ISIS doesn’t speak for Islam.

Obama strategically changes his rhetoric without admitting his own culpability.  No longer is he denying that ISIS is Islamic, now he is arguing that ISIS is not the purest most Authoritative Voice of Islam.  Like a petulant child Obama has refused to call them ISIS because that tacitly points to the fact that they are in Syria, but that point is becoming moot as Russia is leaking intel on Turkey’s (NATO member)  aiding and abetting ISIS and France is now bombing their headquarters WHICH ARE APPARENTLY IN SYRIA!!!  Why all of this slow talking, slow walking, feet and knuckle dragging, hemming and hawing?

Because the resistance that Obama mounted secretly against Assad in Syria funded and armed ISIS, which then turned on America & Obama.  Maybe the same reason that he feels responsible for bringing Syrian refugees into America because of his failed leadershit?  But I digress, allow ourselves to examine whether they actually are Islamic.  in spite of the fact that they have “Islamic State” in their name, in spite of the fact that they are trying to establish a Global Caliphate that was foretold by Muslim scripture, in spite of the fact that the tactics that they are using are used not by fringe, radical elements, as Obama’s Propaganda Ministry would have us believe, they are using the tactics of Orthodox, Core, Centrist, Muslims.

Terrorists are Orthodox Muslims.

Now what I am about to tell you is not only fact, it comes from a Muslim propaganda site that encourages your children to convert secretly to Islam without your knowledge or permission which is acceptable from the perspective of Islam.  From the Muslim perspective all children are born Muslim.

Link to HTML document on how to convert to Islam.

Terrorists are not “Radicals” they are Orthodox Muslims…

Quran (2:216) – “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.”

Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward ” 

CAIR Freudian Slip.

Out of a vague sense of morbid curiosity, which Americans do you stand in solidarity with and which do you not stand in solidarity with?  I know that being a pathologically lying, covertly hostile, douchebag who blames us for the fact that you have to constantly conceal your contempt for us Kaffir has become a permanent part of your personality.  I understand that the psychological strain of living a lie and acting like you are not doing exactly what you are doing takes a toll on an individual until they “blow up”.  And I am very familiar with the arrogance, superiority, and different interpretations that make up the Arabic language and psyche, that presupposes one’s superiority, royalty even, but even I had to rewind the video 3 times to make sure I had heard your qualification correctly, as you stand there with your bored emotionless face not simply concealing your emotions, but genuinely not feeling anything.  I bet you stand in solidarity with Obama don’t you?  Maybe, Louis Farrakhan? Jay-Z?  Eric Holder?

Link to info about Muzammil Siddiqi on the left.

Orange County Chapter Representative for CAIR, which has been categorized as a terrorist organization by UAE

 

The men at the left hand side of the picture, his name is Muzammil Siddiqi, he is the leader of the Orange County or Anaheim chapter of CAIR.  After I got fired from the Jamboree Whole Foods Market for my anti-Sharia advocacy earlier this year, I moved 1,000 miles north.  At the time I was predicting exactly what is happening in the world and what just happened in Southern California.  I was predicting what happened in France, that is why I created the Ban Sharia Brand, to wake people up.  To let them know what the Quran says and to teach them Muslim psychology so their might be a chance of confronting the issue.

Troll is a language.

 People will bristle at this concept.  I am a linguistic philosopher so you can take my word for it or not but history will prove me correct.  Troll is becoming the lingua-franca of comedy, if it isn’t already.

I have studied troll behavior ever since Myspace had group and philosophy functions.  On Facebook I became such a successful troll, even though that wasn’t my intent, people crowned me the king of Fight Club.  A group in which all of the old school trolls from Myspace came together to troll each other.  I was more interested in positive, rational, mutually beneficial relationships on the internet but at the time, especially with the people I was associated with, that wasn’t an option.  I didn’t start out trolling, it became necessary to defend myself as it appeared everyone was a troll and was always trolling.

