which in contrast to the rest of the material is needlessly over-represented to the point of ad naseum that I felt that he lost the plot (and consequently revealed more than intended I am beginning to think).
To start, I don’t disagree with the condemnations of hypocrisy espoused by the “Conservatives” that you tend to find promoted in mainstream media, that is so-called Christian Right-leaning pundits or other blatantly profit-driven “thought leaders”, but Imran only briefly touched on a theme I’m compelled to expand upon greatly, “Democracy is merely a dictatorship by whomever controls the media” (ref 17a). In other words, it can be inferred that people generally operate based upon the dominant programming they receive through repetition, or put another way, most people believe and do what they are told from trusted sources of authority within the bounds of their respective/collective Overton window (see manufacturing consent and warfare).
Until the last decade, the vehicle for the dominant programming of the West has been audio-visual media experienced most effectively through television and film. Anyone on this forum, I think, will recognize this truth to be self-evident and is probably acutely aware and sensitized to the increasing pressure for censorship and control of the narrative over the post modern printing press we call the internet. It strikes me as peculiar how amongst all of Mr. Kahn’s analysis, there is an absence, made stark by consequence of its omission in his macro-level exploration, of the influence that this medium has had in creating and shaping the Misandry Bubble in the West. Furthermore, the lack of interest from Mr. Kahn in the parties who predominantly owned and produced “programming” for the public’s consumption is also worthy of taking notice of.
In the spirit of Imran’s statement, I would assert that the today’s cultural-influencing sphere of Christianity in the West did not find itself in the throes of Cultural Marxism and the subsequent prostration before the gynocratic throne organically. Rather, this has been product of a long campaign to subvert an existing culture and traditions with one that is inherently gynocratic a characteristic belonging to a culture of influential outsides who have been extremely successful in propagating their value system over the previously dominant one. Therefore, to culminate his diligent work highlighting examples of misandry in the repeated condemnation of Conservatism (essentially erecting what amounts to a Western Patriarchal effigy) comes off as intellectually dishonest and is even somewhat reminiscent of the now very tired trope of blatant hatred expressed by the majority of “Get Woke, Go Broke” campaigns attacking white males, Christianity, and their Patriarchal roots of which Westerners are inundated with today.
In my opinion, no one today illuminates the influences of Hollywood film and television on America and the Western culture better than youtuber Blackpilled https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvaHgYcWAAcn5D54w4Dqezg, see his excellent video, Selling Divorce on the West https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwbzF9tKSd8, on the correlation between divorce rates after the 1960s and the infuence of Hollywood films across what used to be the Anglosphere in the first 45 seconds of this 9 minute video.
See his video on How Boomers Were Taught to Hate (Themselves) https://www.bitchute.com/video/vwFshwxECq0/ (16 mins) for a prime example of how Patriarchal (sustainable) American Christian culture was deconstructed and diminished by contrasting contrived caricatures of this culture against an elevated Jewish-identity savior archetype in the 1979 film, Norma Rae. As mentioned in the video, this strategy of misrepresentation and mis-characterization in order to attack traditions, subvert cultural norms, and generally lower standards of decency is so common in film it is difficult for the indoctrinated to even begin to recognize it unless they have been sensitized in it’s recognition, after which you cannot help but wonder how this form of manipulation wasn’t noticed all along.
And see again, Pawnbreaking our Culture https://www.bitchute.com/video/qYBt6J0mZgo/ (37 mins) for a vivid representation of how early and mid 20th century WASP culture and laws such as the Hays code http://www.american-historama.org/1929-1945-depression-ww2-era/hays-code.htm
were subverted over-time by powerful Marxists (Jewish) influences in order to push and ultimately destroy decency standards against pornography and other Christian-based influence that served to maintain codes of conduct. It is not difficult to recognize where this trail of degeneracy has led us to today (increasing gender confusion, normalization of pedophilia, demonic transgenderism foisted upon children's story hour in public libraries, etc.). The trend only seems to accelerate in the West.
Moreover, look into the history of pornography in America and the ownership of these companies (see Mindgeek and all of their holdings as a contemporary example). One classic example of Jewish domination in the pornography “industry” is a quote from Al Goldstein, a Jewish American pornographer who said the following when asked why Jews were dramatically over-represented in the porn industry, “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don't believe in authoritarianism.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Goldstein. Indeed!
There are so many examples of Jewish subversion that have spread and flourished because of the exploitative mentality that Imran seems to extol (Game ref 16i – exploitation of women’s inherent biological weaknesses), (Female Psychology and Aptitude ref 12o – promotion of negative life choices for exploitative profit). This value, or lacktherof, is actively promoted and more importantly, regularly rewarded (think about the types who move up in American Corporate hierarchy), in what has become to be known by the world through popular media consumption as modern Western culture. The number of willing participants who will adopt (https://www.3quarksdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/NPC-dehuman.jpg) the now normative permissive mentality of “when in Rome” toward such culturally destructive pursuits (think long term consequences of unprincipled lifestyles → declining birthrates → future belongs to those who show up (ref 20d)) is likely well past the point of return for many Western countries, that many people who might have otherwise been led to a life of purpose are instead enticed and led astray (11diii) by the rotten fruit, pornography just being one such example, made so readily available to the masses.
Make no mistake, I’m not against learning the principles of Game in order to protect yourself and your immediate community from bad actors and the State, but as someone who prefers to live in a k-selected society, who has an inherent value system congruous to this desire, and who has previously been led and led others away from principled and dignified paths it is not only reasonable but prudent to judge harshly those who advocate the unprincipled behavior that favors r-selection social and economic interactions, the product of which is ultimately degeneracy and disgenics.
The video examples I listed are all incredibly illuminating and should be extremely instructive, especially for young Americans, in reconciling how is it we are where we are in this all-encompassing Misandry Bubble. The American public, and really the West at large, has been subjected to the same cultural influences directed (literally) by the same ethnic group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_film_directors for decades now and one of the many fruits born of undisciplined tolerance for this Cultural programming is feminism which you see heavily promoted in virtually all mediums of entertainment and media (ref 11v for one example that Imran listed). Even Jewish publications such as Hadassah Magazine https://www.hadassahmagazine.org/2019/05/09/jewish-radical-feminism-voices-womens-liberation-movement/ have published lamentations about the predominance of Jewish representation in early radical feminist movements and the fear of which potentially stoking blanket criticism of Jews.
