The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
An Age When Vibrators Are Sold on the High Street
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

***Note to readers and commenters*** The blog is now archived and inactive. Ron Unz has created a comment thread for the intellectually diverse community of commenters to continue open discussions on whatever topics they deem interesting. The blog and thread will no longer be moderated and will only be accessible to previously approved commenters who have been active in past threads. As long as it is regularly participated in, it will remain open. When–or if!–it dies down, it too will go dormant.

Turn pressure to power, turn stress to strength, and never lose your curiosity or your playfulness!

Isonomy yes, but respect? It is earned, says rebel yell:

If someone can run faster or do better math than me, they have superior skill and I can respect that definition of meritocracy. “Honors to the strong,” as the Romans said. But no one should have superior rights to mine or claim that their life has more moral value than mine or anyone else’s. Our elites like to hold up their Ivy League degrees as proof they should rule over the rest of us. Nonsense. My rulers should be people I choose, who represent my interests, and are accountable to me.

Auctoritas is on life support. Maybe it’s just as well. Rulers are overrated.

Triteleia Laxa makes an astute if crass observation:

In an age when vibrators are sold on the high street, I am astonished that people can convince themselves that women merely like sex as something to trade for romance.

After acceding to the assertion that men and women aren’t necessarily from different planets when it comes to enjoying sex, we won’t get too carried away. Wency on why the general experiences of men and women differ on dating apps:

I think women in our society just don’t go after men nearly to the degree men go after women. A woman saying, “I *need* a man!” is viewed as somewhat gauche nowadays, while in yesteryear it might have been as obvious and non-controversial a statement for a maiden to make as “My car *needs* gas.”

Instead, men are viewed as more of a “nice to have”. “I’d *like* a man. And I’d *like* a coffee maker that also does espresso.”

Men, for one, aren’t really given this message that finding a mate is unimportant. And two, even if we were, it’s not in our nature to listen to such things as much as women do.

What’s the male pro-independence equivalent to a woman needing a man like a fish needs a bicycle? Rhetorical, I think.

And again on the about leftism’s century-long twirl:

Leftism started out the 20th century more on the side of order and conformity (seeking to regiment and rationalize society according to scientific/industrial principles and pushing back against somewhat chaotic and organic traditionalism), then sometime in the mid-20th flipped to the side of chaos and nonconformity (pushing for free speech and free love and a thousand wacky ideas against a modernist gray-suited conservative consensus) and in the form of Wokeism is now once again on the side of order and conformity (restricting free speech and free thought and allying with Woke Corporations and the Woke Military-Industrial Complex).

In a touching tribute to a man’s love for his wife, Twinkie provides an excuse to cover three different marital situations:

My wife and I are in our early 50’s. We both feel strongly that, were one of us to die, the other would not remarry, but would devote himself or herself to the children.

She and I had a “start-up” marriage (as opposed to a “merger” marriage). She married me when I was penniless and was nothing but potential (the first time my parents visited us in our 1 BR apartment, they told me that we looked like children playing house). I love her so intensely and she is so much a part of me and I of her that I don’t think I could ever give the same kind of love, affection, or trust to another woman. And if I couldn’t have that kind of a powerful bond, I don’t think I’d want another as a wife.

Were she to die before I, I would do my best to raise our children well, hopefully watch them have families of their own, and then I would be happy to see her again, God willing.

In addition to start-up (both partners are unestablished, starting out and generally younger) and merger marriages (both partners are established, financially independent and generally older), there is also the acquisition marriage. One partner is established (and probably older) while the other is getting started (and probably younger). The acquisition marriage is presumably the most challenging of the three to maintain over time.

This COTW roundup will be the blog’s concluding act. After many years through various iterations and authorship, it has run its course. When the comment window closes on this post, it will move into the archives. See you around the interwebs, friends.

 
• Category: Arts/Letters, Culture/Society • Tags: COTW 
Hide 393 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. anon[753] • Disclaimer says:

    You’re leaving? Why? The party’s just getting started.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  2. MattinLA says:

    Why are you quitting?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  3. BlackC says:

    What’s the male pro-independence equivalent to a woman needing a man like a fish needs a bicycle? Rhetorical, I think.

    Not rhetorical at all:
    “If it flies, floats, or f*cks, you’re better off renting.”

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • LOL: Jus' Sayin'...
    • Replies: @Neuday
    , @SFG
    , @Mario Partisan
  4. Thanks for all the excellent posts.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  5. Dumbo says:

    It’s not a question of sex, but of access.

    Also, marriage and relationships are more than just about sex. If a vibrator or pr0n solves it for you, then you are doing it wrong.

    Women are the ones who men go after, so they can afford to pretend to be uninterested or take more time to evaluate their choices.

    The main problem is losing their fertile years in hopeless hypergamous pursuits.

    It is stupid to lose your fertile years having sex with several supposed alphas and then ending up a cat lady, or as a single mom (with a mulatto baby perhaps).

    I know several attractive white women, now in their thirties, they didn’t marry, have no kids, they just pursued their “career” and “casual sex”, now they are increasingly desperate and you see them posting increasingly insane virtual-signalling stuff on social media about saving the whales in Tibet or black children in the Amazon.

    When the comment window closes on this post, it will move into the archives. See you around the interwebs, friends.

    Why? While I am not a great fan of statistics, it was one of the few blogs at UR that made some commonsensical points and didn’t require moderation (nor blocked people who disagreed, like some megalomaniac Russian bloggers)

  6. Jay Fink says:

    I will miss your blog. I really enjoyed your posts and the comments. I would check in a few times a day. Of all the blogs this one felt like home to me.

  7. Malenfant says:

    I hope you reconsider and decide to stick around. I didn’t comment much here, but your blog was among the best, and will be missed.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  8. DuanDiRen says:

    Sorry you are wrapping it up. Great job, I have really enjoyed the blog. Thanks and good luck.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  9. Audacious Epigone’s focus on data, factoid sets, graphs, and charts, have been devastating key weapons in the culture wars … distinctive, valuable, and not easily replaced

    general reaction to AE’s departure –

    • Agree: iffen, DanHessinMD
    • Replies: @angmoh
  10. Sorry to see you go, you’re one of my favorite bloggers, maybe my favorite actually. Loved all the statistical work, it’s a shame there really aren’t other out there doing this.

    Enjoy the family and have a good rest of your life!

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  11. There are a few U.S. commenters with whom I’d like to keep in touch, who have made a sufficient number of thoughtful comments over long enough a period that I am satisfied that they are no Feds. They can probably guess who they are, but earlier comments of mine have carried a nonexistent email address, whereas this comment carries an email address that actually works.

    It’s the last chance to ask AE to put you and me in touch, if that is what you wish.

  12. Twinkie says:

    there is also the acquisition marriage

    I am so steeped in the culture of marriage of equals that the third option didn’t even occur to me! Thanks for pointing that out.

    And let me add a heart-felt agreement to those who have paid tribute to you. You have been a welcome voice of reason and sanity. As far as I can tell, you are the only blogger on Unz who publicly acknowledged and issued corrections when you were wrong about something, however few those instances were. That kind of intellectual honesty is indeed rare in this day of mindless tribalism, innumerate obstinacy, and ideological hardness. You are a Mensch.

    I shall miss your writing and your presence on Unz (and now that the best part of Unz Review is gone, I think I will follow the example you set and reduce my own participation as well).

    I wish you and your family well (have a few more kids!), and in your future endeavors. God bless.

    • Agree: songbird, RSDB, Johann Ricke
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Anon
  13. @V. K. Ovelund

    It’s the last chance to ask AE to put you and me in touch, if that is what you wish.

    Alternately, here is a better solution: a longtime reader who likes statistics, stands close to AE’s worldview, and is willing to spend the time, might negotiate to assume management of the blog.

    That’s easy for me to say, since no one can fill AE’s shoes, anyway; but because I like the blog and like the blog’s commenters even more, I would prefer competent new management to just watching the blog close and the blog’s commentariat scatter to the four winds!

    But, then, if the blog’s most valuable commenter by the consensus of many, Twinkie, means to retire, too, then maybe it was not meant to be.

    • Replies: @RogerL
  14. Damn. One of the few (and fewer all the time) sources of pleasant, useful entertainment and information gone. I will miss it. Just like employees: The good ones move on to other things and the bad ones cling like barnacles.

    Via con Dios, AE.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  15. AE – You have unearthed valuable data and brought a perspective to our times that has been helpful to me in my own development. You will be greatly missed.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  16. @anon

    The party never ends, it’s always been burning since the world’s been turning.

    • LOL: Stan d Mute
  17. nebulafox says:

    Good Luck.

    Good Bye.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  18. @MattinLA

    A confluence of factors, primarily that with over 3000 posts the blog has covered what it can cover and resource limitations including time most of all.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  19. @Jackbnimble1

    If you’re unfamiliar with Zach Goldberg, consider checking him out. He is just getting started with what is sure to be a very insightful and productive career. Inductivist also covers similar topics.

    • Replies: @Jackbnimble1
  20. @V. K. Ovelund

    List them here. If they respond and the emails associated with your handles are real, that’ll be easy to facilitate.

  21. @nebulafox

    Same to you. There is no way your story is finished. You’ve brought a lot to readers of the comments over the years. Don’t sell yourself short because you’ve had a false start or two. You’ve survived, you’re here, and the future is unwritten.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  22. Usura says:

    Came for Mefobills, stayed for Audacious Epigone. I only regret I discovered this blog relatively late; I’ll be digging through the archives. Thank you for all the erudite and even-handed analysis, and good luck.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  23. Arclight says:

    Consider that there will undoubtedly be new events and developments where your take would be welcome to many of us, and I do enjoy reading a number of the regular commenters in reaction to it. I understand that producing a high volume can be laborious, but the well-timed and occasional post would be great. Very interesting group here and it would be a shame to see it dissolve.

    All that said, best of luck and obviously you have to do what feels right. Hope to see your re-emergence at some point!

    • Agree: Some Guy, Johann Ricke
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  24. 216 says: • Website

    A tip of the hat to you.

    You made a great case for self-determination.

    Next year in Redstan.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  25. It’s been a real joy.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  26. Stay Audacious my man. It’s been a pleasure.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  27. @Audacious Epigone

    List them here. If they respond and the emails associated with your handles are real, that’ll be easy to facilitate.

    If any of the following were passing through my area, I wish that he would drop by for supper: Almost Missouri; iffen; Mario Partisan; Mark G.; nebulafox; res; RSDB; Twinkie; Wency. Each is a better man than I, so for me to ask is presumptuous, but there is my list.

    Of course, the incomparable dfordoom would be welcome in my home any time. It would be a special day, to be marked in red ink on my calendar; but my home stands so far away from his, his visit will never happen, sadly. My home isn’t much to boast of, anyway, so he’ll not be missing much in that respect.

    There are a few others (Athletic and Whitesplosive, Barbarossa, Boomthorkell, WorkingClass and especially Catdog come to mind) with whom I have not had quite enough interaction to be sure, but whom I appreciate nevertheless. There is one (not listed) with whom I have already got in touch. I have valued Jay Fink’s tolerance more than he probably realizes, but to invite Jay under the circumstance would be pressing, so when it comes to Jay I should defer. As for A123, a persistent sparring partner is hard to find and I shall remember him well in that role.

  28. @Dumbo

    It is stupid to lose your fertile years having sex with several supposed alphas and then ending up a cat lady, or as a single mom (with a mulatto baby perhaps).

    I know several attractive white women, now in their thirties, they didn’t marry, have no kids, they just pursued their “career” and “casual sex”, now they are increasingly desperate and you see them posting increasingly insane virtual-signalling stuff on social media about saving the whales in Tibet or black children in the Amazon.

    I wouldn’t pass too much judgement on them. Most were indoctrinated.

    I worked around liberal White women and there was a much bigger problem with them holding out for a White man that was already taken. They were all waiting for a man that checked the right amount of boxes and not really getting that there is no secret supply of White collar White men that smell nice and vote Democrat.

    They weren’t hitting the bars either. Most were going home to watch TV. One spoke of her dog as if it was her boyfriend. It was really sad. If someone brought in kids their female genes did not go unnoticed. Liberalism tries to program women into thinking that kids will not make them happy and yet I’ve never met a woman with kids that was as unhappy as a liberal cat mom. It’s all a lie.

    It isn’t so much that they never wanted children or wanted to slut it up for years. Those women are out there but most got some stupid liberal arts degree and now think they are part of the Smart Class and as such expect a White man with minimal build/height/career/etc. The liberal men they work with are pretty much ignored and get friend zoned. By the time they realize they were too picky their options are even more limited. This is a huge problem that no one seems to be addressing.

  29. @V. K. Ovelund

    Sorry, AE, I was caught up in farewells and failed to write a straightforward list: Almost Missouri; dfordoom; iffen; Mario Partisan; Mark G.; nebulafox; res; RSDB; Twinkie; Wency. I press none of them, for some probably have more to lose by compromising anonymity than I have, but there is the list.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    , @Wency
  30. nebulafox says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    It’s beginning, one way or another. I’m in for a very interesting year or two.

    The difference is that I-and I alone-am going to be the one consciously writing it now.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  31. Neuday says:
    @BlackC

    What’s the male pro-independence equivalent to a woman needing a man like a fish needs a bicycle? Rhetorical, I think.

    If we couldn’t fuck ’em, there’d be bounties on their heads.

  32. SafeNow says:

    I share in the many expressions of gratitude, and of sadness to see this pub close. The loss is quite significant because these days even conservative media like The Wall Street Journal resort to vague adjectives without quantitatively addressing the magnitude.

    Thanks again, AE. And many thanks to the commenters, for your insights, anecdotes, humor, and companionship.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  33. @John Johnson

    ….there is no secret supply of White collar White men that smell nice and vote Democrat.

    Some years ago I was scanning a thread on a liberal blog. It was mostly women complaining about the lack of or the quality of available men. Trying to be helpful I suggested they might try dating men who work with their hands. They attacked me like a swarm of killer bees.

    Blessed are the Redneck Girls for they shall become mothers and grand mothers.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  34. Very short-term poster, very long-term reader, if off and on. Best of luck in the future. I wish you everything you want!

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  35. @WorkingClass

    there is no secret supply of White collar White men that smell nice and vote Democrat.*

    Every so often, there is a really great turn of phrase on here. That was one.

    Blessed are the Redneck Girls for they shall become mothers and grand mothers.

    That was another.

    Trying to be helpful I suggested they might try dating men who work with their hands. They attacked me like a swarm of killer bees.

    That’s too bad … for all involved: the women who won’t find men because of their liberal prejudice, the men who are deprived of women because the wokarchy declared them off-limits, the children who will never be born because their parentage has been subverted, the happy families that will never be made because of the stealthy (but decreasingly so) genocide.

    Among liberalism’s victims are its own adherents. The fail just keeps happening. Has liberalism no endpoint of inevitable self-destruction?

    I recall reading the dating advice column in the human interest section of big 1980s newspaper. The story that week was that white-/pink-collar women were discovering happiness with blue-collar men. At the time, I thought, “Why is this a news story? This seems obvious.” But in retrospect, I guess that the women in the article were trying to create some social clearance that dating slightly down the social ladder was okay. (In fact a lot of the tradesmen I now know are better men and make more money than standard-issue office drones, but the stigma of manual labor apparently still persists, even—especially?—among the “liberated”.) The point of this anecdote being that I’m surprised that 30 years later the stigma is still as strong, when every supposedly “oppressed” class is being uplifted and reparated. Someone forgot to include the tradesmen! Who knew that when the workers of the world finally unite, having nothing to lose but their chains, the group that would be left out of the glorious Revolution would be … the actual workers?

    On the other hand, that newspaper column was in a Midwestern newspaper, and Midwesterners tend to be practical and commonsensical, so the women they covered were like, “Marry a guy who can actually do stuff? Okay!” It will take some time for the class-bound coastal society to catch up to flyover egalitarianism. Easy does it, Comrades!

    —–

    *I’m not sure there is much of a supply at all of this, secret or not. There used to be, but that was the in the days of the bad old Democrat Party, not the new woke Party. I was born to Democrat voters, and raised among Democrat voters to be a Democrat voter, yet of all the white men I know who vote Democrat, I can only think of one who is eligible (well, he’s divorced actually) and white collar. And he’s gotta be pushing 60. The rest are all gay, nonwhite, or defective in some way.

    • Thanks: WorkingClass
  36. @V. K. Ovelund

    I’m honored, and would reciprocate, but although my handle email is real, the service provider has locked me out of it, so I can’t read or send anything from it.

    🙁

  37. After many years through various iterations and authorship, it has run its course.

    Wait, are you saying you are not the original AE?

    Is Audacious Epigone like the Dread Pirate Roberts?

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  38. “This COTW roundup will be the blog’s concluding act. After many years through various iterations and authorship, it has run its course. When the comment window closes on this post, it will move into the archives. See you around the interwebs, friends.”

    What? No!

    Feels bad, man.

    “See you around the interwebs, friends.”

    Where will we see you again?

    Is there no other way? I can only imagine how much time has gone into feeding this blog.

    “various iterations and authorship”

    I was under the impression that the same gentleman of a small town in middle America continued through time. No?

    Deep gratitude for your being a light in the darkness. There must be another way. Can you post less often, like once every week or two instead of 7x a week?

    I feel like lights are going out in the world, one-by-one.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  39. I owe a debt of gratitude to AE for offering me the privilege of a guest post. I’m quite sure he is the only blogger here who would have done so. This is sad news for me, for now I don’t know how I will ever get anything published again.

    I have been working on my promised long-form African essay, which is through with prewriting and is fully outlined.

    I would still like to write for Unz.

    Of course, I can always post on my own blog, but it has no audience. I have neither the skills nor the desire to be a webmaster, and I have neither the time nor the personality to spend years writing an endless stream of clickbait posts in order to build up a following. I write “contemporary scholastic philosophy” (I am probably the only person doing so), and it is by nature not glamorous. But I still think it is valuable enough for publication somewhere.

    I’m sorry this is happening.

  40. German_reader says:

    Can’t claim to have been a regular commenter here, but imo it’s a bad sign for Unz review that this blog is ending. It was one of the more moderate and sane parts of the site, with commenters who aren’t just loons and often provided interesting comments. Definitely bodes ill for the future of UR. On the other hand, maybe a good choice to leave that ship.
    Anyway, best of luck for whatever you’re going to do.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous, Dissident
  41. @Audacious Epigone

    Yeah he’s good I enjoy his stats. Not sure if he’s one of (((my people))) or just uses the name as a pseudonym . Either way will keep reading him

  42. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    There are a few U.S. commenters with whom I’d like to keep in touch

    Yes, I feel the same way. What’s so unusual about this blog is that it’s been enjoyable and stimulating interacting even with commenters with whom I sometimes disagree. Even with commenters with whom I often disagree! It must be just about the last place left on the internet where people with often diverging political views have been able to interact amicably and fruitfully.

    I’d be happy to keep in touch.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  43. nebulafox says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    >Each is a better man than I, so for me to ask is presumptuous, but there is my list.

    Oh, trust me, that’s not true. I’m flattered, though.

  44. nebulafox says:
    @John Johnson

    As is always the case with manosphere-esque topics, the “carousel” narratives takes a kernel of truth and blows it out of proportion. Most people have more mundane sex lives than you’d guess online. More that time just goes by, life happens, and people always think they can push things off until next year. The rocky economic situation that Millennials face doesn’t help. Long-term unemployment can mean several years out of the dating market. Then there’s the mental health angle…

    I think the good news is that younger women-30 and below-are realizing how unhappy these older women are. Many are deciding they don’t want to end up like that. A lot of the recent spate of articles encouraging men to settle down is probably driven by this. Albeit I’ve noticed it carefully targets men who have a variety of options, because public discussion about men who don’t is too poisoned for anybody to touch. Overall, people tend to underestimate who might make a great spouse if you are willing to put in the work. It’s great if you can marry your optimal match, but let’s be real, most people are not going to be that lucky, and will have to compromise if they want to get married.

    I should note that men are equally prone to this: I don’t think there’s an innate difference between the sexes so much as there is different conditioning. The difference lies in the fact that the dating market for people in their 20s punishes male delusions much more harshly and directly than female ones, meaning that non-perma incel men are more likely to have had a degree of realism beaten into them by the time they hit marrying age.

  45. Dumbo says:
    @dfordoom

    It must be just about the last place left on the internet where people with often diverging political views have been able to interact amicably and fruitfully.

    And, you know what? With barely no moderation (as far as I know). Compare it to Sailer’s and others who might take hours or even days to approve a post (and others like AK who outright ban).

    Perhaps it’s the friendly atmosphere.

    Or perhaps, AE’s data-based approach just attracted less crazy commenters. I don’t know.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
  46. Dumbo says:
    @nebulafox

    The difference lies in the fact that the dating market for people in their 20s punishes male delusions much more harshly and directly than female ones, meaning that non-perma incel men are more likely to have had a degree of realism beaten into them by the time they hit marrying age.

    Also, women are more prone to romanticize stuff and wait for Prince Charming. Already in the 19th century Stendhal (I think) and Flaubert decried romantic novels for the illusions they created in women (now it’s Hollywood, etc). Men have illusions too, but they end faster and more brutally, so men become pragmatic or resigned sooner – some become just cynical, but then it’s too much. It’s not all bad.

    I think the idea of finding a “soul mate” is deeply ingrained in all of us; even if it’s in many ways impossible, it makes sense in a spiritual way, so we keep wishing it.

  47. I’m sure that your reasons for ending the blog are good, but you will be missed AE!

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  48. songbird says:

    Let me say that I’ve always appreciated AE’s ability to engage with commentors and also his unique penchant for coming up with funny titles.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  49. @Triteleia Laxa

    Very short-term poster

    That’s too bad, since I’ve been admiring your recent commenting, even if I don’t agree with all of it.

    Speaking of which,

    In an age when vibrators are sold on the high street

    I guess your (UK?) High Streets are different from our Main Streets?

    I’m old enough to remember seeing this being sold on the High Street:

    No Sex Please, We’re British!

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  50. I am grateful for all the effort you have put into informing the readers of your blog. It is one I read every day and never fail to be improved by your research. I will not urge you to change your mind since that would be an ungracious response to your generous labors on the part of your readers. However, I would still like you to know that I will greatly miss your presence.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  51. @nebulafox

    As is always the case with manosphere-esque topics, the “carousel” narratives takes a kernel of truth and blows it out of proportion. Most people have more mundane sex lives than you’d guess online.

    These incels/manosphere guys much watch Sex and the City and think it is a documentary. When I was single I stopped going to bars because half the time the single women went with the friend that was running defense. Gyms and coffee shops are much better.

    This idea of all these single women going to the bars to get laid is mostly Hollywood myth. Sure it happens but it is a Hollywood myth that most single women take up slutting as a hobby. It’s mostly projection based on the false assumption that women are men with boobs.

    Overall, people tend to underestimate who might make a great spouse if you are willing to put in the work. It’s great if you can marry your optimal match, but let’s be real, most people are not going to be that lucky, and will have to compromise if they want to get married.

    This is a huge part of the problem.

    Hollywood tells these women they have prince charming waiting for them. Christianity tells them that God has a pre-ordained soul mate for them. No one is working in their best interest and telling them to find a man with a job while they can.

    Most people will not get prince charming/princess babe. That is just the way it is. Both liberals and Christians are pushing unrealistic expectations. Liberals push gender denial and Hollywod fables while Christians tell their followers to pray and wait for a mate. That is terrible advice. God should not be called upon as a matchmaker.

    • Replies: @Catdog
    , @Rosie
  52. @Intelligent Dasein

    I can always post on my own blog,

    You have a blog? Why not hyperlink it?

    but it has no audience

    Hmm.

  53. @Almost Missouri

    Vibrators in the US are now sold in most major drug stores. They keep one or two models with the condoms.

    I talked to someone who worked at one such store and she said they rarely sell them.

    It sounded like when they do sell one it was usually to a guy buying one for his girlfriend or wife.

    Women really are wired differently.

  54. Thanks for the content AE! You were a bastion of sanity and data among a great many hot-takes.

    As far as the love & marriage stuff goes — my suspicion is that the people who post most about are those who are single.

    -I used to think a fair bit about women until I was 17, got a motorcycle and started sleeping with them.
    -I thought a fair bit about marriage until I married the woman I had been thinking about it with at 23.
    -I didn’t think much about divorce until she told me she wanted to via a Skype chat while I on a research project in Taiwan.
    -I thought a lot about finding a new partner and a good feminine influence for my daughter until I found my current wife in China.
    -Now I don’t think very much about marriage or relationships at all. Who has the time with a toddler and one in school?

    I’ve met my thinking quota for the month on these things.

    Cheers.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  55. @John Johnson

    Okay, I admit I don’t know this. Now I’m going to have to make an awkward visit to the drug store to see for myself:

    “May I help you sir?”

    “I’m just here to see the vibr—, I mean cond—, I mean, never mind, I’m fine. That lady over there looks like she needs help!”

  56. @songbird

    Let me say that I’ve always appreciated AE’s ability to engage with commentors and also his unique penchant for coming up with funny titles.

    He is intelligent while humble and genuine. Also has a good sense of humor. A truly rare combination.

    It is a shame he is going but I assume this blog takes a bit of his time and without any financial compensation.

    • Agree: songbird
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  57. @John Johnson

    It sounded like when they do sell one it was usually to a guy buying one for his girlfriend or wife.

    All of the women I know, own a vibrator. Many of them are happily married. Some of them need this vibrator to help them climax during sex.

    These are highly educated, professional women, under 35, but they are mostly not sexually voracious.*

    They shouldn’t need the vibrator, but they get used to it, or the man they are with is insufficiently responsive/they themselves are insufficiently communicative.

    *There is one exception; and she is sexually very open and sleeps with both men and women. She does not feel she needs one as she “understands her own body”. She is quite androgynous or even masculine.

    I am sorry if you experience this comment as lewd, but it might be useful for you.

  58. Charlotte says:

    I’m sorry to see you go, AE. Your blog has always been a thought-provoking space with excellent commenters. I wish you all the best in your future endeavors.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  59. anon[434] • Disclaimer says:

    Epigone: bear in mind that the “Ask A Mexican” blog is standing idle, and ripe for takeover.

    Just a thought.

    • LOL: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  60. anon[434] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson

    Vibrators in the US are now sold in most major drug stores.

    At least a couple of the chain stores, for sure.

    Women really are wired differently.

    In many cities there are other stores that sell such things, often such stores are either owned by women or hire mostly women as clerks.

    None of this is new, of course.

    Penguins have had their issues for years.

  61. @John Johnson

    They were all waiting for a man that checked the right amount of boxes and not really getting that there is no secret supply of White collar White men that smell nice and vote Democrat.

    I’m a sample size of one, but my experience was pretty rewarding turning out rich little liberal girls with my wickedly incorrect ways. I’ve been kept in the barn for a couple decades now, but I can’t help but remember how easy it was back then and wonder if the problem today is a lack of masculinity..

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  62. @Dumbo

    Perhaps it’s the friendly atmosphere.

    I think this explains quite a bit.

    I think the rest is explained by AE’s typical topic selection and how he presents it to we, the blog readers.

    AE’s overall presentation style just doesn’t encourage weirdos, trolls, infighting, or even comments that push the boundaries of respectability.

    That’s a good thing, considering what one encounters on most of the rest of the Internet.

  63. @Audacious Epigone

    Not so much that all the ground has been churned, but that you are burning out on it. There’s no shame in that. You are not the first and you’ll not be the last.

    Thanks for not being a grifter and for hanging it up rather than phoning it in.

    What any of us might hope is to find a worthy successor for the time we’ve wasted here. To that end, have you and Ron discussed at all? Do you know if he has plans to fill this blogging slot? Perhaps with one of the guys you mentioned?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  64. @Stan d Mute

    Too many people are afraid to be themselves. They need constant validation, often of the moral kind. This makes them much less attractive.

    What is there to be attracted to in a person who is just a conglomeration of other people’s perceptions, expectations and their own anxieties and fears?

    Women tell each other “you are OK, you are enough” a lot.

    Many men would benefit from being reminded of the same.

    You can call this masculinity, but I think integrity or courage fit better.

    Incel types blame their looks. This is something they can’t change. Blaming something you can’t change is the narcissist’s excuse for not changing what you can.

    Change is about becoming more you, this is what people never realise.

    • Replies: @anon
  65. @Almost Missouri

    Where else are they supposed to experience magic? Telling them stories about some guy who had to talk to his followers from a fishing boat over a body of water because he couldn’t organise a TikTik broadcast isn’t going to cut it.

    It just doesn’t fit the feel of their lives.

    Harry Potter is helpful, ​but where is the mystery, the transmission of authority, the ritual?

    Shopping malls are a wasteland of the soul.

    Internet outlets are worse.

    Politics is poison. It only exacerbates small-minded egocentrism.

    At least an orgasm is fun and honest.

    People don’t do bad things because they feel like they have a choice.

  66. @Triteleia Laxa

    There are obviously women using them given that there is a market for them. I don’t have a problem if a woman wants to use one. In fact a lot of single women probably need one.

    But women are not shopping for them as one might expect under egalitarian assumptions. That is more my point.

