Tag Archives: relationship

The truth about the LGBTQ caste system.


Let me start by saying that I have gay friends.  I used to live and work in a gay community.  It was my gay friend Patrick John Coleman that originally brought this topic to my attention.

Why is the L before the G?  They will deny this up and down but it is a caste system and the letters appear according to their importance which is a meritocracy of gay-ness defined by man-hating lesbians. 

I know from observation that Gay men are not defined by hating women.  Gay men are more predisposed to being pedophiles than the average individual.  I don’t want you to think that I am defending them.  I have 3 lesbian couples as my immediate neighbors and I get along with all of them. 

Lesbianism, as a whole, has a deep vein of man hate.  The immediate response of the useful idiots is to think, “Well some man must have done something to them to make them hate men.”  Thereby transferring blame from women to men.  This is the first instinct of the Western Mind.  This is the bigotry of low expectation.  Those people can’t get right so we have to accept them as they are and act like we don’t notice their problems.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  People can be born gay.  I have witnessed it with my own eyes. Being traumatized by a man doesn’t make you sexually attracted to women.

I worked as a bouncer in night clubs for 5 years.  I observed lesbian couples sucking people into their drama.  The fem would flirt with a man and when he responded the butch would eventually butt in and act aggressive saying something like, “Hey, are you flirting with my girlfriend?!” creating an awkward situation that the lesbians get off on.  Office psychopaths use a similar strategy.  The histrionic psychopath will act as though they have been victimized and cause a scene, their enabler will come to their rescue and confirm that they have been victimized and are behaving rationally.  Abracadabra, drama where there was none, materialized out of thin air.

Lesbian relationships notoriously fail.  I listen to my next door neighbors yelling at each other.  One of them says that she is anorexic because her partner doesn’t pay enough attention to her.  Lesbian Bed Death is the phenomena in which same sex female partners lose interest in one another.  Why? because their relationship isn’t based on attraction it is based on mutual hatred of men.

So why would man hating lesbians be placed on the top of the caste system?  Because from that position they can dictate what is the “true” and “false” lesbian opinion.  They can speak for gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals.  If you don’t agree with them then you are excluded as, “Not a real, gay person”.  They can ruin your reputation in your own community.  

Now they have expanded the LGBT Acronym to LGBTQQIAAP.  It is as though we are getting attacked by the entire alphabet.  I don’t know if you missed it but a while back they actually tried to make pedophilia a sexual lifestyle preference and add it to their acronym.  This is just another Liberal Union, a Democrat Monopoly.  They are trying to expand the Thought Plantation even further.  I get that the Democrat Party is a big tent but I don’t want to live in a big tent with a bunch of homeless sexual perverts and drug addicted freaks.  

Have Women Transcended Sex?




One of the premises that women like to force and that western society doesn’t scrutinize is that women are good and morally superior because they have transcended sex and are not motivated by it.  Women show disgust at men that approach them sexually or that express sexual desires.  This goes back to how male and female brains are different.  The mind is an association making machine.  Men associate everything with sex.  This actually makes them smarter.  Men incentivize themselves by believing that they will be rewarded with intimacy and found desirable by a woman.  On a subconscious level this means that the man will survive into the future in the form of a child but the man doesn’t actually consciously think this, he just wants the affection of a female a positive interaction with a woman.  Men don’t all have sex for children they have sex for the sake of having sex.


Women on the other hand are only aroused by a man that they might want to have a child with.  The female brain associates everything, including sex, with children and that means her increased authority over children and her increased ability to provide well for those children (by using the resources of others, society or a rich man or men assuming she cannot earn enough money on her own to provide for them which presupposes the woman actually desires to provide financially for herself and her children, which is often not at all the case…)  Even the act of sex is associated by the woman with children.  You stick your penis in her vagina which is where babies come out of.  You suck her nipples like a baby.  These rituals prepare the woman for sexual arousal because you are reminding her body of babies.  Women infantilize men by thinking of them as babies and treating them like babies.  In this way they presuppose their authority over men.


Another of the premise forced by women is that having children is a 100% altruistic endeavor on the part of the woman, which is patently false.  The existence of the child solidifies the authority of the woman, not only is she the authority on the child, she is the authority on how she and the child should be provided for by the man.  Historically men can survive quite well without women for their life time, they only need women if they feel the desire to reproduce.  Women, however, when survival is difficult, need to be protected and fended for, by men, this is true when survival is difficult.  When times are easy, feminine values dominate, when times are hard masculine values dominate.  The western mind has been feminized, and especially the united states, because survival has been so easy for so long.

When you create a society in which the government provides for all of the needs of women and women get paid the same as men whether they have demonstrated proficiency or not, getting promotions because they are women, how does this effect the relationship between men and women in society?

“Once made equal to man, woman becomes his superior.”


Women naturally look for a man that has more prestige or money than she has.  Women, in general, sleep up.  What this means is that as women depend less and less on men, they will become less and less aroused by and interested in men.  They will become less sympathetic to men.  Women naturally edit their consideration sets to think only of themselves, their authority and stature, and their children.  Masculine authority is always considered a foreign invasive threat to the authority of the woman.  If women had everything their way they would make the entire world safe for babies, because their mind is in relationship with babies, puppies, and kittens and anyone that participates with their authority over them and accepts their mercy and charity.