The fact that this extremely relevant topic isn’t addressed, even if only to preempt and counter-act any points like I am making now is highly suspicious to me considering that one will encounter these ideas searching the internet with even cursory curiosity into macro themes associated with feminism and misandry. For readers who have made it thus far, a more in-depth study and spiritual explanation and critique of Jewish influence on traditional Christianity, see E. Michael Jone’s book, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit https://www.fidelitypress.org/jewish-revolutionary-spirit or, for brevity (lol), view the hour long discussion video contained within.
Now I have to apologize as, from everything I’ve read on this site, the issues I am raising can be construed as somewhat disrespectful to Kartik who I think largely seeks to abstain from any negative correlations associated with contrasting the mass expressions of culture stemming from the average inherent characteristics and beliefs of differing ethnic/racial groups of people by anchoring this site to the realm of technological advancement, but I can’t let the effigy erected by Mr. Kahn burn without offering a counter-argument to the division that he seems to want to stoke between what remains of the declining Conservative Christian West and the aptly described, growing Muslim East. In the interest of respectful free speech, I hope that these my words are allowed equal and fair consideration.
Now, on a fundamental level, there would be NO conflict between what remains of the Christian West and the Muslim world if it were not for purposeful steering of interventionism. The typical American mentality can be summarized exactly in the reaction of former presidential candidate Gary Johnson in 2016 when confronted on topical Middle Eastern foreign policy where he reacted with the sentiment: “What is Aleppo?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGX7-9JXiG8&feature=emb_logo (1 min). That is, with ignorance and nonchalance. Fact is, most Americans, like most other peoples, are isolationist, live and let live and the outspoken zionistic “Christians” are mostly pawns whipped into a frenzy by exploitative and propagandized religious leadership in support of foreign intervention at the behest of their “greatest ally” due to influential organized lobbying efforts. The flock does what it is told just as “Democracy is a dictatorship by whomever controls the media” as Mr. Kahn elogently surmised.
This manufactured conflict between cultures and ideologies is exclusively due to artificially induced proximity. What am I saying? Allow Christians and Muslims to live apart as they have (the world is plenty big enough and has been for a very long time) and there are no problems associated with forced multi-culturalism. Deliberately bring these factions together whether through subversive immigration https://thedailycoin.org/2019/09/22/israeli-ngo-helping-migrant-boats-reach-europes-shores-instructs-them-where-to-go-videos/ or interventionist foreign policy (see the completely falsified 9/11 justification for invading Iraq and subsequent military campaigns), the result is tension and conflict. This play of humanity has been repeated numerous times throughout history with completely predictable results and it’s long past time to start looking at who the puppetmasters are orchestrating these inevitable and predictable human tragedies.
I know you can see exactly where I am going with this. Which ethnic lobbyist group holds the most power in the American political sphere and commands interventionist foreign policy identically irrespective of the political party currently in charge of the executive branch? You guessed it, Israel. The youtuber CaspianReport, renown for his neutral stance and sound analysis of geopolitics, describes the power of the Israel lobby in American foreign policy and government in general terms in this 10 minute video with great clarity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzZBYOPn26o.
This power over the Anglo-sphere isn’t limited to the American government either. In the very recent elections in the United Kingdom, the issue of sovereignty (especially with regard to immigration) continues to divide and trip up British politics over what is summarized simply as BREXIT. It has culminated in a sweeping conservative majority party election with UK’s Boris Johnson taking the mantle of Prime Minister. Was his first act in office to address the populist will of his countrymen and women by immediately setting to work addressing the issue of sovereignty in spite of the desires of the bureaucrats of the European Union? No, it was to pass an anti-free speech, anti-freedom of association “Anti-BDS” law! https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/141685/newly-elected-uk-pm-johnsons-first-order-business-bill-combat-bds/ Sounds like his work is done now that he got the most important issue that concerned his voters most out of the way! The influence this faction holds is as incredible as it is vast.
The problem with subversion is that you cannot promote a position or idea without eventually revealing the true nature of your advocacy as I am inclined to believe Mr. Kahn has. One cannot, in good faith, simultaneously hold the position that “women cannot easily predict the effect of a decision more than one step ahead” (ref 12a) without also coming to the conclusion that principled men who are better suited to recognize complex dangers and external threats have a natural role to fill as protector of women and thus protector of their respective society’s culture and traditions that are expressed by and through the natural pairing of men and women. What harms one will inevitably harm the other and thus their respective society. So, as I mentioned earlier, his recommendations in full recognition of inherent female behavior and limitations, to exploit them when it profits you via material acquisition or sexual gratification is absolutely --haram-- base.
I should amend my previous statement and add that this type of advocacy for exploitation with full knowledge of FI and the consequences of female promiscuity actually can be recommended by someone who’s goal is in fact to increase the damage to the culture in question OR promote an r-selected polygamous society which should amount to exactly the same thing in the judgment from Christian values, justifiable condemnation.
I also think it is somewhat insulting that Mr. Kahn, similarly to women, does not appear to believe that his readers can predict what the consequences will be beyond more than one step for an even greater majority holding and acting upon such a base modus operandi. By advocating for men to direct the same mentality of exploitation synonymous with the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit that was used to weaken and destroy the cultural traditions of the West which kept female hypergamy in check and ultimately resulted in a high-quality society worth investing in, this advocacy only serves to propagate and accelerate the irreversible replacement of the global minority ethnic-European people and their inherent cultural value system which is responsible for the greatest number of contributions to the ATOM I will add.
In addition, normalizing and advocating exploitation will also continue to result in disgenic wealth transfer (see the Idiocracy effect), and more overt forms of taxation and imposed state control as otherwise potentially good women are permanently damaged (ref 11biii) by said exploitation and become even more susceptible to the allures of radical feminism and the toxic universal acceptance/tolerance so heavily promoted by the Cultural Marxists who are always eager for more government dependents among other things. But hey, as long as white women are converting to Islam (ref 20f), it’s all gravy, no? Gotta love that not-so-subtle dig.
Unfortunately, for the MGTOWs, of which I am sympathetic to and have counted myself part of, the logical conclusion to this rather deliberate social experiment is bleak from a biological and psychological point of view. If, as an MGTOW, you do manage to find meaning in your life or value outside of fulfilling the biological imperative and living as God intended, congratulations to you. For those who want to fulfill the traditional biological imperative and leave behind a strong k-selected society better than you found it, it’s going to be a rough road ahead.
Speaking of value, how does one put in so much work describing the Misandry Bubble as well as the follow-up 10 years later and miss the forest for the trees so completely by not taking a couple more steps back in order to better assess and represent the engine that powers this subversion and resultant distortion in the natural order of human economic interaction? I’m talking specifically about the mechanics of Fiat currency.