    I used to live near the only mini mart in an urban area that had porn and not once did I see a woman even look in the direction of the magazines. They in fact saw it as the porn mini mart and would only run in for a gallon of milk or cigarettes.

    Women are wired differently. Sex for them is not the same as men. Liberal society tries to pretend this isn’t true and *wants to believe* that they would be acting like men if they were conditioned differently. Liberals want to believe they are gay men in female bodies that have been conditioned by Bad Whites of the right. A lot of the manosphere has a similar view where women are naturally sluts and need to be conditioned so they are more realistic in their mates. So the same incorrect view of their underlying nature but with different goals. This view comes from blank slate which has been deeply embedded in society by both Christians and egalitarians.

    Women today are in fact conditioned but it is against their biology and it makes them go bonkers. They are conditioned to believe that having children shouldn’t be a concern for them. It absolutely should be and if they spent any time around dog moms at 50 they would run to the nearest bar while undoing their pants.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @anon
  67. SFG says:
    @BlackC

    There was MGTOW, not sure if it’s still around anymore.

  68. @John Johnson

    But women are not shopping for them as one might expect under egalitarian assumptions. That is more my point.

    I promise you that they are. Women give each other vibrators as presents some times. They will just most often buy them online, delivered in anonymous packaging. A friend recently had her uptight older sister tell her, after a bad relationship, that she might be single for a while to see how it feels. She also sent her a link to an online vibrator vendor, saying “you don’talways need a man”. My friend found this ridiculously condescending, as she already had one, which she had bought when a teenager online. She wasn’t, in her words, “12”.

    Sex for them is not the same as men.

    Yes, it is about 10X more pleasurable, at least if with a responsive partner.

    Also, most women don’t love porn, you’re right on that. Much of it is gross. Partly because it is made for men, partly because it really is just gross. Many do still like it, but, like men who aren’t broken, they prefer tasteful stills and non-mechanistic nonsense.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  69. @Triteleia Laxa

    God knows how many caustic feminists would exist without vibrators.

    Doctors in the 50s would actually induce orgasms in hysterical women by using a vibrator.

    • Agree: Triteleia Laxa
  70. anon[102] • Disclaimer says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    All of the women I know, own a vibrator. Many of them are happily married. Some of them need this vibrator to help them climax during sex.

    These are highly educated, professional women, under 35, but they are mostly not sexually voracious.*

    Thanks, Ms. Bradshaw. Although we both know you really should have typed “Over 35”, now don’t we? Plus we could discuss the concept of the “alpha widow”…

    As an aside, this book is pretty interesting and even funny. Best read by men with a good pair of The Glasses on.

    http://danielbergner.com/what-do-women-want

    • Replies: @Getaclue
  71. @Almost Missouri

    Is Audacious Epigone like the Dread Pirate Roberts?

    I believe that it was his very first Unz post when I asked him exactly whose epigone he purported to be so that we might fairly judge his audacity for ourselves. I believe he replied with a mysterious “LOL” or something like that.

    We’ve been catfished everyone! And now they have our email addresses..

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  72. SFG says:

    Well, good luck and goodbye, AE and everyone. You had a great blog–one of the few that actually followed the data where it led.

    It’s a shame to see you go, but I’m sure you have your reasons (perhaps in addition to those you listed) and I wish you well nonetheless.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  73. anon[102] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson

    I used to live near the only mini mart in an urban area that had porn and not once did I see a woman even look in the direction of the magazines.

    Yeah, well, it’s not 1988 anymore. PornHub claims that about 20% of its subscriber base is female. Very likely true.

    • Replies: @Getaclue
    , @John Johnson
  74. @Triteleia Laxa

    I promise you that they are. Women give each other vibrators as presents some times. They will just most often buy them online, delivered in anonymous packaging. A friend recently had her uptight older sister tell her, after a bad relationship, that she might be single for a while to see how it feels. She also sent her a link to an online vibrator vendor

    Yes of course most of the purchases are going to be online.

    But women are still wired differently.

    They are more emotionally tied to sex than men. There will never be the sexual revolution that liberals hope for and manosphere types already assume happened. Women will never become gay men but with boobs and innys.

    It used to be common in the West for prostitutes to hang around male heavy industries like timber and mining. It was just viewed as the nature of men and no one had a problem with it. If a married man went and visited a brothel he would be chastised but it wouldn’t be grounds for divorce.

    The use of prostitutes by women is extremely rare and this has been consistent throughout history. The sexual nature of women is different and eventually modern society will recognize this and be amazed at how today’s egalitarians were able to delude themselves.

    Also, most women don’t love porn, you’re right on that. Much of it is gross. Partly because it is made for men, partly because it really is just gross.

    Well gross is relative to sexual nature. I find horse erections to be gross but I’m sure female horses like them. A man might find a dildo to be gross but you can’t pull out some authoritative sexual grossness meter and tell him he is wrong and that porn is in fact gross.

    There is nothing wrong with men or women. They simply exist as nature intended. It is the egalitarian that frets over natural differences and idealizes the gender neutral or confused.

    Eventually this age of stupidity will be over and egalitarians will admit that both racial and gender differences exist as the result of evolution. Might even be less than 10 years away.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  75. @Audacious Epigone

    AE,
    Since I don’t see any direct email address for you on this site, I messaged Ron, asking that the message be forwarded to you. It’s sort of a Hail Mary Pass to get around my email account problem. Thanks.
    364758

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  76. @Triteleia Laxa

    Thanks for the interesting replies. They all look like non sequiturs to me, but I sort of agree with them, the ones I can understand.

    • Thanks: Triteleia Laxa
  77. AE — Is there any reasonable way to get paid for what you do? I get it, it isn’t possible to keep up a labor of love forever.

    There has been more genuine insight unleashed by this blog than all the sociology departments at all the universities in America. A low bar I know, but still.

    You have tremendous talent and a substantial audience. Was Unz paying you anything? Sailer hits up his audience for tips. You have never tried that.

    Write books?

    Are there no wealthy patrons who will pay enough to make it worthwhile to do this?

    Substack has gotten a bunch of writers paid. Is Substack a possibility?

    Would Derbyshire or Charles Murray have ideas for how to do this profitably?

    All readers of this blog… Your good ideas on making this worthwhile for AE — or any truth-teller — would be really valuable right now. What can he do?

    Are there any media outlets who would pay this genius? Going dark seems just unacceptable.

    It’s Father’s Day and a man’s has to support his family. This is a problem for the future of America if brilliant lights like AE can’t be supported for the light they bring.

    Or is AE not even the original AE? My mind is spinning here.

  78. @John Johnson

    The use of prostitutes by women is extremely rare and this has been consistent throughout history.

    Prostitutes mostly hate their clients. Women can find a man who feels he needs to prove his masculinity to himself instead; this way they avoid this unpleasant situation.

    You say women are different from men because they don’t use prostitutes, but how often do men use prostitutes?

    Well gross is relative to sexual nature. I find horse erections to be gross but I’m sure female horses like them. A man might find a dildo to be gross but you can’t pull out some authoritative sexual grossness meter and tell him he is wrong and that porn is in fact gross.

    Most men think that watching an ugly other man have unconvincing and unpleasurable sex with an ugly other women is the worst choice if all possible options.

    Eventually this age of stupidity will be over and egalitarians will admit that both racial and gender differences exist as the result of evolution.

    They have averaged differences. That is true. They are just quite different from the way in which contemporary “traditionalists” see them.

    I only repeatedly mention this, because a lot of very online men have a self-limiting belief that alienates them from women. They don’t understand female sexuality at all, which puts them in the frustrated incel category.

    If you don’t realise how much women like sex, even without romance, you will never be able to flirt effectively.

    I am sure you understand this, but let’s not have any more bright young men thinking that women only give them sex for money. That is not only wrong, but also hurtful.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  79. Thank you very much for the posts. You are one of my favorites on Unz, with in my opinion, the best mix of commentariat.

    I think that we won’t be able to let you go though until you have trained up a proper replacement. It’s just plumb irresponsible of you to abandon us all without a proper protege waiting in the wings!

    In all seriousness though, I really will miss your posts AE.
    God bless, and I wish you the best of luck with future endeavors.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  80. @Stan d Mute

    ACK! Say it ain’t so!

    Not the ubiquitous they!

    Next thing you know the CIA will be filling my inbox with ads for vibrators. It beggars the imagination…

  81. anon[289] • Disclaimer says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Women tell each other “you are OK, you are enough” a lot.

    Yep.

    Many men would benefit from being reminded of the same.

    Men are not defective women.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  82. dvorak says:

    Good work AE, farewell.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  83. MBlanc46 says:

    You will be missed. Hope to see you again, somewhere, sometime.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  84. Getaclue says:
    @anon

    Women are nowhere near into porn as men despite the bs we hear in the lying media, for one thing nearly any of them can go out and have sex any time they want if they really want — not the case for the vast majority of men wanking to porn….

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @anon
  85. Getaclue says:
    @anon

    Kinsey wrote a lot of bs also — it was taken as gospel for a long while and then found to be utter bunk — he lied about just about everything in one way or another and did all he could to make everyone a sex maniac as he was in fact it seems (see his death….)….so who knows as to this guy’s claims? “Studies” — worthless as we know even as to Peer Review MD “Studies” these days — all bs and based on what they want to find and who is paying….

  86. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Triteleia Laxa

    All of the women I know, own a vibrator.

    I suspect that the idea that women aren’t interested in vibrators is largely a male cope. Even in the 80s women were buying them. In fact to some extent the “women are different and don’t care so much about sex” thing is probably a male cope. Female sexuality is different, but women seem to like orgasms.

    Drug stores probably don’t sell very many vibrators because there are much more discreet ways to buy them.

    • Agree: Triteleia Laxa
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  87. @anon

    Napoleon agrees with me:

    “Give me enough medals and I’ll win you any war”

    • Replies: @anon
    , @YetAnotherAnon
  88. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Of course, I can always post on my own blog, but it has no audience. I have neither the skills nor the desire to be a webmaster, and I have neither the time nor the personality to spend years writing an endless stream of clickbait posts in order to build up a following.

    That’s been my experience as well. I still post pretty regularly on my blog but I’ve never been motivated enough to do all the things that you can do to attract more traffic. I also have no interest in going down the clickbait path.

  89. @anon

    Yeah, well, it’s not 1988 anymore. PornHub claims that about 20% of its subscriber base is female. Very likely true.

    And one in 5 men have a female brain.

    Most of us that are racial/gender realists are not taking some absolutist position.

    We object to the idea that everyone is the same and differences only exist because of conditioning.

    Male/female brain differences show up in MRI scans. Even liberal sites have reported on this:
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/male-female-brains-wired-differently-scans_n_4374010

    But you can find textbooks that describe any gender differences to be entirely cultural.

    • Replies: @anon
  90. @Triteleia Laxa

    You say women are different from men because they don’t use prostitutes, but how often do men use prostitutes?

    It used to be the norm for men to use them in areas where there were few women. But in modern society the practice has been denigrated by both Christians and liberals. In certain periods of Roman society prostitutes were available to women but were seldom used.

    Men and women are wired differently for sex. It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. The woman has to be a lot more careful about who she selects.

    If you don’t realise how much women like sex, even without romance, you will never be able to flirt effectively.

    I am sure you understand this, but let’s not have any more bright young men thinking that women only give them sex for money. That is not only wrong, but also hurtful.

    I never took issue with your original statement and I am quite critical of incels and the manosphere.

    I actually do well with women but I found one I liked and married her. Anyone that has had some decent girlfriends is aware that Hollywood lies about women. Most really aren’t that interesting. Same is true for most men.

    My problem is with modern egalitarians that want to believe that women are actually suppressed men. It is similar to their belief that Africans are actually suppressed Europeans. It would make the world an easier place but nature is kind of a bitch about things.

  91. @dfordoom

    I suspect that the idea that women aren’t interested in vibrators is largely a male cope.

    No one is saying that women aren’t interested in vibrators.

    They just aren’t wired for sex in the same way as men.

    I’m not sure why so many secular egalitarians assume they would be.

    There isn’t a mammalian species where both genders have the same sex drive. Typically the female is more cyclical than the male.

    Secular liberalism really isn’t secular. It’s a religion where converts take the belief that gender and racial differences must not exist.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  92. 22pp22 says:

    Sorry to see you go. I used to follow you before you joined Unz and think you are one of the best writers on their team.

    All the best.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  93. dfordoom says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    No one is saying that women aren’t interested in vibrators.

    They just aren’t wired for sex in the same way as men.

    I’m not disputing that. Female sexuality is definitely not the same as male sexuality, and women are most definitely not the same as men. I don’t see how anyone who has actually known a member of the opposite sex could believe that men and women are basically the same.

    I do think that women are more interested in sex than some socially conservative men would like to believe. But women are, being women, interested in sex in a slightly different way.

  94. @Intelligent Dasein

    Hyperlink your blog? I would check it out regularly.

    The secret to Unz’s success, I think, is his very good commenting system. Easy to read and use. Without that, you are going to have to settle for writing without the emotional feedback of clicks and comments. But if you have something you want to say, say it!

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  95. Anon[374] • Disclaimer says:

    I started reading you back when Heartiste would comment on your stuff. That era feels like ancient internet history now.

    Sad to see you go.

    Grateful for all of the work you’ve done.

    Best of luck out there AE.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  96. Wency says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Well, I’ll miss this blog and the community here, and I’d be happy to stay in touch — I’ll make it simple and offer the e-mail address I created for this purpose earlier: misterwency [at] yandex.com. I’ll probably then transition that to a different address. Just let me know on here if you message me on there.

    I probably overextended myself somewhat here in the past few months with too many comments, so like Twinkie, I think I’ll try to dial down my online communication for a time. I would like to create my own blog or Substack, but it’s one of those things that I could probably only maintain consistently if there were 30 hours in a day. I’m not sure how AE did it, so I understand fully why he’s getting out now. Family is more important.

    Maybe when those of us with young children are empty-nesters, or at least our kids are all in high school, we’ll manage to find more time for these endeavors. Hopefully there will still be places on the Internet where such things can happen.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  97. Catdog says:
    @John Johnson

    Hollywood tells these women they have prince charming waiting for them. Christianity tells them that God has a pre-ordained soul mate for them.

    Christianity does not teach that. Jesus specifically taught that there is no marriage in heaven. Souls are not linked by marriage and marriage is only an earthly arrangement for the production of children and relief from sexual urges. I can’t recall the titles but there have been a bunch of books written attacking the soul-mate idea from a Christian perspective.

    I love my wife but she is not special in a metaphysical sense. If I wasn’t married to her I’d be married to somebody else, and she’d be married to somebody else, and that would be fine.

    But I agree with your broader point.

    • Replies: @Wency
    , @John Johnson
  98. Catdog says:

    RIP In Peace. This was my favorite blog and it has the only good comment section on Unz, or perhaps anywhere.

  99. After many years through various iterations and authorship, it has run its course.

    I never knew there had been multiple AEs throughout the years. Anyway, thanks for all of the useful information and insightful commentary, my friend. Wishing all the best for you in the future.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  100. This COTW roundup will be the blog’s concluding act. After many years through various iterations and authorship, it has run its course. When the comment window closes on this post, it will move into the archives. See you around the interwebs, friends.

    I say:

    Don’t burn the boats on the beach, Mr. Epigone!

    Keep the boats floating in the water for a possibility of return and head for your next journey.

    In a week or a month or so you might want to try to get what’s on your mind down on electronic paper as it were and you should keep available all your options.

    Trump should have given a “burn the boats” speech but the donors and the ruling class of the Republican Party had Trump on a leash from the get-go and Trump didn’t fight back at all.

    Trump’s problems with the corporate media and the Deep State stem from the fact that Trump didn’t immediately remove them when he had the chance. Trump’s voter base was more than ready for a “burn the boats on the beach” battle plan to defend the United States against the treasonous scum in the Deep State and the anti-White, anti-Christian shyster filth in the corporate media.

    Please Reconsider Your Decision Mr. Epigone!

    Let The Blog Be For A While But Keep It Ready For Action!

    THANK YOU!

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  101. TG says:

    When selling vibrators on High Street is outlawed, only outlaws will sell vibrators on High Street.

  102. Wency says:
    @Catdog

    Yes, I recall arguing this with John Johnson last time this came up. Within Christian culture, all I’ve ever been exposed to is shooting down the “soulmate” idea, which is viewed as a New Age secular notion. My wife had the exact same experience, and the preacher who married us was extremely insistent (and relieved) that we didn’t believe in such contra-Biblical things.

    If you ever watch mainstream sitcoms, soulmate thinking has been all over them forever. “This is the person the universe has decided I’m supposed to be with,” they might say. “The universe” being the New Age sort of way of communicating, “fate”, “fortune”, or possibly “God” but in a very disembodied, you might say pantheistic sense.

    I Googled the phrase “the universe wants” and it comes back with all sorts of links from New Age sites with posts like “17 signs the universe wants you to be with someone”. And of course, “9 signs the universe is trying to set you up with The One”. This sort of stuff is really the origin of “soulmate” thinking.

    But all that said, I can see how elements of this might have leaked into teenage girl purity culture, that you are saving yourself for your future husband.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @Barbarossa
  103. @Catdog

    Christianity does not teach that. Jesus specifically taught that there is no marriage in heaven.

    Well what Jesus taught and what the churches teach can be two different things.

    The US protestant churches spend a lot of time on pre-martial sex. Look at this Focus on the Family resource:
    https://media.focusonthefamily.com/topicinfo/pre-marital_materials.pdf

    Did Jesus spend that much time talking about pre-marital living? No.

    They tie in the soul mate concept with the idea that by having pre-marital sex you aren’t waiting for the person that God has picked for you.

    I can’t recall the titles but there have been a bunch of books written attacking the soul-mate idea from a Christian perspective.

    Yes and there are books about how you can pray for wealth or a soul mate. Lots of Christians selling books. Doesn’t mean anything.

  104. @Wency

    Yes, I recall arguing this with John Johnson last time this came up. Within Christian culture, all I’ve ever been exposed to is shooting down the “soulmate” idea, which is viewed as a New Age secular notion.

    A New Age notion? Do you think I am trying to slander Christianity? I had to sit through these lectures.

    20 steps to finding your soul mate
    https://marriagemissions.com/christian-soul-mate-20-steps-finding-yours/

    It’s common for Christians to teach that everything is pre-ordained which then means your marriage partner has already been chosen by divinity. I was taught this as a teenager and that I would be corrupting that plan if I had pre-marital sex. That actually means I would be breaking the plan by my will…or was that action also pre-ordained??

    I asked my youth pastor about people that never get married and he said that was God’s plan. Funny that because he just told us that we all needed to save ourselves for marriage.

    So in Christianity you can be a moral virgin and God may not reward you with a wife even if you were told that you need to save yourself for marriage.

    Christian doctrine on sex is really solid.

    Islam is amazingly worse. They can’t even agree on whether single women should be allowed to masturbate. Seriously you can find online debates over this. Women masturbating.

    • Replies: @Wency
  105. @Wency

    Yes, I have seen “The One” as a bit of a thing in Evangelical Christianity, with their focus on “God’s Plan”. My parents were even part of a church well before I was born which believed that God had definite plans for what car or mattress one should purchase. Very silly stuff indeed!

    For John Johnson to try to make it a broader point about Christianity in general shows a certain ignorance about broader and historical Christianity.

    You are absolutely correct that the sitcom/ romcom popular culture has saturated women in particular with the notion of “The One”. I’m sure it’s led to countless broken marriages as the deluded folks realized that it isn’t all peaches and cream no matter how swell the honeymoon stage.

  106. Wency says:
    @John Johnson

    You may have a point and the situation might be worse than I thought within some churches (and it sounds sort of Prosperity Gospelish to me), but I still hold it’s a New Age and unserious idea that these people have allowed to infect their thinking, not an idea that has its origins within Christian culture or doctrine specifically. And it still has more than enough momentum outside the church.

    My guess would be that practically everyone who is “spiritual, but not religious” believes something like “the universe” pre-ordains your soulmate, while it’s still a minority position within Evangelicalism and unheard of in the rest of conservative Christianity.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @anon
  107. Corvinus says:
    @Dumbo

    “I know several attractive white women, now in their thirties, they didn’t marry, have no kids, they just pursued their “career” and “casual sex”, now they are increasingly desperate…”

    Men as well.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Dumbo
  108. anon[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson

    And one in 5 men have a female brain.
    Most of us that are racial/gender realists are not taking some absolutist position.
    We object to the idea that everyone is the same and differences only exist because of conditioning.

    Cool babble, bro. What does any of that have do to do with the fact that about 20% of Pornhub subscribers are women?

    You: Wahmen no like porn!
    Reality: At least 1 / 5 do as revealed by their own preference.
    You: BLahLBSLhblalbhalhhshsblh!

    Reality: lol

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  109. anon[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Napoleon agrees with me:

    Lol, no. He wasn’t chatting about affirmations with his besties over a cosmotini.

    Men are not defective women. All of your personalities need to learn that, but the younger one really could benefit from internalizing this fact.

    • Replies: @Catdog
  110. This COTW roundup will be the blog’s concluding act.

    I’m sorry to hear that.

    It’s been a real highlight of the website.
    Probably my #2 blogger here, after Big Steve.

    You’ll be missed.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  111. Svevlad says:

    Dangit, who’s gonna statisticspost now?

  112. Maybe we ought to be using this short window of time to organize for the continuity of this community, rather than debating dildo usage.

  113. Dumbo says:
    @Corvinus

    Sure. But for men it’s different. Of course, some can become angry and violent. But others can find meaning in life beyond children or a relationship.

    I think for women, this is harder.

    Also, men can (in theory) still get married and have children later in life. For women, that’s harder too.

    But I agree, it’s bad for both. We are all in a bad way. And it’s all by design.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  114. @John Johnson

    “By the time they realize they were too picky their options are even more limited. This is a huge problem that no one seems to be addressing.”

    I keep throwing this (attractive, brought up to focus on career (so had abortion when young), intelligent lady at the commentariat. The trouble is that even her site (https://gateway-women.com/) doesn’t go out to young women and tell them “it’s later than you think – don’t do what I did”. Misery loves company.

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/oct/02/the-desire-to-have-a-child-never-goes-away-how-the-involuntarily-childless-are-forming-a-new-movement

    She remembers the moment she realised she was definitely never going to be a mother. It was February 2009 and, at 44-and-a-half, she had left a bad long-term relationship and moved into a grotty London flat. “I was standing by the window, watching the rain make dusty tracks down the glass, when the traffic in the street below seemed to go silent, as if I’d put it on ‘mute’. In that moment, I became acutely aware of myself, almost as if I were an observer of the scene from outside my body. And then it came to me: it’s over. I’m never going to have a baby.

    Very sorry to see AE go. Who will dice and slice the data as he could?

  115. @Wency

    My guess would be that practically everyone who is “spiritual, but not religious” believes something like “the universe” pre-ordains your soulmate, while it’s still a minority position within Evangelicalism and unheard of in the rest of conservative Christianity.

    Yea not at all convinced.

    If everything is pre-ordained by God then everything is already fixed including your spouse.

    Christianity seems to allow that some men and women will remain single which contradicts the message that you should wait for marriage. The real message is:

    You should wait for marriage even though some of you will never marry.

    Kind of sad really. Can’t remember who it was on here that talked about how Christianity needs something like warrior monks. That actually makes a lot of sense. Direct men towards a purpose where being single is a virtue. Reminds me of cases in history where childless men were selected for dangerous battles.

    I have kids and a good wife but I am concerned with the single men that I see. I’m not convinced Christianity is helping them but liberalism / secular culture is certainly far worse. I am critical of modern Christianity but I absolutely despise liberalism. Just in case you are wondering where I am coming from.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  116. @nebulafox

    “As is always the case with manosphere-esque topics, the “carousel” narratives takes a kernel of truth and blows it out of proportion. ”

    I remember the argument from numbers best: the more men a woman has slept with, the lower the likelihood that any one man will be the “best” of the lot. What are the chances of outperforming 10 other men to occupy that place in some woman’s mind? Yet men likely follow a bell curve here, and most will not compete. Or compute, in her mind.

    This leads to the concept of the Alpha Widow: every woman will always be the sexual widow of the man who best rocked her world. Of course, when she was younger, she attracted more of those types of men, and as she ages they will continue to pursue younger women. So the only man who COULD outcompete all those other partners won’t have her. A problem.

    That all struck me as mathematically true. Would you call it a kernel?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  117. @Intelligent Dasein

    How would you continue this community?

    A Disqus account?

    A mailing list based on new anonymous emails?

    Telegram?

    A request to Ron Unz for a small group of long-time commenters to continue the blog?

    Some other suggestion?

    • Replies: @Rattus Norwegius
  118. @TomSchmidt

    I think that theory depends on an unemotional view of sex, which makes it extremely weak.

    Rather than Alpha/Beta, I think a lot of men would best realise that safe, secure in themselves and open to the woman, results in far more sexual satisfaction for her, than some cartoon display of masculinity.

    It is also fortunate that most men get better at this, the longer into a relationship.; which, not coincidentally, is also when sex gets better for many women.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  119. @V. K. Ovelund

    V.K. Overlund
    I must say that I’m somewhat flattered to be on your list of less frequent commenters you have nevertheless appreciated. I sometimes don’t post all that much, though I have been a consistent lurker.

    I’ve certainly appreciated your posts as well for their thoughtfully considered content, impeccably well mannered presentation, and good humor. They are (like several other notable commenters here) of a high caliber rarely found on the internet today.

    If you don’t find it presumptuous I’ll extend a similar invitation to correspond via email outside of this site.
    The email on file is a real one, so if you would like it feel free to get it from AE. If you would prefer not to, no hard feelings and I hope I’ll continue to see you around other parts of Unz.

  120. @John Johnson

    “Can’t remember who it was on here that talked about how Christianity needs something like warrior monks. That actually makes a lot of sense. Direct men towards a purpose where being single is a virtue. Reminds me of cases in history where childless men were selected for dangerous battles.”

    Yes, every society is faced with the question of what to do with excess men. The genetic facts are that 2/3rds of all gene mutations that have survived have originated with women, and 1/3rd with men. The only way that that is possible is if twice as many women as men have left behind descendants, unless mutation happens differentially to women. The best estimate I read was that 80% of human females and 40% of human males have left behind descendants.

    Males are the more fragile sex, being subject to more genetic diseases due to sex-linked traits, like color blindness. A lot of them are the results of bad genetic experiments and not meant to survive, let alone breed. That’s just the bad luck of being born male; the flip side is that a male can propagate a good mutation much more widely than a female can.

    To a large extent, Medieval Christianity was an effort to deal with these very real facts of life. Men are more extreme, more likely to be geniuses and more likely to be mentally retarded, and a lot of that difference is written in the genes. I had very little to do, for example, with being born smart; it’s just a characteristic I was blessed with. Society moves forward when it gains the benefits of the good extremists while it compensates the loser extremists who were born stupid through no fault of their own (or any other characteristic.), and has a social support system that was paired with a Catholic morality (discouraging bastardy while supporting the children but also insisting on adherence to [or at least recognition of the validity of] a Christian morality. It’s an attempt to square the circle of differential sexuality, and also provide an outlet for the 60% of males who will never know the joys and sufferings of fatherhood.

  121. @Dumbo

    Sure. But for men it’s different. Of course, some can become angry and violent. But others can find meaning in life beyond children or a relationship.

    I think for women, this is harder.

    I agree that it is harder for women, much harder in fact.

    This is especially true if their friends have children.

    Society wants to believe it is not true but I have seen it too many times.

    I actually don’t think that women with children should be friends with childless women. There is too much of a gap.

    Childless women get really snippy and gossipy. They will make a lot of negative comments about men.

    Single men can envelop themselves into a hobby. There is the incel problem but men in general are more likely to take action on the extremes. Women are more likely to take it out on personal relationships. I really wish this wasn’t the case but I think women are better off just getting knocked up by a certain age. Even a bar encounter. I’ve met single women that had the accident kid and they were way happier than childless couples.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  122. @Triteleia Laxa

    Best Napoleon quote

    His Majesty told us that when he came back to Paris after his campaign in Italy, Madame de Stäel did everything she could to propitiate him. She even came to the Rue Chantereine, but was sent away. She wrote him a great many letters, some from Italy, some in Paris. She also asked him to a ball, but he did not go. At a fête given by Talleyrand, she came and sat down beside him and talked to him for two hours; finally, she suddenly asked him, ‘Who was the most superior woman in antiquity, and who is so at the present day?’ He answered, ‘She who has borne the most children.

    https://shannonselin.com/2014/08/10-napoleon-bonaparte-quotes-context/

  123. @Intelligent Dasein

    Good Point. Which is why you are the Intelligent Dasein.

    I’m rather a Luddite so my ideas of how to continue are likely to be not very savvy, but I’m certainly up for it in practice, and would be wiling to help make it happen. The wider internet is a parched wasteland when it comes to comment sections and I hate to see this one go.

    Triteleia Laxa’s suggestion to petition Ron to allow the blog to continue under other auspices seems reasonable.

    To also echo other’s point, I would certainly be willing to pay real money to keep AE around should he have a change of heart after a break.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  124. anon[271] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wency

    “Soulmate” appears to be a pseudopod extension out of the cult of Courtly Love, which can be traced back to Eleanor of Aquitaine’s era in the 12th century. A bit older than the New Age stuff that merely restated the same old theme.