Years before, when I lived in Seattle Washington, I had been a stand up comedian, so I started using those skills to troll people.  I would also use debate, which I became quite good at.  I eventually could beat almost anybody in trolling or debate, some people would pop and lock between trolling and being rational looking for any sense of victory.  On Facebook I trolled entire groups of trolls off the internet and developed a technique and even a psychology for doing so.  You can view some of my handy work here (https://atheistfallacies.wordpress.com/).

Several years ago I observed as the comedians on the television, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Bill Maher started using troll humor, this was very disconcerting as they were also using jokes I had written years before.  One joke Bill Maher used that I had written on Myspace was, “My dick is 8 inches long if I start measuring from my b-hole.”  You would understand how this joke could get to him if you understood the nature of trolling, people are acquisitively mimetic, which is to say the copy behaviors they see being rewarded or if they see something that looks awesome they will repeat it because they believe it increases their perceived value.

I decided that since I was such a successful troll I would get back into stand up comedy.  I went to a comedy dinner theater in Tustin and observed several comedians.  None of them ever found the room.  They were all telling troll jokes poorly, making constant references to the internet, social networking sites, and devices.  It was beyond lame.  I went to several open mike nights and performed I was relatively well received by the audience.  I went to the best open mike forums and pretty much killed it at one of them I got a standing ovation, clients were chanting Wolfe! Wolfe! Wolfe!  and then they started Howling.

 My comedy is transgressively sacral which is to say, calculated to be offensive, I believe that comedians have a responsibility to defend freedom of speech and to get people to loosen up about their issues.  This generation of comedians is terrible.  They have thrown the standard into the muck and mire in worship of the false idol of political correctness.  While I get along with audiences other comedians hate me, I am not typical, I am not fat, ugly, insecure, or any of the things most comedians are, because of this they hate me.  Comedians are cliquish and petty, they feel that awesomeness is a finite resource and if one is being too awesome or they feel they can’t compete they turn to their clicks and gang up on you.  This is what had always happened to me.

ONCE A TROLL ALWAYS A TROLL

I returned to trolling with a vengeance.  If I couldn’t express myself on the stage, I would use my trolling skill and turn my jokes into photoshops with time stamps.  I would get to the punchline first.  This was my troll the world strategy.  I realized on Facebook that I was wasting my talent trolling trolls, I should be going after bigger game.  The thing was people weren’t afraid that I would fail, they were afraid I would succeed, which is why they not only didn’t give me a chance they antagonized me, undermined me, lied about me, and ganged up on me.  I could handle that but it wasn’t worth the little that I got from being in clubs.  I didn’t troll people just because I didn’t like them I trolled them because they were doing something reprehensible or poorly motivated, I trolled psychopaths, and I had an uncanny ability to spot them.  Psychopaths have a certain Modus operandi.

Trolling is a language that has a hierarchy, and one communicates through, not only strategic communication but also through strategic behavior.

TROLL HIERARCHY

1. Debate troll, the highest form of troll establishes moral and sapiential dominance over his competitor.  This troll can beat you in a rational debate.
2. Butthurt troll, the butthurt troll can say the worst possible thing and the worst possible time.  He will have some people Rolling on the Floor Lauging their Asses off.  While other people sit their whining that he did something mean or immoral.
3. The Photoshop troll makes humorous to offensive photoshops using your image or images that you resonate with and project your sense of self onto, he makes fun of your issues.
4. Snark and Sarcasm, the beta troll is passive aggressive, not being able to actually establish dominance but is just annoying and emotionally abusive, they don’t teach you anything, they just waist your time and communicate negative emotional data.
5. Histrionic trolls type in all caps, and use repeated question marks and exclamation points (???) (!!!)
6. Lurker, the lurker is a creeper troll that looks at all of your information and possibly steals your photo or gets information on you to use against you.  Lurkers have different levels of skill.
7. Report Fa6, the lowest form of troll is the Report Fa6, they can’t do any kind of trolling well, and are in a constant state of butthurt feeling attacked and offended by everyone else’s awesomeness, so they just report everything you do and say until your account gets deleted.  This is the lowest form of troll because they hate freedom of speech.  Bryan Khemraj Shastri Carpen is the Worst of the Worst of Report Fa6s, he doesn’t just report you with his main profile, he makes multiple sock accounts and reports you from all of them.  He stays in groups where nobody likes him and reports everybody that comes after him.  After the Trollocaust in Fight Club I stopped going on FB because it had become a meritocracy of Butthurt and report fa66otry.  The mistake most new fa6z make is they say essentially this HA HA HA HA!!!!  I AM LAUGHING AT YOU, YOU ARE SO STUPID.  But a genuinely skilled troll will make everybody else laugh at you.  I was getting 40 – 50 likes instantly on my photoshops.  Carpen reported so frequently that facebook didn’t just delete my photoshops they deleted my profile and the profiles of anybody that had clicked like.  To this day the lamer Carpen still hangs out in Fight Club claiming to be the new king.  Everybody else pretty much left the group and he claimed that it was because he wasn’t posting that much in their anymore.  But nobody wants to interact with a known butthurt, report fa6.  (https://trollfiles.wordpress.com/2013/10/29/my-epic-victory-over-bryan-kemraj-shastri-carpen/)