All this talk of female nature, of legitimately-biased government spending, and no mention how the about how all of this Misandric distortion is fueled beyond “the federal reserve prints money.” I invite any remaining readers to think for a minute about the basis of not just the American government currency, but how every single countries’ currency valuation has been predicated on speculative future value of their collective labor output and subsequent speculative ability to repay incurred debts at arbitrarily determined level of interest by the roughly 600 professional academic halfwits that Kartik graciously highlights above. This is a scam of biblical proportions and enables evil, yes I’m going to unironically and quite naturally resort to moralistic judgments and rightly impose the Christian spectrum of good and evil in this matter. Fiat currency is anti-Christian, anti-male, anti-freedom, it is a subversion and mockery of value, of free markets (of which absolutely no longer exist in the broadest sense), and is 100% of the enabler of social engineering on a global scale.
In this system, at the very base level, every economic interaction conducted in fiat is not an exchange of inherent value, but one of debt. Think about the philosophical implications of such a system. If I give you fiat, not only are you transacting in the speculative human work output (GPD) of future generations, but said “commodity” is constantly being devalued by an out-of-control printing press currently in the throes of QE4 while also enabling deficit spending and wealth transfer at levels never before seen in human history (all spending passed by legislators who don’t even read the bills I will also add). Additionally, the total amount of debt outstanding simply serves to grant more power and privilege to the printing press’s private owners as nations become further indebted to masters not beholden to any collective “democratic” will (of which you now know is one of fabrication by those who control and manufacture narrative) of any country in which these grand financial schemes operate.
There is another definition or term for one who is beholden to another via an economic debt. You guessed it, Slave. This is not a system of meritocracy or of liberation or freedom (of association) in which the commodity you trade has inherent value and the recipient of which is owed no future obligation, no, this is a system of servitude in which a complex management system of graft whose value is actively managed and whose adminsitration is set up to benefit an extremely small minority of international banking elites. This system is inherently anti-Christian (how does the Bible treat usury?) as it is antithetical to responsible living, independence, self-sufficiency, you know, typical traditional American values. The other people who flourish in this system are the most ignorant who are incapable of assessing risk, the already wealthy/landed who can tolerate just about any level of risk, and the connected or subversives who scam for a living anyway.
Under such a system, what chance does any disenfranchised minority group have at expressing their sovereignty through freedom of association contrary to desires of the masters of coin when virtually all economic transaction fundamentally does not grant any such freedom? Rhetorical. ‘Something, something, I care not who makes the laws… -Rothschild’. Come on, you probably already know the quote, and you probably already know the responsible parties who met in secret to conspire to create the Federal Reserve cementing in place in 1913 the mechanism in which accountability for debts is deferred, indefinitely it now appears (until it’s all blown to Kingdom-come that is). This is the engine of Cultural Marxism, of social engineering, of forced multi-culturalism and thus heightens and empowers chaotic female nature and fuels the Misandry Bubble. To ignore these facts in a grand assessment of the Misandry Bubble is very peculiar and not something I would expect with Imran’s level of undertanding to miss.
Nearing the end of what has become a rather lengthy essay, I will be explicit and honest in what I advocate and what my position is in attempting to raise awareness to the issues I asserted.
Ethnic-European Christians, like any other ethnic/racial group, have the god-given right to self-determination, the right to free expression including criticism of Israel and Jewish behavior as well as the right to criticize any and all subversive elements that work against our value system, and finally, we have the right to freedom of association. This means that if we choose not to live amongst others that do not share our values, these outsiders will not be forced upon us by an outside authority as has become the custom of post-modern society welfare state. This is a matter of dignity, safety, and most importantly, sovereignty, none of which is currently respected or maintained in current societal and economic status quo. What does this mean in terms of potential courses of action to the disenfranchised members who identify with some of the issues I’ve discussed?
Find a defensible position and exercise your right to freedom of association. I disagree strongly with Imran’s characterization of Conservatives desire for “Calexit” (ref 19e) or of calculated retreat as shameful. Just because you want to leave an indefensible position like California in which an insane amount of taxes are stolen from the product of your labor to fund the subsitence of an ever-growing amount of people you likely have little in common, does not mean you should go down with the ship to prove your manhood now that you’ve become aware of incompatibility of the living conditions. What’s especially damning about Imran’s condemnation (of Conservatives once again) is that he’s using exactly the shaming language he calls out (ref 11cxi) feminists and links to, specifically the Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow). This completely contradicts some of his other pieces of sound advice with respect to the risks men face in gynocratic society under the realities of the Misandry Bubble and Marriage 2.0, INCONGRUENT.
Let me ask you this, would you rather storm the beach of Normandy on D-day or marry a single mother with 2 kids and over 50 sexual partners? If you answered neither, you have arrived at the correct calculus in recognition of both choices having terrible cost-to-benefit ratios. I will reiterate, if you are in an indefensible position, make it your goal to find a defensible one hopefully among people that you can be proud of association with.
Some more practical advise, use sites like http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/ and https://www.freedominthe50states.org/ if you are in the US to compile a list of states based on the features you’re interested in selecting for such as 2nd amendement laws, demographics, state debt burden, income and property taxes, population growth, etc. in an excel program to compare and down-select to states where you might seek relocation and employment if needed. Once you’re situated in a defensible location, then you can worry about activism and making sure your new home doesn’t fall to the pervasive influences of Cultural Marxism.
Now here’s a few of my very predictable predictions for the 2020s:
-Thanks to the post modern printing press, this decade will be host to a mass awakening amongst the subverted peoples who are currently in decline and have been the primary target in many ways including campaigns of psychological demoralization by the forces responsible for the Misandry Bubble. The internet will be further subject to ratcheting dystopian measures of censorship in a futile attempt to stem this awakening (see Russia’s recent disconnection, China’s increasing demands and influence over international Western corporations suppressing criticism of their state, and all Silicon valley tech giants’ increasing heavy-handed and arbitrary enforcement of partisan policies as examples of the coming censorship). In addition, state-proclaimed wrong-think will have increasingly devastating real-world consequences as the increase in authoritarian influence upon the masses rises proportionally to the increase of access and amount of collective knowledge made available to the masses.
-Multiculturalism will result, as it always has in human history, in continued conflict, suffering, and an eventual conquering by a dominant faction at most locales where the experiment runs (evident through birthrates alone) or more, positively, by the successful assertion by freedom-loving communities in their right to freedom of association through political secession. For a conclusive host of over 100 fully-sourced studies supporting this assertion in a very easy to read fashion, see this .pdf link titled “Biological Ethnocentrism: The Negative Impact of Racial and Ethnic Diversity Upon Societies and Individuals.” https://files.catbox.moe/su1vjr.pdf.