Women are naturally less sexually aroused and this has nothing to do with any innate spirituality that women are supposed to have.  Women need to feel desired, they need to be pursued, they need to be turned on, often times the man that is willing to lie to and manipulate the woman is the one that wins her affections.  The man that conceals what he really thinks and reveals himself falsely is the one who is rewarded by the female.  Why does society punish men for wanting sex?  Why does society punish men for having children?  Why does society blame men for having children?  What if we did away with marriage all together?  That way women would be responsible for their own decisions and they would make better choices.  Women haven’t transcended sex, in order to transcend something it has to be an addiction.  The spiritual woman is the one that has transcended the natural instincts of women and has risen above the feminine ego consciousness, and unconscious reasoning in which she doesn’t recognize or scrutinize her natural impulses and the emergent properties of Feminine Conquests.

Relationship has become a form of Asymmetric Warfare.


In this blog we are going to discuss the current state of relationship between men and women in this country based on shifting ideologies, socially created incentives,  views of sexes that are being reified, general properties of male and female perspectives, and natural instincts, strategies, and judgments of society and those sexes.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because unlike other countries that accept that men and women are different there has been a century long successful campaign in this country to blur the lines between men and women while at the same time marginalizing men and promoting women.  This means that we don’t have the vocabulary to discuss the topic, the topic itself is unfamiliar, and their is a social taboo on the topic itself, that topic being left for certain people to discuss in dark corners and by making back door deals and choosing what is good for everybody to be allowed think.


Relationship seems like a simple enough thing.  One man one woman, but we find that is not actually the case.  There is a playing field of public opinion and normalcy that is slanted in favor of the woman.  Western Society itself has a feminine bias which we are going to examine.

In cultures where survival is difficult masculine values dominate, in cultures where survival is easy female values dominate.  What are female values, you say?  Mercy and Charity.  Millions of years of Neural Myelination create the instincts of the female mind.  Nature has compartmentalized male and female minds to focus on two different subjects, survival (male) and Procreation (female). The female mind edits its consideration set to focus on the things that it likes, that make it feel good and it expands and increases it’s authority by usurping masculine authority in the form of reason.

Women are attracted to the most alpha man (they can control) in the largest group of people that they like.  This is herding instinct.  They feel safer because of the size of the herd and then upon starting a relationship with a man in good standing in that herd, they instantaneously have status and recognition in that herd.  But the female mind is more self interested in relationship, being that it’s instinct is to enter into relationship for it’s own benefit, not mutual benefit.  This happens because women need the surplus created by men to care for their children, they are weak when they are pregnant and the also need a safe environment for taking care of the children.  So the female mind has an incentive to have a child and then protect the child, to do this she needs the resources and participation of other people.  But the female mind is more sympathetic to the child and herself than it is to the man she is in relationship with.  So women are aggressive in relationship but also submissive to the herd.  From the woman’s perspective she is more part of the herd than she is part of the relationship and when she can’t get what she wants from the relationship she will go outside the relationship to enlist the peer pressure of others to put pressure on her male partner to give her what she feels she deserves or what she wants, when she does this she weakens her mates reputation in the herd.

Babies start out as whiny emotional creatures, completely Dependant on everybody to do everything for them.  They communicate no analytical data and only emotional data, for this reason the female mind was created to interpret the babies emotional data and communicate emotional data to the child.  From the mother’s perspective the emotional perspective of the child is valid, as it has to be for the survival of the species.  But this also means that the mother’s perspective itself is more emotional and less analytical which is why feminine reasoning appeals to emotions, makes certain logical appeals, throws histrionic fits to get its way and engages in other irrational behaviors.  The babies perspective, is completely delusional as far as the world is concerned because it would immediately perish on it’s own.  The mother’s perspective is slightly less so, still depending on the herd and her husband to protect and provide a surplus for her and an environment for her  with which she can take care of the baby.  The existence of the baby reifies the authority of the mother in the form of mercy and charity for the baby.  The female mind edits it’s consideration set to focus on things that please it and make sense to it.  Puppies, babies, kittens, relationship, poor people, victims, anybody that she can expand her authority over and usurp the authority of reason.

If men and women are the same, as some people argue, why are men thought of as bad for wanting what they want (sex) and women are thought of as good for wanting what they want (children)?  Why since this world is so massively over populated does society not think of women as evil for reproducing irresponsibly?  If men and women are the same, why is society so hostile to masculine opinions and so accepting of feminine reasoning and emotional appeals?  Why does society tolerate more violent and insane behavior from women then it will from men?  Why is society less concerned for the fate of men than it is for women?  Why is it that society is more concerned about breast cancer than it is for Veterans that have fought and bled for the country and risked their lives and their health?  Because Western Society itself has a feminine bias.


A brief description of female communication rituals is as follows:

  1. the conversation proceeds pleasantly and ends pleasantly.
  2. the conversation ends in the appearance of agreement.
  3. Women communicate sameness.
  4. If it isn’t pleasant you can’t say it.


The problem is the way this conversation style edits it’s consideration set and application set.  It is possible to lie, or to be passive aggressive.  The female mind being more psychopathic is less capable of detecting the psychopath because it defends against the sociopath (male mind) which can be demonstrated by masculine communication rituals and how women are hostile to male communication.

When a society forces political correctness, it counter incentivizes masculine thought and solutions, it also fails to detect the strategic behavior of psychopaths that are gaming society, by lying, concealing their true intention and motivation and manipulating others or stealing from them.

Women have double and triple standards.  Women are tacitly arrogant, in that they view femininity superior to masculinity.  Even though they depend on the surplus created by male minds they like being what they are, they don’t realize that the male minds and the herd have to be successful first before their is a surplus to satisfy their needs.  If a man uses female communication rituals a woman can interpret that as he is admitting that women are superior.  If a man tries to get a woman to speak as a man, she will either refuse to participate, lie, or try to communicate that she is dominant by being abusive, if he accelerates the situation to get her to submit at some point she acts like the victim and goes outside the relationship. Some women, tacitly believing in their superiority, frame male minds as childish minds, and try to manipulate men as a mother does a child.  Trying to get him to take a course of action and making him think it was his idea.  I call this jingling the keys.  The female mind tries to control the focal point of the conversation and then communicates emotional data to the male to control how he is in relationship with the topic emotionally.  This tactic is very effective on way too many males.