Since my comment was so rudely deleted…

https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=78660&item=5943576026830356481&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5943576026830356481%3Agroup%3A78660&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_LIKED#commentID_discussion%3A5943576026830356481%3Agroup%3A78660

My comment which was deleted, was as follows to the best of my recollection.

We do have an inborn moral sense and that inborn moral sense is based on Neural Myelination passed on through cellular memory.  Now they have already found cellular memory in animals, a sheep dog that has never shepherded sheep is put with sheep and with little to know coaching he is moving them about like a pro within 30 minutes having awoken his cellular memory.

http://news.ucsc.edu/2014/09/epigenetics.html

The way I word this is repeated thoughts and actions creates Neural Myelination which is passed on to future generations in the form of cellular memory.  When I first came up with this concept my Organic Computer Theory on which my psychological models are based on, it had not yet been proven to exist in humans but experiments suggested it.

Many of you don’t know that Noam Chomsky is famous for falsifying the tabula rasa of Skinner and the behaviorists.  This made sweeping changes in the kind of research that was being done in certain scientific fields.  One such study found that French babies cry in French and German babies cry in German.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8346058.stm

In his Meno, Plato raises an important epistemological quandary: How is it that we have certain ideas which are not conclusively derivable from our environments?Noam Chomsky has taken this problem as a philosophical framework for the scientific enquiry into innatism. His linguistic theory, which derives from 18th centuryclassical-liberal thinkers such as Wilhelm von Humboldt, attempts to explain in cognitive terms how we can develop knowledge of systems which are said, by supporters of innatism, to be too rich and complex to be derived from our environment. One such example is our linguistic faculty. Our linguistic systems contain a systemic complexity which supposedly could not be empirically derived: the environment seems too poor, variable and indeterminate, according to Chomsky, to explain the extraordinary ability to learn complex concepts possessed by very young children. It follows that humans must be born with a universal innate grammar, which is determinate and has a highly organized directive component, and enables the language learner to ascertain and categorize language heard into a system. Noam Chomsky cites as evidence for this theory the apparent invariability, according to his views, of human languages at a fundamental level. In this way, linguistics may provide a window into the human mind, and establish scientific theories of innateness which otherwise would remain merely speculative.

One implication of Noam Chomsky’s innatism, if correct, is that at least a part of human knowledge consists in cognitive predispositions, which are triggered and developed by the environment, but not determined by it. Parallels can then be drawn, on a purely speculative level, between our moral faculties and language, as has been done by sociobiologists such as E. O. Wilson and evolutionary psychologists such as Steven Pinker. The relative consistency of fundamental notions of morality across cultures seems to produce convincing evidence for these theories. In psychology, notions of archetypes such as those developed by Carl Jung, suggest determinate identity perceptions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innatism

If we do indeed have an innate morality as is suggested by Atheists and Richard Dawkins to suggest that we don’t need religion or some manner of Moral influence exerted on us, then ask yourself this, Where did our morality come from?  It came from cellular memory passed on to us by our ancestors who were exerting on themselves a moral influence.  So what was that moral influence?