In addition, Imran himself also advises against any conversion of Western men to Islam for completely valid reasons (ref 20h), which begs the rather rhetorical question (at this point in the discussion); why should America or the West in general accept the immigration of Muslims when it is evident not only will they not assimilate, but they also would not accept the assimilation of ethnic foreigners into their culture as Imran has correctly asserted? Indeed.
-A worldwide crisis of confidence in fiat currency https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/helicopter-money-here-how-fed-monetized-billions-debt-sold-just-days-earlier resulting in extremely disruptive commodity shortages, physical conflict, sporadic starvation, and a very nervous ruling class that will call and lead the charge for a radical re-imagining of global governance in which centralized control would be established under a worldwide currency shedding any pretenses and illusions of sovereignty remaining in the legacy federal reserve currency scam we have all been collectively subject to for over the last 100 years. This plan is likely ready to go on stand-by, has already been brokered by each countries elite classes. Misandry and feminism will be the least of our problems when the inflection point occurs.
At the end of the day, Mr. Kahn’s culminating rhetoric, base recommendations (admitedly cherry-picked which served to taint my interpretation of some of the valuable information he shared), and enthusiastic condemnations of Conservatives did not strike me as the rhetoric of a particularly devout or holy religious man. In fact, if I had to posit a guess at the risk of sounding excessively rude (have I not succeeded in offending over 50% of readers thus far?), I would suspect he was ethnically Jewish using a Middle-Eastern moniker as a ruse. Why do I say this? Some of the favorite past times of ethnically Jewish social media denizens (aka the blue check mark brigade) is insulting --white males-- --Christians-- Conservatives as well as creating conflict and stoking the manufactured fire between Christianity and Islam. This piece by Imran Kahn, while certainly erudite, eventually, (lengthy) leaves me with this impression.
I once posited, quite --autistically-- publicly, in my first freshman college English-Lit course that the author of a poorly written and rather whiny book we were assigned passages from in class (which I have long since forgotten the name of) was in fact disabled and fat based on her rhetoric alone (it was some proto-SJW drivel and we’re talking 15+ years ago). The class was mortified, I can still picture it, haha- but I pressed on determined to make my point to my excessively obese and perspiring elder student-professor in the spirit of free speech and discussion. You see, I naively believed I was finally in the presence of the erudite elite and pure logic could finally be valued above social convention. Well, I was quite spectacularly wrong in my naivety as you can imagine. But you know what, about the physical characteristics of the author of that “book,” it turned out.. I was fucking right.
Posted by: H.M.Icarus | January 03, 2020 at 03:39 AM
H.M. Icarus,
It is pretty evident to me that Imran is trying to get Western white guys to do better. He is advocating Game. He also says Christianity has the right idea, but has been gutted and filled with feminism, so is no longer Christianity.
He links to Dalrock extensively in support of his attack on cuckservatives, so I think you are way off about his goals.
Posted by: Bowman | January 03, 2020 at 08:58 AM
Very good stuff. One critical factor not mentioned: trending obesity.
Posted by: Kay Lu | January 04, 2020 at 06:15 AM
It’s a shame Imran has retired, id really like more comment on exactly how a bursting of the bubble will play out in real time day to day interactions with women.
Obviously we won’t be holding doors for them anymore, but some of us stopped doing that two decades ago.
There is the Male utility that they all take for granted, doing all the shit jobs, repairing stuff etc.. if they had to pay the full market rate for all the stuff they get for free because vagina then that would be a wake up.
Something as simple as the bulk of men ignoring them on social media (ie not liking their posts) would cause a huge meltdown. Simply withdrawing from the market would do it if enough men changed how they acted.
Posted by: Palmasailor | January 04, 2020 at 07:00 AM
Post-first world...
Living in Toronto for several years, my standard of living has declined, while my friends in Latin America (except Venezuela) have started families, own houses and have careers.
Why did I leave my country to live as a single, undatable and unemployed person in Canada?
The racism in Canada is also growing that I'm lumped together with Arabian refugees...
Posted by: Trini | January 06, 2020 at 07:34 AM
techprogressive,
I know you're a VR shill but this is just intellectually dishonest.
How clueless could you be? Well, given that you provided exactly zero points to support your bogus assertion, it is safe to say you don't know anything about technology.
No one who knows anything about technology thinks 'bots' are happening before VR sex.
Posted by: David | January 06, 2020 at 12:08 PM
The only quibble I have is this:
We know leftists and feminists are very prone to claiming someone raped them, molested them, "eye raped" them, etc.
We know this for a fact, and we wholeheartedly, 100%, believe all "victims" of the left because they accused a male feminist?
I need more evidence than he said/she said. I will never "just believe her", even if she's a leftist shitting on a male feminist.
Posted by: Jen Farmer | January 06, 2020 at 04:52 PM
Jen Farmer,
Yes, everyone should have due process, even a 'male feminist'. False accusations are about 40%, as per most police departments.
It is jarring how uneven justice is. Aziz Ansari got in trouble just for not being adept at seduction. But Harvey Weinstein should have gotten in trouble with the law over 20 years ago.
Posted by: Imran Khan | January 06, 2020 at 06:02 PM
Hi Kartik and Imran, great article, worth waiting a decade foe
Question to Kartik, in 1(f) above, you explain that demand for materially intensive things creates inflation? I am not an economist, so could you perhaps explain why this happened, as it would better illustrate why materially non intensive things (software) have the opposite effect.
Regards and thanks.
Posted by: Stephen Murray | January 11, 2020 at 05:22 AM
It's legal for a femoid teacher to strip nude for minor students in UK, Canada and Australia. Foid teachers are challenging the indecency laws even if they were caught showing their coochies to their underage students on Pornhub.
Posted by: 2020 WW3 Feminazi | January 12, 2020 at 10:09 AM
Teacher Nicole Ryan hires hitman to kill ex husband Supreme Court:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq2WWsY8Rmc&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: Ryan | January 12, 2020 at 11:32 AM
Men with higher minds have no reason to partake in society now, as they are looked at as scum by the anglob*tch compared to men who are 6'3 chiseled face and tattooed.
The population will be totally and utterly replaced by immigrants, and Anglosphete cities will become the third world.
Posted by: Nostradamus | January 16, 2020 at 06:13 AM
David: You are an absolute fucking moron. I never made any predictions on sexbots coming out before VR sex. I called Imran out on his ridiculous claim that sexbots haven't progressed since 2010. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?
Today's sexbots have facial expressions, eyes that move and blink, simulated human body temperature, conversational abilities, the ability to moan, smart sensors that react to your touch, and other features that weren't available in fucking 2010.