Millions of years of Neural Myelination have hardwired certain behaviors and strategies into feminine instinct.  Women want to appear submissive to the herd, so they adopt an intellectual camouflage in the form of agreeing with the social norms.  Whatever society thinks is true about black people, white men, women, Mexicans, Muslims, or what have you, women in general will adopt the most common perspective.  Not just women but psychopaths and female minds.  You see this every day in the form of the P.C. Police that presuppose their own authority to judge and punish anybody that doesn’t agree with the common opinion.  Champions of normalcy and enemies of freedom of speech and individuality.  You got the “Cool Honky” who thinks he is the only one who is down with the black people and tries to act as a mediator and an expert on the topic.  Or you have the “White Knight” who will police conversations between men about women.  They conversation block, or through histrionic fits, or make emotional appeals, or complain to other people in the herd to manipulate your reputation and standing in the herd.

Women/female minds/psychopaths are innate social climbers.  They enter into a large herd and try to climb as high as they can get using various strategies.  Since they have to get “up there” they have to push others down, so they will attack pre-emptively because they need to get “up there” as fast as they can and they have unwarranted, innate, feelings of superiority.  Instead of using a masculine, democratic, horizontal communication process, they use tyrannical, vertical, female communication processes.

mcr fce


Imagine for a moment that you have put together a fraternity of a successful group of people.  Everything is working out fine and then you decide to add a woman, nothing bad happens so you decide to add another women.  Because of the way women reason, relate and think this is what happens.


This isn’t an isolated incident, it happens all of the time.  A good looking woman goes to a grocery store, finds the biggest most pussy starved gomer that dotes on her and caters to her every whim and then complains that other team members are giving her bad service when they don’t treat her like he does.  And then Helga Unibrow shows up.


Women and psychopaths take advantage of the way things appear to game and manipulate society, and to win against reason.  Recently in Ferguson one advocate said, “it’s not enough that things are right they have to look right.”  This is an appeal to what I refer to as the female mind, Superficial, Aesthetic, Snap decisions without understanding or reason.  When we cater to the Aesthitics of the uninformed or stupid you unleash the Lowest Common Good, not the Highest Common Good that is released when people exert an influence on themselves to be reasonable.

When you scale a government down so that all of women’s needs are satisfied and given priority over men’s so that women don’t rely on relationship to satisfy them, what happens is that the female mind keeps editing it’s consideration set.  The psychopath and the female mind try to maximize the amount of return while minimizing their investment.  When you change the playing field to suit women that becomes the norm, which becomes the expectation, which is then taken for granted.  Women being natural social climbers, unconscious of their instincts and behavior and incapable of self discipline or self scrutiny will just raise the level of their expectations, as they are doing right now.  Women as a group are more inclined to reward only, and men to punish only.  For men the reward is that you did it right and you get to live, they expect you to be reasonable because it is about success and survival, this is not enough for women, they also have to have a support group and like children they have to be bribed with pleasant words and candy in order to do the right thing, and then they have to be encouraged afterward.

Women in western society treat men as if they are disposable, now that they make as much or more then men they still date men that can buy them nice things.  Now that women don’t need men, they show less interest and arousal for them.  Women act as though it is some manner of accomplishment to not be attracted sexually to men.  This is just a natural outcropping of society stigmatizing them and diminishing their role and constantly humiliating them.  Some women only date men who will let them dominate the relationship.  Some women only date men that chase them, compete with other men, and make them the center of attention.  None of this impresses me, what impresses me is a woman who has good taste in men and pursues one pointedly that which she wants.  What impresses me is a rational woman.


The other interesting thing is that while western civilized men are not allowed to exert an influence on their women because of societal judgments, Western Society turns a blind eye to cultures that are tribal and do control their women.  Black people as a culture are for more likely to view a Black woman dating a white man as a race traitor.  In the Mexican culture, males sons have a say in who their sister dates, and they are more controlling of their women.  The Muslim culture even in the united states still kills their daughters for having intercourse with Non-muslim men.  If it isn’t strictly frowned on it is downright forbidden.  But none of this enters the consideration set of the Western Female because she only cares about herself and getting what she wants.  And from the perspective of the western mind, this kind of behavior gets categorized as requiring charity and mercy, it falls into the protected category of children and women, it’s just part of their culture, they don’t know any better. . .

The reason I don’t believe in relationship anymore.


Most people don’t understand the concept of what Aristotle was talking about, he was talking about philia, 

Philia (/ˈfɪljə/ or /ˈfɪliə/; Ancient Greek: φιλία), often translated “brotherly love“, is one of the four ancient Greek words for love. Philia, Storge, agape and eros inAristotle‘s Nicomachean Ethics is usually translated as affectionate regard or “friendship“.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philia

He was making reference to a philoish, which is a philosophical family.  The closest thing to that today is a Fraternity, but not like a college Fraternity, more like a Secret Society.  


I have a saying, “if you don’t understand me you can’t love me.”  I am a very deep and complicated person and somewhat of an expert on myself.  In order to feel loved I would need to be understood, and understanding me isn’t easy, hell, becoming me wasn’t easy, but I like myself and I understand myself.  I have had several people, all of them women, tell me that they could love me without understanding me, no, they can’t and they didn’t.  If your love isn’t specifically crafted for me, then you are not loving me, you are giving me some manner of generic love, a stupid love, because it is not genuine and not for me.  