People that were raised in Democracy presuppose Democracy, and people that were raised for thousands of years under tyranny presuppose the goodness of tyranny.

The Atheist suggestion, without understanding psychology or human behavior, is that we should just let everybody follow their natural instincts.  What every person’s morality allows them to do is equal to what everybody else’s morality allows them to do.  To paraphrase, Martin Heideggar, referencing Kierkegaard:

“The duty of the philosopher is to overturn the covert judgments of common reason.”

Louis Figo asks the question:

“Does caring behavior necessarily imply a moral sensibility?”

In a way, yes.  To use my philosophical calculus we have what I refer to as a plasticity of our sense of self, which means that we arbitrarily expand and retract our sense of self throughout the day and our lives, projecting sameness onto others for various reasons and retracting sameness from others.  This is what causes our “caring” and our participation or lack of participation or outright hostility.  Until we examine why we participate with what we participate with caring and participation are not valid indicators or morality.

Tyranny and democracy have always been hostile to one another and anti-thetical to one another.  Why will some people participate with tyranny and coercive authority, while others participate with sapiential authority and the authority of reason?  What happens when you grant equality between tyranny and democracy?  To make Tyranny an equal citizen with Democracy, under the Authority of Reason, is not reasonable.  It flies in the face of reason.  Because of the nature of both mentalities, to make Democracy equal to Tyranny is to make Democracy the prey of Tyranny. . . Because they are not equal in essence they can never be equal in relationship.

http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=51421&utm_campaign=linkedin&utm_medium=zc#.VIH_59LF_To

Id Ego and Super Ego in Richard Dawkins

 

 I am going to describe how I use my methods to construct details psychological profiles of people.  In every human psyche there are the son, the mother, and the father.  

The id is the persons issues, and delusions their diseases mental and emotional.  Children are born being delusional and incapable of dealing with reality or the truth in it’s uncorrupted form.  For this reason the mother exists, the existence of the child validates the authority of the mother who protects the child from reality but she also protects the child’s mental and emotional diseases as well.  As the child reaches the end of the mother’s authority the child comes under the authority of the father, who prepares the child to be a functional part of the world, removing the mental and emotional diseases from the child.  

Now what happened with Dawkin’s and what happens with Psychopaths is that they refuse the last stage of evolution, the neural myelination of the frontal lobe that governs right and wrong and relationship.  He clings to ego because he clings to the disease. He is a histrionic psychopath.  He clings to the frame that he was victimized by religion, and he invites other people not only to also feel victimized by religion but to champion his cause.  It is really fascinating observing how strategic psychopaths can be and how much time and energy they will spend devising plans to manipulate people so that they can feel that their issues are correct.  What are his issues?  (https://psykolinguist.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/richard-dawkins-deconstructed-by-the-mindhacker/)

Now with histrionic psychopaths they use their damage or perceived damage in this case as a source of power and energy, they keep that ball of morbid emotion alive and seething.  Now what is interesting is that the psychopath can’t appear to be the instigator, they have to appear to be the victim.  Why is he damaged?  Because he was shamed for his sexual inclinations or orientation, (read the link, I am not re-explaining myself).  According to his perspective he was molested by being shamed, but not harmed by being molested, and he resents the shaming, which is why he tries to humiliate and ridicule religious people.  According to shared state theory of communication, a person communicates whatever state they are in.  To my knowledge Dawkins has not yet described the shaming and I will explain why, he says he was not “permanently damaged” by the sexual contact with his teacher.  What I know is that her feels he was permanently harmed by the shaming.  Now what is interesting is that If he told us why he was shamed, and how he actually feels, SOCIETY would reject his ideas and perspective, because what he actually feels is socially unacceptable, which is why he is concealing it and also why the repression continues and also why he is permanently wounded, and he blames religiosity for it.  

Now the sum of a psychopath’s actions have to take them towards doing their will.  So in the form of the conquest they repeat you can see what they are trying to do or undo.  Dawkins is trying to create an environment and a world where what he really wants can be indulged.  As I have shown in the other article he is creating an environment for children where they can learn and be exposed to the casual contempt of others for religion, this is evidenced by the material I have gleaned from observing dawkinite trolls on this blog (http://atheistfallacies.wordpress.com/).  