Kill yourself.
Posted by: techprogressive | January 17, 2020 at 03:48 PM
Techprogressive,
I never made any predictions on sexbots coming out before VR sex.
Then why do sexbots matter at all? If you have a point, you may want to disclose it.
Today's sexbots have
So all you are saying is that sexbots were supposedly 10 years away a decade ago, but now are 'just' 9 years away, and will actually arrive by the year 2100. I wouldn't call that 'major progress' or even minor progress. Why should anyone follow this dead end at all?
Kill yourself.
That is your reaction to being corrected about engineering concepts? You sound like a happy person who should be listened to.
Posted by: David | January 17, 2020 at 05:52 PM
So all you are saying is that sexbots were supposedly 10 years away a decade ago, but now are 'just' 9 years away, and will actually arrive by the year 2100.
I never said that at all. My argument is that sexbots have come a long way in recent years. Ten years ago, you could not order your own customizable AI robot for a few thousand dollars or euros. Ten years ago, sex robot brothels didn't exist. Ten years ago, smart skin and self-lubricating technology didn't exist and neither did any of the features I mentioned in my previous response. At the current rate of development, you won't have to wait until the year 2100 or even 2030 for robots that are capable of outcompeting women. Already you are seeing feminist outrage towards sexdolls and sexbots that was unheard-of back in 2010 because the primitive technology that existed back then didn't pose any threat.
Then why do sexbots matter at all?
Because they provide an increasingly realistic alternative to women that could play a critical role in popping the Misandry Bubble by placing a long-overdue check on women's out-of-control SMV/RMV. The same women who have benefited from past technological developments (like birth control pills and hookup apps) are now rightfully fearful of pro-male technological advances (like sexbots, artificial wombs, and to a lesser extent virtual reality) causing the pendulum to finally swing the other away.
That is your reaction to being corrected about engineering concepts?
You have done nothing to counter my arguments so far.
Posted by: techprogressive | January 18, 2020 at 03:47 AM
Techprogressive,
You have done nothing to counter my arguments so far.
I did correct you. Since VR will happen long, long before sexbots (and be cheaper and harder to ban), sexbots aren't worth talking about at all.
All the 'tech advancements' you list were said by people years ago. There has been little to no progress. 'Sexbots' are the jetpacks of this era - advocated by people who can't separate science fiction from practical realities.
even 2030 for robots that are capable of outcompeting women.
I wish there were a way we could force you to risk money on this entirely wrong prediction.
But again, you are someone who says "kill yourself" to people who correct you, on top of your prediction being one no knowledgeable people are willing to get behind. Why should anyone listen to you?
Posted by: David | January 18, 2020 at 05:21 PM
There has been little to no progress.
Show me an example of robots like these being developed back in 2010. You can't.
Among the latest developments are 3D vision, human-like sitting posture, and breathing capabilities.
So yeah, the robotics industry hasn't been stagnant - to say the least - and to argue otherwise is to be deliberately obtuse.
I wish there were a way we could force you to risk money on this entirely wrong prediction.
Well, maybe I will put my money where my mouth is and purchase shares in a robotics company this week. I'll also be present in the comments section of the 2030 Misandry Bubble update should one be posted.
Come back when you have any real arguments or refutations instead of unsupported naysayerism.
Posted by: techprogressive | January 19, 2020 at 04:41 AM
I have been wondering if a nation state can even back out of FI-domination of everything in government, at all.
I mean, if the entire feminism-financing wealth transfer were even slightly reversed, tons of useless women, who are too old to reproduce, and too unattractive in any event, are totally useless. But they can still vote. Technological progress allows deficit spending higher than anyone thought, but beyond that merely being a wasted opportunity cost, there is no indication that they don't want to go see how high they can go until a major debt crisis.
Posted by: Alcibiades | January 19, 2020 at 02:59 PM
The same women who have benefited from past technological developments (like birth control pills and hookup apps) are now rightfully fearful of pro-male technological advances (like sexbots, artificial wombs, and to a lesser extent virtual reality) causing the pendulum to finally swing the other away.
The pendulum is not going to swing the other way. We are not dealing with rational people. They have started a war on men, and the only route that wars end is through destruction and harm to men until society collapses.
The future of men in a feminist city like Toronto is destitution, homelessness and eventually death:
https://www.reddit.com/r/askTO/comments/erp1re/1_missed_paycheque_and_now_im_homeless_in_toronto/
Posted by: Emo Kid | January 21, 2020 at 05:25 AM
After almost a decade, I thought that the bubble would burst and everything would be nearly back to get a normal life, next to a woman to form a marriage like my grandfather and father did in their time. However, it hasn't happened. Could it be that we were also transformed by all the events of the past decade? Could it be that we stopped believing in the fantasy of marriage and love for the cruel and raw truth that the women of our generation made us live? Most likely. Perhaps.
For instance, all my friends are now bitter persons thanks to their ex-wives. They're all professionals. From doctors to engineers. But none of them could lived up to their wives' unrealistic expectations, that’s the truth.
What does that tell you? Was it them that had the problem? I assure you, they don’t. For those poor bastards, the reality and truth were determined from fantasies and lies thrown to women in popular media.
And yet 2020 has come.
It is sad to see not only men but a new generation of children separated from their loved ones.
Women of my generation, however, are there. Fat, growing old, thinking like they deserve everything. Dying and slowly killing all the people that surround them. They never will know how to be daughters, sisters, mothers or wives. They, perhaps, will never know their true value in society.
Personally, I think the bubble burst is in slow motion. The rate of change of time, the speed, is now slower for you and I. To choose between an incredible and enjoyable opera or to see Dantesque scenes is up to you. That’s a decision that I think some of us gained in the 2010 “process”.
Posted by: Jack Sahel | January 21, 2020 at 03:38 PM
Jack Sahel,
I had a dream last night talking with people in the year 2010. I asked them what was different "that time" compared to today.
One word: Tinder.
Dating apps, online Tumblr feminism and global cultural shifts have made life worse for men.
The Arab Spring of 2011 and the influx of refugees into the 1st world have also created and fostered hate against ethnic males who were born in the 1st world.
Life for a single, ethnic male in 2020 is that of suicidal despair. Unlike a white male, he cannot just pack his bags and try to expatriate to the less and less male-friendly countries.
"Gender relations" are not going to go back to normal unless you find a wife living in a remote jungle.
Feminism and hypergamy are diseases and cancer which has been spreading to the world. Where and when it ends is only known as societal collapse.
The Soviet Union and East Germany lasted for decades, until it quickly collapsed after years of stagnation.