A friend to all is a friend to none.


I am not only not of this world I am AGAINST THE WORLD.  The world is screwed up, Reason has fled, relationship is impoverished, the laughter of fools everywhere, the leaders are corrupt nincompoops.  I worship the god of reason, I move towards the solution.  My emotions and my body follow the dictates of reason, now for me to be in a relationship with a person less wise than myself whose Reason follows their emotion that would not allow me to do my will.  In order for me to stay in that relationship I would have to force my reason to follow their emotions which means I would give up on my purpose and lose my soul, unacceptable.  

Being that I am on a path and moving in a direction towards a solution for the sake of the world to destroy the current world, in order for relationship to exist for me the other person would have to be on my level at this point in time, moving at the same speed, towards the same goal.  If they weren’t on my level then the only relationship we could have is an educational one in which I am the teacher.  Should I meet somebody that is in front of me moving towards the same goal who knows more than myself then I would let them teach me, because I am reasonable. 


Now what most people call relationship is more like 2 boats passing each other in the night.  You never really know the other person.  When relationship begins you don’t know each other at all, relationship is a process of getting to know one another. Most people are shallow, fake, superficial people that conceal their true self and misrepresent who they are.  My last gf used to constantly ask me, “where is the nice man I met,”  and I would respond, “you killed him.”  What she was trying to do was to force me back in time to when she didn’t know anything about me, and we hadn’t had any disagreements, and none of her lies had been uncovered, and none of her strategic behavior had been exposed.  She thought she had the right to lie, emotionally abuse, manipulate, sabotage, refuse to participate, demand my participation, and all other manner of psychopathic strategic behavior.  She thought she had the right to terrorize the relationship for her own benefit if she wasn’t getting everything she wanted while at the same time denying me everything I needed.  


Every event in the relationship not only characterizes the relationship and determines how we feel about it it also characterizes the other person in the relationship and both people in the relationship to people outside the relationship.  If you are in relationship unconsciously you are creating friction and releasing negative energy, so I have a saying, “Save your best for first and constantly strive to increase your best.”  


What usually happens in relationship is that people’s paths cross, like star-crossed lovers, and as time goes on they realize that they are moving in two different directions.  At this point one of them tries to coerce or seduce the other into following them on their course, what this means is that one party has to follow the other and give up on their dreams.  Relationships should create value for both parties not just one party.  The relationship should help each person do their own will.  It should create value for both of them, not a relationship where one party parasites off the other.  

People shouldn’t be aggressive in the relationship against the relationship, they should be aggressive for the relationship, aggressive against the world.  They shouldn’t try to hi-jack the relationship.  It is a process of learning and growing and increasing the value of the people in the relationship.  It is a process of mutually perfecting one another and helping one another do our own will.  One of the problems I have with Jesus saying,”Do unto others as you want them to do unto you.”  Is that what I want for myself is not what other people want for themselves and unless we share the same philosophy, who is to say they are going to reciprocate in kind?  I want what I want, you want what you want, don’t try to force me to do your will and I won’t force my good on you.  Amen. 

Emotional Morbidity and Psychopathology


Now the difference between the Psychopath and a rational or  sane person is that the Psychopath acts out of emotional morbidity.  I created Shared State Theory of Communication in part because I was observing two things, the fact that I was aware of the fact that I was changing states, emotional states and the way I was in relationship with people, the world, facts,  and events.  While every time I would communicate that I had changed states I noticed that almost everybody else would change the way they were in relationship with me and the relationship either without knowing, or without communicating that something had changed.

Whereas I was able to be self aware, self conscious, and self controlled, these appeared to be intelligences that others did not possess in the same proportions or at all.  I was constantly the victim of this unconscious changing of states, some of the time it was strategic, subversive, or passive aggressive.  I was the first to get screwed.  Instead of being considered a virtue, people seemed to consider being self aware a form of sorcery of which they were suspicious.  Baba Muktananda had always mentioned how he studied people that were successful and people that failed.  I found this interesting as well, how over and over again I was the first person to get sold down the river, not because I was wrong, or bad at my job, but because people feared my knowledge, insight, and ability.  They didn’t want to compete with me on a level playing field because they were afraid of how they would look in comparison to me, and they would have been right, given a chance I would have made them look like they were moving backwards in time.  This is also a clue to why we as a country and a world are in the state of affairs that we are in.  No money in the economy, cleptocracy in the banks and stockmarket, propaganda in the media, puppets in the government.

Knowing that I was in an emotionally morbid state I wouldn’t make decisions or act.  Psychopaths on the other hand only act on their issues, and out of emotionally morbid states.  They don’t take responsibility for their issues or their emotions, as far as they are concerned, everybody else is responsible for their emotions and their emotions are responsible for their behavior.  So a psychopath will throw an histrionic fit, and it is your fault, because you attacked them by existing and them being aware of your existence.


Histrionic psychopaths keep their pain fresh, like an open wound, and they use it as a source of power, they are consciously looking for things to get offended by and they think they win be getting offended.  Then when they have an opportunity they loose their venom on somebody that they are projecting their damage onto.

We now know that Anger comes from feelings of frustration, according to my SSTOC people are always communicating whatever state they are in, even if they are concealing that state, they are probably still leaking that state.  A person that feels thwarted will communicate thwartedness, unjustly thwarting others that don’t deserve it.  In an environment in which people are not educated knowing psychology, America, and not encouraged to be mentally healthy, what we see now is a creeping normalcy.  People are acquisitively mimetic, and they copy behaviors they see.  Monkey see monkey do, ad nauseum.  I refer to it as the tragedy of the commons in regard to strategic behavior.