Now you have the cause of the good and the cause of the bad, which makes in the person’s narrative the form of the good or their god and the form of the bad, which is the opposite of their highest good.  As I have demonstrated in Dawkin’s narrative, he frames himself as the victim of religiosity, that was the first cause, the teleological error, not that his sexual inclinations are frowned upon and socially unacceptable today, by our standards, but he feels molested by having been instilled with sense of shame at something that is now socially unacceptable.  So from his perspective and in his narrative, his personal mental association with (sexual arousal, science, education) is the form of the good and very much associated with his personal happiness and his sense of self.  If you look at my plasticity of the sense of self theory you know we automatically and unconsciously expand and retract our sense of self in a way that appears arbitrary but is not.  What is the form of his conquest? (fagging, the humiliation of inferiors or the opposite of the form of the good), and what is the form of the bad?  (religiosity, shame, moral authority)  remember Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.  

It is amazing to me how people can choose to stay in relationship with the disease and protect the disease and even nurture the disease.  Psychopaths are so good at manipulating other people while concealing who they are.  They act harmless, like victims and bypass everyone’s threat filter.  I HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED!  YOU HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED!  WE ARE BEING VICTIMIZED!  WE MUST TURN THE TIDE ON OUR ABUSERS!  GRAB YOUR PITCHFORKS AND YOUR TORCHES AND YOUR NOOSES AND FOLLOW ME TO THE INTERWEBZ!  So he gets people to extend their sense of self to him and his issues, concealing what is really going on.  And once everybody is facing the “enemy” and attacking the enemy, then he reveals his real self.  

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly tyrants rise to power and with the aid of everyone around them.  I have often thought that the tyrant is a reflection of the people that worship him, and if you remove the tyrant they will replace him with the exact same type of tyrant.  This was recently confirmed for me with the democratic elections in the Muslim worlds.  

 

 

Douchebag Nation pt. 3 The Psychopath Explosion

I used this picture because of the visually stunning nature and the emotional data that it communicates.  HEATH LEDGER’S JOKER IS NOT A PSYCHOPATH HE IS A SOCIOPATH!  

A Sociopath MUST have the following traits:

1. Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them.
2. Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them.
3. Authoritarian.
4. Secretive.
5. Paranoid.
6. Seldom in trouble with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired.
7. Conventional appearance and behaviour.
8. Lust for power, money, or revenge.
9. Exercises despotic control over every aspect of their victims’ lives.
10. Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim’s affirmation (respect, gratitude and love).
11. Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim.
12. Incapable of real human attachment to another.
13. Unable to feel remorse or guilt, yet at the same time unable to seek pleasure from harming others.
14. Extreme narcissism and grandiose.
15. May state readily that their goal is to rule the world or other great ambitions, and as such as very organised and methodical to live up to such grandiose goals.

http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Sociopaths

http://www.reddit.com/r/FanTheories/comments/1cefwr/

Psychopaths are in relationship with their authority over others, in order to be in relationship with their authority they have to edit their consideration sets to only be in relationship with people that participate with their authority.  Which means they need a stupid manipulable society in order to stay in power.  It used to be that there were opportunities for everyone in the united states, there were enough carrots to go around.  

So as the amount of rewards are decreasing, because the people at the top are keeping more of the wealth in order to destroy the middle class and consolidate power and control to themselves, how do you continue incentivizing a stupider and stupider society?  You indoctrinate them into a gambling mentality.  Human beings are acquisitively mimetic due to the existence of the mirror neuron and they copy behaviors that they see being rewarded.  Instead of evaluating people correctly and putting them in the commensurate positions where they can create the most value for the most people, instead of giving people what they earned you reward people for competing and jumping through your hoops, you reward the people that participate with your authority over them.  It creates a process where we go from the American Dream for everybody, to a few carrots that are up for grabs, to everybody is fighting over one carrot.  The actual solution is to turn universally on the people causing the problem for their own benefit, and that solution is going to be the only solution that actually succeeds.  