    It should be no surprise that “soulmate” is a staple of romance fiction.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  125. @Triteleia Laxa

    Yes, it’s literally a rational view of sex. The ratio of 1/n as the probability of being best gets smaller and smaller as n grows. That might not be the best way to view it, but it correlates with what I have heard from non-partner women telling me about their own sex lives. They go right in their minds to the one who rocked their worlds, and for a lucky few, that’s the current Mr.

    James Joyce wrote about this long ago:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dead_(short_story)

    The Conroys leave and Gabriel is excited, for it has been a long time since he and Gretta have had a night in a hotel to themselves. When they arrived at the hotel, Gabriel’s aspirations of passionate lovemaking are conclusively dashed by Gretta’s lack of interest. He presses her about what is bothering her, and she admits that she is “thinking about that song, The Lass of Aughrim.”[3] She admits that it reminds her of someone, a young man named Michael Furey, who had courted her in her youth in Galway. He used to sing The Lass of Aughrim for her. … Gabriel is shocked and dismayed that there was something of such significance in his wife’s life that he never knew about.

    Rather than Alpha/Beta, I think a lot of men would best realise that safe, secure in themselves and open to the woman, results in far more sexual satisfaction for her, than some cartoon display of masculinity.
    I agree.

    It is also fortunate that most men get better at this, the longer into a relationship.; which, not coincidentally, is also when sex gets better for many women.
    Yes, but if Michael Furey is occupying the spot of best, the long term will never come. Therein lies the problem, no? If there is no replacing Michael, then the best course of action is not to try. Joyce did not invent this female tendency, and it’s one of the wondrous things about that sex. It can also lead to disaster.

  126. anon[271] • Disclaimer says:
    @Getaclue

    Women are nowhere near into porn as men…

    Yeah, they are. It’s just that in the larger world, “porn” is defined solely in terms of men’s porn, i.e. visual. This is a benefit to women, who can indulge in their porn without most men noticing. Those who can see, however, merely smirk.

    Tell me, how many copies did “Fifty Shades of Grey” sell, world wide? How about the other two volumes in the series? Those books were sold everywhere, even in airports. Did you ever read one of them? It’s a classic RomFic series; includes graphic porny text at semi regular intervals, with appropriate build up of the “will she? will he?” sort.

    Go to a bookstore. New or used, doesn’t matter. See how large the “romance” section is. Pick up a Harlequin or other rom-fic and start skimming. How many pages does it take before some girl is in danger of foul ravishment? How many ravishings are their in the entire 180 page novel? What’s the narrative description like? How detailed are the words describing her swirl of emotions? Oh, and how graphic & anatomically correct are the details of the ravishment?

    Yup. There it is. Like cleaning out someone’s garage and finding an old copy of “Letters to Penthouse”.

    Buuuut….books are old tech. Stroll up to a 20 year old college girl and start looking into her phone, see what stories she’s carrying around – if she’ll let you. There’s a whole world of stories available from Amazon for 99 cents, suitable for phone or Kindle or other device than can be held with one hand. They generally go far beyond anything for sale in Barnes & Noble. Of course there are plenty of women pushing 40 who have their one-handed Kindle library as well. I know some of them.

    Yeah, a lot of women are into porn, just not so much into men’s style of porn. This is part of that brain difference that John Johnson was going on about – that he does not completely understand, yet.

    • Agree: Triteleia Laxa, dfordoom
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    , @Getaclue
  127. Sad to hear you will be moving on, AE. You’ve been a great contribution to the site. Take care and best of luck to you. The email on file is real. Feel free to share with VK Ovelund.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  128. @V. K. Ovelund

    Flattered to make your guest list, V.K. An IRL UR commentariat dinner party actually sounds like a nice idea (or a potential disaster, lol.) Thanks for the compliment, but I wouldn’t presume to be a better man than you. You are very polite and a consistent gentleman in the comments section and there are times when I should take a step back and emulate your approach more. As I told AE, you are welcome to get my email on file. It is real. In any case, see you around the rest of the site. Cheers!

  129. @John Johnson

    Okay, now I’ve visited a couple of US drug stores, and … zero vibrators on sale. And this is in a major metro area, so we’re not talking about the Bible Belt.

    I suppose I may as well put down another marker on the “All of the women I know, own a vibrator” narrative. That is that none of the women that I know own a vibrator. Are they all “highly educated, professional women”? Well, a couple of them have advanced degrees, but most of them are just high school or college graduates. More teachers, housewives and social workers than lawyers, economists and college professors. Correlation may not be causation, but it could be a good hint.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Triteleia Laxa
  130. anon[446] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri

    Okay, now I’ve visited a couple of US drug stores, and … zero vibrators on sale. And this is in a major metro area,

    Interesting. I’ve seen such things in every major chain in the US, even here in flyover. CVS, Walgreen, Rite-Aid. Not in the smaller, independent ones.

    Here are some examples.

    https://www.walgreens.com/q/sexual+vibrators
    https://www.riteaid.com/shop/sexual-health/adult-toys
    https://www.cvs.com/shop/sexual-health/vibrators-adult-toys/vibrators

    That is that none of the women that I know own a vibrator.

    Lol. Maybe, maybe not. It isn’t the sort of thing girls generally tell men, or at least most men.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  131. @Almost Missouri

    The British sex shop and High Street chain for women claims to have sold 40 million+ of their own brand device.

    Although only a third of British women admit to owning a sex toy, according to another survey I found.

    Amazon US results in 1200+ results for vibrators. Some with tens of thousands of reviews, and I suspect that people are hesitant to leave reviews.

    Trojan, a condom brand, says that, after research, the US vibrator market is worth twice the US condom market; as $1 billion annually.

    50 Shades of Grey, a crass sex book, was the biggest selling book in the US of the 2010s. Its featuring of vibrators was soon as pushing huge growth in the market.

    [MORE]

    Considering that vibrators should be unnecessary, these are all big facts. Imagine if fleshlights, or some male device, came close to these figures. It would be seen here as incontrovertible proof that women hate sex and only want money/status/romance.

    I am not alleging that you are making this point, just that a lot of lonely men convince themselves of this so as to assuage their hurt feelings, when their charms don’t seem to be paying off.

    The problem is that their belief ends up determining their experience, as only women who fit the pattern are going to want to get with those men who try to make them fit that pattern.

  132. @Chrisnonymous

    Here is my blog. There isn’t anything of substance on it right now except my anti-Darwinian essay. It’s more of a placeholder blog for when I start writing in earnest (which perhaps I will need to start doing).

    http://intelligentdasein.blogspot.com/

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  133. @BlackC

    A man needs a woman like a worker needs a union – you want it until you have it.

    For men, marriage is a like a tornado – it starts with a lot of sucking and blowing, but in the end you lose your house.

    • LOL: Almost Missouri
    • Troll: Corvinus
  134. @Wency

    Just let me know on here if you message me on there.

    I have messaged you on there. (I do not know whether 945570 helps, but Almost Missouri has given a number for some inscrutable reason, so why can’t I give one, too?)

  135. I loved audacious epigone as the best of all of the offerings on unz. It provided fact-based insight, as opposed to gobs of projection based on a news item blown out of proportion.
    I am really going to miss you.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  136. @Audacious Epigone

    At this writing, Almost Missouri, dfordoom, Barbarossa and Mario Partisan seem to have accepted your offer. (Barbarossa was not on the original list but I can think of no reason not to add him, so let’s do it.)

    Wency is getting in touch via other means.

  137. Talha says:

    A brother I know who is also a good friend and avid reader of UNZ saw this and suggested I should come out of “retirement” to say some words to our parting host. Sound advice.

    A lot has been said and I echo those sentiments; this was a unique blog and the tone set by the host was crucial to helping the general civility and interesting nature of the discussions.

    AE, UNZ will find it difficult to replace you. The topics you covered, with such interesting stats was always a welcome read. It was easily my favorite online hangout for the last few years.

    It is my hope that the honesty and sincerity you displayed in your interactions will take you far in life.

    May God grant you and your family honor in this world and the next.

    Peace.

    Since you have my email; if you are ever traveling around Chicago and have a couple of hours to spare, I’ll treat you to some joints that serve some of the best nihari and Bihari kababs this side of the Atlantic.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Rosie
  138. @nebulafox

    I’m bullish on your future.

  139. @DanHessinMD

    Is the email attached to your handle an active one you check regularly?

  140. @Intelligent Dasein

    Far be it from me to speak for him, but Ron highlighted your previous post so it’d be worth running the idea of a guest post by him under your handle.

  141. Rosie says:
    @John Johnson

    Most people will not get prince charming/princess babe.

    I remain unconvinced of this. The idea of mate scarcity and hypercompetition rests on the premise that we are all basically the same and basically want the same things.

    I may be biased on account of my own experience.

  142. Rosie says:
    @John Johnson

    Women really are wired differently.

    Yes, we are. I suspect the truth boils down to something like this:

    sex : men :: chocolate :: women

    And I’m only half joking. A parting hbd-related armchair hypothesis:

    Women cannot improve their reproductive fitness by having more sex, but we can ensure that, in the event of a pregnancy, we have sufficient calories stored up to carry the pregnancy to term.

    Where is Talha? He was my favorite commenter here.

    As for you, AE, you have been a most gracious host and your commitment to a sincere search for truth has never failed.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  143. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    Ah, there you are. Anyway, you have given me much food for thought, Talha, and probably had more influence on me than anyone else here. I feel I have a much better and more charitable understanding of your faith than I ever have before. My sincere hope is that Christians and Muslims coexist on this planet for centuries to come.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Anon
  144. Curle says:
    @John Johnson

    “ there is no secret supply of White collar White men that smell nice and vote Democrat.”

    Yes there is, they’re called the senate Republican caucus. House R caucus too, at least under Ryan.

  145. @Triteleia Laxa

    All I can say to all the vibrator discussion is that it certainly seems like a blot on manly pride that so many of them have to be in circulation. Perhaps it’s that men are just that bad at the arts of feminine pleasure from watching too many disgusting porn video’s? Are most men just that terrible at good sex?

    My wife certainly has no needs for such a device, and If I suspected otherwise I would feel terribly ashamed. It’s not rocket science, but it does require paying attention to what gets results!

    My small sample size from experience says that women do approach sex far differently from men (which should hardly be surprising), but that pleasure is still a major and desirable factor.

  146. Curle says:
    @John Johnson

    I went to college with a girl who was an early employee at Amazon. According to her one of their earliest major profit centers was sex toys, mostly vibrators. She worked in this unheralded but very profitable dept. and called herself the Dildo Queen as a joke. Before Amazon it was mail order. Women may be too shy to buy them at the drug store but not too shy to avoid them altogether. Bezos made a lot of money off those gals.

  147. @Intelligent Dasein

    That’s a good idea except that you shouldn’t write on Blogspot which is Google. If you ever get a following you will be doxxed and cancelled because Google knows who you are.

    I have been researching anonymous publishing. Nothing reliable yet, but it something dissidents need a primer on. There are many, many ways to accidentally ID yoursel f to TPTB.

  148. @anon

    It isn’t the sort of thing girls generally tell men, or at least most men.

    Okay, obviously, I phrased it to match Triteleia Laxa’s phrasing, but it would be more accurate if we had said something like, “none/all of the women that I am in a position to know about definitively, own a vibrator.”

    Here are some examples.

    Yeah, okay they are offered on websites, but the original headline quote was “sold on the High Street”, which was the particularity I responded to.

  149. @Triteleia Laxa

    The British sex shop and High Street chain for women claims to have sold 40 million+ of their own brand device.

    Although only a third of British women admit to owning a sex toy

    There are more guns than people in the US, yet less than a third of Americans are gun owners. Obviously, people who buy guns/vibrators don’t stop at one.

    I am not alleging that you are making this point

    You’re correct: I’m not. I’m only making the perhaps minor point that High Street vibrators and a-vibrator-in-every-pudendum ethos is less manifest from where I’m standing. On the larger and more salient point that public depravity is big and getting bigger, though, I do not gainsay.

    • Agree: Barbarossa
    • Thanks: Triteleia Laxa
  150. @Barbarossa

    it certainly seems like a blot on manly pride that so many of them have to be in circulation

    Yes I think this is the underlying matter over which the varied rhetoric has been swirling. But then the number in circulation is a function not only of female appetite but also of the availability of mechanical vibrators to fill that appetite. I gather that female ownership of vibrators is quite low in, say, Saudi Arabia and the People’s Republic of China, but is that a result of Saudi* and Chinese men being exquisite lovers, or of vibrators not being particularly available in those markets?

    ——

    *There was that whole “Sheik of Araby” thing a century ago, but then its real popularity only came after an Italian was cast as The Sheik.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Barbarossa
  151. Dumbo says:
    @John Johnson

    I’ve met single women that had the accident kid and they were way happier than childless couples.

    Hm, I don’t know. I know childless couples – either by desire or biological reasons – who are mostly happy. Sure, there’ll always be the feeling of something missing, but isn’t it true of all lives? Also there are options such as fostering or adoption.

    As for single or divorced moms, I know quite a few who are pretty miserable and lead messy lives. Worse, if they have an only child, and in particular a male child, they tend to smother him, and cause an infinity of problems for him later in life. Many such cases. A boy needs a father. (And lesbian couples with a male child, that must be hell).

  152. Rosie says:
    @Almost Missouri

    I gather that female ownership of vibrators is quite low in, say, Saudi Arabia and the People’s Republic of China, but is that a result of Saudi* and Chinese men being exquisite lovers, or of vibrators not being particularly available in those markets?

    Oftentimes, it’s a gag gift.

    You know how sometimes you’re joking, and then sometimes you’re just kind of joking, or saying something “half-in-jest”? Well, it’s kinda like that. It’s a joke, but yeah, we also know you’re problem gonna use it at some point. 😉

  153. @anon

    “See how large the “romance” section is.”

    Man and women are different. I’m trying to think which feminist back in the 1970s (Greer perhaps?) did a neat deconstruction of Georgette Heyer’s 1935 novel “Regency Buck”, in which there’s zero explicit sex.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regency_Buck

    Men and women are different.

    I hated it when a girl I loved slept with someone else, not in the least a turn on. But a girl can react quite differently to the thought that another girl wants her chap.

  154. @Chrisnonymous

    If you ever get a following you will be doxxed and cancelled because Google knows who you are.

    True.

    have been researching anonymous publishing. Nothing reliable yet

    Though they’re getting woker, WordPress is not so intolerant as Google et al. yet, and more to the point they so far lack Google’s piercing panopticon reach into your privacy. Plus their blogging software is a sort of de facto standard (the Unz site uses a variation of it).

    Minimal opsec is to register/post through a reliable VPN and/or Tor.

    OTOTH, your neo-Scholastic Thomism (if I may describe it thus) may be too abstruse for woke midwits to parse. If you don’t use any algorithmic trigger words, they may just ignore you for now.

    • LOL: Triteleia Laxa
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    , @dfordoom
  155. @Chrisnonymous

    What causes you to believe that Google would dox someone?

    I don’t know any instance of this happening. I also suspect that ordinary employees can’t access this information as it is encrypted for privacy reasons.

    The only examples of doxxing that I have seen, have been where the individual repeatedly outs themselves in often boastful or ludicrous ways. I don’t blame them. They have a following and they want to benefit from it; but this seems to be the way.

    Perhaps you have contradicting examples? Or anyone does?

    I’d recommend being safe not sorry, but this is something I’ve noticed.

  156. anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:

    We’ll miss your perspective, always refreshing, AE. Best wishes !

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  157. @Almost Missouri

    WordPress cancelled Roissy (Heartiste).

    TL – google have the potential to dox anyone given the amount of info they have on most people – as you may see from the targeted ads you’re delivered.

    Degoogling – uncoupling – is (deliberately?) difficult and time consuming.

  158. Corvinus says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    “WordPress cancelled Roissy (Heartiste)”.

    He canceled himself by not marrying and having more than 2 white children.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
  159. @YetAnotherAnon

    But have they doxxed anyone?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  160. @Triteleia Laxa

    Sorry, I thought your reply was to me. I agree with your point as regards Google. They could doxx anyone, but they never do. They are happy to deplatform, but they don’t do more. They act in a way which is broadly consistent with how they see themselves and what they think is right.

    Might this change if a fully Woke wave takes over from their moderate liberalism? I don’t know.

    No idea how to prepare if that ever becomes the case, but I don’t think it will.

    Any suggestions?

  161. @anon

    Ecuadorans are not Mexicans. How many times do you have to be told this? Though ask an Ecuadoran does have more of an alliterative ring…

  162. @Stan d Mute

    He’s always on the prowl. For every writer who drops out, two come in.

  163. @Almost Missouri

    It should be updated now. That provider is the best one, by the way. Good choice!

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  164. @Charles Pewitt

    It’ll be on the archives here and our gracious host might permit a reapplication if it came through the doggy door:

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
  165. @YetAnotherAnon

    Blogger continues to host Vox Day’s blog. It may be the largest blogspot address. If not the largest, one of them and he has some quite controversial content. Google doesn’t deplatform at all so far as I can tell. Less than WP does for certain.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  166. Catdog says:
    @anon

    Men are not defective women.

    Who are you arguing with?

    • Agree: Triteleia Laxa
  167. @anon

    Cool babble, bro. What does any of that have do to do with the fact that about 20% of Pornhub subscribers are women?

    The point is that men and women are more complicated than the traditional or the liberal view.

    The traditional view is that women and men have different brains.

    The liberal view is that gender is a social construct and there is no male or female brain.

    Through MRI scans we can in fact see differences but many men in fact have female brains. So pointing out that 20% of pornhub subscribers are women doesn’t negate anything I have stated. I never took an absolutist position like the traditionalist or liberal.

    However in the schools gender is still taught as a social construct. Liberals have no interest in reality and prefer to lie when it involves gender or race. You can find PDFs of college texts online where they depict the idea of gender brain differences as the ignorant thinking of conservatives. They have completely ignored MRI scan studies.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  168. @Audacious Epigone

    It’ll be on the archives here and our gracious host might permit a reapplication if it came through the doggy door:

    I say:

    Reapplication Now!

    Thank you for all the blog posting and thank you for focusing on monetary policy.

    Andrew Jackson was able to explain the power of the central banks so it can be done and I find it odd that the Democrat Party and the Republican Party go out of their way to avoid discussing monetary policy.

    The Wall Street Journal at least allows some debate on monetary policy and asset bubbles and the NY Times will run some bits on monetary policy, too, but it must be explained to the voters, especially young voters, that the asset bubbles created by the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve Bank have overwhelmingly given ill-gotten gains to the top ten percent of wealth holders and Americans born before 1965.

    Thank You Again Mr. Epigone!

  169. Soak The Billionaires Now!

    Financially Liquidate The Billionaires Now!

    Legally And Forcibly Exile The Financially Liquidated Billionaires To A Walled And Fenced Compound Camp In Sub-Saharan Africa!

    Not just Jeff Bezos, all the billionaires, and his damn ex-wife with all that divorce loot too!

  170. @Triteleia Laxa

    I don’t know any instance of this happening.

    I don’t track this, but there have at least been various YouTubers doxxed over the years. YouTube is owned and controlled by Google. The doxxing may not have been done by Google itself, but Google has a long history of working hand-in-glove with the Deep State, so they needn’t themselves jubilantly announce the identity of a formerly anonymous person, as an SJW-journalist does. Instead they can merely leak a bit of adverse information to government authorities, Antifa, a journalist/activist, or whomever might make adverse use of it. Google isn’t implicated, but “bad” people still suffer.

    Right now, anyone can file a subpoena for your Google records. Most of the time Google just ignores subpoenas (for some mysterious reason, they are never penalized for this, as you or I would be), but if you happen to be the “right” kind of person, Google may choose to comply and release your “private” information to the petitioner. I don’t know, but I suspect, that this is part of what keeps people like, say, Michael Flynn in perpetual litigation/prosecution hell: his persecutors keep getting privileged access to data that would be private for “good” people.

    In any case, Google has the power to do this any time it chooses to, so whether or not it has used this power already, there is no reason entrust Google with more power than it already has. Though it seeks to present a benign, anodyne public face, internal documents have demonstrated conclusively that the company, up to and including executive suites, is full of SJWs who view Trump voters, conservatives and whites in general with great hostility. To put it forensically, they have the means, they have the motive, … it would be the height of complacency to assume they will never start taking opportunities, if they haven’t already.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  171. @Almost Missouri

    I suppose my disbelief is mostly rhetorical.

    It really does seem a perverse world when the it’s awash in vibrators, too many men are sexually ineffectual porn addicts, and divorce is everywhere, while the culture is completely saturated in the sexualization of everything. It’s just so profoundly stupid and unhappy.

    As someone who has been married for nearly 17 years to my only sexual partner, it just seems like it’s not that complicated (if one starts out with reasonable assumptions and expectations, that is. The lack of which are the crux of the problem.)
    We still have a great time with each other (along with five kids to prove it) and while it takes some attention it’s just really not rocket science.

    I suppose that I shouldn’t be surprised at humanity’s ability to eff up a wet dream!

  172. Corvinus says:
    @John Johnson

    “However in the schools gender is still taught as a social construct. Liberals have no interest in reality and prefer to lie when it involves gender or race. You can find PDFs of college texts online where they depict the idea of gender brain differences as the ignorant thinking of conservatives. They have completely ignored MRI scan studies.”

    We understand your point, but you overgeneralizing it. Some, not all or even most, liberals hold that illogical position.

    https://qz.com/1190996/scientific-research-shows-gender-is-not-just-a-social-construct

    This runs counter to the popular narrative that gender differences expressed in childhood play are determined entirely by social expectations. Social factors certainly do have influence, and the paper found evidence of this: For example, as boys got older they were increasingly likely to play with conventionally male toys, reflecting the impact of environmental rather than biological causes. But overall, the data reflect broader findings in psychology, which show that biology and society interact to cause gendered behavior. In other words, contrary to the popular progressive belief, gender is partly socially constructed—but it’s not just a social construct.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
  173. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    Thanks for the kind words, Rosie, and thank you for reading my comments over these past years.

    You may have missed my earlier comment that I was taking a major timeout from online forums/social media for the foreseeable future based on the advice of my teachers:
    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/bipocs-view-cure-as-modestly-riskier-than-disease/#comment-4656685

    Some of those reasons perhaps converging with AE’s reasons and rearrangement of priorities – there are only 24 hours in a day after all. One of the immediate benefits being that I’ve lost almost 25 pounds since my hiatus started in March – alhamdulillah.

    I just came back for this instance (on the advice of the brother I mentioned) on the occasion of this blog ending and to say some well-deserved words of appreciation to our good online host for these past few years.

    Stay well – and may your children make you proud and be a source of comfort and coolness for your eyes in your later years.

    Peace.

    Note: For the record, I think these kinds of forums would benefit greatly from more women commenters (especially mothers) who bring a different perspective (whether or not the men agree with everything they say). Any group/movement/ideology that cannot attract mothers (or would-be mothers) into its ranks is…well…whistling past the graveyard.

    I came across a hadith during Ramadan that you might appreciate (it made an impression on me when I read it), it is reported in various authentic collections in slightly different wording, but…
    The Prophet (pbuh) said to his Companions (ra) “The utterly devoted (mufarridun) have preceded.” They asked, “Who are the utterly devoted?” He answered, “The ones who are absorbed-in/addicted-to the remembrance of God.”

    What a thing to be addicted to, eh?

    And now, I’ll take my leave back into “retirement”, I thought it would be rude not to reply back, but please pardon me if I don’t reply any further to yourself or others.

    • Thanks: Rosie, Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @RogerL
  174. @Almost Missouri

    I disagree with their liberal flirtation with SJW stuff being a sign of anything substantial, but I see your point. A primer on how to be undoxxable, without making much effort, would be useful.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  175. I really enjoyed reading your analysis. Hopefully, you’ll still remain a regular poster on this site. All the best to you.

  176. ATate says:

    I doubt I ever commented here. I’m too dumb to say anything meaningful that would add to the conversation.

    This really bums me out though! Shit…I’ve not been this upset at losing a blogger/voice I enjoyed since TLP quit blogging.

    Good luck to you and yours whatever you’re doing! You’ll be missed a great deal.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @RogerL
  177. SIMP simp says:

    Sorry to see you stop. Despite not always agreeing with your opinions, I always valued your arguments. You are one of the few intellectuals who actually does his homework and shows his work while the rest are just bloviating carefully avoiding anything resembling evidence and logic.
    From now on my headcanon will be that your life is so awesome that you ascended above the culture war.
    Stay sane and be happy!

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  178. Anon[177] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie

    Thank God. Please take Rosie with you, the two of you made half of AE’s comment sections unreadable.

  179. @Triteleia Laxa

    A primer on how to be undoxxable, without making much effort, would be useful.

    IMHO, if there is a single concept that is key to privacy/security/confidentiality/undoxability, it is …

    [drum roll]

    compartmentalization.

    The big boys do it, and you can too. Just in different ways.

    Keep your online identity separate from your real life identity. Particularly avoid mentioning specific dates and places together that would severely narrow the field of candidates for who you are. Maybe sprinkle in some false clues now and again.

    Don’t do personally-identifiable browsing (shopping, personal email, work, etc.) and crimethink poasting from the same browser. Better not even to do them from the same computer.

    VPNs can help, but a converged VPN knows as much about you as a converged ISP. Any network connection you paid for with your credit card knows your identity definitively. A VPN just pledges not to do anything with that knowledge. Maybe they’re telling the truth.

    Your smart phone is spying on you and reporting back to the mother ship. That doesn’t mean don’t have one; it means understand what it is.

    Chrome is Google spyware. IE and Edge are Microsoft spyware. Opera is CCP spyware.

    Most browsers can be “fingerprinted” nowadays (a unique identity established and linked to you via data aggregators), especially if you have unusual fonts loaded. Brave actively resists this. Vivaldi passively resists this.

    Tor works, mostly.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Thanks: Barbarossa
  180. @Almost Missouri

    Thank you!

    It does seem like a lot though; and I have broken it in every way.

    I suppose it may be the Gulag for me, but I do have a feeling of security and beneficence in the universe, so I’m not torn up about it. If this is my delusion, then I am still happy with it.

    • Agree: Barbarossa
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  181. @Audacious Epigone

    Thank you.

    BTW, there is question I always hoped you would address, but now that you are retiring, the most I can hope for is that you might deign to give some parting guidance on how someone else could answer it, or maybe point to someone else who already has addressed it, if you know of such.

    In the past, you have made some simple posts demonstrating that modern breeding is dysgenic for intelligence, with some groups more so than others. This is bracing stuff, but undeniable as it is, obviously it cannot always have been the case. So the question arises, when did human breeding turn dysgenic? I have a theory about when (and what) caused this change, but never mind that, what do the data say? Is there a way to look back in time and see when the fertility curves vs. wordsum scores turned dysgenic? I believe you used the GSS to do these curves, so those data only go back as far as the GSS, which I think is 1972, which I suspect is after the turn happened.

    Any advice/guidance/hints/tips?

    • Replies: @Wency
    , @Audacious Epigone
  182. @Triteleia Laxa

    I have broken it in every way.

    Haven’t we all, at some point?

    But don’t despair. Undoxxability doesn’t really exist. All that exists is less doxxable vs. more doxxable. Try to be less.

    If you want to be hardcore about it, you can start over with fresh identities on fresh devices with better opsec practices, but that takes more effort than most people will muster. So just try to be less doxxable.

  183. @Almost Missouri

    I have thought about implementing more internet security and your succinct tutorial is a good one. I should at least switch to Brave as a browser since Duck Duck Go seems like a lame attempt now. I’m still using a flip phone, for a variety of reasons including privacy and sheer contrarian spirit.

    Mostly I’ve intentionally not worried about being doxxed though. I write a column in the local paper (which is probably pretty lame by Unz standards, but still somewhat perturbing to the normies) so my beliefs are hardly a secret in my community. I made that decision intentionally a few years back since I felt like it was time to put up or shut up. I’ve gotten called a racist etc. by some of the woke contingent affiliated with the local college, but it doesn’t affect my local standing.

    That decision has been made significantly easier by the fact that I am self employed. If I worked at the college in town, I probably would have been much more tempted to lie low and not rock the boat. I rather feel like I owe it to my kids to not keep my head down too much though.

    This might bite me in the rear later on as my previously fairly anodyne nonconformity becomes considered full crime-think. I really don’t get too crazy online anyhow, relatively speaking.

    I know that there a lot of folks who would lose their jobs and livelihoods if they were doxxed and I understand their concern. However, it seems worth considering making oneself doxx-proof by virtue of one’s life choices. Mine were certainly not made with that specific goal in mind, but I’m happy enough to be at that place.

    If the current zeitgeist is only confronted by a lot of anonymous people talking to each other online it will never change. The key in my mind is having that solid local community as one’s base.

  184. RogerL says:
    @Talha

    Talha has some good points. Any discussion, which is missing the participation of women and mothers will end up being skewed, which then undermines learning and problem solving. If you aren’t learning or problem solving when commenting on a blog, then what’s the point?

    Many of the columns and blogs on Unz.com have very few commenters with names typical of women. In that sense, this has been an unusual blog. So I have some questions about this.