The problem with modern psychology is that it is normative, which means that it compares the individual to the normal person in society which presupposes that the society itself isn’t batshit insane.  Which as it happens right now, is the case.  This also means that people that are quite rational will be singled out, and considered insane, because the crazy society has to be protected from the sane individuals that every day see the decay of the form of the good.

As part of my theory of rational relationship, a person should communicate in a timely manner if their behavior has been modified from what is rational or expected or necessary so that the other person can respond or change their mind or plan.  This maximizes the value in a rational relationship.  If you don’t communicate correctly, you do not think correctly and you do not act correctly which means the end result will be bad.  All force is a subtle form of rape.

Some of you know my theory on how philosophy and religion came to the west from India through Greece and for those of you this word will be meaningful.

auspicious (adj.) Look up auspicious at Dictionary.com1590s, “of good omen” (implied in auspiciously), from Latin auspicium “divination by observing the flight of birds,” from auspex (genitive auspicis) + -ous. Related:Auspiciouslyauspiciousness.



From auspice +‎ -ious, from Latin auspicium (augury), from Latin auspex (augur), possibly via French.

  1. Of good omen; indicating future success.
  2. Conducive to success.
    This is an auspicious day.
  3. Marked by successprosperous.

Ask yourself these questions:  What stimulated my need recognition?  What are my intentions?  What is my motivation?  What is my desire?  What is my end game?  What is my desired result? 

Things end as they begin, and nothing ends well that is motivated by negative emotions.


The Holy Trinity as a Psychological Metaphor


I have been trying to figure out how to put this information together in the least offensive way.  The western brain, male and female has a feminine bias, and reacts emotionally and violently to certain Ideas.  The information expressed in this blog is descriptive of a philosophy from a long time ago and explanatory of the situation we currently find ourselves in.  Please do not presuppose that I agree with everything in this blog.  You don’t know how I am in relationship with the information in this blog, if you ask me I will tell you.  Above all I would like to appreciate Fidem Turbare for having the open mindedness to entertain my explanations, and the intelligence to understand what I am talking about.  It is a huge frustration when there is nobody on your level capable of evaluating you or understanding what you are talking about.  I have decided to rewrite this blog as a personal conversation between me and Fidem.  



As some of you know I am a philologist and a linguistic philosopher, I have traced the origins of Christianity to India through Judaism.  Many of you might not know this but the people that created the religions were not theists, they were deists.  I set out a long time ago to understand the perspective of the people that created the religions.  Jesus was a member of the cult of Pythagorus, I know this because I have learned how to recognize rhetorical tautologies, and languages of experience in a person’s narrative.  Jesus references the corner stone that was rejected, even today this symbolism is very important to freemasonry which also traces it’s origins back to Pythagorus.


In my very popular piece here (http://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/the-metaphysics-of-joxua-luxor/) I lay out my metaphysics and explain the rolls assigned men and women in an attempt to make a scientific marriage unit, scientific from ancient standards, but still not without merit as we will discuss later in this blog.

From the perspective of the ancients, male and female roles were internalized and externalized, there was a division of labor and a division of attention.  In Persia women were property, in Greece marriage was a business contract.  It had less to do with love and more to do with survival.  Women naturally and instinctively like to think about things that women like, puppies, kittens, babies, etc.  It was known back in the day that women are interested in extending and expanding their authority, anybody that is not a threat and that expands their authority they want to protect, the sick, the poor, etc.  Women expand their authority to usurp masculine authority.  They don’t think about the political environment, or the economic environment, and when they make decisions they take fewer considerations into account.  They think only of their own needs and the needs of those under their authority.  For this reason the man represented Sapiential Authority, the Mother Moral authority and the child survival and action in the future, also acting on the fathers wisdom.


It is important to note that the average western male no longer studies Torah everyday, or attends a Wisdom school like Freemasonry, and even if he did Freemasonry is no longer the moral science that it once was, it has devolved into a business fraternity and drinking club for the most part.  The average American male is no longer conversant in high philosophy, he doesn’t hang out with the boys at the gymnasium discussing politics and policy.  So the rules have changed.

If you observe women’s behavior under life threatening circumstances you realize that in that state of temporary autism a person operates on their hard wiring.  Never have I heard of a woman throwing herself between her boyfriend and a gunman.  I have heard of women sheltering their babies.  In the recent batman movie shootings 3 young men died protecting their girlfriends.

Aristotle wrote on this subject immensely, of interest is that any society that stops reading Aristotle shortly ends up back in the Dark Ages.  Aristotle wrote extensively on the proper relationship between men and women noting too that men sexually peak at the age of 18 and women at the age of 40.


In the Hindu Epic the Ramayana, which I believe is the source of inspiration for the biblical account of Adam and Eve, Sita is kidnapped because she sees a beautiful deer and she wants Rama and his brother to go and catch it for her so she can have it as a pet.  At the end of the book it is because of her Fickle sentimental thinking that the whole escapade happened in the first place.  Women are sentimental thinkers.  They weigh emotions as more important than reason.

Most people don’t know this but God’s Holy Spirit is actually a woman:

ShekinahShechinahShechina, or Schechinah (Hebrewשכינה‎), is the English spelling of agrammatically feminineHebrewname of God in Judaism.[citation needed] The original word means the dwelling or settling, and denotes the dwelling or settling of the Divine Presence of God, especially in the Temple in Jerusalem.


The reason that the Catholic Church had to turn her into a ghost is to silence her.  There is a psychological reason for shaming girls for their sexual behavior, women need to be more careful and take more responsibility for their actions because of their nature.  Women do not take responsibility for their actions in general.  A woman will have sex with a man and just assume the relationship is about her needs, desires, and wants, without communication ahead of time.  When men are blamed and shamed for the desire for sex this creates negative, unsustainable, patterns in society.  It counter incentivizes masculine sexuality.  This is something that should be meditated on.