Every major civilization has had one thing in common, a large middle class.  These middled classes moved freely horizontally across the world, sharing ideas and philosophies with one another.  The removal of the middle class is a ploy to keep democratic horizontal ideas from being shared and best processes from being utilized.  They are trying to maintain their quality of life for as long as they can while depriving us of a quality of life and demoting us into a slave class with no freedom.  

Casinos are essentially banks in the eyes of the IRS.  They don’t create any real value for an economy, the value they do create is illusory and temporary.  Everybody is opening casinos to stimulate their economies, which only works if you have a few casinos and have to travel from all over the world to go to them.  You bring the wealth that you created from your country and you lose it to the Casino.  THE HOUSE ALWAYS WINS.  Casinos indoctrinate people into a gambling addiction, if people are getting bored they rig one of the machines to pay out.  This stimulates everybody to feel that they have a chance of winning.  Casinos are considered entertainment.  Besides being a black hole for cash, how do they actually enrich an economy, or raise the quality of it’s citizens?  They don’t.  ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_regulations_under_the_Bank_Secrecy_Act)

I was watching VH1 and there was some show where they were talking about how much money Lil Wayne’s grill cost.  There was a guy with a British voice narrating everything, it was very reminiscent of the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.  As long as we can be entertained by the vicarious enjoyment of other people’s success and deluded into thinking that we are not special and don’t have anything to offer we are perpetuating the system.  It is evidence of self loathing, because you have innate guilt and feelings that you yourself are not worthy, you will keep everyone around you down as well, wishing you had that special something that certain…

je ne sais quoi 

ETYMOLOGY

From French je ne sais quoi, literally ‘I don’t know what’.

je ne sais quoi (uncountable)

1. An intangible quality that makes something distinctive or attractive.

   She has a certain je ne sais quoi about her.

Yeah, it sounds special because it’s in another language and you don’t know what it means, feel stupid yet?  Good!  You should.  A year ago I described to my General Manager what was about to happen, this is how I described it:

You don’t get it, the ship has already sunk.  What is happening now is that all of the rats that were on the ship have formed a big ball in the middle of the ocean and they are climbing on top of each other in order to be the last rat to drown.  

Don’t be a rat.  All those that play the game lose.  Love yourself by staying in relationship and being loyal to those people that are loyal to you and who create value for you.  Don’t denigrate or humiliate yourself by trying to socially climb on the people that are close to you that have never harmed you.  All of this shit is going bye bye anyway.  

•  http://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/idiocracy-douchebag-nation-part-1/
• http://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/deuchebag-nation-womans-world-part-2/

Male and Female Minds Revisited

I am going to revisit my theory on male and female brains to practice my explanation of it.  Science after all is the explanatory art.  

-Wikipedia

Super-ego[edit]

The superego (German: Über-Ich)^[26] reflects the internalization of cultural rules, mainly taught by parents applying their guidance and influence.^[8] Freud developed his concept of the super-ego from an earlier combination of the ego ideal and the “special psychical agency which performs the task of seeing that narcissistic satisfaction from the ego ideal is ensured … what we call our ‘conscience’.”^[27] For him “the installation of the super-ego can be described as a successful instance of identification with the parental agency,” while as development proceeds “the super-ego also takes on the influence of those who have stepped into the place of parents — educators, teachers, people chosen as ideal models.”^[28]

…also known as growing the fuck up. 

The existence of id consolidates the authority of Ego, in the absence of Id the ego will be sympathetic with it’s own desires and try to get super-ego to participate with it, which is the sole purpose of ego, and exactly the opposite of what Super ego wants, it directly antagonizes the will of super ego.  When I was studying male and female communication rituals my obscene abilities of pattern recognition were able to pick up on the patterns of the female brain and the way it is in relationship with the male brain.  This creates emergent properties in society and the world.  The 1 on 1 relationships create the norm, and people being aquisitively mimetic copy what they have seen.  This unconscious process, these unconscious relationships and patterns create a normative bias that creates disparate impact in favor of feminine judgments or ego.  Not only are the outcropping patterns bad they are dangerous and unsustainable.  