    Why have a significant number of women been participating in this blog?

    What can be done to increase the participation of women commenters on a column or blog?

    Is there anything else that can be done to increase the participation of mothers?

  185. Curle says:

    “ If you aren’t learning or problem solving when commenting on a blog, then what’s the point?”

    Correcting errors?

    “What can be done to increase the participation of women commenters on a column or blog?”

    Turn them into men.

    “Is there anything else that can be done to increase the participation of mothers?”

    Offer coupons?

  186. Jay Fink says:
    @RogerL

    Women are mostly not interested in the type of discussions we get in here. They prefer more light weight topics. I know that sounds sexist but it’s the truth.

    • Agree: Wency
    • Replies: @Curle
    , @Corvinus
  187. RogerL says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I agree with you that its important to make a significant effort to find a way forwards to sustain this community. This community seems close to Ron’s ideal of different kinds of people talking with each other, listening, and learning from each other.

    Marriages work because people deal with issues, adapt, and find ways forwards. The same applies to sustaining communities.

    In the short time I’ve been following this blog, I’ve appreciated your comments. When you respectfully asked me what my thinking was behind my comment, that might be the first time in my life somebody did that, instead of attacking me for thinking differently.

    I wrote a couple thousand words in reply to you, and didn’t finish because I got stuck. I’m disabled by PTSD and disassociation, and my worst handicap is that at a very low level of stress I become overwhelmed, inarticulate, and stuck.

    I think there might be a pattern, that the longer the writing is, then the more likely I am to get stuck. So I’m working on the concept of breaking my writing up into installments, to reduce the risk of getting stuck.

    ~
    I learned and grew a lot while working on writing that response to your question, and am sorry I can’t finish it and share it in the near future. If you contact me offline, I will make an effort to finish it and share it with you, after its settled down enough in the back of my mind that I can continue working on it again.

    However, by that time, there might not be much difference in our positions on those issues. LOL

    I always knew there was a difference between hardworking, good neighbor, regular-people conservatives, and the trap of Conservative Inc. Until recently I didn’t see the difference between the old time liberal values, such as a livable wage for a hard day’s work and safe working conditions while you did that work, and the trap of elitist wokeism, which is in partnership with Conservative Inc.

    The conservative/liberal framing is being used as a divide and conquer wedge. We need language that works better. I’ve always been 110% for regular people.

    Maybe for now, the language of regular people versus the bloodsucking globalists and their zombie armies (on the right and left), will work good enough.

    ~
    Euroamericans took the idea of consensus from indigenous people and turned it into a verbal arm wrestling practice, which is why so many people hate to do it.

    The indigenous practice for creating consensus is to keep listening, learning, growing, and changing, and keep doing this until the shared wisdom reaches a common ground. I’ve done this for about 30 years now, and its very effective, as long as others are doing it too. I even did it in the marines in two different units.

    To work well, consensus must have a good balance of talking and listening.

    In the marines they called it taking soundings. The big boss, with a coffee cup permanently attached to the hand they didn’t write with, would walk around talking to people, adjusting thinking and plans, and keep doing this until everybody was on the same page. Basically it was facilitating consensus, but using more manly vocabulary. LOL

    Yes, there are times when instant response to orders is needed. However, that works far more smoothly with a previously established foundation of trust and consensus. Of course, this was long before the military became heavily politicalized. One of the few good things about the USMC was leadership school, where I was 3rd in my class. Since I hate spit and polish, and points for that were a significant part of the ranking scores, that was a major accomplishment. I think my community and team orientation is part of why I did surprisingly well in the marines.

    Much of what I’ve learned I gained by simply listening to others.

    Thank you for your contributions to increasing my understanding of life.

    I have more to say about continuing this blog/group/community, and that will be the next installment, which will be a couple of days because I think and write slowly, which is another huge handicap.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  188. Anon[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    That is exactly his mission here. Utterly deceptive. I wish Muslims well, but far, far away from my country and my daughters.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  189. Too bad for us that you’re leaving, but if you need a break then fair enough. Thanks for all your work over the years. Perhaps you might leave the odd comment at Steve’s to stay in touch.
    When we need you, we’ll project a bar graph into the night sky.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  190. I’ll be sorry to see you go, you have a nicely sideways look at things that we could use more of.

    Be well.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  191. Wency says:
    @Almost Missouri

    I thought the best guess was that it accompanied the Industrial Revolution, so the 19th century for most of the West. I’m trying to recall if Farewell to Alms had an estimate for precisely when the eugenic process that it described ended in England. But in general, eugenic times are rough — they consist of the underclass failing to reproduce itself (mostly due to childhood mortality) and most of the children of the middle class taking their place. The fact that this doesn’t sound like anything we know means that it has been over for a long time.

    For the most part, until very recent times, I think the poor mostly did as they always do, and the main determinant of eugenics was child mortality and the fertility of the middle and upper classes.

    Anecdotally, in support of things changing in the 19th century, I observe that a number of prominent men had these massive families in the 18th century, but this was mostly over by the mid-19th. Bach had 20 children (by two wives). A number of religious figures of the era had 10+ children: Jonathan Edwards had 11. John Wesley was intentionally childless and celibate for most of his career, but his father was a prominent clergyman whose wife bore him 19 and was herself the daughter of a prominent clergyman and youngest of 25 children.

    Earl Charles Grey (after whom the tea is named), born 1764, was a British PM with 16 legitimate children by a single wife. After him, I don’t think another PM ever surpassed 10.

    “Tippecanoe and Tyler too” (running in 1840) had a total of 25 legitimate children — Tyler was married twice but neither wife did too poorly: 8 + 7, while WH Harrison’s 10 children were by a single wife. It would be 28 years before another President (Grant) had more than 2 children survive to adulthood.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    , @songbird
  192. Curle says:
    @Jay Fink

    “They prefer more light weight topics.”

    They tend to think all knowledge can be gleaned from relationships and are hostile to things that might disrupt relationships. This makes them excellent targets of opportunity for con men and those with control over messaging. It also makes the ones who see through the relationship angles useful allies.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  193. Rosie says:
    @RogerL

    Is there anything else that can be done to increase the participation of mothers?

    There is nothing in particular that needs to be done, short of not making it a point to offend and repel women. These circles will be male-dominated for the foreseeable future, and that’s OK, so long as they’re not misogynist.

    The position of women in the dissident right is roughly analogous to the position of Whites in mainstream society. You’re allowed to be White, so long as you go along with your own systemic demonization. Obviously, that needs to change.

    The solution is complicated, though. The manosphere is extremely antimarriage. The only way they can justify this stance is by demonizing women and claiming that the courts are antimale or whatever. I have attempted to have constructive discussions about what reforms would be needed to improve the situation, but it never comes to anything, because, at the end of the day, the misogynists don’t want to share wealth or power with women.

    Things have gotten much better, though. As bad as it is now, it was far worse in the past.

    • Agree: Catdog, Triteleia Laxa
    • Disagree: YetAnotherAnon
  194. Rosie says:
    @Anon

    I wish Muslims well, but far, far away from my country and my daughters.

    I said I wanted Christians and Muslims to coexist on the same planet, not the same country. Indeed, coexistence requires a degree of separation.

    • Replies: @Anon
  195. Rosie says:
    @Curle

    This makes them excellent targets of opportunity for con men and those with control over messaging.

    I don’t know how true this is. Two points of view are allowed in this country: individualism and universalism. TPTB sell the former to men and the latter to women, with equally devastating success.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  196. @Wency

    But in general, eugenic times are rough — they consist of the underclass failing to reproduce itself (mostly due to childhood mortality) and most of the children of the middle class taking their place.

    That’s a good point, and was apparently the case in England at least. Nevertheless, modernity has proven that lowered fertility is possible—and can even be ubiquitous—without childhood mortality and other “roughness”. Unfortunately, it has also proven that fertility ubiquitously lowered by modernity tends to be dysgenic. So the question naturally arises of can we keep the lowered fertility but make it eugenic? Knowing when and how fertility became dysgenic in the first place would help answer that.

    My own theory is that it was the welfare state that turned fertility dysgenic, and Great Society programs that put it into high gear, and importing third worlders to sign them up for welfare has engaged the turbocharger. After all, paying people to have kids who otherwise couldn’t afford it sounds like a tailor-made path to dysgenia, and injecting the world’s underclass into our process makes it even worse. So we should hardly be surprised that things turned out exactly so.

    But never mind our theories, what do the data say?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Wency
  197. usNthem says:

    First got pointed in your direction by the Zman. Didn’t comment much but enjoyed your stat based posts. Best of luck and keep up the good fight.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  198. @Almost Missouri

    Strongly eugenic times are downwardly mobile times. I imagine that this leads to a lot of social dissatisfaction and instability. I get the point of improving the genetic inheritance of future generations, but this problem is a big one. It needn’t be, as the dissatisfaction is equal to the prevalence of small-mindedness, but it would be!

  199. Wency says:
    @Almost Missouri

    If you want data, you can take a look at this paper, which I think I cited here before:

    https://users.econ.umn.edu/~lej/papers/empiricalfertilityDec06.pdf

    In the US, income and fertility have been negatively correlated for as long as the government has tracked these things (i.e. the 1820s). Education and fertility have similarly been negatively correlated.

    Now, you might think that poorer groups having fewer surviving children offset that, but this was never true within this data set: in the 19th century US, the survival rate of children was actually higher for poorer/less educated groups, since cities were deathtraps and the poor and uneducated were more rural. Though I could imagine this fact being different in 19th century Europe, I’m not sure.

    I also recall others observing that the demographic transition started first among the 18th century French aristocracy and from there spread to the rest of French society, but also reached other national elites before diffusing into those countries’ lower classes. Though I don’t have a data source handy for this point.

    But as to your point on eugenics, I suppose I’m just inclined to accept a certain amount of dysgenics as the price of comfort. Modern healthcare and clean water are dysgenic. Someday society will be eugenic again, and it will also be considerably less comfortable. Until then, the trend will probably remain at least somewhat dysgenic.

    From a policy standpoint, probably the most important things we can do are encourage conscientious young people to have children, to aid their family formation, and to not let multiple billions of Africans migrate into the West.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  200. @Triteleia Laxa

    There was a blogspot blog by Chicago PD officers that closed down, I believe because of being doxxed by Google. I’m sure there are some employees at Google who have access to the identities or at least collected data about Google Account users.

  201. @Triteleia Laxa

    There’s also the issue of government subpoena, although probably neoScholasticism wouldn’t trigger the FBI.

  202. @Audacious Epigone

    Yeah, I guess you’re right. WordPress has deplatformed several people (like Sundance at Conservative Treehouse), but quick research doesn’t reveal any deplatformed Blogger blogs. Frankly, that’s surprising. Maybe there js more division among the companies at Alphabet than you would imagine. Deplatforming has definitely happened at YouTube. It may just be a matter of time though. Blogger is pretty small compared to YouTube and doesn’t attract the Eye as much perhaps.

    And anyway, giving a thought to possible futures, I would still be wary for opsec reasons of accessing any Google affiliate to publish.

    My guess is the way to go is:
    -own non-US domain name
    -hosted on out of country servers
    -paid for via crypto
    -accessed via Tor to publish

    It’s too bad there isn’t a dissident blogging platform so that writers wouldn’t have to do the first two of those.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  203. Corvinus says:
    @Jay Fink

    “Women are mostly not interested in the type of discussions we get in here. They prefer more light weight topics. I know that sounds sexist but it’s the truth.”

    That is profoundly ignorant on your part.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    , @Curle
  204. @Almost Missouri

    One more thing for writers–AI can already to some extent and will in the future more be able to ID you from prose style. All the more reason to de-Google, de-Facebook, de-Amazon, etc. Don’t give them samples and data, even in “compartmentalized” private lives.

    (Samples can come from translation services, Alexa, etc too.)

  205. Jay Fink says:
    @Corvinus

    No it’s just a truth that you don’t like (I don’t particularly like it either but have accepted it). I once worked in print media and saw the demographic profile of every magazine. Anything with hard news, and serious commentary skewed overwhelmingly male. Anything with light fluff topics leaned female, unless you count sports as fluff.

    Go to any website where things are heavily analyzed (it doesn’t have to be related to the alt-right or anything political) and the readership and participants will be mostly men. It’s the way our brains work. We like to analyze.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  206. @Jay Fink

    I guess you’re not so young. Many young women are extremely politicised.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Almost Missouri
  207. “Many young women are extremely politicised.”

    Isn’t that just the Tumblrisation of politics? An attitude rather than a philosophy? Heavy on feelings and outrage, light on analysis?

    We’re talking about people who see The Handmaid’s Tale as a serious allegory about the Religious Right*.

    (* rather than the submission fantasy it’s probably closer to)

  208. Anon[386] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    As long as the Koran exists, young Muslims will correctly interpret it as a call to war. War can be waged by deception or by violence. Their world is divided in two camps: the House of War (Dar al Harb) and the House of Peace (Dar al Islam). Coexistence is thus in principle impossible for them. When material reality limits the imposition of Islam, a deceptive “truce” happens.

    Talha was the name of a relative of Mahoma, who saved his life in pitched battle by stopping a sword thrust with his bare hand.

  209. @Wency

    I also recall others observing that the demographic transition started first among the 18th century French aristocracy and from there spread to the rest of French society, but also reached other national elites before diffusing into those countries’ lower classes. Though I don’t have a data source handy for this point.

    Sounds like a Karlin post.

    I suppose I’m just inclined to accept a certain amount of dysgenics as the price of comfort. Modern healthcare and clean water are dysgenic. Someday society will be eugenic again, and it will also be considerably less comfortable. Until then, the trend will probably remain at least somewhat dysgenic.

    Hang on, don’t surrender to inevitable dysgenia yet. Haven’t you heard that AE has already shown us that eugenics in modernity is possible! Mormons are doing it right now. Based on personal observation, I suspect the descendants of the Puritans are too, but they are harder to isolate statistically (“nominal Episcopalians and Congregationalists”?). This is an already solved problem, but the solution hasn’t leaked out much beyond the Great Basin and the more genteel zip codes of New England. (It was probably also true in the antebellum South before the Union wrecked it, but you could argue that was still pre-modern so it wouldn’t be helpful to us now anyway.)

    Indeed, if you strip nonwhites out of the US samples, the overall white dysgenic curve is not too bad: nearly flat. (I suspect that is part of why that otherwise interesting “Economic History of Fertility” paper you cited is so pessimistic about income vs. fertility: for the most part it lumps higher fertility but lower income blacks in with whites, which of course imparts a dysgenic slope to the combined curve.) So even just a slight eugenic tipping of the white curve would already yield success. If we can identify what Mormons and Puritans do, and replicate it more widely, eugenic modernity is within our grasp. Don’t give up the ship!

  210. @YetAnotherAnon

    Isn’t that just the Tumblrisation of politics? An attitude rather than a philosophy? Heavy on feelings and outrage, light on analysis?

    Honestly, I see this as a nice cope.

    I see no lack of feelings and outrage here. I see a lot of light analysis in both.

    I’m yet to meet perhaps more than one person who doesn’t confuse politics with their personal issues. Steve Sailer writes like he doesn’t, but writing is easier than conversing.

    We’re talking about people who see The Handmaid’s Tale as a serious allegory about the Religious Right*.

    I can find a lot crazier stuff here.

    (* rather than the submission fantasy it’s probably closer to)

    It is not extreme enough for Taliban Afghanistan, a touch too extreme for Iran and about right for Saudi Arabia when it was written.

    Perhaps you wish it was a submission fantasy, rather than a dystopia based on real conditions you can find in the world?

    Yes, it also can be both. People’s shadows are so long nowadays.

  211. @RogerL

    For my own part, I will often read interesting articles, comments, or other tidbits from Unz to my wife in the evenings, which she enjoys but she isn’t going to take the time to hang out on Unz.

    I make the money, but she home-schools our kids and runs the household. Generally speaking, she has more important things to than comment on Unz, and is doubtless to me having more of a direct impact on sustaining Western Civilization by what she does at home, than I do.

    I have heard a few times from much older folks that in the “bad old days” (modern popular perception, not their usage) women often enough thought that politics was a useful distraction to keep the menfolk from getting underfoot while the wives got on with the actual work of keeping the household going and the kids cared for.

    I agree that the perspective of women and mothers is useful and interesting and I am glad that there are a few women like Rosie around this site to add their piece. However, it seems to me like doing the work of walking the walk is even better than talking the talk. This is true for men and women both, and perhaps this is one reason why things have gone so awry in society. In the past, if men were being stupid as is our occasional wont and massacring each other, at least the women tried to keep some stability at home. Now, that is out of fashion and women are as obsessed as men with the often pointless political street-fighting.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  212. @YetAnotherAnon

    Isn’t that just the Tumblrisation of politics? An attitude rather than a philosophy? Heavy on feelings and outrage, light on analysis?

    Can you honestly say that this is not true of almost everyone? Politics is the national religion of our post-Christian nation and therefore almost everyone left, right, and center lets all their squishy parts bleed into it.

    The seeker of truth continues to be a very rare thing in this age as it always has been. Humans are experts at self delusion, especially when they are emotionally invested, be it in Woke or in Trump.

    • Agree: Dissident
  213. songbird says:
    @Wency

    Estimate that I heard for when dysgenics began in England is 1850. Probably later for places like Ireland, Russia, and Finland.

    I’m uncertain about the US and Canada because I think conditions were too different.

    I’ve wondered how much of the gap between Europeans and NE Asians might be explained by the timeline. The Victorians were pretty impressive.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  214. @RogerL

    What can be done to increase the participation of women commenters on a column or blog?

    Nothing, I hope.

    Women can comment if they like but increasing the participation of women would not have increased the quality, camaraderie or enjoyability of the blog.

    • Replies: @RogerL
  215. Rosie says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I guess you’re not so young. Many young women are extremely politicised.

    They can’t make up their minds. One minute we’re the cutting edge of radical politics, the next we’re indifferent.

    The closest thing to any truth there is in this crap is that women’s political interests trend more local. Even I have difficulty sustaining any interest in geopolitics, though I understand it’s importance.

    • Replies: @res
  216. Curle says:
    @Corvinus

    Shouldn’t you leave the monastery first before opining on female behavior?

  217. This comment is late, because this commenter too has stepped away a bit. Thank you, AE, for what you have given us, and thanks to all the commenters for their enthusiastic and interesting participation here. I will miss all of it.

    All the best.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  218. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    Triteleia Laxa’s suggestion to petition Ron to allow the blog to continue under other auspices seems reasonable.

    I don’t think you’ll find anybody with the time and energy to do all that statistics crunching but that probably doesn’t matter. All you really need is a kind of minimalist version of the blog. Have the person who takes it over just pick a weekly topic at random. So all the postings would need to consist of would be a single sentence. “This week’s topic is marriage.” Or “This week’s topic is Hollywood Wokeness.” Or “This week’s topic is democracy.” With any luck once the first few comments appeared the threads would just develop their own momentum. That should happen if you already have an established commentariat (which we have).

    The tricky part would be to find someone who could be relied on to continue AE’s moderation policies (which have obviously worked) and who was prepared to do the moderating. Maybe have two moderators to reduce the workload?

    Another possibility would be to allow commenters to suggest topics. Or even have guest posters.

    We just need to find a formula which wouldn’t put too heavy a workload on the person taking over.

  219. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    All I can say to all the vibrator discussion is that it certainly seems like a blot on manly pride that so many of them have to be in circulation. Perhaps it’s that men are just that bad at the arts of feminine pleasure from watching too many disgusting porn video’s? Are most men just that terrible at good sex?

    My impression, gained from actually talking to women who use vibrators, is that one reason that vibrators are popular is that quite a few women find it difficult to reach orgasm through intercourse. Even if they really like the guy and even if he’s a very attentive lover. They don’t get enough clitoral stimulation through intercourse. But a lot of women are reluctant to tell their guy, “Gee honey, I love you to pieces and you’re really good in bed but I just can’t reliably reach orgasm when we make love.”Because the guy would be likely to go and stick his head in a gas oven if she told him that. Or, more likely, he’d be so devastated that in future he wouldn’t be able to perform at all.

    I’d guess that there are very few women who would say, “I have a vibrator so I don’t need a man.” But there’d be quite a few who’d say, “I have a fabulous man but if I want regular orgasms I need my vibrator.” And there’d be quite a few who’d say, “I don’t have a boyfriend at the moment but I still want sexual pleasure and I’d prefer to get it from a vibrator than from picking up anonymous dudes in bars.”

    When a woman trusts a man enough to open up to him on the subject of sex she’ll reveal some very surprising things. Things that social conservatives are reluctant to believe. Social conservatives would for example be shocked to learn how many women are into kinky sex.

  220. @dfordoom

    We just need to find a formula which wouldn’t put too heavy a workload on the person taking over.

    I was hoping that you had just volunteered!

    Not that it would be easy. Statistics are everywhere, but what is not everywhere is the discernment to tease out the interesting facets from the statistics, along with the style to write a few brief, cogent words about them. AE has a certain touch that is hard to duplicate.

    For example, it naïvely, arbitrarily occurs to me (being American rather than Australian) that there ought to be one or two interesting posts to draw from this page at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. However, unlike AE, I would hardly know from which angle to attack the page.

    Have the person who takes it over just pick a weekly topic at random.

    Maybe so. Since this is not my blog to dispose of, since my advice was not asked, and since I have no idea what I am talking about anyway, I’ll leave the comment at that point—except to note one thing that has been noted before: if The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal were still sufficiently serious, one or the other would already be publishing AE’s blog, with remuneration that made the publication worth AE’s time. All one needs to do is to compare the output here to the output that now runs under the mastheads of those great old papers: it’s pretty obvious. ‘Tis a shame.

  221. @YetAnotherAnon

    1. You don’t see a lot of feelings and outrage here?

    2. You don’t think that there are plenty of women who are quite happy creating serious analysis?

    3. You don’t think I can find a lot of crazier pronouncements here, than comparing the religious right to the Handmaid’s Tale?

    4. You don’t think the Handmaid’s Tale portrays a world no more extreme than some countries in the world at the time? Orwell’s dystopia was set in England, with English references, but it wasn’t more extreme than Stalinism. The same could be said about Attwood’s dystopia, and Saudia Arabia at the time, and the US.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  222. res says:
    @Rosie

    They can’t make up their minds. One minute we’re the cutting edge of radical politics, the next we’re indifferent.

    This all makes more sense if you realize that Jay Fink’s comment was this:

    No it’s just a truth that you don’t like (I don’t particularly like it either but have accepted it). I once worked in print media and saw the demographic profile of every magazine. Anything with hard news, and serious commentary skewed overwhelmingly male. Anything with light fluff topics leaned female, unless you count sports as fluff.

    Go to any website where things are heavily analyzed (it doesn’t have to be related to the alt-right or anything political) and the readership and participants will be mostly men. It’s the way our brains work. We like to analyze.

    Which TL turned into (in reply comment) this (note the degree to which it is non-responsive to JF’s point, BTW):

    I guess you’re not so young. Many young women are extremely politicised.

    Consider that the following two points are both true and consistent.
    1. Young women are politicized. (TL’s point, and yours)
    2. Not many young women do heavy analysis. (JF’s point, note the mostly)

    Also note that in comment 215 TL even qualified: “light analysis”.

    • Thanks: Jay Fink
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Rosie
  223. res says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Thanks for introducing me to Lobby Lud. TL’s style seems quite different from Corvinus’ style to me. Anyone else have an opinion?

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  224. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    We just need to find a formula which wouldn’t put too heavy a workload on the person taking over.

    I was hoping that you had just volunteered!

    LOL. I don’t have the tech smarts and I certainly don’t have the math smarts. I’d be willing to help but I’m so technologically challenged I’d almost certainly be more of a hindrance than a help. I can barely cope with publishing my blog. I can’t even change the damned layout of the blog because I have no idea how to do it.

    My technological ineptitude frightens even me.

  225. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Triteleia Laxa

    1. You don’t see a lot of feelings and outrage here?

    I certainly do. It’s endlessly amusing to me that right-wing men seem to be convinced that they’re models of rationality.

    3. You don’t think I can find a lot of crazier pronouncements here, than comparing the religious right to the Handmaid’s Tale?

    I’ve encountered people right here on Unz Review who would love to see a world like that of The Handmaid’s Tale come to pass. The fact that it isn’t likely to happen doesn’t change the craziness of yearning for such a world.

    There’s just a lot of craziness in the world today, across the entire political spectrum.

    • Thanks: Triteleia Laxa
  226. Curle says:
    @Barbarossa

    “ My wife certainly has no needs for such a device, and If I suspected otherwise I would feel terribly ashamed. It’s not rocket science, but it does require paying attention to what gets results!”

    What percent of the male population is > 55 or >60? What percent of that group could perform better with drugs they don’t want to take? What percent of them have wives/etc. who still want orgasms? How does that number correspond to vibrator sales/ownership?

  227. @V. K. Ovelund

    I was hoping that you had just volunteered!

    Well, I am volunteering. Does anybody care?

  228. @Intelligent Dasein

    Well, I am volunteering. Does anybody care?

    Sure. I care. Whether anybody cares that I care is another question. (On second thought, no one had better answer that last question. If the answer it, then it starts a train of replies: “I care that you care that he cares that someone else cares, etc.”)

    A Scholastic blog would, of course, be a different kind of thing.

  229. @res

    Go back further.

    Jay Fink initially said ““Women are mostly not interested in the type of discussions we get in here. They prefer more light weight topics. I know that sounds sexist but it’s the truth.”

    Corvinus then laughed at it; causing JayFink to say “No it’s just a truth that you don’t like” and add some mostly irrelevant anecdotal evidence to reinforce his point that “Women are mostly not interested in the type of discussion we get in here.”

    I then replied “I guess you’re not so young. Many young women are extremely politicised.”

    You might argue that my point did not disagree with JayFink’s for the following reasons:

    1. He was transitioning to “analysis”, which he defines his own way, from “politics.”

    2. He hadn’t thought of young women.

    3. Things have changed.

    Or you may say that it is wrong for the following reasons:

    1. Political discussion here is particularly heavyweight – I doubt this was really his point, as it would be astonishingly pompous

    2. Women are only interested in the most lightweight of political discussion – plausible, but only because that is true for everyone, including those here.

    Some questions for Res to reflect on:

    Why were you unable to read back and see this? How many of my comments have you been viewing through and how regularly waiting for a chance to jump in like this? The combination between the two demonstrates a lot of intensity and passion. Why?

    • LOL: res
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  230. Dissident says:

    Let me add my voice to that of the many others who have expressed thanks and appreciation to you, AE. I will miss you, and I wish you well.

    After many years through various iterations and authorship,

    Like a number of others, I, too, am quite surprised and intrigued to learn that there has been more than one Audacious Epigone.

    When the comment window closes on this post, it will move into the archives.

    That would be roughly four days from now, sometime on June 30th, is that correct?

    A request, if I may. At the time of this writing, there appear to be a total of three older threads whose commenting windows remain open. (The oldest of these, dated June 15, may have barely twenty-four hours left.) Would you consider, if it would not place any undue burden on you, extending the commenting window on all three of these so that they will all close at the same time as this latest thread (i.e., ~June 30th)? It could be thought of as an encore of sorts, one for which I suspect I would not be alone in appreciating. If extending all three of threads in-question would be too much, then perhaps you could at least extend the oldest one, The Marriage Pot (dated June 15th)?

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  231. Anon[211] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    There’s a reason personal anecdotes cannot be the basis of wide sweeping generalizations. You know the old adage: “Birds of a feather, fly together.” Of course in times of promoted disinhibition, more women will try kinkiness. Some will like it, at least for a while, and some will even rationalize it. It happens with all perversions, just look at the tranny surge.

  232. Rosie says:
    @res

    Consider that the following two points are both true and consistent.
    1. Young women are politicized. (TL’s point, and yours)
    2. Not many young women do heavy analysis. (JF’s point, note the mostly)

    They are potentially consistent in theory. In actual fact, both statements are half-truths at best.

    Let’s take the first statement. Young women aren’t that politicized. Campus activists are a tiny fraction of women college students, let alone young women as a whole. The same goes for men. Young women are about five percent more likely to vote than young men. That gap has remained the same for a generation. Click and scroll down:

    https://cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/voters/turnout

    Now your second: Not many young women do heavy analysis.

    What do you mean they don’t do heavy analysis? Sure, they do. They have to follow their professors’ labyrinthine arguments as to why we should all disregard the evidence of our senses. It is college girls who have been radicalized, after all. Didn’t Jared Taylor himself say something to the effect that one has to be intelligent to convince oneself of their nonsense? There is truth in this, of course.

    Nor am I convinced by the gender of commenters on websites. I lurked for years before ever commenting. But for the rampant misogyny, I probably still wouldn’t be commenting, because I have better things to do than repeat what other commenters have already said.

    As for magazines, no, we’re generally not very interested in what the bean-counters at Marketwatch have to say. If we were, that would be evidence of our mannish obsession with acquiring wealth, of course. No matter what women do, you can use it as a reason to say something unflattering about us and sure enough someone will.