Because women don’t solve problems in such a way as they create value for men (IN GENERAL) they automatically presuppose their own authority and think that men should be like women.  It is a cognitive bias to think that everyone thinks like you do.  Men and women were separated back in the day not to protect women from men but to protect masculinity from femininity.





Genesis 2:18  Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper as his complement.”

In societies where survival is difficult masculine values dominate, in societies where survival is easy, feminine values dominate.  To believe is the current virtues of Western culture you have to presuppose a leisurely ability to survive.  But that isn’t the case is it?  The economy isn’t coming back because we do not have a large surplus of anything to sell that we don’t appreciate or need.  We do not have an infinite supply of energy with which to transport those products.  Atomic energy has proven to be unsustainable, which is why they are shutting down the atomic energy plants.  We are running out of oil which America needs because it has the larges military in the world and China needs that oil because they are industrializing.  So the military is a depreciating asset and the oil is a resource that every day gets more expensive and less abundant.  

A few years ago I downloaded all of the free classes from Itunes university from all of the Ivy league colleges on all of the subjects I was interested in, and I listened to them over and over.  Cognitive science, philosophy, and psychology.  I also downloaded a bunch of commentaries on literature and such.  One of the things I downloaded, and I wish I remembered her name, was a speech by a black female Judge from Chicago, explaining how the no fault divorce was created in order to get women out of abusive marriages, but what it did was it allowed a windfall of women divorcing their husbands for no reason.  She specifically blamed women for the divorce epidemic.  And I believe she was correct.  Once a man has been divorced he doesn’t have a home but he still has to pay her bills, he can’t see his children unless she allows him to, and somehow, depressed and alone he still has to support himself.

The female mind is naturally insensitive to the male mind.  So in a society which every day is being scaled down to please women NO VALUE IS BEING CREATED FOR MEN.  Men don’t have an incentive to protect this society or these women.  Every woman that comes along wants to hitch her wagon to my horse.  She enters into relationship for her own benefit presupposing herself good and correct in her desires and giving not a single fuck about my desires and happiness unless my will is to serve her needs alone.  What is being said to American men is this, “Oh, I am sorry, me and the children do not have enough stuff, perhaps you can kindly go kill yourself so that we can get the insurance money.”

Now ponder this, Muslim men and the Islamic culture CAN control their women, while our women are not reasonable and refuse to be controlled.  Which society is going to survive?  Especially, when women edit their consideration sets so that they only look at the things that make them happy, immediately are suspicious of western men, and blame and abuse the very men they expect to serve and protect them?

The liberal, elitist, feminist mentality is only sustainable in a society that is highly successful.  Imagine that we are in ancient Greece and it isn’t that easy to survive.  You have to survive into the future or your culture will disappear, so you have to have children.  You have to have a relationship that maximizes value for everybody.  Everybody has roles to fill and they have rights. You can’t afford to give any person in that relationship more than is sustainable from the surplus of value created by the success of the relationship.


Muslims consider Christians polytheists and therefore heretics and blasphemers BECAUSE of the Doctrine of the Trinity.  From their perspective:

“There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of God.”

That is a rhetorical tautology of a masculine only perspective.  So who is going to inherit the earth?  What precedes the collapse of Western rule historically?

In my psychological models what I did was I studied, Deborah Tannen’s work on male female communication rituals.  All narrative is doxography, which is to say point of view.  So it characterizes each person speaking.  What you realize is that the human brain was compartmentalized into 2 different brains by evolution. Due to their natural strengths and weaknesses a division of labors if you will.  What modern society is doing is undoing what evolution did, while at the same time destroying  modern society.  If you observe female vs. male communication rituals you see also how the male brain and female brain are in relationship with one another.

Now here is the key for you, when I say “male and female” part of that is based on yin and yang or broken and unbroken.  Which is to say an inferior mind to a superior mind and the relationship between them.  The reason you cannot infer from your experience to falsify my research is this, you are not normal, you are a lot smarter than most people and completely different from any other woman I have met.  From your perspective, the majority of psychopaths/female minds that you have experienced in relationship are men.  Psychopaths are aggressive in relationship, they approach relationship strategically for their own benefit.  They expect you to stay in the relationship while they continue to judge you, abuse you, lie to you, manipulate you, and punish you.  No matter how many times they are wrong or they fail they still feel themselves your equal and refuse to participate with reason.

The Science of yoga is the art of finding all of the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases that the human brain makes.  In essence, throwing the mind.  Emotions warp and distort reality around us.  I call this the averseness of the mind, it happens unconsciously without our knowing it.  Familiarity breeds contempt.  Nassim Nicholas Taleb documented a similar phenomenon.  On long flights statisticians were more likely to buy insurance for things that were far less likely to happen, like terrorism, than insurance for accidents that were far more likely to happen, due to what I call the averseness of the mind.  Observe if you will the behavior of the Atheists.  They are far more verbally abusive against Christians than the far more menacing threat of Muslims.  Even in the middle of a global Jihad push they would rather harass Christians.  Richard Dawkins himself says that you won’t see atheists leading troupes into battle.  Who is fighting the Muslims?  The Christians.