Female authority comes from usurping, blaming, guilting, shaming, and humiliating masculine authority.  Women do not see reason as their own will, they see it as a foreign invasive will, because they edit their consideration set to think sentimentally and emotionally not analytically or logically.  They don’t think about the ugly things that are going on in the world they think about the pretty things that would be pleasant if they were true.  The female mind ignores threats, and is naturally hostile to the masculine narrative which is to say they don’t listen to men with the same eagerness that they listen to other women and to their own emotions.  The female mind uses mercy and charity to expand her authority and to appear a moral superior to reason.  The male narrative is democratic, bold, offensive, truthful, easy to understand because it isn’t vague.  The female narrative tries to shut the male narrative up by presupposing a meritocracy of pleasantness where being pleasant is a virtue and you can’t speak your truth plainly and boldly.  The meritocracy of pleasantness thwarts the meritocracy of reason and prevents participation of the best with the best.  The female mind thinks it wins by getting offended even if it throws itself in the way to get offended for someone else, once offended the female mind presupposes it’s own moral authority to judge and punish.  

Parrhesia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In rhetoric, parrhesia is a figure of speech described as: to speak candidly or to ask forgiveness for so speaking.^[1] The term is borrowed from the Greek παρρησία (πᾶν “all” + ῥῆσις / ῥῆμα “utterance, speech”) meaning literally “to speak everything” and by extension “to speak freely,” “to speak boldly,” or “boldness.” It implies not only freedom of speech, but the obligation to speak the truth for the common good, even at personal risk.

An example of this is the quote “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat” by Winston Churchill.^[2]

My term “Superficial Aesthetic Snap Decisions”  are the tacit judgments made by the uneducated female mind without understanding.  (http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/superficial-aesthetic-snap-decisions/) The uneducated mind is easily offended thinking  that everything in the brief, pleasant span of its short life has prepared it to judge everything that goes on from it’s own narrow-minded opinion.  It is essentially operating tacitly on a dynamic tautology of argument from ignorance. 

Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance stands for “lack of evidence to the contrary”), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four, (1) true, (2) false, (3) unknown between true or false, and (4) being unknowable (among the first three).^[2] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof. -wikipedia

Let me see if I can explain this another way.  We have all of this technology in America, google +, facebook, wordpress, etc. many people think that they are experts on how the internet works.  This is called epistemic arrogance.  Over valuing what you know and undervaluing what you don’t know.  It is very good for making you feel good about yourself but it is very bad for knowing the threats that are coming at you.  That feeling goodness, prevents you from understanding the nature of the enemy that hates you and wants to eradicate you off the face of the planet.  That positive emotional female crap, is a liability, it makes you weak, slow, and unprepared.  

The Deep Web (also called the Deepnet,^[1] Invisible Web,^[2] or Hidden Web^[3]) is World Wide Web content that is not part of the Surface Web, which is indexed by standardsearch engines. It should not be confused with the dark Internet, the computers that can no longer be reached via the Internet, or with a Darknet distributed filesharing network, which could be classified as a smaller part of the Deep Web. There is concern that the deep web can be used for serious criminal activity.^[4]

Mike Bergman, founder of BrightPlanet and credited with coining the phrase,^[5] said that searching on the Internet today can be compared to dragging a net across the surface of the ocean: a great deal may be caught in the net, but there is a wealth of information that is deep and therefore missed.^[6] Most of the Web’s information is buried far down on dynamically generated sites, and standard search engines do not find it. Traditional search engines cannot “see” or retrieve content in the deep Web—those pages do not exist until they are created dynamically as the result of a specific search. As of 2001, the deep Web was several orders of magnitude larger than the surface Web.^[7]

thank you iconographic art of joxua mourningstar 

 

This is a photoshop I did of Nishkala shiva, and Sikala Shiva, an ancient Indian metaphor for the nature of the mind. Sikala Shiva is in corpse pose but still alive, although in a dormant state, he represents the subconscious mind, many orders of magnitude greater than the conscious mind represented by Shakti.  Below him is Niskala Shiva in his dead form representing the unconscious mind, many orders of magnitude greater than the subconscious mind.