    Personally, I follow Rachel Ray. She helps me get dinner on the table and the kids to practice on time. If you want to call that “fluff,” go ahead, but then all you’re doing is acting like the same MCPs of old, with an attempt to dress it up as “objective fact” or whatever. As always, motherhood and homemaking are indispensable to civilization, but publications that help us do it better are “fluff.” Which is it?

    https://www.foodnetwork.com/shows/30-minute-meals

    • Replies: @Jeff M Smith
  233. @Triteleia Laxa

    The discussion seems to consist of two competing explanations for one phenemenon.

    The phenomenon is the paucity of women on this site.

    The explanations quickly described are:

    1. Women don’t do politics/this site is too heavyweight.

    Or:

    2. Women don’t like the general ideological slant of this site/the behaviour of the commenters.

    I can see why the commenters prefer explanation 1. It implies that they are serious heavyweight people. I can also see why they dislike 2. It implies that their ideology and/or behaviour is off-putting to women.

    I, myself, am strongly inclined to explanation 2. Not only because I am generally biased to explanations in which I take partial responsibility, but also because I know a lot of intensely political women who would find the ideology and behaviour of most of the commenters here completely unbearable.

    They would even argue that it is exactly these types of people that drove them to intense feminism in the first place!

    I can also see that explanation 1 is plausible, though I disagree with it. Not because the analysis here is particularly heavyweight, I think Steve Sailer accurately characterised himself as middlebrow, but more because most of those women would rather discuss things in person.

    This might be a women thing, or, more likely, their attitudes are more socially acceptable and so they can have those politicised discussions in person without social cost. I suspect that many commenters here would not use this site if their attitudes were more acceptable either.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  234. @Intelligent Dasein

    Would you be willing to follow in Audacious Epigone’s footsteps, to take bold risks in your posts, even as his inferior?

    • Disagree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  235. RogerL says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I don’t understand. Please explain.

    From myself, the more perspectives that are involved in a discussion, the more interesting and useful the discussion is.

    Answering this question could be inflammatory. However you are good at using neutral language, so please give it a go.

    I always believe its better to know, than to go forwards in ignorance and illusions.

    Also, I really believe in the value of building common ground, and to do this you must understand what is going on with other people.

    Since you generally post thoughtful comments and avoid dogma, I figure its a good idea to ask you questions.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  236. Anonymous[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Thanks, Triteleia. This is an excellent explanation.
    I began reading TUR almost as soon as Ron Unz created it, and often commented. This was back in the days when women such as “Pamela” commented, and this was then clearly a serious intellectual site.
    As Ron Unz added more writers, to my mind often of dubious quality, the site, in my view, began to deteriorate. Peter Frost left. Jayman left. Razib Khan left. Then when Takimag closed comments and that collection of internet slime moved here, serious commenting at Unz essentially died.
    Anyway, my personal experience, was that when I posted as a woman, which I am, the intensity of the hostility my remarks engendered was surprising to me because since high school days I’d always engaged in serious discussions on all sorts of subjects with mixed-gendered groups of friends and classmates without ever being attacked or belittled because of my sex.
    And then I noticed that when I posted comments under a generic pseudonym, readers were positive and I was not attacked. Unfortunately, a few shrewd individuals could figure out I was female, and then the attacks began again, so I gave up posting except for the occasional anonymous comment, which I usually later regretted making because it seems a waste to engage the sorts who infest TUR comment sections (except for a notable few) in any way at all.

  237. nebulafox says:

    I don’t deny that there are some commentators on this website that reek of bitterness toward women, but I think the real reason you don’t see a lot of female commentators here is a bit more mundane. Women are, on average, saner and more pragmatic than men. They are less likely to find debating odd bits of historical trivia to death with Internet strangers a good use of their time.

    I actually think this explains a surprising amount about sex gaps in many areas of society. For example: why women who have the intellectual chops and work ethic to make a career doing, say, theoretical physics are not as likely to do so. They are more likely to run a rational cost/benefit analysis and decide it isn’t worth it, particularly if they want a family. It’s possible to start a family as a grad student or postdoc, but if you are looking at a family, an unstable location combined with peanut salary isn’t a winner. Adding to this is the fact that women also have to start thinking about this in concrete terms earlier than men because of their biological clocks. Men have biological clocks of a sort-declining sperm quality and number-but it it just isn’t as hard and fast as a woman’s is: there’s nothing stopping a 40-something man from producing a child, provided the woman is young enough. A woman in her late 30s or early 40s who wants a baby is going to have to make some hard, fast decisions to do so.

    (I should note that there are other countries that do a much better job of reconciling parenthood to a scientific career than the US does. Germany and Israel in particular are standouts. The PRC has also rapidly improved here. Mainland Chinese tend to be relatively sexually conservative compared to Westerners, so they are likely to find a spouse in graduate school. That means that by the time graduation comes, they’ll be thinking about what to do for the kids.)

    For better and for worse, men are much more likely to be at the extremes of human nature. This should make sense to anybody with a basic grasp on reality. Being male is generally a much higher-risk, higher-reward proposition in life. From a biological perspective, the challenge for women is finding a mate with qualities she’d like her children to have, and the challenge for men is securing the opportunity to mate at all. I think a lot of the bitterness that people my age of both sexes have toward the other can be partially healed if they understood that the opposite sex goes through a set of different challenges which prompts their behavior, that nobody’s at fault for that, and that neither men nor women should be ashamed of what they want even if that’s completely at odds with what they are told to want.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Corvinus
  238. nebulafox says:
    @dfordoom

    I don’t disagree with your take, but it’s not irreconcilable with the fact that orgasm also tends to be more emotionally fueled for women than it is for men. From personal experience, women who can’t achieve orgasm during sex with a long-time partner often feel deeply insecure about their relationship with the man they are sleeping with.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  239. @nebulafox

    I don’t think your instincts are wrong, but I do think they miss a lot of what is extremely objectionable about the ideas of many of the commenters here.

    Things that are common:

    1. Men should be able to vote, women should not.

    2. Men should have special rights for careers and education for those careers, above women.

    3. Women should not be allowed choice over who they have sex with/marry.

    These take away the trifecta of freedoms, political, professional and personal.

    What’s worse is the flimsy reasoneering offered, especially in a deluded tone of being totally objective and fair-minded.

    As if someone who is self-aware could ever offer the platform above, and fail to realise how immoderate it is, utterly unlikely to succeed and how crazy it would be seen by anyone normal.

    This does not make people crazy for believing in it; but it does make them crazy for thinking that anyone who disagrees with it must be crazy.

    Then there’s the explanations for why women dislike this astonishingly extreme political platform:

    1. Women don’t do serious analysis.

    2. Women are all brainwashed, because they are soft-headed.

    3. Women will act up, if men don’t treat them harshly enough.

    Unsurprisingly, few women find this persuasive, or welcome, as totally “fact-based” hugely “evidenced” one hundred percent “objective analysis.”

    This is all before you get to the aggressive, bullying behaviour of various commenters and also before you get to the clearly deranged ones, who pepper the board with comments like “childless women are disgusting”.

    A more pertinent question than “why are there very few women here” would be “why are there any women here at all?”

    [MORE]

    Before some anonymous commenter, thinking they have a killer argument, spams me again, with some variant of “Women are not men with wombs”. I know. There will be averaged differences.

    In my opinion, political discussion will trend male.

    But there are fewer women here than in gay men’s nightclubs. It is not suffice to say that there are “averaged differences in interests” in the face of a disparity this stark.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @RogerL
  240. @nebulafox

    Not as insecure as the man often feels about his masculinity.

    A big part of why women don’t tell men about this, or why they fake orgasm, is because they don’t want to wound the ego of the man they love. They are worried about him feeling insecure.

    People might just drop their egos in this area. Sex is best when about the journey (intimacy) not the destination (orgasm), for everyone.

    It is like life, most people are constantly living in anticipation of the destination, completely failing to realise that the end of the journey of life is always death. People may not really die, but it is a terrible mindset nonetheless.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  241. Corvinus says:
    @nebulafox

    “Being male is generally a much higher-risk, higher-reward proposition in life.”

    In what specific areas?

    “From a biological perspective, the challenge for women is finding a mate with qualities she’d like her children to have, and the challenge for men is securing the opportunity to mate at all.”

    I would say the challenge for men AND women is to secure the opportunity to mate with someone with the qualities they each like their children to have, whatever qualities they may be.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @nebulafox
  242. Corvinus says:
    @Anonymous

    “Unfortunately, a few shrewd individuals could figure out I was female, and then the attacks began again, so I gave up posting except for the occasional anonymous comment, which I usually later regretted making because it seems a waste to engage the sorts who infest TUR comment sections (except for a notable few) in any way at all.”

    Interesting. So why do you think (white) male posters here go this route? You would think with their high IQ and high time preferences they would welcome the perspective of a woman who is in line with their ideologies.

    • Replies: @Supply and Demand
  243. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Well, I am volunteering.

    Are you volunteering to take over the blog and run it more or less the way AE has run it? If so I think it’s a fine idea.

    If you’re volunteering to run a different sort of blog on UR then I think that’s fine as well, although you’d probably find that you’d end up with a slightly different commentariat.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  244. @RogerL

    It’s probably a matter of personal preference. Other than my wife and relatives, I have always been slightly allergic to women. I cannot explain more than that.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Wency
  245. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Not as insecure as the man often feels about his masculinity.

    A big part of why women don’t tell men about this, or why they fake orgasm, is because they don’t want to wound the ego of the man they love. They are worried about him feeling insecure.

    And as a result there are a lot of men who are blissfully unaware that a huge number of women don’t reliably achieve orgasm through intercourse (and that some women are not achieving orgasm at all through intercourse). And then those men are bewildered when they discover that so many women are buying vibrators.

    Personally I’m puzzled as to why there are people here who see female vibrator usage as a problem. If a woman wants to have orgasms and she finds that the most effective way of doing so is with a vibrator I can’t for the life of me see why anyone would disapprove of that. But then there are people here who seem to think that masturbation in general is wicked and immoral, and are outraged that women are no longer as consumed by guilt about masturbation as they used to be.

    I know I’m probably out of step with the prevailing view around these parts but I actually think it’s a good thing that women are now less embarrassed about buying vibrators.

    Another anecdote. A female friend of mine wanted to buy a vibrator and she insisted that I accompany her to a sex shop to get one. She thought the shop would be full of sleazy guys in raincoats buying porn. In fact most of the store’s shelf space was taken up by sex toys for women. All the sales assistants were bubbly young women (who were remarkably friendly and helpful). And on the day we were there most of the customers were women.

    • Agree: Triteleia Laxa
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Wency
  246. @res

    ’twas but a jest, although TL’s habit of coming back with three/four questions to every assertion is a tad reminiscent.

    I think in TL’s case it may be the extra X chromosome, women do like to have the last word, so after one’s made one’s point I don’t respond further.

    If it was Coronavirus I’d follow to the end of the earth, though only with “Troll”.

    I regret that I only have 5 “Trolls” in an 8 hour period to donate to Coronavirus’ pointless posts.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  247. @Corvinus

    I wouldn’t have moved to China if I wanted to hear more from white women about politics, race, and society.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  248. @V. K. Ovelund

    There’s nothing wrong with being who you are; as long as you are aware of it. None of the criticisms that I’ve made on this thread apply to you. I hope that could be easily inferred.

    I say this, because it is perfectly possible that all of your politics are right, and that, in whatever way I disagree, I am wrong. We are both dealing with a globe-sized cave, full of fog and shadows, but only possess a flickering torch each, with which to see.

    We will report what we believe appears before us, as accurately as we can, but interpretation of the images will always be warped by our own feelings, issues and fears.

    People who lack self-awareness, will be the hammer, that only sees nails, and never questions it. It is very obvious when someone is like that, and ridiculous when they think they are giving a “fact-based argument”, when in reality they are just in the grip of their own anxious, frenetic delusion.

    People who are honest about the baggage they carry, which means having the courage to admit it to themselves, are those you can look into the dark with. You may disagree about what there is to be seen, but at least both of you are somewhat complete people.

    Boromir claimed that he was all about objectively saving Gondor. Faramir knew better.

  249. @Anonymous

    I would say that Unz contains both the very best and worst of commenters. I only bother reading a small portion of the site, including the comment sections.

    That makes sense about Takimag comments section as I remember when those closed down (and they were fetid), though I hadn’t discovered Unz yet at that point. I wasn’t here for the Unz “Golden Age” you speak of, though I imagine AE’s blog hearkens to it.

    At any rate, I have noticed that any female commenters too often get trashed mercilessly and unfairly here, as you experienced. That is a shame, and I’m sorry to hear that you were treated that way.

    This a prime reason to keep AE’s group of commenters going. For a variety of reasons, the trolls have largely stayed away and kept the field open for actual discussion. I suspect that you may have had better luck on this board than other parts of Unz.

  250. Wency says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I’m of a similar mind when it comes to social gatherings. If I’m in a social gathering that does not involve my wife, I’d much rather the group be all-male, and even a single woman dramatically affects the social energy of the whole group. I think this feeling is, if not universal, pretty normal if men are being real and not thirsty or virtue-signaling.

    However, I don’t think it would bother me so much around here if there were a few more women. The dynamics of an anonymous and asynchronous posting community are rather different from an actual social gathering, and if someone is prepared to type something interesting, I’m prepared to read it and comment on it respectfully. But I’m also certainly not mourning their lack of presence or interested in any initiatives to actively seek more Diversity/Inclusion/Equity in this or any other online community.

  251. @dfordoom

    I could not ever be like AE. I would have to be something completely different. But, I have heard from a number of existing commenters recently, including some that aren’t usually too sympathetic, that my comments are a valuable contribution. And since nobody else writes in the manner I do, I believe it fits Ron Unz’s definition of what this site ought to be about—interesting views excluded from the mainstream.

  252. @dfordoom

    This seems like an excellent format to keep things going, at least temporarily, perhaps permanently.
    Perhaps a provocative conceptual paragraph would all it would take to get the comment ball rolling.

    I’m a little spotty on participation, but if others didn’t step forward I’d volunteer for sharing moderation duties. I hasten to say that I find it a little presumptuous for me to say that, however I know that if concrete steps are not taken AE’s group won’t stay together and I enjoy it enough to want to push for it to happen. If more frequent/ longer term folks take that up it’s preferable to me, but I’d like to make a move in a concrete direction.

    In response to Intelligent Dasein, I’m glad that you are volunteering. I actually like the idea myself of a rotating roster of posters perhaps until a definite front-runner emerged, but if AE and Ron give folks the keys perhaps you can have the first go at it.

    The real question is how does this actually get implemented?

    We’ll have to be off to see the Wizard…
    The wonderful Wizard of Unz.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  253. nebulafox says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Fair enough. I agree that’s probably more of it, actually, although I do think my point still stands.

    I’m reminded of something I once said to a Jewish commentator on iSteve about Hitler apologists: people who seriously believe stuff like this are too dumb to waste time worrying about. I get how glib that sounds, but the way I see it, you might as well care what some 12 year old trolling a YouTube channel thinks if you take such people seriously.

    >Not as insecure as the man often feels about his masculinity.

    That’s really neither here nor there. Orgasm for men is a pretty straightforward, mechanical business, relative to women.

    >A big part of why women don’t tell men about this, or why they fake orgasm, is because they don’t want to wound the ego of the man they love. They are worried about him feeling insecure.

    They also might be blaming themselves for feeling the way they do. Sexual assault victims, in particular, can be prone to this, because this can overlap with self-blame on that front. Again, this is just my own experience, but I’ve found that once the emotional hangups are addressed, the physical stuff follows naturally from there.

    • Thanks: Triteleia Laxa
  254. nebulafox says:
    @Corvinus

    >In what specific areas?

    Reproduction? Humanity has a lot more mothers than fathers.

    Everything else kind of follows from that. Lot more males at the absolute top and absolute bottom of society for a reason. You become a man or you don’t in a way that has no analogue for women.

    >I would say the challenge for men AND women is to secure the opportunity to mate with someone with the qualities they each like their children to have, whatever qualities they may be.

    The end game is the same. The path to getting there, the biology behind it, and the mentality is very, very different. Personally, I’d say accepting the foibles of the opposite sex with a smile is the way to go.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  255. nebulafox says:
    @dfordoom

    I’m a pretty live-and-let-live dude when it comes to people’s personal lives. Part of the reason I find modern America’s elites disturbing is because of how clearly they view other people as abstractions to be molded to fit their ideological whims.

    I just really, really don’t like the massive gaslighting on gender issues that everything “mainstream” engages in. Both because I don’t like lies, as a matter of principle, and because a lot of the general dysfunction much of my generation is going through in their romantic lives can be traced to this. Nobody growing up should be gaslighted on their fundamental nature, of all things, whether it is masculine or feminine. That’s child abuse, really.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  256. Wency says:
    @dfordoom

    Personally I’m puzzled as to why there are people here who see female vibrator usage as a problem.

    I’m not particularly troubled by vibrator usage, nor is it something I’ve thought once about in the past 5 years prior to this discussion. As troubles go, it’s scarcely a fraction as troubling as the rise of promiscuity, the collapse of marriage and family, and the Rainbow Flag. Though I do think it probably belongs to the same memeplex as those things (at least, when it comes to women openly and cheerfully discussing their usage of vibrators), and these trends reinforce one another.

    People do in private what they do, and sex is meant to be enjoyable, but the notion that sex is primarily an individual journey of self-discovery, and that this journey is a great and joyous thing to be widely broadcasted, is really the same core value behind a Pride Parade. If there isn’t yet a specific rainbow flag for “autosexuals”, I imagine there soon will be.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  257. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Almost Missouri

    WordPress is ghastly. I wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole. The commenting system is totally useless. The advantage of Blogger is that it actually works. Unless you’re a hardcore tech geek I’d stay away from WordPress.

  258. Corvinus says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    “I regret that I only have 5 “Trolls” in an 8 hour period to donate to Coronavirus’ pointless posts.”

    As I tell res, that only demonstrates I’m on the right track to truth. At least he is willing to engage in discourse, unlike yourself. I surmise you would be afraid of being intellectually exposed.

  259. Corvinus says:
    @Supply and Demand

    That makes sense for you to move to a repressive regime.

  260. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    This seems like an excellent format to keep things going, at least temporarily, perhaps permanently.
    Perhaps a provocative conceptual paragraph would all it would take to get the comment ball rolling.

    Yes. If you have someone like AE who is prepared to put in the hard work crunching all those statistics then that’s a huge bonus but it’s probably not strictly necessary. It depends on how you look at a blog – whether you see it as a place to post in-depth analysis (which is fine) or whether you see it as a mechanism to stimulate discussion (in other words if you see it as a kind of online forum).

    I actually like the idea myself of a rotating roster of posters perhaps until a definite front-runner emerged

    I like that idea. I’d be happy to contribute the occasional guest post, bearing in mind my monumental technical incompetence.

    The real question is how does this actually get implemented?

    We’ll have to be off to see the Wizard…
    The wonderful Wizard of Unz.

    We’ll have to get moving. We’re seriously running out of time. Unless AE can be prevailed upon to keep this comment section open for another week?

  261. @dfordoom

    We’ll have to get moving. We’re seriously running out of time. Unless AE can be prevailed upon to keep this comment section open for another week?

    I have sent the following email to Ron. We’ll see what he says.

    Dear Mr. Unz,

    I am a longtime commenter on your website who posts under the handle “Intelligent Dasein.” A few of us were interested in preserving the unique commenting community which has built up under the auspices of the “Audacious Epigone” blog, which is shortly to be decommissioned. We were wondering if you would consider appointing one of us—myself, or another, or perhaps a panel of commenters—to take over the space. Thank you for your time and for this wonderful site.

    -I.D.

  262. Corvinus says:
    @nebulafox

    “Reproduction? Humanity has a lot more mothers than fathers. Lot more males at the absolute top and absolute bottom of society for a reason. You become a man or you don’t in a way that has no analogue for women.”

    I’m not sure that I follow here. Would you please clarify? Thanks.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @nebulafox
  263. @Wency

    If there isn’t yet a specific rainbow flag for “autosexuals”, I imagine there soon will be.

    I do believe this is actually a thing. I’m not going to check though since I’m not really sure I want confirmation.

    I agree fully with your comment to dfordoom. It’s not really vibrator usage particularly, but that it represents just another piece in the continued disassociation of sexual behavior from not only reproduction, but even human interaction. I find widespread porn usage, sexbots, etc. to be just as disturbing. It’s going to be a disaster, primarily for men, once mass market VR helmets coincide with the porn industry (which is already in the works).

    It really just another aspect of the continued atomization of all human relationships. We’re being progressively stripped of community, religious, familial, and even interactional ties until we’re all entirely alone, defined as consumers, comforted only by our purchasing and entertaining preferences and our sex toys. What a hellish inhuman reality.

    The dehumanization of sex almost makes one nostalgic for the good old days of promiscuity as a social issue! Ah for the days when pearls were clutched over youngsters having sex with real humans of the opposite sex!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  264. @Dissident

    That’s under Ron’s control. He’s burdened with enough as is.

  265. @dfordoom

    There is an open forum that exists on UR. It’s lightly moderated so far as I can tell, but the regular crew should be able to move over there. There is the “ignore commenter” option if trolls or nuts become a problem, but it’s not heavily used now, just a handful of comments each day. Seems ripe for takeover.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  266. @Triteleia Laxa

    Maybe someone could post open threads for the commentaritat?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  267. inertial says:

    So your last post is a post on vibrators? That’s what I call going out with a bang.

  268. RogerL says:

    While great writers are a pleasure, we don’t have to have that to continue this group – we can grow our own writer.

    Pressure can lead to a writer’s block, especially for people newer to writing.

    dfordoom has a great suggestion – they can simple post a topic for the week. This is a great fallback position that will help avoid panic on the part of the new writer.

    There could be a team of 2 people, one to do research on statistics, and one to write comments on interesting statistics that are found.

    There is a large archive of blog posts by AE, which will be a valuable resource for a new writer. They can read thru it and get a sense of which presentations worked better than others.

    There could be an occasional open thread, where people could suggest topics and provide feedback on the writing.

    [MORE]

    ~
    One thing I did was write technical documentation. Everybody on the doc team reviewed and commented on everybody else’s writing. This was part of the learning cycle for everybody. Polite, respectful feedback is very useful because it helps a person see how others see their writing.

    Writing clear, unambiguous statements is much more difficult than it seems. That is the most important lesson I got out of that experience. When you say xyz, and others ask what you meant by that, obviously the statement wasn’t clear enough.

    I used to pay for an online dictionary. Now I make do with these
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Main_Page
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:All_Thesaurus_pages
    I check these frequently to clarify the significance of specific words.

    A common way for writers to get started is participation in a writers circle, where people share their writing with others in the circle, who then comment on the writing.

    We can provide helpful feedback to the new writer for this blog.

    ~
    To some extent I’ve always believed: Put up, or shut up.

    Everybody has had their chance to volunteer. Intelligent Dasein did volunteer. Thanks.

    I doubt if Unz.com wants a committee making policy decisions for this blog. Assuming that the powers that be approve Intelligent Dasein continuing the blog, while we can provide help, encouragement, and support, Intelligent Dasein gets to (has to) make the policy decisions (after carefully listening to input from the commenter), and we get to find ways to make the best of it.

    ~
    What I can contribute.

    I’m good at asking questions that stimulate conversation. If there is just a one line topic, then I will put on my thinking cap and a day or two later ask about that subject. It took a lot of work to learn to ask questions in nonjudgmental, neutral language, which were more likely to have a net positive effect than a net negative impact.

    Wikipedia put a lot of work into educating writers about impartial language. Here is a starting point on that:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
    – The “see also” section on the weasel word page has useful related pages.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Unsupported_attributions
    The deep state propaganda on Wikipedia is a separate issue.

    So many online essays are so full of weasel words that my subconscious mind absorbs them, and then it takes constant effort to clean them out of my thinking and working vocabulary.

    The email address I use for these posts is real. I’m willing to review and comment on draft posts to the blog. I will do the best I can to answer any question the new writer wants to ask me.

    If somebody sends me email, use a real subject line, not a typical spam subject like “quick question”. I get a lot of spam, so if in doubt, I assume its spam and ignore the email.

    A funny thing about human psychology is that when there are workable fallback options, people tend to be confident and competent, and don’t need the fallback options. When there aren’t any fallback options, the stress tends to lead to mistakes and poor judgment calls.

    I’m good at seeing patterns, and at seeing the implications of those patterns. If somebody sees some statistics that look a bit odd, then I’m willing to look at them and share what I see. At their root, the dynamics in complex systems are similar, regardless if the system is digital, social, or environmental.

    ~
    I can’t help with moderation because stress causes me to become inarticulate and then my mind to become filled with static. I really hope one or more people step up and help with the moderation.

    After I get disability money from the VA, I plan on writing. Until then I have to focus on dealing with the VA and avoiding homelessness.

    I’ve been getting disability money from Social Security for a long time, and still haven’t got anything from the VA, so don’t hold your breath until I get money from the VA.

    I temporarily set some of that work aside, so I could support this group in its transition to a new writer.

  269. Getaclue says:
    @anon

    You redefined “Porn” LOL to something else — what I am talking about and what you are talking about are 2 DIFFERENT things — no women are not into the Porn men are in, which is what I was talking about — they may well be into what you are talking about but that is not the Porn men are into and you just proved my point by what you wrote….

  270. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    It’s not really vibrator usage particularly, but that it represents just another piece in the continued disassociation of sexual behavior from not only reproduction, but even human interaction. I find widespread porn usage, sexbots, etc. to be just as disturbing.

    I kind of agree, and disagree. Masturbation is nothing new. In a perfect world everybody has a happy fulfilling marriage which fully satisfies them sexually. But we’ve never lived in a perfect world. There have always been people who have, for whatever reasons, missed out on marriage. Human loneliness is nothing new. There have always been people who have found that marriage does not bring sexual fulfilment. Masturbation has always been one of the ways that people deal with this. Since it’s nothing new I tend not to worry about it.

    Vibrators are not exactly new technology. They were invented in 1869. And even before they were invented women displayed extraordinary ingenuity and imagination in finding simple household implements to give themselves sexual pleasure. Women in ancient Greece were using dildos. Modern vibrators just do the job more efficiently, and probably a great deal more safely.

    It’s going to be a disaster, primarily for men, once mass market VR helmets coincide with the porn industry (which is already in the works).

    It really just another aspect of the continued atomization of all human relationships.

    I agree. The biggest threat we face is not ideological but technological. It’s technology that is doing more than anything else to produce an alienated atomised society. Television, personal computers, the internet, cell phones, social media, smartphones, dating apps – these have all been purely technological changes that have all reduced the amount of genuine social interaction.

    We need to rethink out attitude towards technology. We need to ask ourselves which of the many new technological gizmos invented in recent decades we really need, and which of those technologies are simply too harmful to be permitted. We need to do this, but we won’t.

    A lot of negative social change has in fact been driven purely by technology.

    The dehumanization of sex almost makes one nostalgic for the good old days of promiscuity as a social issue! Ah for the days when pearls were clutched over youngsters having sex with real humans of the opposite sex!

    Yes, you have a point! There was a time when parents’ biggest worry was their youngsters necking at the drive-in. These days parents wish their kids would do something healthy and normal like necking at the drive-in.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
    , @V. K. Ovelund
  271. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Audacious Epigone

    There is an open forum that exists on UR. It’s lightly moderated so far as I can tell, but the regular crew should be able to move over there.

    I’ve just had a look at the latest open thread there. Almost every comment is about Jews. And the place is full of serious hardcore crazies. Yikes. Include me out.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Barbarossa
  272. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rattus Norwegius

    Maybe someone could post open threads for the commentaritat?

    There is another very simple solution. Just persuade one of the regular commenters here to set up a blog elsewhere, with possibly several people being given posting privileges. Then just have that person (or persons) post a topic for discussion once a week (or twice a week or whatever).

    But please, for the love of God, not a WordPress blog. Their commenting system does not work. It does not work at all. It’s horrendous.

    Blogger is the easiest option. Setting up a Blogger blog is fairly simple and their commenting system is very very reliable. And moderating comments is very very simple. Maybe there are other simple blogging platforms.

    The big advantage of this option is that only the regular commenters here will know about the blog, so the drooling crazies who infest so much of the rest of Unz Review won’t know about it.

    Blogger also allows you to use a pseudonymous handle when commenting.

    You’d need some moderation, but probably nothing more onerous than AE’s schoolmarm and none of us here seem to have any serious issues with that.

    To be honest I don’t think such a blog would ever gain a high enough profile for anyone to want to shut it down. And I don’t really think any of us here are important enough for anyone to be interested in hunting us down.

    • Replies: @Rattus Norwegius
  273. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Include me out.

    I don’t know why “we” couldn’t at least give it a try. Numerous regular AE commenters have expressed an interest in maintaining contact. It is an open thread so we can shake the guilt feeling for going off topic. The only problem that I foresee is that the number that can be placed on the CTI list is limited. This means that every so often you will have to purge your list and start over.

    @res

    If you are interested in continuing our exchange on soft anti-Semitism, and whether you and I qualify, post a comment on the open thread and I will respond. I am interested in continuing.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @res
  274. @Triteleia Laxa

    and about right for Saudi Arabia when it was written.

    I’m guessing you had no firsthand experience of Saudi Arabia in that period.

    I can find a lot crazier stuff here.

    That didn’t mean you had to provide it yourself.