Women are aggressive communicators while at the same time being deaf to reason.  If appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy than communicating emotionally is a dynamic tautology of the appeal to emotion fallacy. Observe how women argue, histrionic fits, changing the pitch, tone, and cadence of their speech, talking over your.  Observe how this deviates from Socratic dialogue.  Men are sensitive listeners, women adopt these communication rituals to abuse the male mind, and to force it’s compliance.  When I was younger I actually developed a psychosomatic response to the sound of Diane Chamber’s voice on Cheers, my eyes would dilate and my heart would race, I was having a panic attack, it was stimulated by my having to talk to my mother and my relationship with my sister.  All of her smarmy sanctimony and her self appointed moral authority, presupposing her right to judge everybody from her own narrow perspective.  The funny thing about her was that she wasn’t acting, that is really who she was.  Everybody on the caste hated her.  One time they threw a party and they gave her the wrong address.  True story.

Inferior minds are bitch move artists, (I am sorry, I know you don’t like that word)  they are artists that express themselves through the medium of bitch moves to appear to be more than they are.  They try to expand and increase their authority and interrupt the rational conversation.  They approach the conversation strategically, concealing their true intention and misrepresenting themselves, they try to control what can be said, the direction of the conversation, the focus of the conversation and they attempt to force the conclusion of the conversation.  The conversation is the relationship, every event in the relationship characterizes the relationship.  All of these tactics are the same tactics used by mothers on babies.  I call it “jingling the keys” the mother tries to control your focal point, and then communicates to you emotional data as to how you should feel about the thing and what you should do.


The feminine bias in society is also associated with tacit judgments I refer to as superficial aesthetic snap decisions.  This is based on the flow of negative emotional data.  The child can communicate negative emotional data to the mother, and the mother to the father, but the flow of negative emotional data cannot be reversed without invoking the refractory state of the western mind which reveals a tacit bias in favor of femininity.  Here is a picture I photo-shopped to illustrate the way in which the male and female mind are in relationship with one another.


In ancient times they had the age of accountability. It was at that age that the authority of the mother ended and the authority of the father began.  The role of the father was to make the child suitable for society, psychologically sound and whole, capable of being a citizen and understanding the values of the culture.  The highest form of the good and the worst form of the bad.  With daughters when the age of accountability was reached, they were given or sold or married to a man and he took over her instruction.  In our current modern society the authority of the mother never ends, and people never take responsibility, they never understand, they never grow up.  We have created an entire generation of babies expecting to be provided for.  When they do something wrong or stupid they just appeal to feminine authority to mercy and charity, claiming that they weren’t responsible and they didn’t know what they were doing.

Other countries and cultures have no problem recognizing that men and women are different.  It is only because of propaganda in Western science that we hold this prejudice.  Even Western science is starting to realize it’s error.  If Western society hasn’t degenerated it is degenerating. . .

At least that is the view from my seat.


Sex Equality in America


First of all we have to examine how we got into this predicament in the first place.  We assumed that there was no difference between men and women, first unproven presupposition.  Secondly, when we saw evidence that this wasn’t the case we concealed it, ignored it, and lied about it.  When we saw that men excelled in certain fields like maths and sciences, we assumed that their was prejudice and discrimination and that men were to blame.  We assumed some nefarious manipulation by men in order to make that the case.  We assumed it was wrong and bad and needed to be changed.  We assumed it was unnatural.  

When women were allowed in the maths and sciences nothing much changed as far as proportions of male to female scientists and the grades also did not change.  (http://www.livescience.com/1927-men-dominate-math-science-fields.html)  So what we did is we discouraged men from going into fields they were naturally inclined to go into, and encouraged women to go into fields that were not inclined to go into.  Also in the work place we promoted women for no other reason that they were women in order to protect against prima fascia law suits, by vexatious litigators (lawyers) who were trying to make money in a failing economy.  All they needed to do to bring charges was to show that the amount of women verses men in any level of employment did not mirror in proportions, the population of the area.  If there were 50% women and %50 men in the surrounding population then 50% of the leaders should be women.  If this wasn’t the case then a disparate impact was being created in favor of men, and this was grounds to sue. 

Burden of proof[edit]

Main article: Legal burden of proof

In most legal proceedings, one party has a burden of proof, which requires it to present prima facie evidence for all of the essential facts in its case. If they cannot, its claim may be dismissed without any need for a response by other parties. A prima facie case might not stand or fall on its own; if an opposing party introduces other evidence or asserts an affirmative defense it can only be reconciled with a full trial. Sometimes the introduction of prima facie evidence is informally called making a case or building a case.



Now nothing in the Western world is working.  No value is being created.  In order to have value you need to have a society that is efficient with value.  This would be a meritocracy of value.  A person would earn a position by being able to create more value for more people in that position than anybody else.  



Men and women are not equal because they are not the same.  To quote Martin Luther King, “Separate is not equal.”  to take that philosophic calculus a bit further, Different is not equal, only same is equal.  Men and women do not think the same, they don’t talk the same, they don’t behave the same, they are not interested in the same things, they don’t judge things the same way or interpret things the same way.  They don’t even have the same desires.  

When you ignore the differences between men and women and cement a false forced equality between them you turn a blind eye to potentially devastating emergent properties in society.  Who has the right and authority to make these decisions for everybody else without any evidence or any debate?  

We went from being the most successful country in the wolf in which American men were the most attractive and sought after with a booming economy, we could fly to the moon, cure any disease, and we looked forward to a bright future with technological miracles and an increased quality of life for all and now look at us.  Where is my hover scateboard?  Where are my Nike’s that lace themselves?    Where is my light saber and my lazer gun? 

I was raised in a manhating Jehovah’s Witness family.  I was exposed to casual misandry all throughout my educational career.  During 5 years on and off the street due to the economy in Seattle, I observed how for every 1 program there was for getting women off the street there were 20 for women, and they got paid even if they didn’t have any women joining the programs.  Throughout my work career I have been lied to, lied about, harassed, and denied promotions, not because of my ability or results but in spite of them.  People weren’t afraid that I would fail they were afraid that I would succeed, I literally didn’t get promotions because people didn’t want to compete with me on equal footing with equal rank, because of how they would look in comparison to me.  