The feminist society will reach a peak bubble (which hasn't happened yet, contrary to what some might think), and then it will decline, and then quickly collapse.
Posted by: Emo Kid | January 22, 2020 at 10:39 AM
@techprogressive
There’s no doubt that sexbots have come a long way. They’re not everywhere in the same way that porn is, and they won’t progress as fast as VR porn but there’s no doubt that they’re coming, and progressing.
I’ve got a theory that men are chemically built to bond with “whatever” they’re fucking if the physical cues of fertility are there. Slim but slightly wider hips and big tits are genetic indicators of health, and I think it’s subconscious.
That’s how frankly horrible toxic women have men queuing up if they’re hot. Men are programmed by the visual to the exclusion of most other metrics including being bloody horrible (and / or being plastic).
There are suggestions that in some of the brothels, the sexbots are more popular than the real women and I could easily see this playing out where a lot of men totally leave the market.
As a man in my 50’s who has been successful with women through the bulk of my life (N of over 200 but 2 divorces) I’ve hit the stage where I’ve stopped chasing women to a large extent. A friend suggested that I had low T and I should get checked because it wasn’t “normal” to lose interest.
I got checked and I’m borderline high T so it isn’t that. It is that I’ve genuinely lost interest in the very vast majority of women that society says are age appropriate, and even the bulk of ones younger then me.
So it is changing quite a lot, and I think it’s Tinder that’s been a big driver. Most men get absolutely no action except the ones at the top who get loads. Most women can get laid by a man that won’t commit or even call them back.
I don’t think it will end well, because there are strong signs that most younger women now are totally incapable of consolidating on “commitment” from a man.
Basically we’re at a stage where women will have to work until they drop exactly like men have done for centuries. They’re in denial about this, but I think it hits them at about 42. This is a few years after Tinder totally stops working for them.
Posted by: PalmsSailor | January 22, 2020 at 05:04 PM
@ Jack Sahel
“all my friends are now bitter persons thanks to their ex-wives. They're all professionals. From doctors to engineers”
So they’re all about my age, and in practical terms have removed themselves from the market. They will have been taken to the cleaners once or twice, but they still have substantial earning capability, and probably some assets.
They will have reached the same conclusion I have which is that if I stick at it I’ll probably make a decent retirement, but if they get wiped out again it’ll be shit.
I doubt very much that these men will participate in another round of wealth transfer.
Some will learn game and will get access to sex, others will get laid because the women are desperate but I doubt that any are dumb enough to go again with co habitation.
This is what you see in midlife dating. A cohort of women that are absolutely obsessed with “commitment”, not looking for “time wasters”.
Why is it they’re so obsessed with “time wasters”?
I had to really think about that, and it’s because they’re very aware that they’re a depreciating asset, and an increasing liability so they need to consolidate on provisioning before they can’t.
Posted by: PalmaSailor | January 22, 2020 at 05:39 PM
I found this article last night. Very good. I noticed that the author heavily cited Dalrock's content. Dalrock went silent from Christmas until yesterday, when he announced that he will discontinue his blog and likely either delete it or make the archive private. It's speculation on my part, but his brief post had the sound of being written by someone who had been gotten to and threatened with negative repercussions. That's nearly ten years worth of content that's about to be scrubbed and removed from the sight of men who are looking for knowledge and support. A private online bachelors' community I frequent stopped accepting new members a while ago. They came close to shutting it down and deleting it last month over similar concerns.
I don't blame the author of this article for swearing off further public involvement in this topic area. I'm also grateful to those who soldier on and push ahead. People are being threatened with personal and professional destruction for having Impermissible Opinions these days. The flak is thickest when you're over the target.
Posted by: Iowa Slim | January 23, 2020 at 10:44 AM
H.M.Icarus
I read your comment. And the links. Especially the one with the book the Jewish Revolutionary spirit.
My question to you, Why are the Jews so overrepresented in the entertainment and media industry? This has literally been true from the moment the big studios were established by Jewish moguls in the 1920s up to today. Why?
And, why are the jews also very highly represented in the writing field?
Why is it that the jews were the driving force behind the frankfurt school? Why have these jews played such a huge role in all these areas? What is the game plan here? What are they hoping to achieve? Is all of this planned or did it just happen to organically unfold?
Posted by: Eastern_Upanishad | February 23, 2020 at 12:23 PM
Hey people.
I've read the articles on this blog that discuss the state of gender relations. I've also read about how dismal dating and relationships are these days generally speaking. I've seen statistics about marriages and divorce. I've read opinions, articles published on blogs, magazines like quilette about the whole redpill thing. I'm quite young btw and I can't seem to make head or tail of this thing. I'll be honest that I don't have anyone in real life to discuss this with and find out how much truth there is to all this, because most men and women I know don't see things this way. I've also been on many forums where I've got diverse answers from men and women - while some agree with what's written in this article, some have a balanced view,some are fence-sitters, others outright call it misogyny, they call it bitter men projecting their hate onto the world because they can't deal with women's freedom. I've also seen men use examples like this -> "Mitochondrial DNA has proved beyond a shadow of doubt that most of the men born throughout the whole history of the human species have not fathered children, whereas most females have born children. So who was getting all the sex and fathering all the children?
The answer is those males that had all the above attributes, and strangely enough that meant they were risk takers, because taking calculated risks, and succeeding was, and still is, the main way to attain what women want in a mate.
Interestingly this meant they were inadvertently breeding risk taking males. For example: When was the last time you heard about a group of women, sitting down together, designing and building a boat, then sailing off in it to make their fortune? ……The vast majority of young women behave just like their mothers, and sit at home waiting for a successful male to come along and impregnate them".
I've seen women come up with long counter arguments and saying things like "red pillers are just bitter and they take their frustrations out on women. This will blow way soon. Online are infested with bitter men unfortunately"
And they've said stuff like "Red Pillers have problems with women (I think they have problem with their moms) and so they want to take control of what women should do with their bodies, it’s sickening and sad. What women would want to date a Red Pill male.. I don’t think anyone wants to date them".
All in all I've seen men blame the women and women getting defensive and outright denying all of it saying it's all misogyny and bro-science. I've literally heard it all. I don't know which side of the argument to trust. I feel like there's a grey area and the answer lies in between. I also don't subscribe to any ideologies like RP because I usually like to see if it fits with my real life experience first. And so far there's been very little evidence in support of that. Frankly it all seems like the culprit is the negative aspects of human nature that are being brought out in our society in both men and women that is causing all this decades-long drama.
I'm just trying to figure out what is the real deal. What is the truth? Like the real truth. No hiding behind excuses. No generalizations. No pseudoscience. Not the half-baked truth. What is really going on?