    YetAnotherAnon is right: Margaret Atwood is not a serious person and her “political” literature is nothing more than externalization of her personal neuroses.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  275. Garlic says:

    AE, thank you for your contributions over the years. You ran a quality blog, full of interesting insights. Best of luck in whatever you choose to do in the future.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  276. @Almost Missouri

    YetAnotherAnon is right: Margaret Atwood is not a serious person and her “political” literature is nothing more than externalization of her personal neuroses

    The Taliban banned women from having jobs, from education, from being seen in public, they could not speak with men who weren’t direct blood relatives, could not have their voice heard by strangers, could not be on balconies and were therefore essentially imprisoned in their apartments, in the dark, from the age of 8 onwards.

    Their husbands could beat, rape and treat them however they wanted, which made their prison less respectful of their humanity, quite often, than a real prison would be. It is not like Taliban men are great respecters of women, after all; given the laws above.

    I am sure that Attwood poured her neuroses into her work, like 99% of politically interested people do, but these problems really exist.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  277. @dfordoom

    quite a few women find it difficult to reach orgasm through intercourse.

    I hear this kind of thing occasionally. My impression from—ahem—various sources is that this is more of a problem in the Angloshpere than elsewhere (leaving aside the clitoridectomal cultures). Or stated another way, the more Western (not geographically but culturally) a culture is, the more defeminized the women are. Or stated another way, modernity and its consequences have been a disaster for femininity.

    This is the kind of thing that would greatly benefit from an AE analysis. Unfortunately, I think the data are lacking, so even an analyst of AE’s caliber doesn’t have much to work with. Furthermore, better data are unlikely to be forthcoming, partly because this is hard to measure, but also perhaps because of the conclusions that may be reached.

  278. @dfordoom

    quite a few women find it difficult to reach orgasm through intercourse.

    I hear this kind of thing occasionally. My impression from—ahem—various sources is that this is more of a problem in the Angloshpere than elsewhere (leaving aside the clitoridectomal cultures).

    Or stated another way, the more Western (not geographically but culturally) a culture is, the more defeminized the women are.

    Or stated another way, modernity and its consequences have been a disaster for femininity.

    This is the kind of thing that would greatly benefit from an AE analysis. Unfortunately, I think the data are lacking, so even an analyst of AE’s caliber doesn’t have much to work with. Furthermore, better data are unlikely to be forthcoming, partly because this is hard to measure, but also perhaps because of the conclusions that may be reached.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @dfordoom
  279. @Almost Missouri

    I hear this kind of thing occasionally. My impression from—ahem—various sources is that this is more of a problem in the Angloshpere than elsewhere (leaving aside the clitoridectomal cultures).

    Or stated another way, the more Western (not geographically but culturally) a culture is, the more defeminized the women are

    You think the women in the Middle East, Africa and Asia are all totally orgasmic all of the time?

    I am using hyperbole, but the ordinary perception is that you’ve gotten this backwards.

    Are there any specific reasons you think the way you do?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  280. @Triteleia Laxa

    politicised ≠ analytical

    When people are “politicised”, it just means that political topics (in the literal sense of “approximate upper surface”) are added to their grab-bag of fashion accessories and pop-cultural references, not that they have any comprehension, insight, or even interest in actual political matters.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  281. @dfordoom

    You and I are certainly on the same page concerning the pitfalls of unchecked technological adoption. I have a lot of Amish near me, and while one can criticize the Amish for a variety of things, I find their basic approach to technology to be eminently sane. They judge the adoption of any given technology by it’s likely effects on the cohesiveness of their society, since they have judged that cohesion to be their primary good to preserve.

    I personally try for a similar judgement in my own household, but it’s much harder without a reinforcing group with the same goals.

    I completely understand your points on masturbation or Greek women with dildos and they are, I think completely valid as far as they go. Where I’m differing is that I’m of the opinion that the combination of technology and societal norms make it an entirely different situation today.

    Just as there has always been porn, I’ve seen it argued by some that today’s porn is not different and it’s no big deal. I would disagree, because the sheer volume, easy of access, and relative filthiness of today’s internet porn make it an entirely different phenomena from finding your Dad’s Playboys back in the 80’s. I find the vibrator issue to be similar since the mass marketing and technological sophistication certainly make it far likely to be not just a supplemental pleasure device, but a perceived replacement for actual human intercourse.

    These technologies, combined with a society which increasingly ignores not only the procreative aspects of sex but also the emotional aspects, seems to be pushing inexorably toward the point where porn, vibrators, etc. are replacements for sex, not merely supplements. Since personal pleasure is seen as the only worthy goal, this is not even perceived as an issue in wider society. If one wants to have sex with a tree stump, the only advice will be on how to avoid splinters, since there can be no qualitative judgement allowed anymore!

    I think it’s possible to see the isolated factors (widespread vibrator purchasing, ballooning porn usage, divorce rates, lack of childbearing, explosion in LGBT identities, etc.) as less of a big deal when viewed in isolation. Taken together in aggregate they seem to add up to a pretty grim picture.

    These days parents wish their kids would do something healthy and normal like necking at the drive-in.

    As a parent of five kids, the oldest of which is getting into being a teenager, I can attest that this is no exaggeration!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  282. @dfordoom

    Agree.

    I think the AE recipe had two main ingredients for success: 1) incisive stats, delivered in a mild, mid-tier way, and 2) tidy, even-handed comment moderation.

    I think the latter is second-nature to mild-mannered, tolerant Midwesterners such as AE, so it could be readily reproduced by others who are cut from the same cloth. Maybe AE could at least clue us in to how much time he spent on comment moderation versus posting preparation?

    The former is a little harder to reproduce. I would guess that AE had set things up a bit to make it easier on himself in somewhat the following way: pre-downloaded all the GSS datasets that his posts generally relied on, had semi-digested tables or spreadsheets of data already made that could be applied to various subjects, and had statistical, software and spreadsheet shortcuts which allowed him quickly to generate answers to questions as they occurred to him. Perhaps if someone were willing to take up the mantle of Epigonism, AE would be willing to share some tips and tricks of his “rig”.

    AE’s type of statistical analysis has high fixed costs—or upfront investment costs—but lower variable costs once the initial investment is made. This is why analysis tends to be done in depth by a few highly motivated people rather casually by many people. (“Casually by many people” = commenters.)

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  283. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    I don’t know why “we” couldn’t at least give it a try. Numerous regular AE commenters have expressed an interest in maintaining contact. It is an open thread so we can shake the guilt feeling for going off topic.

    Well I’d be prepared to give it a go. What the heck.

    The only problem that I foresee is that the number that can be placed on the CTI list is limited.

    Yeah, that’s the problem I foresee. I’d be putting a lot of regular commenters on that open thread on Ignore. A lot. But I guess that’s doable.

    The trick is disciplining oneself not to respond to the crazies.

    • Replies: @iffen
  284. @dfordoom

    I agree with iffen that it could be given a whirl if ID’s petition comes to naught. It seems like it might be possible to carve out a space which is relatively nutter free.

    I share your allergy to the Jewish monomania. I feel like pre-Covid, Unz was turning into all Jews, all the time, which was tiresome. It seems to have found a somewhat better balance lately.

    I don’t care if there are some hardcore Jew haters or racists around, but any time one myopically focuses on a single cause to explain everything on earth it gets boring and annoying really fast.

    That was one of the great things about AE. While he didn’t shy away from talking about Jews, race, sex, or any other hot button topic, it was always done with great nuance.

    • Agree: Dissident
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @iffen
  285. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Almost Missouri

    quite a few women find it difficult to reach orgasm through intercourse.

    I hear this kind of thing occasionally. My impression from—ahem—various sources is that this is more of a problem in the Angloshpere than elsewhere

    In the West, and perhaps especially in the Protestant-dominated Anglosphere, there’s the problem of sexual guilt and that has a lot to do with Christianity.

    My guess is that some women find it difficult to be sufficiently relaxed to really enjoy intercourse. They may feel shame if they seem to be enjoying it too much – what if he thinks I’m a slut? They may just feel embarrassed.

    They can have orgasms with a vibrator because there’s no-one else there to make them feel embarrassed or ashamed. They also don’t have to feel embarrassed about expressing their pleasure vocally.

    From what I’ve read on the subject failure to achieve orgasm through intercourse is a very widespread problem among women.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  286. res says:
    @iffen

    If you are interested in continuing our exchange on soft anti-Semitism, and whether you and I qualify, post a comment on the open thread and I will respond. I am interested in continuing.

    I’m interested as well. Busy today, but leaving this reply as a marker.

    P.S. Doing it in those open threads might get interesting. IIRC lots of strong opinions there.

    • Replies: @res
    , @iffen
  287. @Intelligent Dasein

    I care. I like reading your writing. I would like it even more if I could read it at Unz.com, since then I wouldn’t have to remember to check your above-linked blog.

    (If you don’t mind my mentioning it though, it wasn’t clear—to me anyway—from your previous comments that you were volunteering to take over AE’s blog and comment moderation, so I don’t think anyone can be blamed to not responding to an offer that wasn’t plainly made.)

    Looking at subsequent comments (I’m not up-to-date on this thread yet), it looks like you are actually volunteering to write more of an ID blog than an AE blog, which I think is actually better than an ID-ized version of the AE blog. As you say, the stated purpose of the Unz-zine is “interesting views excluded from the mainstream”, and Thomist neo-Scholasticism is certainly excluded from the mainstream.

    Still, that doesn’t solve the problem of what to do with the momentum of the AE blog and commentariat.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  288. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    Just as there has always been porn, I’ve seen it argued by some that today’s porn is not different and it’s no big deal. I would disagree, because the sheer volume, easy of access, and relative filthiness of today’s internet porn make it an entirely different phenomena from finding your Dad’s Playboys back in the 80’s.

    Yes, I agree. And again the change was driven almost entirely by technology – firstly by home video (videocassettes opened up a vast new market), then the internet. And those new technologies made it almost impossible to exercise ant control over the nature of the content.

    If you ever see photos from girlie magazines up to the 1970s they’re not just remarkably innocuous, they’re oddly wholesome. Pretty girls lounging by swimming pools and then taking their clothes off and smiling shyly at the camera. It’s kinda sweet. It can even be seen as a healthy celebration of the beauty of the female body. Not really a whole lot different from the very long tradition of nude painting in the West. Velázquez’s mid-17th century Rokeby Venus could be a painted version of a girlie magazine centrefold from the mid-1960s.

    The content has certainly changed, but it was the technology that drove the change.

  289. @dfordoom

    There might be a deadline for creating this new blog. If someone waits too long he/she might forget to create the blog in the first place. Worse, someone might create a blog without anyone arriving. Having abandoned the earlier meeting point.

  290. res says:
    @res

    Another marker. TL made a quite reasonable comment replying to my final comment there which shows up in my comment feed but not in the thread view. Odd. Recording it here for reference.

    @res

    I thought somewhat dishonest was fairly light criticism. What would you suggest instead? Misleading?

    This is just a observation; so please don’t bite my head off for it.

    I would, personally, be extremely hesitant to question someone’s (conscious) sincerity. I feel it would immediately make discussion pointless and be placing them in some sort of “enemy” category, where the stakes are high and the game is zero sum. I also feel that it would be me just being extremely paranoid were I to do it. You clearly disagree for some reason, but I don’t understand why?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  291. RogerL says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    You said:
    A more pertinent question than “why are there very few women here” would be “why are there any women here at all?”

    Previously I asked:
    Why have a significant number of women been participating in this blog?

    Did you ever explain why you are participating in this blog?

    I’ve been watching for this, and didn’t see it. So far I haven’t seen any women explain why they continue to comment on this blog, in spite of the negative responses they often get.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  292. @Almost Missouri

    I appreciate that. I’m just not sure they are any less analytical than the majority of the commenters here.

    “Let him, who is without sin, cast the first stone” can be understood as “those who do not pause to reflect on their sin, before they cast a stone, will be drowning in it.”

    Not as pithy, but very practical.

  293. @Anonymous

    This is a curious comment, since if you are the commenter referred to by Jenner Ickham Errican, above, the commenting history seems to show a great deal of interest and respect from other male commenters. (Reactions from other female commenters, on the other hand, were … not so much.)

    Also, on a personal note, if you are that commenter, I still recall (in a good way) some of the comments you made, particularly the one about Indians that Steve highlighted, which was one of the best ever comments at this site, IMHO, both in content and style.

  294. @Rosie

    I do not generally despise members of the opposite sex, and I have no desire to insult them as a group. As far as I can tell, Rosie, this makes me different from you.

    So this applies to any student, male or female.

    “They have to follow their professors’ labyrinthine arguments as to why we should all disregard the evidence of our senses. It is college girls who have been radicalized, after all. Didn’t Jared Taylor himself say something to the effect that one has to be intelligent to convince oneself of their nonsense? There is truth in this, of course.”

    Parrots don’t convince themselves. A student who regurgitates the professor’s garbage is not necessarily intellectually engaged. The professor’s garbage might align with their FEELINGS on the subject, though, and in this way they might be “convinced.”

    “As always, motherhood and homemaking are indispensable to civilization..”

    Yes.

    Most men would agree with this (although if I am correct in what I think you mean by this, many men have not directly experienced it). Most women of today (and for as long as I have been alive, some 5 decades) would immediately start screaming about sexism.

  295. @Almost Missouri

    Yes, I would be willing to assume duties for the blog and content moderation, but it would be an ID blog for an AE audience. That’s what I can offer.

    I think the issue may be moot, though. I have not heard back from Ron.

  296. @Triteleia Laxa

    I was making a silly joke AE; about your name. Not trying to be rude.

  297. iffen says:
    @res

    Great. I learn a lot more and think better with the stimulus of dialogue.

    Just to tell you, we are on a disconnect on some planes, but it doesn’t bother me, so maybe the same with you.

  298. iffen says:
    @Barbarossa

    it might be possible to carve out a space which is relatively nutter free.

    LOL

    I thought that we wanted a space for the AE commentariat.

    • LOL: dfordoom
  299. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    The trick is disciplining oneself not to respond to the crazies.

    Appears to be some sort of personal problem.

    I can do it without discipline.

  300. @Triteleia Laxa

    You think the women in the Middle East, Africa and Asia are all totally orgasmic all of the time?

    Hmm, I wrote, “leaving aside the clitoridectomal cultures”, and the first thing you want to do is go headfirst into clitoridectomy climes.

    Are there any specific reasons you think the way you do?

    Yes. As with many great scientific principles, it started as a personal observation, which I assumed was just something peculiar to me. But then I began hearing the same from others, and even alleged academic research. The fact that the Pome-Oz Axis is spamming up this thread with lots of comments to the effect of, “Why, of course it is totally natural for our women to have the electric grid plugged into their cooches!” is perhaps the final proof.

    • Disagree: Triteleia Laxa
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  301. @Triteleia Laxa

    The Taliban banned women … [blah, blah, blah].

    Did I say anything about the Taliban?

    I will say that one thing I’ve learned is that my firsthand experience so often contradicts whatever the major media are shilling that it would be foolish to accept the media’s pronouncements on any subject at face value. Taliban included.

    I am sure that Attwood poured her neuroses into her work, like 99% of politically interested people do,

    Is Shakespeare “pouring neuroses”? Or is he politically uninterested? Goethe? Dante? Virgil? Homer? Dostoevsky? Basho?

    but these problems really exist.

    Which problems? The Taliban? (See above.) Or the non-existent future dystopia Atwood made up?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  302. @John Johnson

    “One spoke of her dog as if it was her boyfriend. It was really sad. . . . ”

    Funny you should mention that. Not too long ago in a small Southern city (which will remain nameless to protect the innocent), a single white woman in her mid-forties was observed by her neighbors as she had sex with her pit bull in her backyard in broad daylight. This happened in an older, but still solidly upper middle class neighborhood.

    She still has a court date.

    • Replies: @iffen
  303. @res

    I’ve had some unusual comment bounces here lately too. Not the type (comment in commenter history but not original thread) you describe though.

    I thought it was just me.

  304. @dfordoom

    I would say that blaming Christianity is a bit of an overly simplistic answer. The Middle Ages seem like they were overall rather lusty times, though often to the consternation of the clergy.

    I think you are right when you center it more on Protestantism. I would place modern sexual dysfunction in the Anglosphere mostly upon the prudishness of the Victorians. They really had some strange hangups in that department. That would also explain why it’s more of an issue in the Anglosphere and not across other parts of Christendom like France or Spain which seem to preserve more of that Catholic lustiness.

    The Victorians seemed intent upon making anything surrounding sex a regrettable and unmentionable, if necessary, chore.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  305. @Almost Missouri

    Comment moderation is a heavy upfront cost. Once good faith commenters are identified and put on auto approve, things get quite a bit easier. The GSS is accessible online (see here). Datasets can be downloaded but they don’t need to be.

  306. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    I think you are right when you center it more on Protestantism. I would place modern sexual dysfunction in the Anglosphere mostly upon the prudishness of the Victorians.

    That would also explain why it’s more of an issue in the Anglosphere and not across other parts of Christendom like France or Spain which seem to preserve more of that Catholic lustiness.

    I think that a lot of people in the Anglosphere are not really aware of the extent to which they are still influenced by those Victorian sexual attitudes. You can see that in some of the comments on this thread – the idea that there’s something immoral about a woman who wants sexual pleasure simply for the sake of sexual pleasure.

    The Victorians seemed intent upon making anything surrounding sex a regrettable and unmentionable, if necessary, chore.

    Victorian attitudes towards sex are really really fascinating. There were doctors at that time who didn’t believe women were capable of having orgasms and there were other doct0rs who believed that regular orgasms were essential for women’s mental health (which is why Victorian doctors invented the vibrator). Victorian ideas on sex were all over the place.

    I talk about some of this stuff (love, sex, marriage) quite frequently on my blog, most recently in my review of Michael Mason’s The Making of Victorian Sexual Attitudes.

    Since AE’s blog is shutting down I’ll take the liberty of linking to my blog (for anyone who might be interested) –

    https://anotherpoliticallyincorrectblog.blogspot.com/

    And here’s the direct link to my review of Mason’s book –

    https://tinyurl.com/4myxfvby

    • Agree: Barbarossa
  307. @Almost Missouri

    I’ll have to end my part in this discussion. Perhaps the Taliban didn’t make all those laws against women that I listed, and perhaps they don’t make Attwood’s dystopia look Utopian for women; perhaps my experience was also an illusion, which I can’t go into, but still!

    I don’t think it is an exaggeration for me to say that your line seems to be that women have it great outside of the West, excluding FGM non-West, and awful within it – something about it valuing feminity.

    I’ve been to a lot of places and extremely strongly disagree.

    I’ve met no people who agree with you, who aren’t men trying to justify a political programme of the essential enslavement of women, who typify, in their behaviour, unpleasant misogynistic stereotypes; but it is possible that I’ve just met the wrong people.

    I have only met a minute fraction of the world’s population; but it is those that I’ve met, so we probably won’t come to any sort of agreement.

    Is Shakespeare “pouring neuroses”? Or is he politically uninterested? Goethe? Dante? Virgil? Homer? Dostoevsky? Basho?

    Inferno is full of them. Crime and Punishment is them. The rest seem to have, at least, poured their own psychologies/spiritualities. This is a big topic though!

  308. @RogerL

    Why have a significant number of women been participating in this blog

    I’d argue that it is an “insignificant” number, and circling zero.

  309. @Triteleia Laxa

    This “discussion” started when I pointed out that your assertion that The Handmaid’s Tale was an accurate depiction of life in contemporary Saudi Arabia was utter bollocks. Rather than refute or concede the point, you repeated a bunch of mass media tropes about a different place that I hadn’t mentioned, a place thousands of kilometers away from the place that I did mention, a place you apparently have no direct knowledge of either. When I pointed that out, you doubled down with the irrelevant strawmen, accused me of saying things I didn’t say, and brought in what is apparently your idiosyncratic (mis)interpretation of a different discussion thread we had.

    So it is not really accurate to say you are ending this discussion, since avoiding what I actually said while randomly expostulating on your personal hobby horses (neuroses?) is not a discussion as traditionally understood. Ah well, I tried.

    As I’ve said before, I’ve found some of your commentary interesting and admirable. But for whatever reason, I failed to conjure any of that up from you on this subject.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  310. @Almost Missouri

    I believe that our discussion was whether The Handmaid’s Tale was a reasonable dystopia, once you look at some of the conditions women live in around the world, and in recent history.

    If you look back through the thread, I offered the definition of “reasonable dystopia” as 1984 was to the USSR. I then argued that HMT is to various Muslim countries at the time, as that was.

    I stand by this.

    We can argue the relative degrees of obvious oppression in different places and times, but, while I may have details wrong or right, I don’t think they are going to be inaccurate enough to invalidate my broader point.

    I also don’t see a sensible way of measuring those disparities with an accuracy suitable to make more than the general point that I was trying to make.

    HMT is to conditions that some women lived in at the time as 1984 was to conditions that some people lived in at the time. Both were not an exact picture of anywhere in the world, certainly not the country they were set in, but that’s OK.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  311. Sad, but understandable. The internet sucks now so it’s no fun, and 2020 made it a little too obvious that ignorance of hard reality isn’t really the issue (because the real issue is deficiency in moral courage), so there’s no point explaining anything unless you get off on it.

    Good luck out there in the desert of the real.

  312. @dfordoom

    A lot of negative social change has in fact been driven purely by technology.

    I completely agree with this and will push it to the next degree: negative social change has been driven even by medical technology.

    It is not easy to acknowledge that the world might be a better place if the modern medicine that has saved my life, my wife’s life, and some of my children’s lives did not exist, but unfortunately the message of Mouse Utopia has only confirmed personal observations. In an earlier, more tragic state, in which early death was a common fact of life, it would seem that the robust and the well rounded preferentially survived, with eugenic effect.

    I just went off on a tangent there, but can add little directly to your original point, which seems to me both correct and significant.

    Here is another, even more sharply divergent tangent: the death penalty is simpler, more traditional and less cruel than extended incarceration. Any crime that merits a prison sentence longer than ten years should probably again as aforetime be punished by the hangman’s noose. (I would prefer to be hanged, at any rate, than to spend 20 years among muscular negro felons at the state penitentiary.)

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  313. nebulafox says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I’d agree about Dostoevsky. Tolstoy is who you want to go by if you are a fundamentally well-adjusted, normal person. Dostoevsky is the guide for people who aren’t, which are a minority of the populace. I mean that without condemnation! You need both.

    But the Comedy… not as much. One of the interesting things about the Comedy is that Dante had multiple purposes for the work that might not come across to modern readers upon first glance. One of them was to serve as an encyclopedia of sorts. This was before Petrarch or the Greek exodus from the fall of Constantinople into Italy, remember. Dante had to teach himself and assemble his own education from scraps in a way that, say, Machiavelli never had to do. Dante found the medieval notion of life as a “vale of tears” profoundly repugnant, but also knew that most people would not have his patience or discipline to go hunting for general knowledge. The Comedy, written in Italian rather than Latin, was meant as a way to help people there.

    (He allowed himself no false modesty-and he noted in Purgatorio that Pride was the circle he feared the most, for good reason.)

    For the Inferno in particular: it’s the most grubby, psychologically weird, “human” part of the poem. Of course it is. Hell is meant to be baseness incarnate. The dead can’t dissemble. What they were in life, they can’t hide as they could when alive. Now, there’s no question that Dante started the Inferno from an extreme low point in life, and it was a personal work. But it’s pretty remarkably free of his own neuroses, and to a limited extent, his own biases. Among the few condemned in the Inferno treated with genuine respect and retaining some of their heroism from the world above are Farinata degli Uberti, the leading figure of the opposition in Florence from the previous generation, and Odysseus, the great big bad guy for a man who prided himself on being the heir of Virgil and had no access to the Iliad or Odyssey in his life.

    What it instead shows in vivid detail is hell not just as a literal, physical place in the mind of a medieval, parochial Catholic, which Dante unquestionably was. But as an apt insight into the consciences of the damned. Each circle of hell’s punishment is not accidental: from the lustful being blown about the winds, showing their lack of self-control over physical appetites, to the traitors whose souls were so frozen that they violated the most sacred bonds in life, to family or guests or benefactors. It is an insightful treatise of self-destructive behavior, and how men engaging in it both love and fear it.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  314. nebulafox says:
    @Corvinus

    Mark Stoneking’s 2014 DNA analysis shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that more women than men successfully reproduced throughout the majority of human history. We, as a species, have a wider variety of female ancestors than male ones.

    This should not be shocking, on a number of levels. Men can theoretically get dozens of women pregnant within a single month. Whereas a woman can only pregnant from a single man for 9 months. That’s just biology at work. This drives male competition for women rather than the other way around. In primitive societies, that means the likely result is going to be some men dominating the gene pool and other men losing out on the mating game entirely.

    As for the rest: just go take a look at the proportion of male to female CEOs and billionaires, and male to female homeless and mentally ill people.

    The irony is, I don’t disagree at all with feminist talk about “glass ceilings”. They do exist, and for most of human history, used to be a lot stronger. They just don’t notice the other part of the dynamic. And I don’t think that focus is cynical. If you happen to be a Type A personality who has the abilities and drive to make it to the top, the ceiling is naturally what you’ll pay attention to, not the net. But they miss the fact that a man in the converse situation from theirs doesn’t really have an “opt out” option like they do. “Fragility” and “privilege” have little to do with why men respond so poorly to a lack of professional success or are unlikely to take pink-collar jobs: that’s a death sentence in attracting women, and they know it, regardless of what the New York Times claims. And that ties to the biological reality that if they make crucial “mistakes”, they won’t reproduce at all.

    Women have their own challenges, which are neither inherently better or worse. They are just different, with a different set of trade-offs that benefits or penalizes people individually. Among the unstated trade-offs is this: as a woman, you don’t have to get as much right in your perceptions about the opposite sex. I suspect that is part of the underlying growing male bitterness about mainstream discussions about gender.

    • Thanks: Corvinus
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  315. dfordoom says: • Website

    It’s starting to look like the open thread may be the only option we’re going to be left with if we want to continue at UR. I’ve just left a comment there (it’s comment 285 on Open Thread 5). It’s not an exciting comment. I just wanted to see if I got swarmed by nutters!

    • Thanks: Triteleia Laxa
    • Replies: @iffen
  316. @nebulafox

    I like your description. I just note that Dante could be mighty petty about who he placed in eternal damnation.

  317. @nebulafox

    I hate to encourage anyone to respond to the troll Coronavirus, but this is a very good comment. The ideas were very well expressed by the good Professor Beaumeister here. Note that he wrote in a more innocent age, all of nine or so years ago – no one now would argue that mostly male CEOs or inventors meant men were ‘better’ than women, it would be prima facie evidence of the institutional and structural sexism inherent in …

    http://www.denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

    Men go to extremes more than women. It’s true not just with IQ but also with other things, even height: The male distribution of height is flatter, with more really tall and really short men.

    Again, there is a reason for this, to which I shall return.

    For now, the point is that it explains how we can have opposite stereotypes. Men go to extremes more than women. Stereotypes are sustained by confirmation bias. Want to think men are better than women? Then look at the top, the heroes, the inventors, the philanthropists, and so on. Want to think women are better than men? Then look at the bottom, the criminals, the junkies, the losers.

    In an important sense, men really are better AND worse than women.

    Today’s human population is descended from twice as many women as men. I think this difference is the single most underappreciated fact about gender. To get that kind of difference, you had to have something like, throughout the entire history of the human race, maybe 80% of women but only 40% of men reproduced.

    For women throughout history (and prehistory), the odds of reproducing have been pretty good. Later in this talk we will ponder things like, why was it so rare for a hundred women to get together and build a ship and sail off to explore unknown regions, whereas men have fairly regularly done such things? But taking chances like that would be stupid, from the perspective of a biological organism seeking to reproduce. They might drown or be killed by savages or catch a disease. For women, the optimal thing to do is go along with the crowd, be nice, play it safe. The odds are good that men will come along and offer sex and you’ll be able to have babies. All that matters is choosing the best offer. We’re descended from women who played it safe.

    For men, the outlook was radically different. If you go along with the crowd and play it safe, the odds are you won’t have children. Most men who ever lived did not have descendants who are alive today. Their lines were dead ends. Hence it was necessary to take chances, try new things, be creative, explore other possibilities. Sailing off into the unknown may be risky, and you might drown or be killed or whatever, but then again if you stay home you won’t reproduce anyway. We’re most descended from the type of men who made the risky voyage and managed to come back rich. In that case he would finally get a good chance to pass on his genes. We’re descended from men who took chances (and were lucky).

    The huge difference in reproductive success very likely contributed to some personality differences, because different traits pointed the way to success. Women did best by minimizing risks, whereas the successful men were the ones who took chances. Ambition and competitive striving probably mattered more to male success (measured in offspring) than female. Creativity was probably more necessary, to help the individual man stand out in some way. Even the sex drive difference was relevant: For many men, there would be few chances to reproduce and so they had to be ready for every sexual opportunity. If a man said “not today, I have a headache,” he might miss his only chance.

    Another crucial point. The danger of having no children is only one side of the male coin. Every child has a biological mother and father, and so if there were only half as many fathers as mothers among our ancestors, then some of those fathers had lots of children.