Ignored, neglected, and harassed by school teachers, I was taught to be concernful of my sister and ignore my own feelings and desires.  While she was free to bully, and torment me without any consequences from my parents.  She once stabbed me in the leg with a pencil and cut me from him to knee, dragging it slowly down my leg.  There was no end to her talking bad about me to people, teachers, and her friends.  

It was the same in my personal relationships.  My girlfriends felt it was their right or responsibility to lie to me, lie about me, judge me, punish me, correct me, ignore me, and provoke me.  Demanding my participation with their ignorant emotional whim and refusing to participate with my reasoned solution that created value for her, myself, and others.  They literally wouldn’t participate because they wanted to control who value was created for.  Like cats.

We blame men for everything that is wrong with this country and we expect them to fix it with their resources, for everybody else, with no self interest on their part.  And people say chivalry is dead.  Men are not allowed to have an opinion, their opinion is preemptively wrong because they are a man, and society has already decided that their argument is incorrect.  If you criticize or dislike women, in general, you are considered a horrible person.  Our society demands the prejudice that women are a priorly good.  You can’t tell a woman what you dislike about women or what you dislike about her without her claiming to have been a victim of an attack and 5 pussy starved gomers jumping into the conversation to white knight for her.  If women are the equals of men then why can’t they defend themselves in a conversation?  Why do they have to throw a histrionic fit in the first place?  

Not only do women not understand themselves, and the negative impact of what they do, say, and think, they do not have a socially created incentive to criticize themselves, control themselves, or discipline themselves.  Raised on fairy tails to believe that they are little princesses incapable of doing anything wrong or ever being the cause of the bad, they live in a pretend fantasy where they think relationship exists for their benefit, and they are the sole judge of the state of the relationship based entirely on how they FEEL based on their emotional thinking.  Emotion dominating their reasoning, not emotions following reasoning.  This is what happens when you raise one sex to be incensitive towards it’s own feelings and another sex to think only about it’s feelings and to discount the feelings of everybody else.  You turn men into drones. 

It is a tautology of the communist mantra: “from those with greater ability to those with greater need.”  What it does is reifies a pattern in society, where people win by failing and losing.  It counter-incentivizes success, and it incentivizes failure, people get rewarded for failing.  Their failure is superior to the success of another.  If you want to know where American Wealth went, their is a little hole in the bottom of the bucket.  



If you seriously want equality between the sexes this is what you do.  Give men and woment he same education and opportunities and then evaluate them by the same standard.  Test them by the same physical standard and moral standard, evaluate them correctly and honestly not evaluating girls emotionally and boys unsympathetically.  Measure their physical strength, and agility scientifically, don’t conceal this information because it doesn’t confirm your bias.  

After high school, mandatorily, everybody, male and female has to sere 2 years in the military, if they are not able this should be noted on their permanent record and they should be barred from certain offices.  There are many reasons why this has to be done and if you  ask me I will explain them to you, the reason we are not already doing this is because of the feminine part of the mind in both women and men which sees something, has an emotional reaction, and reacts incorrectly without thinking or understanding.  I call it “Superficial Aesthetic Snap Decisions.” (http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/superficial-aesthetic-snap-decisions/)


In order to unleash the Highest Common Good, everybody needs to be Highly and Equally educated.  This is based on my Shared State Theory of Communication, we communicate, participate, agree, and understand through shared states, even those 4 things are shared states. 

In political philosophy, the general will (volonté générale) is the will of the people as a whole. The term was made famous by Jean-Jacques Rousseau.  –http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_will

This obscure reference was something that has mystified Western philosophers and for the very reasons that I mentioned, the lack of the high and equal education.  It is the positive version of the early Christian concept of the vexing of the spirit.  

Diderot on the General Will [emphasis added]:

EVERYTHING you conceive, everything you contemplate, will be good, great, elevated, sublime, if it accords with the general and common interest. There is no quality essential to your species apart from that which you demand from all your fellow men to ensure your happiness and theirs . . . . [D]o not ever lose sight of it, or else you will find that your comprehension of the notions of goodness, justice, humanity and virtue grow dim. Say to yourself often, “I am a man, and I have no other truly inalienable natural rights except those of humanity.”


But, you will ask, in what does this general will reside? Where can I consult it? . . . [The answer is:] In the principles of prescribed law of all civilized nations, in the social practices of savage and barbarous peoples; in the tacit agreements obtaining amongst the enemies of mankind; and even in those two emotions — indignation and resentment — which nature has extended as far as animals to compensate for social laws and public retributions. –Denis Diderot, “Droit Naturel” article in the Encyclopédie.[11]

The reason we don’t share the same education is because some people avoid exposure to certain things.  Having not had that experience they proffer an opinion on it to others based on their not having experienced it, and they are very confident in their judgments that everybody should feel about it the way they do and relate to it the same way.  People should not be allowed to speak with authority on subjects they don’t understand or be allowed to confuse the subject or conceal the subject from others.  Anything that scrutinizes and criticizes must be exposed to scrutiny and criticism, you can’t have two standards.  You can’t have one privileged class, that doesn’t play by the same rules.  

Politics without Principle
Wealth Without Work
Pleasure Without Conscience
Knowledge without Character
Commerce without Morality
Science without Humanity
Worship without Sacrifice   – Young India, 22-10-1925

Rights Without Responsibility  – This is the 8th sin by Arun Gandhi.   



Don’t take the picture the wrong way, I love Chelsea and the Clintons.  Equality must be demonstrated and earned, not entitled and granted…