Posted by: Eastern_Upanishad | March 08, 2020 at 02:31 PM
Holy hell! The Misandry Bubble actually DID pop in 2020! Only about 90 days later than predicted 10 years prior.
What a prediction!
It seems that the Coronavirus pandemic exposed all these stupid women for how fragile their existence was. Their bullshit jobs are being evaporated, they have no savings, and can't hide within a group anymore.
Even feminists agree :
"The Coronavirus is a Disaster for Feminism" - the Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/feminism-womens-rights-coronavirus-covid19/608302/
Captain Capitalism has it right :
https://youtu.be/txQVg8UsKtU
We knew the time would come, and it came pretty much right on schedule!!
Posted by: Bowman | March 22, 2020 at 03:54 PM
Re-reading section 21(i) in light of the Coronavirus...
"i) While only a few countries are P1W countries, and have only been so for a short time (I would say 2006 was when the US formally crossed the P1W threshold), the outcome of this remains to be seen."
... sadly, I wonder if we'll discover the outcome sooner than we thought. It's pretty obvious that, nowadays, the most competent countries in the world are in the Far East. Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong have kept the Coronavirus under control without completely tanking their economies through various combinations of vigorous contact checking and testing, getting everyone to wear masks, checking everyone for fevers, etc. Countries in Europe haven't been doing so well, sadly. As of this writing, the results in the US still remain to be seen. I hope things turn out all right, but I'm not particularly confident that they will.
Posted by: Dynamic | March 26, 2020 at 05:24 PM
In Canada, criticizing women could be classified as terrorism.
Posted by: Joey | May 31, 2020 at 07:56 PM
Toronto is post-first world. Toronto is a costly city but men are dying in silence.
Rents are C$1850 for a one-bedroom apartment in a suburb 45 mins from the downtown core by transit,
university graduates starting wages are working for unpaid interns or minimum wage C$14/hr,
99.9% of Torontoized women hate the bottom 99.9% of men unless they can gain something from the relationship,
a man has to be at least 6 foot tall. It's common for 4ft 5 Pakistani FOB femigrants to settle for no less than a 6 foot white Chad.
Sub 8 men are committing suicide and dying in silence. Those who fight back against the fempire are labelled as "incel terrorists".
Posted by: My life expectancy is lower in Toronto | June 01, 2020 at 12:44 PM
People are being threatened with personal and professional destruction for having Impermissible Opinions these days. The flak is thickest when you're over the target.
.......................................................................
Criticizing women in Canada is considered "terrorism", and Canada is a feminist country which discriminates against the bottom 99% of men.
Posted by: Timothy | June 03, 2020 at 10:24 PM
This site is back! It was out for so long that I stopped going to it. I’m happy to see a post by both authors.
Gartik Gada made an interesting point about the factor of physical attractiveness of Indians in India. I’ll admit I found this perplexing as well. Plenty of other Asian cultures have very attractive immigrants coming over here (in their own way, but with key attractiveness features that are understood to be beautiful by others). I’m white, so talking about this without being called a racist is difficult. I am inclined to blame the vegan/vegetarian heavy diet. The reason for this is the utter lack of protein in plants that humans need to maintain their muscle tone and suppleness of the skin. Furthermore, the added sugar in India’s diet is not doing wonders when it comes to seeing more slender Indians. I’ve seen Indian-Americans dressed in their beautiful clothes... only to hide the rolls of lard underneath... this is actually quite tragic.
I do think that as India becomes wealthier, it will result in greater consumption of fish and chicken, alleviating this problem somewhat. I hope.
Also, there is the insular nature of Indians. The lack of integration is also sad. I think a large part is a lack of incentive. If you have friends and family and others that you can easily get your socializing done without putting in the effort to make new friends. But I’m at a total loss as to what else could be behind this behavior.
Also, while the Indians in the US are not the intellectual elite, they are the entrepreneurial elite. As was said, they run a number of businesses that make life easier and unsurprisingly make good money doing this. This benefits the US overall.
Lastly, thee questions:
1 - Why do you think that visiting India is a bad idea up until 2025? Is it the lack of infrastructure? Crime?
2 - You said that India is will not be read for the attention that it will receive, what do you mean? Could you please elaborate on this topic?
3 - How successful is Amazon penetrating the Indian market? The relative youth of the population makes them a tantalizing market, I’d like to know more about this.
Posted by: i_like_barnacles | June 05, 2020 at 06:28 AM
My comment above the diet of Indians is purely a hypothesis. I am fully aware that I could be entirely wrong on this topic.
Posted by: i_like_barnacles | June 05, 2020 at 06:29 AM
Lesson: White woman walk naked on the street and call police:
https://thegrio.com/2020/05/27/white-women-amy-cooper-karen/
It took a gay African-American descendant to put a stop to we believe survivors lying white woman bull zit.
Posted by: Cooper | June 21, 2020 at 05:23 PM
The Misandry Bubble of white woman has popped:
https://t.co/PxdlVY5K3y
Feminism is being dismantled because of white woman. Lying white whores will think twice before making a false accusation. God Bless those LGBT minorities. I never thought that being a gay or transgender would afford so many rights and privileges. It makes me believe that the Bible is garbage and Christianity, Islam and Judaism are the works of Satan, just ike the idol worshiping religions of Hinduism and Buddhism.
Posted by: Cooper | June 21, 2020 at 05:28 PM
Why are Canadian women obnoxious when they live in the States? Was Roosh Vee right to declare that Toronto is the worst city for men? Why doesn't one see a French-Canadian woman act this Karenish way in the USA?
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/06/15/calling-out-karens-from-pacific-heights-to-amy-cooper-to-meghan-markles-best-friend/
Toronto women, especially white women, are the worst breed of women. What is it that they teach in Canadian schools? Is it true that female teachers send police on male students when she strips naked for sex-ed classes?
By the way, that Jacksonville teacher who shoved a dildo up her ass was actually Carlyle Jansen, a sex-ed teacher from Toronto.
Posted by: Cooper | June 21, 2020 at 05:33 PM
Anita Sarkeesian (who isn't even attractive) received $158,000 from beta dupes just to produce 12 videos that most people could produce for free. I can't blame her for harvesting the beta males who were begging for it.
.......................................................
That's sooooo 2010.
The 2020s trend is for cucks to pay at least a grand for a "exclusive video" from a Twatter.
Posted by: Mises | June 29, 2020 at 10:35 PM
1 - Why do you think that visiting India is a bad idea up until 2025? Is it the lack of infrastructure? Crime?
...................................................................