    Look at it this way. Most women have only a few children, and hardly any have more than a dozen — but many fathers have had more than a few, and some men have actually had several dozen, even hundreds of kids.

    My point is that no woman, even if she conquered twice as much territory as Genghis Khan, could have had a thousand children. Striving for greatness in that sense offered the human female no such biological payoff. For the man, the possibility was there, and so the blood of Genghis Khan runs through a large segment of today’s human population. By definition, only a few men can achieve greatness, but for the few men who do, the gains have been real.

    In terms of the biological competition to produce offspring, then, men outnumbered women both among the losers and among the biggest winners.

    His comment about “women who played it safe” still applies, which is why the average woman in the West was conservative in the 50s and is ‘radical’ (as dictated by MSM) now. “Go along to get along”.

  318. Jay Fink says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    It seems the mid 20th Century was an exception to the rule. Monogamy was socially enforced and marriage and children fell into place for most men. After the sexual revolution we returned to the haves and have nots.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  319. RogerL says:

    I’m not sure if TUR is a good fit for this blog community anymore.

    Recently C J Hopkins was dropped and Andrew Anglin was added. If you aren’t familiar with them, read their commenters and compare them. This is on top of the comments in post #242 about the history of commenting on TUR. That post gave me a lot to think about, and it took a while to think thru the implications and adjust to them – adjusting to them took a lot of effort. This is the fastest I can do things.

    There are all kinds of reasons not to use blogger. However dfordoom says its quick and easy. Right now we need REALLY QUICK. Later on, if somebody finds a better blogging solution, then we could move there.

    ~
    Google is part of the upgrade treadmill mafia, where you upgrade, or die. So a few years ago they intentionally broke the last version of Firefox that supported windows XP, which is what my computer runs. In this light, its amazing how many websites I can still access, use, and make purchases on, without any problems at all. In general, I can still use most websites, except for the trendy sites and globalist sites – this alone says a lot.

    I will upgrade to new everything, after I get some money from the VA, which won’t be anytime soon. Shortly the local library will reopen again (they have been excessive in their wokeness and screwing the not-privileged) and probably I could go there to post comments on blogger.

    There probably aren’t many people, still running XP, who are interested in continuing this blog community, so overall this isn’t a blocking issue to this community moving to blogger – REALLY SOON.

    ~
    So if somebody set up a blog on blogger, then this community could at least temporarily move there.

    Once the blog is setup, probably the person who set it up could delegate almost all of the work needed to sustain the blog. So setting it up isn’t likely to be a major ongoing time commitment.

    The bottom line is that somebody, who isn’t running XP, has to set up the new blog on blogger.

  320. @YetAnotherAnon

    The effects are real, but the effects are small and just averages, except at the extremes.

    You need a maths problem solved or else it is the end of the universe. There is a man and a woman to pick from. Do you pick the man, or do you give them both a maths test to see who is better?

    The current system, of if the man does better, you decry sexism, is even more stupid; but the old traditionally sexist one, was wrong too.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
  321. @RogerL

    Recently C J Hopkins was dropped and Andrew Anglin was added.

    Andrew Anglin is a known informant and agent provocateur who engages in rather deceptive commenting practices to stir the pot, and his inclusion here at TUR is one of the reasons why I am very leery about being on this website at all anymore. The Daily Stormer is full of sock puppets and unicorns who basically turn the com-boxes into a kaleidoscopic house of mirrors, and that character has penetrated into TUR in recent years.

    I am more and more convinced that many of the commenters here are not who they present themselves to be. “Rosie,” for instance, is a unicorn and a troll whose comments are for some reason approved on Sailer’s blog even before my own. And have you noticed how many longtime commenters have left lately, within the last few months? It’s almost as if they decided, their purpose now served, to up stakes and preserve operational security.

    CJ Hopkins is a good writer who was kicking the truth about Corona. Why should he be dropped?

    This is all very unsettling and I don’t think I am comfortable with it anymore.

  322. @Intelligent Dasein

    I guess “unicorn” doesn’t mean to you, what it means to me!

  323. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Jay Fink

    It seems the mid 20th Century was an exception to the rule. Monogamy was socially enforced and marriage and children fell into place for most men. After the sexual revolution we returned to the haves and have nots.

    I think that’s true. It was a unique time in which most men could get decent well-paid secure jobs. Secure being the really important factor. For the only time in human history most men were very attractive marriage propositions for women.

    While the Sexual Revolution did play a part in ending that golden age the most important factors were the disappearance of those decent well-paid and the ending of job security.

    It’s also crucial to remember that the ending of job security affected not just the working class but the lower middle class.

  324. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Intelligent Dasein

    CJ Hopkins is a good writer who was kicking the truth about Corona. Why should he be dropped?

    As I understand it he left voluntarily because it was no longer safe for him to be associated with Unz Review. In the country in which he lives being associated with Unz Review could potentially earn you a long prison sentence.

    That’s the real problem. That’s the reason the sane sensible contributors and the sane sensible commenters are leaving one by one.

    And that’s the reason why we should think about trying to set up a new blog/community elsewhere.

    We need to realise that Unz Review is increasingly seen as an extremist site that sane sensible people can no longer afford to be associated with. Because increasingly it really has become an incredibly extremist site. And as the sane sensible contributors leave they’re being replaced by new contributors who are full-on extremist nutters.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  325. RogerL says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I would be easy for me to write a long post speculating on those issues. However its probably not appropriate, its definitely not germane, and we are running out of time.

    The bottom line is, do we want to be involved with anything that is involved with Andrew Anglin? For me, now that I’ve framed the question this way, the answer is NO.

    Where do we move to now?

    Who is going to set up the new blog?

    ~
    Occasionally I see a few articles on how the left is being sabotaged, but they don’t reference a toolbox for coping with it. I haven’t ever seen an article on how the right is being sabotaged. What a lot of innocents in the deep state wilderness.

    However this is a long-term issue to be dealt with, after we’ve moved to a location that won’t expire in a couple of days.

    ~
    AE – exactly when is the plug going to be pulled on this group?

    Probably its best to reply in GMT time, to prevent confusion.

    I use this website for setting my watch, and checking what the GMT/UTC time is:
    http://www.time.gov

    Okay, I just outed myself – I live somewhere in North America. LOL

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  326. @dfordoom

    And that’s the reason why we should think about trying to set up a new blog/community elsewhere.

    My blog remains available for that.

    I can’t promise to write every day, nor can I promise to write things that people here will find interesting; but since Unz is getting dangerous, I think that’s just what I’ll have to do.

    There is no place here that can serve as a substitute. Sailer’s moderating policies are way too flakey and glacial-paced to support decent conversation; besides, I don’t care for Sailer anyway. I’m banned from commenting on Karlin. I am not going to touch Anglin. Nobody else really has an acceptable atmosphere.

    I guess that’s a wrap, folks.

  327. Dissident says:
    @Anonymous

    It may interest you to know that the individual whose comment endorsing you is seen in the screenshot you posted happens to be an unabashed defender of the Nazi genocide.

    (And not just of Jews; in the comment linked above, the estimable Mr. Errican acknowledges that,

    Hitler’s Wehrmacht also killed many, many Red Army (and civilian) goyim

    , before immediately going on to posit,

    perhaps he was unimpressed with Slavic capitulation to Jewish revolutionary troublemaking.

    )

  328. dfordoom says: • Website
    @RogerL

    So if somebody set up a blog on blogger, then this community could at least temporarily move there.

    I already have a political blog on Blogger and it would be inconvenient and confusing for me to try to run two political blogs.

    Anyone who wants to follow my blog or leave comments is of course very welcome to do so. Comments are moderated (which in my opinion is absolutely essential) and my moderation policies are slightly stricter than AE’s schoolmarm.

    If anyone wants to write a guest post they’re welcome to do so. At the moment the blog is set up with myself as the only authorised poster and I don’t want to fiddle with those settings at the moment (although I’d certainly consider it in the future) but if you email a guest post to me I’ll publish it (under the pseudonym of your choice of course) as long as it passes muster with my schoolmarm.

    The blog mainly focuses on social issue stuff (the family, political correctness, censorship, marriage, sex, education, history, Wokeness in popular culture, the politicisation of science, etc). It has a modest following and a few decent regular commenters. I check it every day so the longest you’d ever have to wait for a comment to be approved would be 24 hours (I have to do things like sleep).

    Anyway that’s what I personally can offer at the moment. If you missed the link to my blog last time here it is again –

    https://anotherpoliticallyincorrectblog.blogspot.com/

    • Thanks: Dissident
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @Marty
  329. @Intelligent Dasein

    “I am more and more convinced that many of the commenters here are not who they present themselves to be.”

    That’s obvious, I presume some are working for the other side, whether officially or unofficially. Remember the German court case I linked to where out of 200 top NPD party leaders, 30 were state agents.

    The agents/opposition/whatever won’t be Coronavirus-type trolls. More likely to be people accusing others of not being radical enough, stirring the pot. Or encouraging everyone to leave, who knows? Wilderness of mirrors.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  330. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    I just wanted to see if I got swarmed by nutters!

    I did my part.

    • LOL: dfordoom
  331. @Dissident

    It may interest you to know that the individual whose comment endorsing you is seen in the screenshot you posted happens to be an unabashed defender of the Nazi genocide.

    I think that’s a mischaracterization. If you read the original in context, it is pretty clear he is saying something more like, “in an era of competing genocides, the Nazis (temporarily) won first place.”

    But perhaps a more important question is, are these threads now a forum where we try to set up other blog commenters for future show trials? Include me out, as dfordoom says.

  332. @Triteleia Laxa

    I offered the definition of “reasonable dystopia” as 1984 was to the USSR.

    Eh? Dude, this is the first time anyone has mentioned the USSR on this page. It’s also the first time you’ve used “reasonable” on this page.

    It seems that part of your discussions are occurring inside your own head, and only part of it occurs on the page where everyone else can see it. If you prefer keeping your arguments to yourself, that’s fine, as it does save time. But it would have been nice to know that dialogue was only open to mind-readers.

    I then argued that HMT is to various Muslim countries at the time, as that was.

    Except it wasn’t, as already described, and anyhow Atwood specifically and explicitly intended it as a critique of the US, not of the Taliban, which no one had ever heard of when she wrote it. As a critique of the US it was laughably off target and it gets further off target every year.

    Meanwhile, the zealous and intolerant forces seizing control of government power are Atwood’s own followers and fellow travellers, some of whom even dress up as characters in her book as a performative display of their fanaticism.

    So as a piece of “speculative fiction” it’s an utter failure. At best it is just an extrusion of her own paranoid delusions, or possibly, as someone speculated above, her submission fantasy. But it has inspired many people to carry out the kinds of injustice and oppression she wrote about, only for the opposite purpose for which she described. And she likes that kind of injustice and oppression just fine.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  333. iffen says:
    @Almost Missouri

    I think that’s a mischaracterization.

    I went back a re-read and I think that you are doing more mischaracterization. He essentially said that Jews were responsible for the communist takeover of Russia and because of that they had it coming and deservedly so.

    • Agree: Dissident
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  334. @Almost Missouri

    Yes, sorry. I must not have clicked “publish” on that comment.

    I should have said Attwood saw how life transformed for women in the cities in Iran and extrapolated out. I assume she knew about life for women in countries with even more oppressive attitudes to women too.

    Britain didn’t actually turn into Airstrip One, but Orwell was not crazy to look at various forces in British society, how the USSR had turned, and extrapolate out.

    I’m not a fan of HMT, but I still don’t think it was an insane book to write. The women who convince themselves that the US is just like it now, they are mad, but they are also very few.

  335. @Almost Missouri

    I see that the content in the link to the archive.org article that I cited has been wiped. Apparently the Left has finally carried out their threat censor hatefacts even from neutral platforms like the Wayback Machine. To complete my comment (which was referring to the 9th and 10th paragraphs of this classic), and so that Mr. Locklin’s hilarious article will not perish from the earth, I am reproducing it below the “MORE” tag. His original article also had many internal hyperlinks (and humorously placed images), which I won’t reproduce, partly because it would be very time consuming, and partly because I suspect that the content at the other end of those hyperlinks has also already been purged in the Left’s digital book burning campaign.

    [MORE]

    Monday, 05 April 2010

    The Case For Open Borders
    Foreign Replacements for American Women
    By Scott Locklin

    Most people on the Alternative Right are decidedly not in favor of our open-border policy in the United States. They complain of the program of race replacement, foreigners stealing our jeeeebs, committing crimes, and generally lowering the property values in the joint. I sympathize with these arguments, but, personally, I hope we make allowances for the kind of immigration I like to date. You see, I belong to an oppressed sexual minority: American men who prefer foreign women. There is power in naming things, and so I’ll just come out and say it: I am an American xenosexual man.

    It took me a while to come to realize my sexual preference. It was never conscious until fairly recently, and I figure it’s time for me to come out of the closet, so my xenosexual brothers won’t feel alone. It isn’t a realization that I’m particularly happy to have had, as it makes life in the Republic incredibly inconvenient. In my long and sordid career as a bachelor, the only women I have been able to maintain a romantic relationship with have been at least raised in other countries.

    I’m sure this statement is causing American female upper lips to distort into a snarl. “Oh, another insecure man who is intimidated by an empowered woman!” — this is how it usually goes. This sentence captures, in essence, what is psychologically wrong with American women for a man of my sexual preference.

    First of all, the facts are wrong. If I were insecure, I wouldn’t have written this. Also, the women I’ve been able to deal with for longer than a year or two had job titles like, “SAW gunner,” “machine learning engineer,” and “scientist.” These are very likely to be considerably more “empowered” job titles than anyone reading this in a high moral dudgeon will ever achieve. If you disagree, and think your job is much more awesome than these, I suggest you take it up with the SAW gunner. Secondly, one of the excellent things about foreign women is they rarely try to cut your metaphorical testicles off with ridiculous shaming language. American women by contrast, don’t seem capable of communication without bagging on some poor man. Being an unpleasant, confrontational, sarcastic grouch seems to have become a sort of gender duty of American women. The rest of the world sees that as bad manners. Finally, the dribbling self-entitlement and totalitarian-princess gall of it all. Why should anyone care if I won’t date American women? It is simply my preference: as worthy of respect and approbation as the preference to not date any women. I count many American women as close friends, confidantes and family members. I love American women! I just don’t want to date them.

    Other varieties of women don’t get so upset about men not liking their kind so much. As a social experiment, I once told a beautiful and talented Russian girl I had a problem with depressing crazy drunkard Russian girls. She agreed with me that most Russian girls are crazy, depressing and drink too much, pointed out the good sides of Russians (hotness, passion, femininity), and noticed that she’s actually not really so Russian: she was from a tribe in Russia known for its cheerfulness and moderation. This anecdote illustrates an important difference between domestic and imported females. When faced with an outcome they do not like, American woman will become disagreeable. The foreign woman will become more feminine and seductive; a tactic I have few powers to resist. Since I am not a masochist who enjoys being menaced by angry harridans with rolling pins, this causes me to like the imported models better. I know, I know, my sexual preference is weird and kind of hard to wrap your brain around, but I can’t help it. Like many men who were afflicted with a non-standard sexual preference, I’m pretty sure I was born this way.

    While my preference is intensely emotional, being wrought in my own sense of extreme heterosexuality, I also look at it as intensely logical. I buy and sell for a living. American women are a bad investment. You see, I’m a very busy man: I’m trying to build a business, create American jobs and generate wealth to help bail us out of the horrible mess we are in. American women get upset when you’re not paying attention to them, and do things like start an argument about where to put your goldfish. Foreign women do things like try to help when you are busy.

    Many American women are also wrapped up in status monkey games (muuuust get big house) and the consumer gerbil wheel. Even if I were to find an American woman who makes the kind of dough I do, she’d likely spend the pair of us into penury before I am able to hire anybody. Foreign women generally come from less prosperous nations, and so they’re less interested in purchasing an enormous McMansion and stuffing it full of plastic tchotchkes along with a couple of neurotic crotch fruit. Foreign women believe in thrift, rather than conspicuous consumption.

    American women also tend to believe in deeply unattractive insanity like “gender as social construct feminism,” astrology, socialism, putting unsightly tattoos all over their bodies, and moral relativism of all kinds. I have yet to figure out why anybody would contract any kind of alliance with a moral relativist. Foreign women have seen these bad ideas disproved on a daily basis in their lives in less civilized nations, so they believe in things like common sense. I know this probably seems incredibly selfish of me, and perhaps some people think I should be a good fellow and pay more attention to where I put my goldfish, but as a productive member of society, I feel it is my patriotic duty to do my bit to help solve the economic crisis. I figure the slouchy hipsters with nothing better to do can go argue with American women about their goldfish to keep them happy while I’m off doing useful work.

    American women have a weird relationship with sex. They’re known the world over as loose women. Yet, sex with an American woman is a study in time-motion efficiency at best. Back in my academic days, I once taught an Italian grad student how to pick up girls on the internets: probably the only useful thing I ever taught anybody in an academic setting. Being Italian, he quickly became better at it than I was, but after his first couple of successes he came to my office with a troubled brow. “Scott, what is wrong with American women? I don’t want to brag, but I am good at sex. These women, they don’t come when I fuck them.” It took considerable powers of persuasion to convince him that the average American female needs to be worked over with power tools, months of therapy, and various acts considered signs of deviant madness by the American Psychological Association 50 years ago, in order to experience authentic genital quakes with someone else present in the room.

    This isn’t just the anecdotal evidence of a couple of science nerds sitting around the synchrotron, there have been scientific studies done on this subject. The vaginal orgasm is observably going away, both in the United States and Western Europe. There are certainly exceptions to all this, but the vaginal orgasm is so elusive among American females, it is widely considered to be a myth among the educated classes. Everywhere else in the world, it’s considered the normal way of conducting business. I have no idea how this came about; ideas I’ve come up with include epigenetics, poisonous feminism, hormonal imbalances, outbreeding depression, and inability to relax. Some researchers have pointed out that a likely cause is improper sex education that focuses on the clitoris… Basically, American women jerk off too much to derive any pleasure from normal, or even heroic heterosexual, intercourse. A parsimonious explanation, somewhat borne out by my personal investigations into the subject.

    Apparently most American men don’t mind that their snuggle bunnies might as well be doing their taxes while they drill for gold, or else they enjoy the manly hobby of weilding power tools even in the boudoir, or perhaps some enjoy dictating Tolstoy with the tips of their tongues every night. Well, that is their preference. While power tools and Tolstoy have their charms, I like the old fashioned kind of sex better, and the imported models are the ones dishing it out.

    And what of poise, style and feminine grace? Most of you Americans won’t know what I am talking about here, because you haven’t been around enough foreign women. American women do things like eat while they’re walking down the boulevard. Foreign women know this is horrifically gauche, to say nothing of fattening, so they don’t do it. Foreign women are too busy trying to balance a plate on their head to shove cupcakes in their mouths while they walk about.

    Fashion? Foreign women unashamedly wear dresses. American women wear clothing designed to disguise the fact that they are actually female. American women … they do not sashay or glide like the old fashioned foreigners do: they gambol and gesticulate like something out of the ape cage at the zoo. When they’re trying to be “feminine,” an American woman will do something like deploy her decolletage like a couple of battleship cannons. While I guess there is something appealing about gratuitous baboon displays of secondary sexual characteristics, it’s a rather crude gambit to my rarified xenosexual senses. A foreign woman can dangle her shoe at me with a naughty smirk, and I will forget all about the battleship cannons seated at the bar next to her. Granted, most American men seem to prefer to be bludgeoned with female battleship cannons; I know I’m the weird one here. Maybe the dress thing is atavistic , or maybe it’s because I understand how fermentation works that I don’t care for girls in pants. I guess most American men prefer that women wear the pants.

    The dimensions of modern American women are worth a mention. The average American woman is 5’4″ and tips the scales at 164lbs with a 37″ waist size. Being a squirrely little man of the exact average height and weight for an American male, I only have a 31″ waist, and so, well, I have to admit, the average, um, “curvy” American woman is certainly of a size that I find rather intimidating. By my calculations, that puts the average American female at approximately 39 percent bodyfat. Normal would be something like 16 percent, yielding a surplus of 38 lbs of fat per woman. There are about 150 million American women, giving us a grand total of 5.7 billion pounds of unsightly excess lard. To get an idea of how obscene this is, 7lbs of fat are about equivalent in energy expenditure to a gallon of petrochemical fuel. Each Saturn-V rocket, the awe-inspiring monstrosities that hurled 1960s era Freemasons to the moon, contained only 960,000 gallons of fuel. Waving my hands over the stoichiometry, this means there is enough excess libido destroying pork butter on American womanhood to power 5900 or so manned moon missions. While American men may like their women on the chunky side, I consider it incredibly wasteful that all this high fructose corn syrup goes to expand female waistlines when it could be used to power space ships to the moon. No, no, I prefer the old fashioned kind of females who have bellies considerably smaller than my own; you know, like the foreign ones.

    Then there is the idea of physical fitness among American women. Foreign women define physical fitness as being slim and feminine. American women think it is OK to be as fat as they like, so long as they can run a marathon or go on grueling hikes in the woods. Well, that’s OK I guess; physical fitness is important, but if you’re carrying around 30lbs of lard, I’m still not going to find you as attractive as a skinny but lazy Romanian or Vietnamese woman. Since I’m trying to find a date, rather than looking for someone to plough my fields, serve as an emergency food supply, or staff a private army, the whole fitness thing isn’t so important to me as the aesthetics of slender arms and waists.

    I’m pretty sure there is a hormonal component to the whole thing. Look, for example, at these American movie stars of yesteryear, Hedy Lamarr and Lillian Gish below. Beautiful, feminine, wholesome even, and dripping with estrogen. This is the kind of woman that appeals to xenosexuals like myself; they used to make them right here in America, back when Americans actually made things. Now we must make do with imports.

    By contrast we have Erin Anderson and Anna Paquin (technically Kiwi: humor me) below, rated 14 and 79 in this year’s “Top 99 most desirable women” by Ask Men. They both have the hatchet jaws, neanderthal brow ridges and beady eyes of a male to female transsexual. These physical features are caused by male hormones like testosterone. What could be going on here? Phthalates? Birth control pills? Virilization through yoyo dieting? It is a long story how this works, but even kids notice that fat ladies often have mustaches. Could it be a side effect of female hypergamy as F. Roger Devlin and the notorious Roissy have posited? Meaning, do women who have sampled too many Vienna sausages on the peen chuckwagon develop some sort of endocrinological issues? Or perhaps because modern American women are encouraged to compete and fight like a man, their adrenal glands have released enough androgens to visibly change them. Think about that for a minute: American feminism might have changed women physically.

    I’m nothing like an endocrinologist, and I’ve never done the calculations to see if this could theoretically happen, but the adrenal glands do release testosterone, and the adrenals are used a lot more by disagreeable grouchy American women than feminine foreigners. American men have been looking pretty testosterone deficient in recent years; perhaps they are seeking out something they lack? By contrast, I have an endocrinological disorder cursing me with a high level of testosterone; it comes from my birth into the violent working classes and is exacerbated by my habit of eating too much red meat and lifting enormous barbells in the gym. As such, I don’t care so much for the Popeye chin on the ladies. I like the ones with nice oval shaped faces and soft neonatal features, like Hedy Lamarr (who, by the way, was also a certifiable genius).

    [image]
    Numbers 14 and 73 most attractive women in the world according to dystopian universe of Ask Men

    The irreplaceable Roissy posted a sociological article about Kazakh perceptions of different nationalities of women that sums it up better than I ever could. Borat’s description of American women:
    American woman is described in quite contradictory way. Most amazing is a negative estimation of her appearance. There are many variations on this topic: not well-groomed, not stylish, does not dress well, not fashionable clothes, not ironed shorts and T-shirt, sleepers, put on bare feet, elderly woman in shorts, emancipated woman, for whom it is not important how she looks, a girl without make-up, happy fatty woman, stout and shapeless person, a short hair-cut, a knapsack, waddling walk, tennis shoes, dentures, plain, manlike, unisex.

    Borat speaks the truth; no political correctness there, and Borat’s women folk won’t menace him with a rolling pin for noticing the obvious. “Not that there is anything wrong with that,” as Seinfeld put it. Different kinds of men have different preferences and all that. If you like “stout and shapeless persons,” all the more power to you.

    It doesn’t matter to me where they’re from. I don’t discriminate against foreign women by race, color or creed: every variety of imported female I know of is better on average than the domestic kinds. Now that America consists of all sorts of racial types, you can no longer tell a foreign woman by an exotic complexion. But we xenosexual men will be able to tell. My F.O.B.-dar is so finely tuned, I can spot a Russian, Eritrean or Serb at 50 paces, and I’ll know if a Korean in America was raised in Los Angeles or is from the old country long before she opens her mouth. They seem to do a decent job of finding me as well; perhaps they notice my surfeit of self-respect compared to other American men — that’s how I spot my xenosexual brothers.

    So, immigration haters, give a care to your less fortunate xenosexual brothers. Would you condemn us to a lifetime of loneliness, or force us into the arms of women we don’t find attractive? I suspect American male xenosexuality might be a bigger phenomenon than was heretofore realized, so I encourage the lot of you to come out of the closet with me. I know Derb is on board. So are such notable conservatives as Fred Reed, and Roissy; even Mel Gibson — men who have seen a bit of life, and know what they like. Open wide the gates!

    [image]
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

    [image]
    Not an American woman

    Post Scriptum: No American women were harmed in researching this essay, despite what they may say.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  336. @V. K. Ovelund

    That basic line of thought is one that has struck me as well.
    To me it seems that a compelling case could be made against things like vaccines and other advanced medical innovations for increasing populations in an unsustainable way which does not necessarily lead to greater human fulfillment projected into the long term.
    It has always been striking to me that fully formed and functional societies do not require large population bases. Examples would be the Italian or Greek City States which had citizenry sometimes numbering only in the tens of thousands, yet having all the attributes of well rounded civilization.

    One of my critical principles on the modern world is based on size and scale. I’m convinced that as institutions increase in size they become less humane and less responsive to real human needs. It seems to me that there is perhaps an ideal organic scale for human societies which has been short circuited by technology, especially the greatly increased mobility of the 20th century.

    Beyond the eugenic biological argument I think there is an underlying philosophical change in one’s outlook on life when health, comfort, and risk aversion are the norms. It seems to me that a higher danger/ risk environment leads to potentially more of a “Carpe Diem” attitude in life. I am really disheartened at the flaccid listlessness and lack of drive in many of the youngest generation coming up. It seems far worse than when I was even growing up, (which was not that long ago). I seems to come from an overprotective and over-structured environment choking off the drive for initiative and exploration. This is even seen in the many instances of younger generations being more hostile to things like free speech and more accepting of coercive political programs.

    It seems to me that life may have had a tad more urgency when it was not uncommon for otherwise healthy young people to be struck down by accident or disease. This doesn’t seem to be an entirely bad thing to me since I don’t think that seeking the greatest comfort is our highest goal in life. Suffering has value too.

    As you allude though, both yourself and myself have benefited from modern medicine, so this line of argument may be considered disingenuous by some. However, I have a relatively dangerous line of work personally, and having come within striking distance of biting the dust a couple times have found that it’s only made me more set on living my life without moral compromise. My kids have a relatively “dangerous” old school upbringing too, living in the middle of nowhere, so we’ll see what results that produces.

    I am personally opposed to the death penalty, although I understand your line of reasoning. My objection is more theological in nature as I don’t think that we as humans have a right to kill another human in cold blood, even under the auspices of the state. That should be reserved for God alone. Even in cases of the seemingly irredeemable, it seems that the possibility for repentance must remain.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @iffen
    , @iffen
  337. dfordoom says: • Website
    @RogerL

    So if somebody set up a blog on blogger, then this community could at least temporarily move there.

    At the moment I’m trying to transfer some of the recent very interesting discussions here to the Open Thread. I see this as a temporary thing. If we can keep this community of commenters going for a while on the Open Thread maybe we can buy ourselves a little time to think of a long term option. So if you go to the Open Thread you’ll find several comments that I’ve left there that relate to our recent discussions.

    I know that the Open Thread is probably not a long-term solution but I’d encourage people to use it as a short-term refuge.

    So if you’re interested the relevant One Thread posts are Numbers 285, 294 and 295. And @Iffen’s comment, Number 287.

    • Thanks: Barbarossa
    • Replies: @RogerL
  338. @Almost Missouri

    It’s still up when I checked a couple minutes ago. I couldn’t figure out at first how to get to the text of the article, but it came up when I hit the “print” button.

    Good news, the Wayback Machine is apparently not lost yet!

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  339. @iffen

    He essentially said that Jews were responsible for the communist takeover of Russia

    Was there not a major Jewish contribution, indeed, perhaps the decisive contribution in personnel, ideology and capital, from Jews [yes, NAJALT] to the Bolshevik/Communist takeover of Russia?

    Did the Bolsheviks not practice bloody and widespread genocides before anyone had heard of Nazis?

    Did the Bolsheviks not explicitly plan to make their “revolution” global?

    Was Germany (and the rest of the West) not explicitly in the attack corridor for the Communist expansion?