India has a nationalist problem and a dispute with China over the border. It's a s-hole. Lots of Indian men and women under the age of 30 are fleeing India.
Posted by: Mises | June 29, 2020 at 10:37 PM
Quote: "the only Islamic countries that mandate burqas happen to be absolute monarchies, which are under 10% of Islamic nations."
Ironically, those countries are allies of the United States, such as Saudi Arabia.
The hatred for Islam (and brown people in general, including Mexicans) is becoming legitimized by POTUS Donald Trump. Yet, the cuckservative Boomer would PayPal thousands of dollars to a thot who sells her bath water, urine.
Posted by: Chuck Norris | June 29, 2020 at 10:50 PM
Roubini: 'My prediction for a Great Depression is not about 2020, but the decade of the 2020s'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM6ZeC2khTc
Posted by: Nouriel Roubini | July 01, 2020 at 06:51 PM
A Bubble did pop in 2020, and that was the phony stock market and QE Bubbles. This decade will see another prick of the recent QE and the middle class liquidity transfer (covid unemployment checks).
Posted by: Ron Meghan | July 04, 2020 at 12:25 AM
Cobid unemployment cheques ain't zit compared to the bailouts of the (((corporations))) in the trillions of dollars. The COVID cheques pay the rent to the (((landlords))) and (((grocery stores))). No one is getting rich off covid cheques unless they were illegal refugees from Mexico or some zit.
Posted by: Golden Trudeau | July 26, 2020 at 10:23 AM
The medical profession is becoming feminist:
https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/doctors-slam-sexist-study-med-bikini-photos-social-media
Using the feminist logic, is it okay for me, a blue collar worker to come to work as a KKK uniform or wear a Hitler moustache?!
Posted by: Leopard | July 27, 2020 at 08:33 AM
DragonChaser101
5 months ago
Working hard in my 20s and saving enough to put a downpayment on a property in Toronto Ontario Canada, was something I regret. I thought being a young male bachelor would have put me on an attractive scale for women. What a lonely decade of my life. If I could go back. I would have invested elsewhere. Cannot wait to leave.
Posted by: Toronto | August 01, 2020 at 11:01 AM
Millions of dollars lost because of a feminist in Canada:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCUxhX0gUSA
Posted by: Adam | August 03, 2020 at 04:38 PM
In England, if a man tries to stop a woman from showing her breasts or her front hole to a minor, the man gets charged for a sex crime and breaching the Public Order Act.
Posted by: Gen Z | August 20, 2020 at 04:42 PM
Feminist doctors are permitted to be naked with children:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyyHQ6v_29w
Posted by: Gen Z | August 20, 2020 at 04:50 PM
In Toronto, it's legal for a female teacher to show her poon to underage students. However, if she feels harassed by her students, Toronto Police are called to warn the students and the parents that they will be charged for criminal harassment.
Posted by: Chuck | September 01, 2020 at 09:37 PM
The modern Canadian woman must be a dog shagging pedo then. Shame on Justin Trudeu!
Posted by: Ben Garrison | September 11, 2020 at 07:18 PM
The misandry bubble is clutching at straws in Toronto, Canada:
A wealthy businessman will have to pay more than $50,000 a month in spousal support for 10 years to a woman with whom he had a long-term romantic relationship even though they kept separate homes and had no children together, Ontario’s top court has ruled.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-no-home-or-kids-together-but-couple-still-spouses-appeal-court-rules
This is insane.
Posted by: Luke | September 15, 2020 at 05:03 PM
The misandry bubble did not pop in Canada. Feminism and man-hating are acceptable by law.
Meanwhile, Justin Castro imports thousands of ISIS combatants and child soldiers to live in Canada.
Posted by: Fox | September 21, 2020 at 02:02 AM
I wonder how Marc Lepine would have predicted since the 80s that modern feminism would mutate into a pro-capitalist and anti-sex movement? A female teacher in Canada is allowed to teach nude, but a sex worker is banned from having clients.
Posted by: Greg | November 05, 2020 at 06:17 AM
COVID did pop the stock market bubble temporarily, but the Anglo empire inflated it again with cheap money and free money for the women.
Men are the losers in this game. As an atheist all of my life, I'm beginning to believe that the only hope for disenfranchised men is God.
Posted by: Evan Woodman | November 24, 2020 at 12:26 PM
Eventually they'll kill off or put in prison all the men that would have them lol. Just stay clear gentlemen.
I read that in Poland there trying to start a "Bachelor Tax". So much for white nationalism and muh 1488!
Female teachers in Canada are protected by police when parents complain that the school board lets female teachers show their vajeejays to their Grade One students for health education. It will only get worse. More and more women will end up unmarried and governments will eventually notice this. A bachelor tax is inevitable honestly. If you have enough money move to South East Asia or to Pluto.
I just found a 44 year old Tinderella that states:
“Attracted to most but super attracted to 6ft+....(I’m 5’3)”
So she's only super attracted to only 14.4% of the male population at an age were there are more single women than men.
Posted by: Waterworld 360 | December 27, 2020 at 11:30 AM
Toronto is imposing a post-feminist Orwellian police state:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIvTPOaA2-U
Posted by: John Calhoun | December 28, 2020 at 09:06 AM
Life changing read, took me more than a couple of hours to read everything in one sitting. Very relevant information. THANKS !!
Posted by: Stanley Ray Main | January 17, 2021 at 08:43 AM
There is a saying in the Quran that before the end of times there would be 50 women chasing a single man. I think those days are coming soon. Dating apps have made it worse for men who aren't the top 10% in looks, height, wealth and social status.
Posted by: Alex Jones | February 07, 2021 at 04:02 PM
Just look at the countless average women on shaking their asses in front of the camera because they know hordes of simps will come and comment compliments, follow them and jack up their view count. Also, they always make sure to post their Instagram link in their profiles to ensure the simps follow them there as well and repeat the simp behavior.
Just imagine how inflated the ego and sense of worth these women have in the real world. They must really feel like celebrities. This is truly a sickening plague that is making more and more women simply intolerable to be with since there’s no incentive to act with respect towards an average guy because she probably has 10 other simps orbiting around her that would pull a u-turn on an interstate and proceed to drive in oncoming traffic just to meet her request.
And… it’s only going to get worse. I truly feel sorry for the young men growing up now.
Posted by: Gen Z | May 10, 2021 at 09:11 AM
I want to leave Toronto. This is because I'm not a 6 foot, wealthy and property owning Chad or Tyrone. God, I pray that you help me find a way to migrate from Toronto. The majority of woemen are terrible.
Posted by: Yolo | June 19, 2021 at 03:04 PM