    The Nazis decided to strike first rather than wait for the next stage of Bolshevism. This isn’t a secret or a retcon; it is what they explicitly said at the time. Was that the right thing to do? Apparently not. But in an age of genocide-or-be-genocided, one can see why they might go that route when faced with an existential threat. After all, it wasn’t just German-Russian thing or a Jewish-Gentile thing. The Turks had (successfully) genocided the Greeks and Armenians out of Anatolia, the British had successfully genocided the Boers out of power in South Africa. Arabs have long been genociding Berbers, Bantus have long genocided Twa, Indian tribes long genocided each other, etc., etc. Like slavery, genocide has been business-as-usual for most of history. Recently, we supposedly decided that we’re gonna stop doing that from now on, which doesn’t actually seem to be working out, except that the genocideers have gotten more suave in how they go about it.

    But again, the more pertinent question here is, are we now making these threads into places where we lodge the accusations and do the pre-work for future show trials against anonymous commenters?

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  340. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barbarossa

    One of my critical principles on the modern world is based on size and scale. I’m convinced that as institutions increase in size they become less humane and less responsive to real human needs. It seems to me that there is perhaps an ideal organic scale for human societies which has been short circuited by technology, especially the greatly increased mobility of the 20th century.

    I agree. And that’s why I’m not as worried as some people about declining birth rates. It’s arguable that when you have nation states with populations numbered in the tens of millions (or in some cases hundreds of millions) it is inevitable that you end up with alienated atomised populations and regimes that are oppressive because they just can’t function any other way.

    In the long term it’s possible that much smaller populations might result in a more civilised healthy society. And this doesn’t have to be achieved by high mortality. Lower birth rates can achieve the same results much more humanely.

    Obviously smaller political units are also desirable but I have no idea how that can be achieved. But it’s the reason I quite like the idea of seeing countries like the UK breaking up.

    If you’re interested we could continue this discussion on the Open Thread.

  341. @RogerL

    The bottom line is, do we want to be involved with anything that is involved with Andrew Anglin? For me, now that I’ve framed the question this way, the answer is NO.

    For me, YES.

    I am not a big follower of Anglin’s, but this is more a matter of style than substance. Aglin is a creative, clever fellow and a good writer. He often has interesting things to say—and, in his ideological lane, there are few who say it better.

    He’s trying to save my people and civilization from the fate that otherwise awaits them. His prescriptions may be imperfect but whose prescriptions aren’t? I like him. He’s got the right enemies, too.

    I want nothing to do with any publisher who would cancel Andrew Anglin.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  342. @Barbarossa

    it came up when I hit the “print” button.

    Ah, good.

    Good news, the Wayback Machine is apparently not lost yet!

    Let us not celebrate prematurely. Perhaps that was just a fortunate oversight on the part of the digital book burners that a second copy of the text is hidden within the “print” function. After all, the full text used to appear automatically, and I suspect 99% of readers don’t have the persistence to root around for a copy hidden within the scripts.

  343. iffen says:
    @Barbarossa

    One of my critical principles on the modern world is based on size and scale.

    It’s likely above my paygrade to pull it all together, but I am convinced that bureaucracy is working to destroy us.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  344. @Dissident

    You and I are simply enemies. How high you are willing to escalate the conflict between your people and mine is up to you; but the conflict, which has gone poorly for my people, will go even worse for yours if you persist. We outnumber you, and while in several respects your people bring more human capital per capita than do mine, the difference will not be enough.

    I suggest that you stop escalating while you still can.

    The comment of Jenner Ickham Errican to which you object is entirely reasonable. You can only make it out to be unreasonable by neuroticism combined with typically Talmudic contortions. Of course, the contortions hardly bother you because, as the Talmud teaches, you do not even believe that Jenner and I have proper souls.

    You are why I am an anti-Semite. If anti-Semitism is what you want, you’re doing great. I think you’re a total jerk.

    What is wrong with you? Why can’t you just act a little more like Ron Unz? If you did, this entire conflict would just go away.

  345. @dfordoom

    Your suggestions are good. Thank you for coordinating. I go to the Open Thread and to your blog.

  346. @Triteleia Laxa

    The old traditional society wasn’t that bad – a women could still be a mathematician or doctor if she wished. Our family doctor when I was a child was a woman who must have graduated in the late 1920s.

    But… she was unmarried and childless, as well as being a great doctor. If only that intelligence and compassion could have been passed down.

    I know an elderly former nurse who gave up the job on marriage. But her children are two doctors, a nurse and a senior civil servant. Men just can’t do that, we’re reliant on you lot to step up to the plate.

    • Agree: Triteleia Laxa
  347. @V. K. Ovelund

    I want nothing to do with any publisher who would cancel Andrew Anglin.

    After posting the above, I realized that I went too far.

    Ron Unz has repeatedly proved his fairness and reliability during these past 25 years, so I assume that if (for some reason) he discontinued Anglin, he’d have a good reason.

    [MORE]

    I think it unfortunate that a web site run by a conspicuously decent Jew like Ron should have become perhaps the U.S. Internet’s most influential anti-Semitic site. It’s not right. It’s not fair. I don’t like it and suppose that Ron might not like it, either, but what can be done? Ron’s site is the best place to post for an American who does not wish to trim his commentary whenever Jews are mentioned.

    Some readers will (understandably) find it hard to believe, but for my part I would rather talk about Jews less. The conversation keeps turning around to them, though. Élite U.S. Jews are so influential that it is hard to discuss many topics of public concern without mentioning the topics’ Jewish angle, yet one would still rather not mention the Jewish angle so much.

    If élite Jews would stop suppressing mention of Jews every place else, it would be less necessary to talk about them here.

    This comment is wandering away from its original point regarding Anglin but, as long as it is wandering: I chanced to visit a familiar, national-chain, big-box retail store last week (Target, Home Depot, etc.; it is unnecessary to name the specific store). Sitting in my driver’s seat in the parking lot, I had a few minutes to spare and my laptop with me, so I connected to the store’s wifi and checked The Unz Review. No luck. The store’s wifi blocked Unz, reporting that visiting Unz was not allowed because Unz was a “hate” site.

    The whole conflict with the Jews is depressing. I want it to go away. All I ask is that more Jews understand what Ron Unz understands, or what Irving Berlin and Barry Farber understood, or what Mark Levin understands. I will never grasp what is so hard about that.

  348. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    It’s likely above my paygrade to pull it all together, but I am convinced that bureaucracy is working to destroy us.

    I agree. I think that’s just in the nature of bureaucracy. As bureaucracies get bigger they get more oppressive and more intrusive. Even if the bureaucracies comprise people who are honest and sincerely believe they’re working in the best interests of society they will still become more oppressive and more intrusive and will end by turning society into a totalitarian nightmare.

    Of course if those bureaucracies also include a significant number of people who are actively malevolent then you have a much bigger problem. But even a benign bureaucracy will be destructive.

    And the bigger the nation state the bigger the bureaucracy and the bigger the bureaucracy gets the more impossible it is to control.

  349. Ron Unz says:

    I noticed that quite a number of the regular commenters here had decided to migrate over to the generic Open Thread.

    Using that isn’t an ideal solution, especially since AE’s auto-approval list doesn’t apply there, adding to the moderation burden to the website.

    Therefore, I decided to split that Open Thread and move the AE community comments to a new one, located right here, that relies upon the approval list that AE had gradually built up. So please use this thread for your ongoing discussions:

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/ae-open-thread/

    This thread will be restricted to existing members of the AE community, and will not allow anonymous comments.

  350. AaronB says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Dissident’s people, which is Jews plus the majority of decent, intelligent Whites (and the decent, intelligent fraction of all races) certainly outnumber “your people” 🙂

    I don’t think Dissident has anything to fear from the likes of you lol. But your threats are cute 🙂

  351. Corvinus says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    “That’s obvious, I presume some are working for the other side, whether officially or unofficially”

    You have an active imagination.

    “The agents/opposition/whatever won’t be Coronavirus-type trolls“

    It’s much easier for you to characterize anyone whom you personally disagree with in that fashion.

    • Replies: @res
  352. RogerL says:
    @dfordoom

    I appreciate your willingness to find creative ways forward.

    Unfortunately, now I can’t comment on that open thread.

    So I’m going to have to stick to responding to comments made in this thread.

  353. Dissident says:
    @Ron Unz

    Thank you, Mr. Unz, for creating the new open thread for those of us privileged to be “existing members of the AE community”.

    As can clearly be seen, there have already been a number of different, distinct topics already discussed in this thread, and it can only be expected that the number of topics that will be covered going forward will expand. In consideration of this and how unwieldy such a large thread covering so many completely different, often unrelated topics can be, I would like to suggest the following, assuming it could be done without placing undue burden on you.

    Create several different topic/category-specific threads, plus one miscellaneous thread as a catch-all for anything that does not fit under any of the specific ones. The topics would presumably be those that have been the most frequent at AE’s blog. The following is a suggestion for some fairly broad categories:
    Electoral and Other Domestic Politics, Policy and Concerns
    Immigration and Foreign Policy
    Economy and Trade
    Minority Populations (for all discussion concerning various racial, ethnic, national or religious minorities and their relation to the majority population)
    Sexuality, Fertility, Family Formation, and Child-Rearing
    Culture and Religion

    Some of the above could perhaps be merged, while others could perhaps be further split. I have no idea of what the relative costs to you are of creating and maintaining more threads vs. fewer. Nor do I have any idea how difficult or complicated implementing such an idea at all might be for you. If at all formidable, then, let me reiterate, I would not expect you to take any such burden upon yourself. If, however, creating at least a few separate threads would not be too difficult, then doing so would be much appreciated, not only by myself but, I am sure, others as well.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @iffen
  354. I haven’t been stopping by as much as I used to (as you might have guessed by the fact that I’m just seeing this 8 days after it was posted), but I’ve visited sporadically for a long time; since well before you were on Unz.

    So many bloggers I followed have called it quits. Inductivist, OneSTDV, Roissy/Heartiste, GucciLittlePiggy…

    You and Sailer were pretty much the only two left.

    Best of luck to you. I hope you and your family are on to bigger and better things.

    You should set up a donation page to accept some parting gifts.

    Barring that, please accept a heartfelt thank you for the many years of clear analysis and witty writing on interesting topics. God bless.

  355. @AaronB

    Dissident’s people, which is Jews plus the majority of decent, intelligent Whites …

    You took the bait, thus making my point for me. Thanks. Such demonstrations of tactical flattery are quintessentially Jewish. Unfortunately, eventually, some gentiles start to notice.

    Decent and intelligent are to you nothing more than clever synonyms for pliable and gullible, of course.

    But who knows? Maybe you are winning, anyway. We shall see.

  356. @Almost Missouri

    A.M., thank you and V. K. Ovelund for your gallant defense of me as a commenter in general—I appreciate the sentiments.

    Background on commenter Dissident’s off-topic attack on me:

    I have taken to objecting, when it comes up, to pedophile Dissident’s ongoing NAMBLA nonce musings and catamite portrait posts. Dissident is not happy about this.

    Here’s his latest obsessive-compulsive post in that onanistic vein:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/anti-beautyism/#comment-4748647 (#277)

    I get a sputtering mention under the MORE tag, LOL

    Is the malignant audacity of a Hitler fanboy to assume some imagined perch as a self-anointed moral arbiter and avenger of some evil that is entirely a figment of his fevered imagination going to be further indulged?

    Returning, tangentially, to the decidedly indelicate sentiment that zundel referenced: a giant f[–]k you. As repellent as I generally find such vulgarity…

    Links to Dissident’s (typically bizarre) reply to my first comment telling him to desist his perverse posts, and copious search results of the word “boy” in Dissident’s comment history:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-msm-tries-to-explain-the-racial-wreckening-on-the-roads/#comment-4737666 (#40)

    As for the past “genocide” topic in question, my concise assessment of historic Nazi motivations, actions, and outcomes has yet to be rebutted by Dissident, nor by original commenter Jack D, whom I addressed in that thread.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Dissident
  357. @V. K. Ovelund

    Thank you, V. K. Here’s my response (should it be approved) to Almost Missouri which explains why commenter Dissident is in a hysterical tizzy upon seeing my particular handle:

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/an-age-when-vibrators-are-sold-on-the-high-street/#comment-4749565

  358. @AaronB

    Dissident’s people, which is Jews plus the majority of decent, intelligent Whites (and the decent, intelligent fraction of all races) certainly outnumber “your people” 🙂

    Hmm. Are all those people proud pedophiles?

    You may want to familiarize yourself with Dissident’s comment history before calling him “your people”. Unless you are already aware, and share his proclivities. 🙁

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-msm-tries-to-explain-the-racial-wreckening-on-the-roads/#comment-4737666

  359. iffen says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    concise assessment of historic Nazi motivations, actions, and outcomes has yet to be rebutted by Dissident, nor by original commenter Jack D, whom I addressed in that thread.

    You should consider the possibility that you don’t know what rebutted means.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
  360. iffen says:
    @Dissident

    –Jews

    After all this is still TUR.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  361. iffen says:
    @Barbarossa

    even under the auspices of the state.

    It doesn’t make a lot of sense to sit here and say that we believe that the government is oppressive and malevolent while not raising any objection to giving it the power of capital punishment. I guess I’m just not ready to storm the Bastille. Yet.

  362. RogerL says:

    I didn’t understand the silent majority in the 60’s, I don’t understand their silence in the face of severe persecution from the woke face of the deep state, and I don’t understand the silence about doing something to continue this group.

    There is a management theory that you can whack 5% of a group, without triggering insurrection. However, if you do this 14 times, then only 48.8% of the group is left – less than half of the original group. Currently there doesn’t seem any end in sight to the slow pogrom against the silent majority.

    To me, this lack of action seems suicidal, but overall the silent majority doesn’t seem to have a death wish. So I’m back to not understanding the lack of action.

    I really wish somebody would help me out here.

    ~
    I wonder if an inclination towards stewardship is in part genetically based. I’ve always been inclined to take action to shift things in a more constructive direction.

    Regardless of that, genetic inclination can be overcome. The silent majority needs to be woken up and encouraged to become active stewards for their culture and future.

    ~
    As the billionaires chop society up into hash using dozens of divide-and-conquer wedges, I’ve been trying to figure out where I fit into all of this.

    I share some of the core values of the silent majority such as a work ethic, honesty, respect, not butting into the private lives of other people, and working hard to support families and raise healthy, moral children.

    However, aligning myself with a demographic, which isn’t resisting the pogrom against them, seems like a poor choice.

    It would be a better choice, if the silent majority would wake up, and stop being silent. Unfortunately, nobody seems to understand why they are silent. Until this is understood, the efforts to wake them up are unlikely to be successful.

    I really wish somebody would help me out here with increased understanding.

  363. @iffen

    You should consider the possibility that you don’t know what rebutted means.

    Here are some synonyms for rebut :

    deny, contradict, controvert, repudiate, counter, attempt to refute, attempt to discredit

    Those commenters’ offered non sequitur objections barely even count as attempts to discredit my cited assessment.

  364. @iffen

    Just pick one of those topics, work out if you are for or against more or less of it, then, whatever binary you don’t pick, put the Jews on. Easy!

    • Replies: @iffen
  365. iffen says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I must be a little too dense to get what you are suggesting. Are you saying that we can/should discuss Jews under all the categories? There are no categories where we shouldn’t be finding the Jew(s)?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  366. iffen says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    At first I thought that the JQ would be under the Minority Populations label then I realized that that would definitely not work. Jews are a unique minority and separate from all the rest, They cannot be subsumed under minorities. They have their own nation state with strict immigration controls and a robust nationalism while the rest of us have to contend with open borders and a hounded and vilified nationalism. The only rationale that occurs to me is: we are special and you are not.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  367. @iffen

    Very few countries allow mass immigration. Even fewer allow it without substantial national considerations. It is this tiny group that Israel is not in. There’s nothing special about not being in a tiny group. Israel is rather more ordinary than Germany or Italy.

    You’d be better off asking what is it with the Italian and German elites that makes them think that they, and their people, are so special, that they can disregard centuries of history, and try to sustain a liberal polity based off diversity, instead of coherence.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @A123
  368. iffen says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    You’d be better off asking

    I think that I’m better off asking why it is that for every Stephen Miller in the U. S. there seem to be 10,000 Bret Stephenses. 🙂

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  369. @iffen

    We’ll get to that. First, let’s answer my question.

    You’d be better off asking what is it with the Italian and German elites that makes them think that they, and their people, are so special, that they can disregard centuries of history, and try to sustain a liberal polity based off diversity, instead of coherence.

    • Replies: @iffen
  370. res says:
    @Corvinus

    It’s much easier for you to characterize anyone whom you personally disagree with in that fashion.

    Says the man who is one of the quickest to reach for the troll flag. 21 on just the first page of your comment history at the moment. Of course, you receive even more than you give. Which should also be a clue ; )

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  371. A123 says: • Website
    @Triteleia Laxa

    You’d be better off asking what is it with the Italian and German elites that makes them think that they, and their people, are so special, that they can disregard centuries of history, and try to sustain a liberal polity based off diversity, instead of coherence.

    You would be better saying France & Germany. Muslims have penetrated the top levels of government and are pushing for open borders. I thought France was moving towards reality, but the recent elections indictate otherwise.

    Italy is coming to terms with the “Muslim Problem” (1)

    If parliamentary elections were held in Italy now, the national conservative and Eurosceptic Brothers of Italy (FdI) would end up in second behind, the anti-immigration Lega Nord. This follows from a survey of electoral preferences conducted by SWG. Currently, 20.1 percent of voters would vote for the Brothers of Italy party, while Lega Nord has the support of 21.4 percent of Italians.

    The current Italian government is likely to fail in the near future resulting in a new round of elections.

    PEACE 😇
    __________

    (1) https://rmx.news/article/article/voter-preference-for-anti-immigration-parties-in-italy-is-rising

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  372. @A123

    Muslims have penetrated the top levels of government and are pushing for open borders.

    My experience of Muslims is that they tend to be enthusiastic about further immigration from wherever they came from. They also often visibly swell with pride and ambition at the idea that the number of Muslims in their vicinity is growing; but they are a minority voice with minority influence.

  373. RogerL says:

    Several people asked about defending yourself from the cancel culture.

    This book is a useful starting point.
    Unassailable: Defend Yourself From Deplatform Attacks, Cancel Culture & Other Online Disasters
    by Mark E Jeftovic
    http://www.amazon.com/Unassailable-Protect-Yourself-Deplatform-Disasters/dp/1999285212/

    The book’s focus is on people making their living putting content on the internet. However it has some application to everybody using the internet.

    Its focus is on protecting access to your internet resources. For example, a key point is, are you the legal owner of your domain name? Is your main email address based on that domain name, or do you use your email address at the whim of some globalist corporation that caters to the deep state?

    While a hosting service can still dump you if you own these, at least you could move them to a different hosting service. If you don’t own them, then its easy for the cancel culture to pressure the corporation, which does own them, to take them away from you.

    The book doesn’t address issues such as the cancel culture smearing you and getting you fired. Its one thing to be smeared, its another thing to be smeared after you’ve lost access to your internet related resources.

    ~
    The book is only 189 pages long, so its more of an overview than an how-to-do-it book. Still, the author makes a lot of recommendations on who to use, and who to avoid, when making arrangements for the resources you use.

    Given how many businesses and people who have been deplatformed in the last year, these recommendations are worth a lot more than the cost of the book. To put it another way, the author shares insight into who is and isn’t likely to burn their customers, when pressured by the cancel culture.

    About half the book is on the concepts, which will be useful for most people. The deep state, thru the cancel culture, is basically conducting hybrid warfare against people objecting to the billionaire backed narrative. Most people aren’t used to thinking of vulnerabilities, fallback positions, and recovery options in a warfare context, and its not something you want to learn thru trial and error.

    This books walks the reader thru the issues, and then thru the options. Then you can decide what is appropriate or feasible for your circumstances.

    To give you an idea of my personal priorities, I can’t afford to upgrade to something newer than windows XP, but I own my domain name and email address, and my data is thoroughly backed up.

    I’ve been writing about 3 pages a day for several decades now. If I lost that, it couldn’t ever be replaced. Most pictures people keep can’t be replaced.

    ~
    The book doesn’t discuss disaster recovery scenarios. There are natural disasters like floods, and human disasters like your computer being confiscated. Its good to think these thru ahead of time, and walk thru each step and the resources needed to accomplish that step.

    There are 2 separate categories of info: historical data like pictures, and data you need to restore the technical resources you use every day.

    For instance, if all of your computers and phones were confiscated (and backup devices near the computer), and then a couple days later your hosting service dumped you, then how would you get back up and going again?

    Some people have said that they are too small and insignificant for anybody to pay attention to. In an age where scapegoats are manufactured, I don’t think that is a safe attitude anymore.

    Part of my plan is having a backup on a USB device which can be plugged into any computer. In that backup are key facts in a TXT file, which can be viewed in any text editor, which I need for recovering after a computer disaster.

    What would you do if the first backup turned out to be bad media, and then somebody spilled coffee on the second backup? The saying about trouble coming in 3’s is based on the fact the first trouble increases stress and chaos, which increases the chances of more mistakes and accidents.

    For most people a reasonable compromise is a set of 3 backup media, and using them on a rotating schedule. Meaning the first backup goes on device A, the next on device B, the next on device C, and then the next backup is put on device A. So all 3 devices have a fairly recent backup, and if only 1 device was usable for restoring the data, then at least it would be a fairly recent backup.

    Its nice if the backup media are big enough to hold several backups, so if you backed up a corrupted file, then maybe in an older backup the file was still usable.

    ~
    The book doesn’t cover anonymous access to the internet. I figure this is like waving a flag asking the government to investigate you.

    I’m not organizing protests, or advocating assault or property destruction, and since I’m disabled I can’t be fired. So I figure its better for me to be reasonably open about what I do and say.

    If I had a job, then it would be different story because I criticize a lot of the sacred cows in the US, and would be vulnerable to the cancel culture.

    For about 30 years my go-to resource for computer and internet security is http://www.pcmag.com

  374. Corvinus says:
    @res

    “Says the man who is one of the quickest to reach for the troll flag. 21 on just the first page of your comment history at the moment.”

    Here is but a sample of the comments I believe are worthy of the “Troll” designation. I would say that level-headed people would think the following statements are based on raw emotion and are irrational. Perhaps you think different. And, thanks for keeping track of that number. Not weird in the least!

    –Taylor won’t name the Jew. He’s just as useless as Murray the Moron or Murron. Problem is Jews are smarter and use money & influence to manipulate whites. Whites Built vs White Guilt.

    –The US is a soft military dictatorship. The military couldn’t account for $2 Trillion on 9/10/2001 as Rumsfeld announced on TV. Today, they can’t account for over $20 Trillion. Where did that currency go? How much went to Israel? 911 happened to cover up their theft by killing the Navy investigators stationed at the pentagon who were looking into the situation. Their offices were the direct hit. Their data backup site in building 7 was destroyed to get rid of evidence.

    –Sandi Morris is also a mudshark, like many collegiate+ female athletes. The best move is to keep your daughter out of collegiate sports entirely.

    –The best ways to limit Jewish power would be first, to make dual citizenship a disqualifier for every government job from teacher to mailman to politician. Second to enforce ethnic quotas.

    –Thank God we defeated Hitler! Can you imagine living in a world of open borders, credit card usury, government-approved riots, sleight-of-hand tricks by a (((central banking cabal))), no freedom of speech and grooming children? Where your race is demonized for its evil, unforgivable achievements, culture and traditions?

    –The first time Enlightenment thinkers got into government, they immediately committed a genocide of Catholics in the Vendee. These thinkers are the source of liberalism that needs to be purged.

    “Of course, you receive even more than you give. Which should also be a clue ; )”

    That I am on the right track regarding the pursuit of knowledge and truth. Thanks for your endorsement!

    • Replies: @res
  375. Corvinus says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    “I hate to encourage anyone to respond to the troll Coronavirus, but this is a very good comment”

    That’s hilarious on your part. I responded to nebulafox, you call me a troll. He provided me with his line of thinking, which I appreciate. See, that is how conversation works. You should learn something here, rather than have your stereotype sustained by confirmation bias 🙂

  376. iffen says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    We’ll get to that.

    We’ll see.

    I will answer your question.

    First I don’t accept your presentation of what they are thinking.

    Italian, German, American, British, etc. politicians don’t think in those terms anymore. To the core they are mostly opportunists, blank slaters and effective altruists and as always handmaids to capitalists, in this case globalists. They have no more concern for traditional Italians, Germans, Americans, Brits, etc. than you do. As to why they think that way, I think that we need to go back to the Enlightenment. Of course, emancipation of the Jews was a part of the Enlightenment so I have done the heavy lifting part of finding the Jew.

    So let’s see how you do with answering my question. Why are there 10,000 Bret Stephenses for every Stephen Miller in the U. S.?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @dfordoom
  377. @iffen

    effective altruists

    What is dwelling in the unexplored deeps of the “effective altruist”?

    So let’s see how you do with answering my question. Why are there 10,000 Bret Stephenses for every Stephen Miller in the U. S.?

    Politics is where most moderns go to convince themselves that they are good people and to project their internal tensions onto the public stage.

    The fact that Jews strongly trend technocratic Democrat is because, like a lot of educated moderns, they have come to wholly identify with their abstract self.

    Donald Trump, with his zest for life, was everything, in themselves, that they deny. They saw him and saw their shadow. Like most humans, this was too much for them. It sent them crazy.

    • Replies: @A123
  378. A123 says: • Website
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Donald Trump, with his zest for life, was everything, in themselves, that they deny. They saw him and saw their shadow. Like most humans, this was too much for them. It sent them crazy.

    A number of observers have pointed out that Trump’s zest for life is very Jewish. A traditional toast is LaChaim. (la – to, chaim – life).

    His recognition of The Golan Heights and relocation of the U.S. Embassy drove violent Muslims and their sympathizers crazy. It got him a great deal of praise from observant Jews, including the Orthodox in the U.S.

    There is a great deal of inertia in terms of individuals and their party identity. Voices like Rashid Tlaib and Ilhan Omar are leading the DNC into open Anti-Semitism. If democracy in the U.S. survives, there will be a trend away from the National Socialists Democrats.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  379. @A123

    I feel like you might benefit from more curiosity; but I do like your comparison of Trump to Rodney Dangerfield’s character from Caddyshack. Shame that so many contemporary Jews think that they have left this side of themselves behind.

    • Disagree: A123
  380. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    Italian, German, American, British, etc. politicians don’t think in those terms anymore. To the core they are mostly opportunists, blank slaters and effective altruists and as always handmaids to capitalists, in this case globalists

    It’s the nature of democracy. Politicians will always be opportunists because democracy is essentially political prostitution. They’re handmaids to capitalists for the same reason that prostitutes hope to find a john with a well-filled wallet.

    Politicians are just like whores except that some whores probably really do have hearts of gold. And most whores are in their own way honest. If they offer you a particular sexual service for a particular sum of money they’ll probably give you what you paid for. Politicians are like the dishonest prostitutes who promise you a good time and then don’t deliver, and then steal your wallet.

    In the case of prostitutes it’s the dishonest 5% who give the rest a bad name. In the case of politicians it’s the dishonest 99% who give the rest a bad name.

    Expecting anything but lies and cynical opportunism from a politician is hopelessly unrealistic. And always has been.

    • Agree: Dissident
  381. Marty says:
    @dfordoom

    You’re blocked by FedEx.

  382. res says:
    @Corvinus

    And, thanks for keeping track of that number. Not weird in the least!

    It is trivial to go to your commenter page and search for “Troll: Corvinus” Note that can result in an undercount ; )

    As for the rest of your comment, thanks for the chuckle. I think you have passed the event horizon of the Corvinus singularity–parody is indistinguishable from the real thing.

  383. Dissident says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I have taken to objecting, when it comes up, to pedophile [sic] Dissident’s ongoing NAMBLA nonce [sic] musings and catamite portrait [sic] posts.

    Yet again, you hurl the same incendiary epithets at me, and offer the same libelous, unsubstantiated, unfounded characterizations of my comments. As if through mere repetition, these somehow gain any substance or credibility. As I wrote in my response to your June 22nd recycling of the initial attack you had lashed-out at me with back in early March,

    I reiterate, once again, my confidence that no careful, fair review of the relevant parts of my commenting history, taken in their proper context, could reasonably be taken as supporting any of your assertions or insinuations. Quite the contrary, I would aver.

    By now, I have posted a number of detailed rebuttals to the repeated libelous attacks upon me that Mr. Errican has now posted across several different threads. Perhaps my most concise response to-date is this one from June 25th. I would urge everyone to, at a bare minimum, carefully read through that comment of mine, in its entirety. Linked within it is a lengthy comment of mine from April that I would also place among the most essential for properly understanding me.

    Returning, for the moment, to my June 23rd rebuttal that I quoted from above, I noted in it that (to-date, and to the best of my awareness) neither Mr. Errican nor anyone else have,

    made even the faintest attempt at articulating any reasoned, substantive objection to or criticism of any of the images of boys, or sentiments, thoughts and views concerning boys that I have posted.

    [MORE]

    For those who may be unfamiliar with the term nonce that Mr. Errican has repeatedly used in libeling me, I offer the following, via Dictionary.com:

    British Dictionary definitions for nonce (2 of 2)

    nonce / (nɒns) /
    noun
    1 prison slang a rapist or child molester; a sexual offender
    […]
    [Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition
    © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins]

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS