Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas

Posted by DanielS on Friday, 03 April 2015 14:19.

Far from the purview of European / American men were two conceptual weapons which could be alternated arbitrarily, wielded in an instant by feminists (or wielded similarly and unwittingly by neo-traditional women, for that matter), as equipped with the cynicism of these memes to dismiss, in either case, recourse to two profoundly important European moral orderings.

Most significantly, one weapon was to deride Europe’s natural Aristotlean morality, its observation of optimality and relationships as central to human nature, and another to destroy the propositions and principles initiated by the likes of Kant to gird, e.g., against arbitrary vicissitudes of empirical philosophy being taken too far – but in either case, the weapons distinguish females (including White females, of course) as having a separate moral order not beholden to White men and thus not beholden to Europeans as a system with shared social, moral capital and human ecology of millennia.

Deep within the wallowing abyss of de Beauvoir’s “The Second Sex”, its talk of “sacred ministry of betrayal” feeding extant dissatisfactions in females, lurked these weapons - far out of the casual purview of White men to apprehend from whence came what hit them and what it was about.

Betty Friedan (1963), with the modernist, “she’s just like one of the boys and, if liberated to participate, may do-so as an equal” approach to feminism, was the preeminent figure in the second wave of feminism; she took as her point of departure this line from Simone de Beauvoir, 1948, page 672: “This utility of the housekeeper’s heaven is the reason why she (speaking of traditional women) adopts the Aristotlean morality of the golden mean, that is, of mediocrity.”

My hunch that was her source inspiration is borne-out through multiple connections.

Carol Gilligan (1982), with the neo-traditional angle focusing on qualitative differences of females, but still within the feminist framework, also took a line from de Beauvoir as her point of departure - 1948, Page 681: “ but she knows that he himself has chosen the premises on which his rigorous deductions depend.. but she refuses to play the game.. she knows that male morality as it concerns her, is a vast hoax.”

My observation that this was the source for Gilligan was confirmed by Helen Haste, a colleague of Gilligan’s at Harvard.

While there are other significant non-Jewish feminists, forebears besides de Beauvoir, it is true that de Beauvoir’s feminist philosophy has roots in Marx’s notion that marriage and patriarchy are veritable slavery - women’s “liberation requires that these institutions be overturned, a revolutionary act corresponding to liberation of all.”

The situation was made ripe for exploitation and runaway by the logical extension of modernity, well-meaning at first as a liberation from mere, but harmful traditions and superstitions, it ran rough-shod and ruptured accountable social classification – their utility naivly or disingenuously pushed-aside in favor of the objectivist scientism of Lockeatine civil rights, objectivist neo-liberal capitalism, and seized upon in distortion by “neo-cons”, but not before these wielded “objectivist” rights were fundamentally weaponized and reversed in form against Whites, by Jews, Marxists re-deploying these ideas in the form of “anti-racism” and “civil rights” - discrimination against Whites and the prohibition of discrimination by White men.

Underpinning susceptibility to this all along was their saboteurs ticking time-bomb - liberal affectation planted into European culture and becoming more deeply embedded over 2,000 years; viz., in contrast to the exclusivity of Jews, (as GW notes) Judeo-Christianity’s propositional altercast as undifferentiated gentiles in the eyes of god, to include any race in its moral order, and the disordering effect of modernity to traditional European moral orders was virtually a necessary consequence.

With racial bounds broken but classification still necessary to human perceptual organ- ization, the least ignorable categories emerged in de facto high relief and resonance – gender being one of them. Within the disorder the female one-up position in partner selection (don’t think so? she’ll call upon the goon squad to show you who is boss) emerged with increased significance, whereupon they are pandered-to from males of every direction and most importantly, cynically and cunningly, by Jews, of course, to betray their co-evolutionary males. With White men vilified thus and White females pandered-to constantly, even puerile White females become articulate, over- confident, correspondingly under-empathetic, sometimes brazen with self righteous entitlement and prerogative.

Jewish interests can take advantage of this; demoralize their adversaries by pandering to their co-evolutionary females in this position and the atavistic denominator of the disorder; for marked example, by promoting the high contrast tropism of White/black mixing –blacks being the other category hardest to ignore despite prohibition on class- ifications –while the prohibition of discrimination leaves the more protracted rate of maturity of White men susceptible to the more episodic, atavistic assertion of blacks.

Professor Pearce (with Rossi) might add that within the paradoxic performance requirements of feminism there is nothing even a well-intentioned male can do if a feminist wishes to put him in the wrong: If he treats her as one of boys, then he may be construed as a male chauvinist pig, who does not respect the special quality of her gender. If he treats her with deference to the special qualities of her gender, he can be construed as a condescending patriarch and/or a wimp who does not respect her agency, autonomy and independence.

The situation is only going to be perpetuated by a paradoxic (really, “quaradoxic”) phenomenon that Whites are prone to be up against, what I call the charmed loop of didactic incitement: This does require that sufficient power is brought to bear against Whites, but it is a likely predicament given social injunctions against discriminatory social classifications rendered by White men and the heavily pandered-to one-up position of females within the disorder of modernity; along with its exponentially more powerfully positioned puerile female inclination to incite genetic competition.

The Dark Side of Self Actualization Intersecting Incommensurate Gender Agendas: Corrective Structures and Systematization -

In this essay I will re-tell the story of how I began to understand and organize gender relations at the intersection of race and individualism in order to diagnose attendant problems and prescribe corrections. I will make refinements with what I have learned since initial instantiations of this hypothesis. I feel compelled to make this case again as there are popular sites in WN which are taking on the issue and I do not trust them to handle it well. For very specific reasons I have long held that there should be a platform for White men/males that both advocates them and is critical of female predilections, inclinations, politics. This will start out with a critical tone, as it is necessary to get to critical parts right away, but there is a happy ending for both genders.

In my first renderings of this hypothesis, I took Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs (which he also referred-to as a hierarchy of motives), as a preliminary framework in need of correction. That remains a particularly useful point of departure for a working hypothesis to address problems: of where and how individualism, peoples’ predica- ment within modernity and incommensurate gender relations may be exacerbated and pandered-to; whether by hostile interests (e.g., YKW) or indifferent interests (e.g. naive or disingenuous objectivist/relativists, neo-liberals); thereby rupturing racial bounds which could otherwise facilitate systemic homeostasis; instead runaway and reflexive reversals is perpetuated -e.g., “the dark side of self actualization.”

I don’t have to tell you about the tyranny of patterns, that is the rubric under which we meet. What you may not know is that you have to accept them.”  - Bateson

But rather than merely accept them, the proposition here is that we recognize them, take them to heart and work with them instead of against them.

For good reasons, I took Maslow as the preliminary framework against which to propose corrections (will explain momentarily). Neither is it necessary to discard the diagnosis of toxicity in this model of higher needs being founded in hierarchical succession upon maximal fulfillment of more fundamental needs, particularly as it has played-out in - and been an influence of - the pop-culture of European-American relations; nor is it necessary to alter its proposed general correction of taking attendance to needs and motives into a circulating process based on the Aristotlean recommendation of optimal levels of need satisfaction and the centrality of human concern for relations.

Unlike Maslow’s terms for the constituent needs, I have ever (since the early 90s) proposed four terms (the number of four terms are taken for reasons that I will explain) in place of the terms that he uses in this hierarchy –

maslow's hierarchy

Socialization, Being, Routine/Reverence and Self Actualization in a circulating management are proposed instead.

“Just a few more words added to his grammar of motives might change a sociopath into a decent man.” - Kenneth Burke
  - thus…

The number 4 is chosen deliberately as it is both simple, evident and comprehensive enough to be practical, sufficiently verifiable for practical purposes, but too complex in its interfaces to reify and take too far into theoretical science, to scientism beyond its intended function in phronesis - practical judgment for use by ordinary people, where practical judgment is necessary and the best one can do as we are engaged in necessary regard to praxis - the multi-interactive and reflexive flux of our relations in the social world. A quaternary system has other positive qualities, such as having been used by venerable scholars and religions, but that’s enough of that for now.

Most significant of the four terms of need/motivation proposed as an alternative from Maslow’s has always been “Socialization.”

This is to acknowledge that we are inextricably social creatures. There is no way around that, it is the most fundamental need and the most basic fact of the human condition. The moment there is nobody left to discuss the facts is the moment that the facts begin to lose any relevance to us.

Undoing “the prejudice against prejudice”, re-institutionalizing the validity of social classification, discrimination thereupon to facilitate accountability, historical/ systemic human ecology of our social capital is necessary to a socialization of Whites/Europeans.

That forms the most fundamental correction to what has been an important error in a false and toxic prioritization of self actualization in spite of social concern.

Socialization is proposed in relation to three other needs, rather hypothesized topoi of needs, of European character, inclination, predilections and susceptibilities as such, in need of enhancement and correction: Being, Routine/Reverence, Self Actualization.

All four categories more or less correspond with Maslows’ needs, but are taken into a proposition of a circulating process, systematized for optimal balance.

A fundamental change from previous renditions of this hypothesis is that I replace the term Selfhood with what I believe is the more helpful heuristic structure of “Routine/ Reverence” (corresponding some with sacrament and ceremony), as instrumental corrective for homeostasis in the systemic management of Socialization (of European classification), Being and Self Actualization.

Recognizing the value of Routine/Reverence (e.g., over and against the continuous transformations called forth by modernity) will help to stabilize the system, make it more just and sane all around;  helping with its cybernetic governance through its endorsement, respect and practice.

Routine/Reverence will correspond with practice, responsibility and duty to inherited, tried and true structures, knowledge and requirements of social capital.

Routine/Reverence will also correspond to corporeal and autobiographical/narrative aspects of seflhood - in terms of maintenance, respect for inherited corporeal, corprisocial, biological structure and gauging the more speculative autobiographical quests against the true and venerable auto/biography. 

Reverence will be reserved for what bears a more special acknowledgement, sacred for its essential value to the pattern beyond normal episode and perhaps ennobled in ceremony as a special kind of routine.

I believe this is a crucial level, insufficiently articulated and valued by Maslow’s scheme, as it places “Self Actualization above it”, where it recognizes these needs as important at all. Routine/reverence is something that needs to be satisfactory for White males to achieve (whereas White females have been able to take this for granted as “enough” expected of them), but has been hard to engage within the disorder of modernity and expectations of “greatness”, let alone that a male might be allowed “to Be” without stigma and incitement.

Nevertheless, I do recognize and believe that it is inherent in our European character, for some of us, anyway, to have highly ambitious reach, and to need to fulfill inborn potential. That is a part of the quaternary system - the neo-traditional male (and modernist female) option, which may be moved into when the time is right for a given individual. I wouldn’t want to stand in the way and remove this potential but on the contrary; would have our people strive after achievement through better foundation, with and upon sane motivational grounds of practiced routines, reverence, particularly in respect of socialization and midtdasein - being amidst the class – to keep them from malevolent transformations, especially against our own – with the capacity, flexibility of unused potentiality for change, the alternative range of functional autonomy and agency, self actualization may recognize the need to return and deliberately return to Being, Routine/Reverence and the ubiquitous fact of Socialization.

It is rather to acknowledge problems not only for actualization’s realization, but also in the very worthiness of the quest, of its quest becoming toxic - to its seekers, to relations, and in the implication of continuous transformation and upheaval of social structures, even resulting in reflexive reversals, for the unnatural and anti-social cast of its popular apprehension.

Further, when you think about it, the “ordinary” is really pretty incredible and ought to be respected as such, not so ordinary: Here we are these walking blobs of protoplasm, if not European creatures having survived in discreet form for 41,000 years. How dare they end this beauty? How dare they deny us Being?

Thus, recognition of the gilded virtue of routine practices and reverence for venerable patterns of the aeons can oppose liberal modernity and the continual imploring of individual “Actualization”, oppose the feral, puerile female incitement to genetic competition and the pandering to that which ruptures social classification’s systemic delimitation and homeostasis (for Whites).

Obstruction, runaway, over-corrective reflexive reversals –non-correction, non-homeo- stasis - the dark side of self actualization, is mapped for its problems against Maslow’s and similarly pop implications of self actualization –its dark side and its correction on an overlapping but ameliorative model of neo-Aristotlean self actualization.

Correcting it with a neo-Aristotlian notion of Self Actualization has been the objective from the onset of this project. It is “neo” in the sense of placing Socialization to the forefront but thoroughly Aristotlean in emphasizing Optimality as guiding framework. With an additional and embarrassing refinement since my first versions. Namely, that in my focusing on correcting the Maslowian and pop notions of self actualization that I’d forgotten that the idea of self actualization came from Aristotle to begin with (had read it, but years ago) and was only reminded again by Greg Johnson’s discussion of Aristotle and self actualization. Thus, I will try to refine the discussion in light of his talks; though I must say, my fundamental hypothesis remains the same, as it was sound to begin with. Still, its being Aritotlean in origin only underscores the depth of its Europeanness as a concept and the need to get it right – including corrections for error that may have come along through Aristotle.

Returning to the fundamental hypothesis of where Maslow provides a good starting point to illustrate a wrong turn in popular apprehension as it was taken to the mismanagement of gender relations, in runaway of modernity, instigated by its over-emphasis on individualism and individual achievement, in detriment of individual, gender and racial homeostasis. And how, ultimately, a neo-Aristotlean model is the proper model for reconstruction of European group, individual and gender relations.

Importantly, Maslow’s hierarchy helps illustrate incommensurate gender agendas of need fulfillment and to trace exacerbation in the context of ruptured racial systemic bounds - the notion of individual rights having priority over social groups – notably in the Lockeatine individual rights of The U.S. Constitution having warrant over group interests – for Whites, anyway (as Jewish interests have construed “rights”).

Originally, I noticed that there was something non-trival to the hippies. It bothered me as it was swept aside the moment the Viet Nam war was over. With the observation that the first renowned hippie get-together was called “a Be-in” (in Golden Gate Park, near Haight-Ashbury), I had a clue that they sought Being, and obviously that, as opposed to being treated as so intrinsically valueless as to be drafted into a war which presented no clear and immanent danger to our people. The draft being more or less a habitual expectation of males, in utter disrespect for the intrinsic value of their human capital. It was also obvious that it was only males who were not afforded this value of intrinsic Being. Then I noticed that this mapped against Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

Next, I noticed that neither feminists, traditional women or (what I’d now call) ‘right wingers’ gave a damn. When Viet Nam war was over, the time for male Being was over.

As I looked into it more, the source of my anger and this way of looking at the issue as a clarifying heuristic made more and more sense.

Eventually, in the early to mid 80’s, I started to read some Heidegger, who gave a clue that one ought to set one’s life in historical autiobiographical perspective. Further, with Heidegger’s preoccupation with Being, I was drawn once again to the being issue of hippie males; with autobiographical/historical context, an obvious comparison emerged to feminism’s second wave coming around the same time; and how feminism went into vicious overdrive, annihilating the hippie agenda when the war was over - feminism was no longer confronted with an obvious disadvantage to being a male.

Thus, despite distaste for feminism, I read its most essential literature on our historical horizon: Friedan, de Beauvoir, Gurley-Brown; later, added Gilligan to the list.

Friedan provided a very pleasant surprise for what I had already taken for a hypothetical framework - as she not only worked within the same Maslowian structure in which I sought to place the oh-so-fundamental complaint of hippies – a right-below-rights as Rollo May called it – but she was, in fact, a student of Maslow. Moreover, her very thesis was that women’s liberation required Maslowian “self actualization” for women. That they were oppressed and suffering for this lack.

I also noticed that she paid little regard to injustices to men, nothing about their basic needs not being met or anything like that, nor their expendability in war, but nevertheless implicated their privileged access to “self actualization.”

Her implication with the Maslowian paradigm is clear – that men were disproport- ionately represented on top levels of “Self Actualization” because their basic needs were fulfilled and because patriarchy discriminated unjustly on their behalf.

I scarcely needed to go beyond personal example or that of other males, but the particularly glaring example of hippie male’s protest against draft into a corporate war, their pathetically low grumbles for mere Being, prompted realization that Friedan’s was not a fair assessment.

I was willing to concede that some men may occupy self actualization as a result of fulfilled basic needs and that some were there due to unfair discrimination, but not all – the discrimination had a more fair compensatory basis than feminists were granting and further - some men were achieving not for a Maslowian fulfillment of basic needs, but a Nietzschean/Freudian sublimation of deprivation and privation. While traditional women did not seem particularly concerned and had the same usual expectations despite changing contexts, feminists cared shockingly little where they did not display outright hostility to male concerns – it became apparent that they were attacking men, their own men, often punishing them for achieving despite little support and much adversity on the way up – if they got to the top despite all, punishing them for being at an oppressive advantage! You want to talk about what may create a misogynist, bad gender relations and a dark, reflexive reversal of self actualization into sociopathology?

These gender agendas mapped against Maslow’s hierarchy of needs quite well, feminists having what he called “high grumbles” - a complaint for higher achievement, their basic needs having been met; the hippie agenda mapped well too, but was unarticulated for males, with their “grumbles very low” - for the most basic needs – right to be, exist, midtdasein and not be required, e.g., to die in senseless war.

Particularly for the American man, in the land of opportunity, where anyone was supposed to “be all they could be” and make it of themselves, achievement of the top of actualization was to be a quest that began by pulling himself up by the bootstraps and pursued through rugged individualism, with little empathy for meandering in traditional female expectations let alone help in feminist cynicism.

The male agenda was very difficult to articulate, stigmatic in fact, for what it sought (midtdasein), for lack in feedback for males as they were not in the addressive position that females were, and as it went against tradition for males to need cooperation if not to be left alone in provisional non-productivity – necessary though unused potentiality for change was with modernity having transformed traditional society such that there was no longer stable criteria for satisfactory and reliable reciprocal participation.

Jews used cover of hippies to try to associate their cause with Jewish politics, while right-wingers, feminist or traditional women find it convenient to take these Jewish ruses and blame hippies for the downfall of the White race; but this is idiotic. The authentic motive of hippies, being (accurately, midtdasein), had nothing to do with Marcuse’s pandering affectation of “free love” - a law of the jungle attitude toward sex is farthest from being for males – let alone with imposition of foreign males: black power and “civil rights” as well being Jewish imposed agendas incommensurate with hippies. 2nd wave feminism was also incommensurate to the hippie agenda -in diametric contrast, feminists sought individual autonomy atop the hierarchy in self actualization, while hippies sought fundament in communal being - midtdasein. White women’s particular concerns were not going to be reconciled with White men’s under Jewish auspices of Friedan/ Maslow. Though our gender relations should be reconciled, might be through attendance and correction of this paradigm, the value and purpose of the hippie agenda as part of a homeostatic process has been buried to this day.

So, it seemed that Maslow, hippies and feminists were a good place to start to understand where we went wrong and how we might correct our relations. It has proved to be true and has shown to be better still in terms of utility.

Bear with me, I’m not advocating passive, soft men, or men/women, I’m arguing against stupid, non-European ways, fighting for wrong reasons, in wrong ways or against each other; and am rather for being against the right enemies, viz., those significantly powerful non-Europeans who might impose and impose others upon us, significant traitors to our autonomy from non-Europeans, intransigent non-European interlopers – but against these we should fight with the appropriate, most effective level of assertion; there it is requisite that men fight when the threshold of awareness and understanding among European peoples is sufficient; then coordination is ripe.

Nor are we proposing something oppressive and unfair to women - on the contrary, between re-institution of sacrament and our typically good natured ways toward our co-evolutionary women, we Europeans have significant advantages against adversaries.

Nevertheless: No Boundaries No Being. Being is a verb, pacifism is not an option.

Part 2 to come…



Posted by Corporeal, autobiographical routine/reverence on Sat, 04 Apr 2015 01:17 | #

I can see that I’ve got to make it clear that “routine/reverence” includes routine acting of one’s differentiated own corporeal self (what I’d formerly called “selfhood”) and reverence in the sense of respect for proprioceptive and other aspects of one’s corporeal and autobiographical self.

I can just imagine my being accused of trying to turn us into undifferentiated eusosial creatures such as “ants” if I don’t clarify something so basic as that.

Then again, Maslow thought that he’d emphasized social concerns and responsibility enough so as not to be misconstrued.

Nevertheless, having previously worked-out the corporeal and autobiogaphical aspects of selfhood to a graspable extent, it won’t be much to simply reintroduce bits of the prior essays to clarify this matter.

However, I probably should equate “self actualization” a bit more with corporeal and autobiographical self - it is, after all, largely about the realization of one’s inborn nature (telos, if you will) and autobiographical propositions for one’s self—which also strech ones self a bit, not just relegating the narrative/ and rules based side of individuality to standard matters such as maintenance.

I’ve now added a bit on corporeal autobiographial selfhood

See? Robinson Crusoe does not live removed from conversation, I am still connected with the patterns of “conversation” (criticism) I might evoke


Posted by wailing modernist actualizaton on Sun, 05 Apr 2015 04:12 | #

Grizzlyman provides an excellent example of a kind of “wailing modernist” quest for self actualization, as one who longs to go back to pursuit of foundations in nature irrespective of human social normalization and its differences from other aspects of nature. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8MjDyfcMmU

...not every people say “ouch.”

His grizzly end:


He screams pathetically and desperately for his girlfriend to “get a frying-pan” (to hit the bear with). One might note that in the beginning of the film, he claimed that he would go stoically, honorably in this event.

Treadwell’s park ranger friend says that “the real tragedy” was that the bear that killed him (and subsequently, his girlfriend) was shot, as “Timothy would never have wanted that.”

Not that his allowing his girlfriend to be taken down with him was the tragedy….she went into his modernist wails to the end, as she haplessly brought a frying pan to bear against the bear at his ownmost being toward death - in visceral, horrified, pleading screams for (human social) help against, and in intervention of the facts; and in reinterpretation for other natural courses.


Posted by DanielS on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 11:16 | #

MIT maps the modern day cultural significance of famous people

CoCC article on MIT study:

MIT used Wikipedia to map the 100 most culturally significant historical figures. The study used even instance of Wikipedia from all over the world in every language. So it is not just who is considered important to an American audience, but worldwide.

Six of the top ten are Greeks. The list also includes numerous other Greeks.

There are no sub-Saharan Africans on the list, and few Asians. While there are four listed as being from Turkey, none of them are ethnic Turks. Three are Greeks and one is the Apostle Paul, who was a Jewish Roman citizen. Two people listed as being from Egypt were part of the Greek Aristocracy during the Roman Empire.

At least 18 of the 100 are Greek. There are also 19 listed as being from Italy. This list spans from the Roman Empire to the Renaissance.

Aristotle is listed as number one.

  Aristotle (Philosopher) was born in Stageira, Greece in 384 B.C..

He is featured in 152 different language editions of Wikipedia and has received 56,355,172 combined Pageviews since 2008.

Top Ten:

1 Aristotle Greece  -384 Male Philosopher 152 11.9 56.36 M 15.75 M 40.61 M 201.07 K 31.994

2 Plato Greece -427 Male Philosopher 142 13.0 46.81 M 13.50 M 33.32 M 141.93 K 31.989

3 Jesus Christ Palestine -4 Male Religious Figure 214 12.1 60.30 M 25.37 M 34.93 M 257.21 K 31.898

4 Socrates Greece -469 Male Philosopher 137 12.3 40.31 M 11.69 M 28.62 M 135.90 K 31.652

5 Alexander the Great Greece -356 Male Military Personnel 138 11.2 48.36 M 19.94 M 28.42 M 153.68 K 31.584

6 Leonardo da Vinci Italy 1452 Male Inventor 174 13.2 88.93 M 29.24 M 59.69 M 352.57 K 31.464

7 Confucius China -551 Male Philosopher 192 13.1 22.36 M 8.06 M 14.30 M 76.36 K 31.371

8 Julius Caesar Italy -100 Male Politician 128 10.8 43.09 M 18.32 M 24.77 M 157.21 K 31.116

9 Homer Greece -800 Male Writer 141 12.7 20.84 M 5.97 M 14.87 M 72.95 K 31.109

10 Pythagoras Greece -570 Male Philosopher 114 12.8 26.17 M



Posted by DanielS on Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:37 | #

Ogi Ogas on neuro-behavioral mapping, discusses pronounced differences revealed by male and female behavior


- verifies dominance and submission as the central mechanism, in fact the only thing, according to him, drawing the interest of both sexes. I have (originally) hypothesized the central and fundamental place of the dominance/submission mechanism here: Sex as Celebration / Sex as Sacrament Part 1:

Let me first address its mechanism – sex is sexy. Its erotic mechanism is of two contrasts.

One contrast is that of human dignity (in patterns of relationship) contrasting with animal drive.

The other is a tension between human dignity as opposed to dominance and submission. (That is, providing that the roles are treated somewhat empathically; and that one role or the other is not taken too seriously).

This mechanism of tension that makes sex sexy in essence bodes for the possibility of sex as sacrament as opposed to a merely naturalistic argument that may dismiss sacrament as nonsense.


Posted by Graham_Lister on Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:20 | #

A little off topic but over at the Spectator there is an article on the evil of gender surgery on young children that are physically normal.


There is a good comment about how extreme liberal dogma is enforced. I think it was a copy & paste moreover it’s also relevant to the Rotherham phenomenon (why white professionals simply go along with what can only be described as evil).

First control the professionals, by inserting a layer of politicised managers into areas of research funding and treatment practice to control the professionals funding and lines of accountability, then the professionals personal career prospects and remuneration are controlled.

Then influence the “research agenda” by funding the studies that deliver “paradigm shift”, call conferences to support findings and encourage and fund reinforcement of the studies by other studies (often by researchers who cite their own work in references and who “peer review” one another).

Reinforce by controlling the professional discourse and reinforcing the findings and practices that are desired, empower “activists” by funding and disempower dissent by funding, politicised management, fear, and intimidation….use “phobe” to discredit findings and practice that go against “progress”. This produces the illusion of “pressure from below” to add to the pressure from above.

Repeat until brainwash complete, and the resistance retires, resigns or is otherwise marginalised, by Twitter storm, threats of boycotts that kind of thing.

Never underestimate the herd mentality of the human race, nor its willingness to admire the Emperors new clothes, especially when money and prestige are at stake.


Posted by Amie Huguenard on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 13:14 | #

Amie Huguenard placed concern for relationship above immanent danger to her life.

Coming back to the bear mauling of Treadwell and Amy Huguenard for a moment. Amie Huguenard staying and fighting with Treadwell when she might have run away provides an example of the kind of “female morality” of which Carol Gilligan speaks.


Women tend to be more afraid of separation and more concerned about relationships; while men are more afraid of being crowded together and are more concerned with abstract principles -

This difference in the genders does have some empirical basis. A study example that Gilligan used was to show two pictures to groups of men and women: the first picture was of a man and woman about to join hands high off the ground in a flying trapeze act and a second was of a man sitting alone at his desk. While men were more afraid of the first picture, women were more afraid of the second.

Anyway, I would not recommend dismissing Gilligan’s book off-hand as it does help to explain some things that men might not readily understand about women (and she did destroy the belittling theories that Kolberg had of women’s morality).


Posted by DanielS on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 07:05 | #

and how feminism went into vicious overdrive, annihilating the hippie agenda when the war was over - feminism was no longer confronted with an obvious disadvantage to being a male.”

This does not dismiss economic angles which look upon powers that be, Rockefeller Foundation, etc, that might have wished to subvert living wages by promoting feminism (there were apparently efforts of that kind in the early 70’s as well).

Nor contradict criticism of the Marxist angle to replace husbands with state welfare.


Posted by Kerry/Cohen - Gilligan.. on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:14 | #

Carol Gilligan, nee Friedman, is not just a little bit Jewish either.



Posted by 13 on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 13:49 | #

Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what impacts you until you realize that you were 13 then, when your brain was changing dramatically and susceptible to influence..

1957 - 1970.



Posted by U.K. on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 14:35 | #



Posted by Susan Yarbrough defends White women on Thu, 16 Apr 2015 16:00 | #


Susan Yarbrough talks to an elder Klan woman who defends WN women against the characterization of White women as being traitorous, uncooperative and incorrigible.

Klan women expected men to be leaders and, in turn, that men would “treat their women like ‘Jesus.”


Posted by DanielS on Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:12 | #

Joseph Atwill & Jerry Russell discuss J.D. Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye as Freemason code: http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2015/04/RIR-150413.php

F U in the Freemason Rye

Interesting analysis of book which I, myself, found boring, depressing and strange (for what I can even remember about it).

But an inference that this was the most meaningful source in creation of the “60s counter culture” and “the dead head” (Grateful Dead, a group that I didn’t like, except for a few songs ) is ridiculous: but that’s the right for you.*

I did go to one Grateful Dead concert, belatedly, in Boston. The music was terrible but the crowd was great fun, just like the sixties all over again, even in 1980, which it was then.

No, “the kids of the sixties were not organically motivated to not be drafted to Viet Nam. No, they were all entranced by Catcher in the Rye.”

I wouldn’t care to deny his analysis of Catcher, nor would I care to deny that the YKW and Powers That Be tried to fuse their agendas with the motive for White male Midt-Dasein, I have acknowledged as much that they would and did try to co-opt it. But again, that is to miss the point of its being a fundamental mani- festation of an organic part of our systemic processes and homeostasis as a people.

* Another important way of looking at those events is to ask, are we going to allow people who are either not interested in our people (as Salinger was not) or not well grounded, to determine how events and literature come to count for us?

The organic motive of the 60’s counter culture was a provisional corrective part of a process, a corrective necessity to war being treated as a habit and pseudo “necessity”, to where White males were expendable even where there was no clear and present danger to our people. By contrast, where White men might be looked upon as having intrinsic value and part in community.

I would not care to defend the hippies in their over indulgence and romanticizing of drug use. While drug use is certainly dangerous and ought to be treated with caution as regards tens of thousands of years of evolution, it is rather experimental and probably dangerous as well to prescribe absolute prohibition of substances, which we are apparently co-evolved with to some extent as well.

However, the hippies drug use does have to be understood as a part of the motive for midtdasein, as a pleasure that females did not have hegemonic control over, as a way to explore older and altered brain patterns in release from the rigidity and sheer regimen of military habits and traditions.

The insanity of their parents, the world war 2 generation, must be understood for its stressful imposition of a regimented and militaristic “can’t fight city hall” attitude, which did require some rebellion (though the PTB did promote too much rebellious disrespect, through the Beatles in Hard Days Night and so on) into what our organic systematization means.


Posted by Lilah's Dance on Wed, 22 Apr 2015 16:10 | #

Lilah’s Dance


Posted by Gunter Grass on Wed, 22 Apr 2015 23:42 | #

Günter Wilhelm Grass

- Was a Kashubian (an identifying people of German and Polish ancestry, of what is now northwestern Poland).

- Most famous for The Tin Drum, a story taking place in World War II conflicted Danzig/Gdansk.


Posted by Rape culture or rape DNA on Sat, 25 Apr 2015 00:42 | #

Having been a little uncomfortable using Ted Bundy as an illustration of the dark side of self actualization, I did not want to suggest that his hideous sadism was sheerly an environmental phenomenon. He may well have been born a sociopath:

The Untold Story

Rape Culture…or Rape DNA?


by Jim Goad

The April edition of International Journal of Epidemiology contains an article called “Sexual offending runs in families: A 37-year nationwide study.” A summary of the article runs as follows:

  Close relatives of men convicted of sexual offenses commit similar offenses themselves more frequently than comparison subjects. This is due to genetic factors rather than shared family environment….

The study scrutinized the records of all 20,000+ convicted sex offenders in Sweden from 1973-2009. It concluded that compared to males in the general population, brothers of convicted sex offenders are roughly five times more likely to also commit sex crimes. Sons of convicted sex offenders are about four times as likely to follow in daddy’s skeevy footsteps. Researchers reportedly teased out variables such as family environment to reach their conclusions. For example, half-brothers raised under the same roof proved far less likely to both be sexual predators than full blood brothers raised under the same roof.
“Sex and power aren’t discrete entities; if anything, they’re nearly synonymous.”

According to co-researcher Niklas Langstrom:

  We found that sex crimes mainly depended on genetic factors and environmental factors that family members do not share with one another, corresponding to about 40 percent and 58 percent, respectively.

As study coauthor Seena Fazel tells it:

  What we have found is high quality evidence from a large population study that genetic factors have a substantial influence on an increased risk of being convicted of sexual offences.

Full article at Taki’s mag:



Posted by DanielS on Tue, 28 Apr 2015 10:10 | #

Elvis Costello: Miracle man



Posted by Advance of Part 2 on Sun, 17 May 2015 06:38 | #

Here is an advance of the part 2 of this Actualization and Gender thing that I have started to work on. Maybe not ready for a full post yet, but should suffice as a comment since comments are slow and its good to have information passing through the system:

Where I might come up against criticism for using the term“female” it would be oblivious to the fact that I do that in order to maintain “woman” as an honorary term for mature, socialized females; and to separate them from the critique of pejorative predilections of puerile females - it is a crucial point that I have used the term deliberately to mark a distinction between biological inclinations among females, particularly when puerile, which should bear critique and criticism if yielded to improperly, while reserving the term “woman” for females who are socialized into mature fostering and respect for the European cultural pattern and human ecology.

We need to be careful as to what and who guides our concept of masculinity and be aware of the context – all things which scientism of the right can lose sight of.

As a matter of factual inclination, a female might impulsively smile or laugh at the funeral of a White man or at seeing a White boy getting beat by a Negro boy; a White woman will tend to have experienced thought beyond that and not respond impulsively as such..

As a European woman, she is socialized and has a view toward the broader evolutionary context and value – her view is beyond momentary and episodic conquest and into the historical pattern; her most base instinct to get-off on being dominated by the victor of battle is sublimated in the wider battle of the way of life as it ensconces the life-span in systemic cultural pattern. She has perspective on children, elderly, indeed the full pattern of Europeans; recognizing their value, contributions and need for protection.

Without this component of European maturity, focusing say, only on the individuality perhaps salient of our northern nations, we are blind to the characteristic life-span pattern of our groups and its apparently optimal level of sublimation as it provides the grounds for our distinct kinds of intelligence, higher numbers of salient geniuses, our creativity, with disproportionate invention and most importantly, our decent way of life.

Why do I want to live among European peoples?

Because the women tend often to be beautiful, subtle and intelligent? That’s certainly the large part of it, but not all and not most fundamentally. Because the men are the most masculine and confident in the world? They aren’t really. But they do tend to be reasonable, thoughtful and decent. They are that way, and the way of life these men and women create together is one aspect of Whites that I could argue is supreme. This is the case where European systems are in tact. In fact, I moved to a homogeneously European place to get away from the hyper-masculinity of Africans - anyone with any sense would want to get away from their ways.

Why then, would I accept an argument that European men are not manly enough and need to become more like third world men, attending karate movies to practice their episodic assertion to assimilate the universal masculinity? Trusting in the judgment of the puerile female view from within the disordered West, disordered as it is by modernity’s and Jews rupturing of our systemic boundaries? That is, why should we be incited to accept the definition of masculinity skewed toward Mulatto supremacism, when we ought to note that what a real European man (and woman, for that matter), will do, is re-establish borders and boundaries to maintain our characteristic nature, not try to assimilate the default gaze of a puerile female toward the universal Mulatto.

In fact, this matter distinguished by the late Philippe Rushton , that of European maturity as opposed say, to African and Oriental maturity, bears further application to distinguish the maturity of our European women and men from universal maturity.

This bears upon the crucial matters of European maturity and socialization, crucial patterns which the right, in their myopic, Catesian, ergo universalist focus, tend to lose sight-of. The task of European socialization and maturity, as opposed to the Cartesian duality of feminism or anti-feminism, is at the heart of our interests in defense and reconstruction of our people from the assaults of “anti-racism” and imposed liberalization of our classificatory boundaries.

What it means to be a socialized European, either man or woman, is to be accountable for our systemic boundaries and human ecology; and both genders are accountable, capable and responsible, not just men. 

With better understanding, a mature European woman is going to realize that she, her opportunities and her children are going to be much better off in the European way of life, with European men; and that those who breed outside the race should not be welcome to participate in its society for the vast destruction they have visited and will visit upon it.

But there is a problem with the fallout of our Cartesian view, of modernity’s disorder, particularly as it has been exploited by Jews to pander and cause pandering to puerile femininity. They have rendered many irreparably corrupt as gate-keepers to power. With their one up position more powerful than ever, in turn, they will incite more destructive competition with non-Whites and the Cartesian anxiety (to transcend this hell) that has left us vulnerable to this mess in the first place. “We need to become real men and more purely sovereign individuals.”

There is a paradox here as well: if females are ordering you to lead, who is leading? We should be brave, proceed confidently and calmly while our borders are rushed by throngs of Africans? While Jews twist and spin language games..

As we speak, right-wingers presenting themselves a White advocates, are undertaking a critique of the status-quo of gender relations leaning toward a universalist notion of gender -

They say we should not blame women while they proceed to say woman should stay home and mind only the business of home, child-rearing and supporting their husband’s decisions - as if saying those roles across the board are all they are good for is not blaming and being critical of women (none of this science business Marie Curie, or commentary from Lasha Darkmoon, or Susan Lindauer - get back home….. Joan of Arc, Boudica, The bitches of the Teutoburg forest ).

As if having a somewhat more flexible notion of gender roles is not characteristically European - of course it is. Gender relations are out of wack because of modernity’s disorder, Neo Liberal mercantilism, the pandering and antagonism of non-Europeans (saliently, Jews, of course). But it is not necessary to become like blacks or Muslims to correct our problems; we can restore our gender relations to health, to where European men are men without being ridiculous and the same with European women - European women without being ridiculous. In fact, this is a prize that we offer our men and women which Africans and Muslims cannot offer; and which Jews would deprive us.


Be a man, so he was told, none of this girlish sentimentality as he marched off into the fraternal massacre of Pickett’s charge..


Posted by DarkSide of Townes Van Zandt's Actualization on Sat, 06 Jun 2015 12:10 | #

“Townes didn’t grow-up needy. His parents were wealth and loved him. It was hard for him to deal with that in comparison to others” - his sister

The Dark Side of Self Actualization:

“I knew that I could do this thing (live as a country/blues musician), but I would have to put everything else aside” - Townes Van Zandt

“Townes put family and everything else aside just to do that one thing” - his son

Townes Van Zandt documentary:

Pancho and Lefty


Posted by Gilligan, née Friedman on Tue, 09 Jun 2015 01:15 | #

I’m not sure that this video is, as billed, “the greatest truthful documentary on feminism.”

However, it isn’t bad and particularly noteworthy is the interview with Carol Gilligan, née Friedman, in her description of feminism and its agenda to overthrow “patriarchy.”


Gilligan (Friedman) has had large influence on American academia, media and pop-culture:

Carol Gilligan was raised in a Jewish family in New York City. She was the only child of a lawyer, William Friedman, and nursery school teacher, Mabel Caminez. She attended Walden School, a progressive private school on Manhattan’s Upper West Side, played piano and pursued a career in modern dance during her graduate studies. Gilligan received her B.A. summa cum laude in English literature from Swarthmore College, a master’s degree in clinical psychology from Radcliffe College, and a Ph.D. in social psychology from Harvard University.

She began her teaching career at Harvard in 1967, receiving tenure with the Harvard Graduate School of Education in 1988.

Jewish crypsis may be operating through her married name, “Gilligan”, but it isn’t always hard to spot a Jew by appearance. This one really can’t hide it.


Posted by The Serena Williams Beast on Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:25 | #

I’ve long been meaning to make a note of the travesty of this beast being enabled to compete against women

Good scoop by Morgoth’s

Nevertheless, Martina Hingis has been quite competitive with the Williams beast:  Their overall head-to-head series is 7–6, in Williams’ favor.



Posted by White female privilege uncomfortable with racism on Wed, 15 Jul 2015 03:59 | #

Of course I do not buy the (Jewish) notion of White male privilege for an instant, but there is, as I indicate in the article, a White female privilge (big time) that stems from their one up position being increased by the disorder of modernity (esp. by its scientistic rupture of group classificatory bounds) and with that, being pandered to by Jews in that one up position.

Since “racism” is about classification it would threaten to diminish the power of their position by actually holdng them accountable; thusly make them “uncomfortable.”

Their heirarchy of needs satisfaction is of higher “grumbles”.. as indicated by the sickening rejoinder of their being made “uncomfortable.”

Excuse me dear.

As a White man you can find yourself desperately trying to argue that anti racism is the torture and destruction of all that you care about..

But the typical White female of recent times will do all she can to prevent you from saying even that much. She can just dismiss you by saying that “you are making her uncomforatable.”

I am making you uncomfortable! Well, excuse me dear that I don’t want to die and be tortured and I’m sorry that my “whining” about that would make you ‘uncomfortabel’!

If that doesn’t get you to stop trying to save yours and her life, she can say that

You “scare me” ..that’s another one (Stan Hess had this experience too).

With that she threatens to call in the enforcers (whomever they might be).

But these women are not scared of the blacks that they would foist upon us!

One’s mind glitches. What kind of sci-fi planet of the apes world do we live in?


Posted by an app too far on Wed, 22 Jul 2015 13:53 | #



A startup founder and iOS developer jumped to her death from a rooftop bar on Monday night, police and onlookers told the New York Post.

Faigy Mayer, who was 29 years old, was the founder and CEO of Appton, a New York-based app-development startup.

Mayer had developed a number of iOS apps, including NYCTips, a New York restaurant tip calculator, a parking app called Carma, and an app called ExpenseTracker, according to her LinkedIn page.

Mayer graduated with a bachelor’s degree in accounting from Touro College, received a master’s in accounting from Brooklyn College, and recently earned a certificate in data science specialization from Johns Hopkins University.

On Monday, Mayer was said to have sprinted toward a shrubbery-lined ledge of the terrace at 230 Fifth’s rooftop bar, climbed up, and jumped to her death at about 7:30 p.m., the Post reports.

It’s unclear whether Mayer had come to the roof to jump or if she had been a guest at the bar earlier in the evening.

Authorities identified Mayer by a purse and backpack she had left behind at the rooftop bar, according to the Post.

Police confirmed to Business Insider that Mayer died at the scene.

“There was a big corporate party up there and she kind of ran through them [the partygoers] and jumped,” one witness told the Post.

Police sources say the death was likely deliberate. However, patrons at the bar say the four-foot-wide ledge where Mayer apparently jumped could be risky for partygoers regardless. “They really need to be more careful up there. There’s nothing to keep you from jumping,” one guest told the Post.

The Post also reports that Mayer used to belong to the Hasidic Jewish faith, but was shunned by her family for leaving. She even appeared in “Inside Hasidism,” a National Geographic documentary, in 2009 to talk about her experiences.

“My parents, they were like, point blank, ‘You have to get out of here because you are not religious anymore,’ ” she said in the documentary.

She had been working on an app to help former Hasids get accustomed to life in the city, her friends told the Post.

If Mayer did commit suicide, she would not be the first startup founder to do so.

Suicides can be outliers of the tech industry’s battle with depression, which can be exacerbated by the stress of starting a company. A study by Dr. Michael Freeman, a clinical professor at UCSF and an entrepreneur, was one of the first to link higher rates of mental-health issues to entrepreneurship.

Of the 242 entrepreneurs he surveyed, 49% reported having a mental-health condition. Depression was the No. 1 reported condition among them and was present in 30% of all entrepreneurs, followed by ADHD (29%) and anxiety problems (27%).

That’s a much higher percentage than the US population at large, where about 7% identify as depressed.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-founder-jumps-to-her-death-from-rooftop-bar-in-manhattan-2015-7#ixzz3ggLNhUMi



Posted by Anglin's view on gender relations on Mon, 11 Jan 2016 08:36 | #

What say you?

Here is Andrew Anglin’s view on gender relations:

The aggressiveness with which the German government is protecting gang-rapists is sick and weird. They are able to get away with it because the feminists support shutting down opposition to rape if it is by Brown people. Apparently, getting raped by Brown people fits into the twisted sex fantasies of feminist sluts.

Remember that I was criticized harshly for saying these women supporting the invasion actually wanted to get raped by Brown men.

People were all like “how dare you insult the honor of muh Aryan princesses!”

Girls-standing-with-sign-welcoming-migrants-7 0132

I have been vindicated.

Granted, it is obviously not every single woman, and maybe in the past I have made it seem like I believed that – mainly because I expected the reader to be intelligent enough to understand that I obviously don’t think every single woman in Germany has an Arab gang-rape fantasy.

But clearly, large numbers of them do.

The point should be that it doesn’t matter what women think, desire or believe. Their tendency to desire things which are terrible is why they have been controlled by men throughout history. It’s simple common sense.

I believe that my view of gender relations is better and more distinctly European.

What say you, women? feminists? We’re ready and eager to hear from you:  Do you want Anglin’s view?  The Muslim view? The Abrahamic view? The black view? The view of scientism?


Posted by The Dark Side After ABBA on Tue, 01 Mar 2016 14:58 | #

The Dark Side of Self Actualization:

Agnetha, after ABBA


Posted by The Dark Side of Nirvana on Mon, 28 Mar 2016 17:14 | #

                        The Dark Side of Nirvana


Posted by lucky man on Fri, 01 Apr 2016 19:25 | #

I’m a lucky man, I hope you understand..


Posted by Vehicle on Fri, 01 Apr 2016 19:48 | #


Hey well
I’m a friendly stranger in a black sedan
Won’t you hop inside my car.
I got pictures, got candy
I’m a loveable man
And I can take you to the nearest star.
I’m your vehicle baby
I’ll take you anywhere you wanna go.
I’m your vehicle woman
But I’m not sure you know
That I love ya
I need ya
I want ya,
Got to have you child,
Great God in heaven you know I love you.
Well if you want to be a movie star
I’ll get a ticket to Hollywood.
But if you want to stayjust the way you are
You know I think you really should.
I’m your vehicle baby
I’ll take you anywhere you wanna go.
I’m your vehicle woman
But I’m not sure you know
That I love ya
I need ya
I want ya,
Got to have you child,
Great God in heaven you know I love you.
Hey well
I’m a friendly stranger in a black sedan
Won’t you hop inside my car.
I got pictures, got candy
I’m a loveable man
And I can take you to the nearest star.
I’m your vehicle baby
I’ll take you anywhere you wanna go.
I’m your vehicle woman
But I’m not sure you know
That I love ya
I need ya
I want ya,
Got to have you child,
Great God in heaven you know I love you.
And I’m your vehicle babe.
You know
I love ya
I need ya
I want ya,
Got to have you child,


Posted by Keith Emerson on Wed, 20 Apr 2016 20:55 | #


Keith Emerson (71) British-born keyboardist of the ‘70s progressive rock band Emerson, Lake & Palmer. Emerson was a keyboardist for several groups in the ‘60s, including The Nice, but was best known as a founding member of Emerson, Lake & Palmer, a super group of well-known rock musicians formed in 1970. Besides Emerson, the band included bassist Greg Lake, formerly of King Crimson, and drummer and percussionist Carl Palmer, a veteran of several famous English bands. The band released nine studio albums during the ‘70s, including its debut self-titled album (1970) and its follow-ups, Trilogy (1972) and Brain Salad Surgery (1973). Emerson later worked as a solo artist. His body was found by police at his Santa Monica, California home, where he died from a self-inflicted single gunshot to the head on March 11, 2016.

His girlfriend says that he killed himself because he didn’t feel that given a problematic condition with his arm and hand that he could play well enough before a coming concert engagement in Japan.

Really, he had done well enough and could have just rested on his laurels (skip the tour and live for some little pleasures).


Posted by since 82, women earned 10mil more degrees than men on Thu, 12 May 2016 18:38 | #

AEI, “Stunning college degree gap: Women have earned almost 10 million more college degrees than men since 1982”, Mark Perry:

According to data from the Department of Education on college degrees by gender, the US college degree gap favoring women started back in 1978, when for the first time ever, more women than men earned Associate’s degrees. Five years later in 1982, women earned more bachelor’s degrees than men for the first time, and women have increased their share of bachelor’s degrees in every year since then. In another five years by 1987, women earned the majority of master’s degrees for the first time. Finally, within another decade, more women than men earned doctor’s degrees by 2006, and female domination of college degrees at every level was complete.

For the current graduating class of 2013, the Department of Education estimates that women will earn 61.6% of all associate’s degrees this year, 56.7% of all bachelor’s degrees, 59.9% of all master’s degrees, and 51.6% of all doctor’s degrees. Overall, 140 women will graduate with a college degree at some level this year for every 100 men.

For bachelor’s degrees, women have earned the majority of those degrees for every college class since 1982, and the female share of degrees has risen every year.  But what about the cumulative gender gap for bachelor’s degrees (and all college degrees) over the last 30 years?  The chart above shows that since 1982, women have earned 4.35 million more bachelor’s degrees than men (22.43 million degrees for women vs. 18.08 million degrees for men). For all college degrees, women have earned 9.7 million more degrees than men (44.1 million vs. 34.4 million) since 1982.

MP: Just as a thought experiment – imagine the public reaction if the educational degree imbalances of 4.35 million bachelor’s degrees and 9.7 million college degrees overall favored men, and not women? I don’t think it would be an exaggeration to say that a college degree imbalance that large in favor of men would be considered a “national crisis.” College degree disparities, when women are over-represented, never seem to be much of a concern. And with those enormous gender imbalances in higher education favoring women, do we really need hundreds of women’s centers on college campuses all over the country, women’s only study lounges, and female-only campus housing for STEM degrees?

Bottom Line: The reality is that the concern about gender imbalances and gender equity in higher education is very selective, imbalanced and inequitable – there is only concern when women are under-represented and never any concern when men are under-represented. There likely won’t be any commencement addresses this year lamenting the huge gender disparities in college degrees over the last 30 years, which is now approaching 10 million on a cumulative basis. Instead, it would be much more likely that we’ll hear about female under-representation in certain fields like engineering, physics and computer science. The selective concern about gender disparities continues.


Posted by sleep is the highest genius on Mon, 23 May 2016 23:31 | #

Before Maslow, psychologists were focusing on what was wrong with people, why they were the way they were, not how they could improve.

Maslow focused on what clients were doing right and how they could improve.

The means he proposed was the heirarchy of needs

1. Biological requirements are most basic.

Russel Foster a neuroscientist at Oxford confirms that sleep is the most fundamental need, confirming Soren Kierkegaard’s statement, as it were: “sleep is the highest genius.”

“The honey heavy dew of slumber” ... “nature’s soft nurse” - Shakespear

2. Security is immediate, personal and fundamental: you must be able to trust people and if you cannot all else is unimportant.

There is a trick in our psyche here, however: you can feel secure when our are not and feel insecure when you are.

We notice extremes, but most of our days are spent in normal activities.

HBD Chick
so 4 or 5 of paris terrorists w/Def or Likely berber backgrounds: abdeslam bros=riffian(D); amimour=kabyle(D); abaaoud(+bro?)=chleuh (L).

3. The reality is that we cannot survive without a group, either.

4. Esteem, love and belonging

5..Self Actualization: focusing on growth and meaning in life.


Posted by blacks not disproportionate in Vietnam on Sun, 03 Jul 2016 15:45 | #

Vietnam Myths and Facts

Myth: Common belief is that a disproportionate number of blacks were killed in the Vietnam War.

Fact: 86% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasians, 12.5% were black, 1.2% were other races. Sociologists Charles C. Moskos and John Sibley Butler, in their recently published book “All That We Can Be,” said they analyzed the claim that blacks were used like cannon fodder during Vietnam “and can report definitely that this charge is untrue. Black fatalities amounted to 12 percent of all Americans killed in Southeast Asia, a figure proportional to the number of blacks in the U.S. population at the time and slightly lower than the proportion of blacks in the Army at the close of the war.”



Posted by The dark side of self actualization on Tue, 12 Jul 2016 03:51 | #

Now, if females value confidence first and foremost in a male and blacks are more confident than anybody (scientific fact) isn’t it obvious that we need to problematize and critique what “is” in favor of a more speculative “is” upheld in the hermeneutic pattern as an oughtness? I.e., congratulating ourselves and defending our somewhat more sublimated pattern as corresponding to more forethought, planning and ingenuity? Yes, of course, oh deaf, dumb and blind right, altright, etc.


Posted by (((Salvador Minuchin))) on Tue, 12 Jul 2016 04:30 | #

Another one not well known as Jewish: Salvador Minuchin


Posted by Derek Black's reflexive reversal on Mon, 17 Oct 2016 09:56 | #

The Dark Side of Self Actualization

...and the inherent instability of the right -

The reflexive reversal of Derek Black - precociously showing early signs to be a leader of White Nationalism, he has done a 180: he renounces anti-Semitism, studies Islamic culture, calling for empathy for this culture which “was advanced of European culture” at a time when Europe was a backwater; says that he agrees with Hillary Clinton’s positions in 97%; claims that he does not believe in the White genocide meme that he helped to popularize because “race is a false concept anyway.”

That comes along with an array of cultural Marxist concepts that he now subscribes-to.

Derek Black pictured Sept. 25, 2016. “It’s scary to know that I helped spread this stuff, and now it’s out there,” he told a friend, alluding to the ideology he once promoted. (Matt McClain/Washington Post)

The Washington Post, “The white flight of Derek Black”, 15 Oct 2016:

“The leading light of our movement,” was how the conference organizer introduced him, and then Derek stepped to the lectern.

“The way ahead is through politics,” he said. “We can infiltrate. We can take the country back.”


He never used racial slurs. He didn’t advocate violence or lawbreaking. He had won a Republican committee seat in Palm Beach County, Fla., where Trump also had a home, without ever mentioning white nationalism, talking instead about the ravages of political correctness, affirmative action and unchecked Hispanic immigration.

He was not only a leader of racial politics but also a product of them. His father, Don Black, had created Stormfront, the Internet’s first and largest white nationalist site, with 300,000 users and counting. His mother, Chloe, had once been married to David Duke, one of the country’s most infamous racial zealots, and Duke had become Derek’s godfather. They had raised Derek at the forefront of the movement, and some white nationalists had begun calling him “the heir.”

Now Derek spoke in Memphis about the future of their ideology. “The Republican Party has to be either demolished or taken over,” he said. “I’m kind of banking on the Republicans staking their claim as the white party.”

A few people in the audience started to clap, and then a few more began to whistle, and before long the whole group was applauding. “Our moment,” Derek said, because at least in this room there was consensus. They believed white nationalism was about to drive a political revolution. They believed, at least for the moment, that Derek would help lead it.

“Years from now, we will look back on this,” he said. “The great intellectual move to save white people started today.”


“It’s been brought to my attention that people might be scared or intimidated or even feel unsafe here because of things said about me,” he began. “I wanted to try to address these concerns publicly, as they absolutely should not exist. I do not support oppression of anyone because of his or her race, creed, religion, gender, socioeconomic status or anything similar.”

The forum post, intended only for the college, was leaked to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which kept a public “Intelligence File” on Derek and other racist leaders, and the group emailed Derek for clarification. Was he disavowing white nationalism? “Your views are now quite different from what many people thought,” the email read.

Derek received the message while vacationing in Europe during winter break. He was staying with Duke, who had started broadcasting his radio show from a part of Europe with lenient free-speech laws. “The tea party is taking some of these ideas mainstream,” Duke said on a broadcast one morning. “Whites are finally coming around to my point of view,” he said another day, and even if Derek now thought some of what Duke said sounded exaggerated or even alarming, the man was still his godfather. Derek wrote back to the SPLC from Duke’s couch.

“Everything I said (on the forum) is true,” he wrote. “I also believe in White Nationalism. My post and my racial ideology are not mutually exclusive concepts.”


But the unstated truth was that Derek was becoming more and more confused about exactly what he believed. Sometimes he looked through posts on Stormfront, hoping to reaffirm his ideology, but now the message threads about Obama’s birth certificate or DNA tests for citizenship just seemed bizarre and conspiratorial. He stopped posting on Stormfront. He began inventing excuses to get out of his radio show, leaving his father alone on the air each morning to explain why Derek wouldn’t be calling in. He was preparing for a test. He was giving those liberal professors hell. Except sometimes what Derek was really doing was taking his kayak to the beach, so he could be alone to think.

He had always based his opinions on fact, and lately his logic was being dismantled by emails from his Shabbat friends. They sent him links to studies showing that racial disparities in IQ could largely be explained by extenuating factors like prenatal nutrition and educational opportunities. They gave him scientific papers about the effects of discrimination on blood pressure, job performance and mental health. He read articles about white privilege and the unfair representation of minorities on television news. One friend emailed: “The geNOcide against whites is incredibly, horribly insulting and degrading to real, actual, lived and experienced genocides against Jews, against Rwandans, against Armenians, etc.”

“I don’t hate anyone because of race or religion,” Derek clarified on the forum.

“I am not a white supremacist,” he wrote.

“I don’t believe people of any race, religion or otherwise should have to leave their homes or be segregated or lose any freedom.”

“Derek,” a friend responded. “I feel like you are a representative of a movement you barely buy into. You need to identify with more than 1/50th of a belief system to consider it your belief system.”

He was taking classes in Jewish scripture and German multiculturalism during his last year at New College, but most of his research was focused on medieval Europe. He learned that Western Europe had begun not as a great society of genetically superior people but as a technologically backward place that lagged behind Islamic culture. He studied the 8th century to the 12th century, trying to trace back the modern concepts of race and whiteness, but he couldn’t find them anywhere. “We basically just invented it,” he concluded.

“Get out of this,” one of his Shabbat friends emailed a few weeks after Derek’s graduation in May 2013, urging Derek to publicly disavow white nationalism. “Get out before it ruins some part of your future more than it already irreparably has.”

Derek stayed near campus to housesit for a professor after graduation, and he began to consider making a public statement. He knew he no longer believed in white nationalism, and he had made plans to distance himself from his past by changing part of his name and moving across the country for graduate school. His instinct was to slip away quietly, but his advocacy had always been public — a legacy of radio shows, Internet posts, TV appearances, and an annual conference on racial tactics.

He was still considering what to do when he returned home to visit his parents later that summer. His father was tracking the rise of white nationalism on cable TV, and his parents were talking about “enemies” and “comrades” in the “ongoing war,” but now it sounded ridiculous to Derek. He spent the day rebuilding windows with them, which was one of Derek’s quirky hobbies that his parents had always supported. They had bought his guitar and joined in his medieval re-enactments. They had paid his tuition at the liberal arts college where he had Shabbat dinners. They had taught him, most of all, to be independent and ideological, and to speak his beliefs even when doing so resulted in backlash.

He left the house that night and went to a bar. He took out his computer and began writing a statement.

“A large section of the community I grew up in believes strongly in white nationalism, and members of my family whom I respect greatly, particularly my father, have long been resolute advocates for that cause. I was not prepared to risk driving a wedge in those relationships.

“After a great deal of thought since then, I have resolved that it is in the best interests of everyone involved to be honest about my slow but steady disaffiliation from white nationalism. I can’t support a movement that tells me I can’t be a friend to whomever I wish or that other people’s races require me to think of them in a certain way or be suspicious at their advancements.

“The things I have said as well as my actions have been harmful to people of color, people of Jewish descent, activists striving for opportunity and fairness for all. I am sorry for the damage done.”

He continued to write for several more paragraphs before addressing an email to the SPLC, the group his father had considered a primary adversary for 40 years.

“Publish in full,” Derek instructed. Then he attached the letter and hit “send.”

Don was at the computer the next afternoon searching Google when Derek’s name popped up in a headline on his screen. For a decade, Don had been typing “Stormfront” and “Derek Black” into the search bar a few times each week to track his son’s public rise in white nationalism. This particular story had been published by the SPLC, which Don had always referred to as the “Poverty Palace.”

“Activist Son of Key Racist Leader Renounces White Nationalism,” it read, and Don began to read the letter. It had phrases like “structural oppression,” “privilege,” “limited opportunity,” and “marginalized groups” — the kind of liberal-apologist language Don and Derek had often made fun of on the radio.

“You got hacked,” Don remembered telling Derek, once he reached him on the phone.

“It’s real,” Derek said, and then he heard the sound of his father hanging up.

For the next few hours, Don was in disbelief.


Later that night, Don logged on to the Stormfront message board. “I’m sure this will be all over the Net and our local media, so I’ll start here,” he wrote, posting a link to Derek’s letter. “I don’t want to talk to him. He says he doesn’t understand why we’d feel betrayed just because he announced his ‘personal beliefs’ to our worst enemies.”


Late this summer, for the first time in years, he traveled to Florida to see them. At a time of increasingly contentious rhetoric, he wanted to hear what his father had to say. They sat in the house and talked about graduate school and Don’s new German shepherd. But after a while, their conversation turned back to ideology, the topic they had always preferred.

Don, who usually didn’t vote, said he was going to support Trump.

Derek said he had taken an online political quiz, and his views aligned 97 percent with Hillary Clinton’s.

Don said immigration restrictions sounded like a good start.

Derek said he actually believed in more immigration, because he had been studying the social and economic benefits of diversity.

Don thought that would result in a white genocide.

Derek thought race was a false concept anyway.


Posted by The Myth of Self Control on Thu, 03 Nov 2016 17:47 | #


The myth of self-control

Psychologists say using willpower to achieve goals is overhyped. Here’s what actually works.

Brian Resnick, 3 Nov 2016:

As the Bible tells it, the first crime committed was a lapse of self-control. Eve was forbidden from tasting the fruit on the tree of knowledge. But the temptation was too much. The fruit was just so “pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom,” Genesis reads. Who wouldn’t want that? Humanity was just days old, but already we were succumbing to a vice.

The takeaway from this story was clear: when temptation overcomes willpower, it’s a moral failing, worthy of punishment.

Modern-day psychologists might not blame Eve for her errant ways at all. Because what’s true today was also true at the beginning of time (regardless of what story you believe in): Human beings are horrible at resisting temptation.

“Effortful restraint, where you are fighting yourself — the benefits of that are overhyped,” Kentaro Fujita, a psychologist who studies self-control at the Ohio State University, says.

He’s not the only one who thinks so. Several researchers I spoke to are making a strong case that we shouldn’t feel so bad when we fall for temptations.

““There’s a strong assumption still that exerting self-control is beneficial … and we’re showing in the long term, it’s not””

Indeed, studies have found that trying to teach people to resist temptation either only has short-term gains or can be an outright failure. “We don’t seem to be all that good at [self-control],” Brian Galla, a psychologist at the University of Pittsburgh, says.

The implications of this are huge: If we accept that brute willpower doesn’t work, we can feel less bad about ourselves when we succumb to temptation. And we might also be able refocus our efforts on solving problems like obesity. A recent national survey from the University of Chicago finds that 75 percent of Americans say a lack of willpower is a barrier to weight loss. And yet the emerging scientific consensus is that the obesity crisis is the result of a number of factors, including genes and the food environment — and, crucially, not a lack of willpower.

If we could stop worshiping self-control, maybe we could start thinking about diluting the power of temptation — and helping people meet their goals in new ways with less effort.

The case against willpower

Many of us assume that if we want to make big changes in our lives, we have to sweat for it.

But if, for example, the change is to eat fewer sweets, and then you find yourself in front of a pile of cookies, researchers say the pile of cookies has already won.

“Our prototypical model of self-control is angel on one side and devil on the other, and they battle it out,” Fujita says. “We tend to think of people with strong willpower as people who are able to fight this battle effectively. Actually, the people who are really good at self-control never have these battles in the first place.”

This idea was crystallized in the results of a 2011 study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. The study tracked 205 people for one week in Germany. The study participants were given BlackBerrys that would go off at random, asking them questions about what desires, temptations, and self-control they were experiencing in the moment.

The paper stumbled on a paradox: The people who were the best at self-control — the ones who most readily agreed to survey questions like “I am good at resisting temptations” — reported fewer temptations throughout the study period.

To put it more simply: The people who said they excel at self-control were hardly using it at all.

At McGill University in Canada, psychologists Marina Milyavskaya and Michael Inzlicht recently confirmed and expanded on this idea. In their study, they monitored 159 students in a similar manner for a week.

If resisting temptation is a virtue, then more resistance should lead to greater achievement, right? That’s not what the results, pending publication in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, found.

The students who exerted more self-control were not more successful in accomplishing their goals. It was the students who experienced fewer temptations overall who were more successful when the researchers checked back in at the end of the semester. What’s more, the people who exercised more effortful self-control also reported feeling more depleted. So not only were they not meeting their goals, they were also exhausted from trying.

“There’s a strong assumption still that exerting self-control is beneficial,” Milyavskaya tells me. “And we’re showing in the long term, it’s not.”

What we can learn from people who are good at self-control

So who are these people who are rarely tested by temptations? And what can we learn from them? There are a few overlapping lessons from this new science:

1) People who are better at self-control actually enjoy the activities some of us resist — like eating healthy, studying, or exercising.

So engaging in these activities isn’t a chore for them. It’s fun.

“‘Want-to’ goals are more likely to be obtained than ‘have-to’ goals,” Milyavskaya says. “Want-to goals lead to experiences of fewer temptations. It’s easier to pursue those goals. It feels more effortless.”

If you’re running because you “have to” get in shape, but find running to be a miserable activity, you’re probably not going to keep it up. That means than an activity you like is more likely to be repeated than an activity you hate.

2) People who are good at self-control have learned better habits

In 2015, psychologists Brian Galla and Angela Duckworth published a paper in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, finding across six studies and more than 2,000 participants that people who are good at self-control also tend to have good habits — like exercising regularly, eating healthy, sleeping well, and studying.

“People who are good at self-control … seem to be structuring their lives in a way to avoid having to make a self-control decision in the first place,” Galla tells me. And structuring your life is a skill. People who do the same activity — like running or meditating — at the same time each day have an easier time accomplishing their goals, he says. Not because of their willpower, but because the routine makes it easier.

A trick to wake up more quickly in the morning is to set the alarm on the other side of the room. That’s not in-the-moment willpower at play. It’s planning.

This theory harks back to one of the classic studies on self-control: Walter Mischel’s “marshmallow test,” conducted in the 1960s and ’70s. In these tests, kids were told they could either eat one marshmallow sitting in front of them immediately or eat two later. The ability to resist was found to correlate with all sorts of positive life outcomes, like SAT scores and BMIs. But the kids who were best at the test weren’t necessarily intrinsically better at resisting temptation. They might have been employing a critical strategy.

“Mischel has consistently found that the crucial factor in delaying gratification is the ability to change your perception of the object or action you want to resist,” the New Yorker reported in 2014. That means kids who avoided eating the first marshmallow would find ways not to look at the candy, or imagine it as something else.

“The really good dieter wouldn’t buy a cupcake,” Fujita explains. “They wouldn’t have passed in front of a bakery; when they saw the cupcake, they would have figured out a way to say yuck instead of yum; they might have an automatic reaction of moving away instead of moving close.”

3) Some people just experience fewer temptations

Our dispositions are determined in part by our genetics. Some people are hungrier than others. Some people love gambling and shopping. People high in conscientiousness — a personality trait largely set by genetics — tend to be more vigilant students and tend to be healthier. When it comes to self-control, they won the genetic lottery.

4) It’s easier to have self-control when you’re wealthy

When Mischel’s marshmallow test is repeated on poorer kids, there’s a clear trend: They perform worse, and appear less able to resist the treat in front of them.

But there’s a good reason for this. As University of Oregon neuroscientist Elliot Berkman argues, people who grow up in poverty are more likely to focus on immediate rewards than long-term rewards. Because when you’re poor, the future is less certain.

Researchers want to figure out if self-control could feel effortless

The new research on self-control demonstrates that eating an extra slice of cake isn’t a moral failing. It’s what we ought to expect when a hungry person is in front of a slice of cake. “Self-control isn’t a special moral muscle,” Galla says. It’s like any decision. And to improve the decision, we need to improve the environment, and give people the skills needed to avoid cake in the first place.

“There are many ways of achieving successful self-control, and we’ve really only been looking at one of them,” which is effortful restraint, Berkman tells me. The previous leading theory on willpower, called ego depletion, has recently come under intense scrutiny for not replicating.

(Berkman argues that the term “self-control” ought to be abolished altogether. “It’s no different than any other decision making,” he says.)

The new research isn’t yet conclusive on whether it’s really possible to teach people the skills needed to make self-control feel effortless. More work needs to be done — designing interventions and evaluating their outcomes over time. But it at least gives researchers a fresh perspective to test out new solutions.

In Berkman’s lab, he’s testing out an idea called “motivational boost.” Participants write essays explaining how their goals (like losing weight) fit into their core values. Berkman will periodically text study participants to remind them why their goals matter, which may increase motivation. “We are still gathering data, but I cannot say yet whether it works or not,” he says.

Another intriguing idea is called “temptation bundling,” in which people make activities more enjoyable by adding a fun component to them. One paper showed that participants were more likely to work out when they could listen to an audio copy of The Hunger Games while at the gym.

Researchers are excited about their new perspective on self-control. “It’s exciting because we’re maybe [about to] break through on a whole variety of new strategies and interventions that we would have never thought about,” Galla says. He and others are looking beyond the “just say no” approach of the past to boost motivation with the help of smartphone apps and other technology.

This is not to say all effortful restraint is useless, but rather that it should be seen as a last-ditch effort to save ourselves from bad behavior.

“Because even if the angel loses most of the time, there’s a chance every now and again the angel will win,” Fujita says. “It’s a defense of last resort.”

..“they would have figured out a way to say yuck instead of yum; they might have an automatic reaction of moving away instead of moving close.” - A view toward the increase of ones qualitative and quantitative place and the place of one’s social group might help to look beyond immediate negative temptations.


Posted by Catcher in the Rye on Sat, 31 Dec 2016 11:51 | #

Mark David Chapman/Catcher in the Rye


Posted by DanielS on Thu, 11 May 2017 15:16 | #

Interesting components and topoi for a good life for a person of European extraction:

Being-dasaein/Midtdasein (socialization) routine/sacrament/the sacred, self actualization, farther reaches


Posted by New Republic asks about role of White women in WN on Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:44 | #

The New Republic is asking questions about the potential role(s) of White woman in White advocacy, but they are asking it of Devlin, MRA people and “the Alt Right”, whereas they should be looking here, to this post for answers.


Posted by Invisible men on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 08:28 | #

Invisible men concept:

Female co-eds in Western Australia are asked what they think about the concept that “beta” males are invisible to women who they are primarily interested in “alpha” males - those males on top in the power game. And what, as females, they think about the predicament of nice guy betas who try to overcome the image of beta weakness and the just friend zone. 

...then the interviewer tells what happened to him.


Posted by Max Musson article mapped on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 00:14 | #

against this post…

Max Musson has an article over at Western Spring which speaks in terms that could fit in with the recommendations of the main post above. In fact he seeks the fair negotiation of gender differentiation and actualization discussed in the post.

Some highlights from Musson’s article:

Western Spring, “Good Night Stories for Boys and Girls”, 17 Feb 2017:

I was a post-war baby-boomer raised in a family in which my mother played a more dominant role than in most other households at that time. This was not a reflection of anything innately lacking in my father, he was badly injured fighting during World War 2 and was left partly disabled as a result, and when we encountered issues that my father struggled to cope with, my mother naturally stepped up and handled things that other women at that time might not have needed to.

My mother was also a highly intelligent woman whose education had been disrupted by the war and her family relocating to the Home Counties and I could sense that she was at times more than a little frustrated that she hadn’t been able to develop a career, at least not until much later in life when the scope for advancement was limited by her age.

Some people may have described her as a bit of a feminist, because she did believe in equal rights and equal opportunities for women and it was a source of some satisfaction to her that she had lived to see Margaret Thatcher become Britain’s first female prime minister. My mother however was not obsessed as feminists are today, with advancing women at the expense of men, she believed that girls should have the opportunity of a first class education and unfettered advancement, limited only by their ability, and that boys also should be trained and equipped to cope with the domestic side of life.

As a consequence my mother taught all four of her sons to sew and to knit, just as she taught my sister, and she taught us to cook and clean and keep the house tidy. I was the oldest of her four sons and as my younger brothers were born, I was taught how to hold them, how to dress and undress them safely, how to change their nappies and to feed them. This, to my mother was all part of equipping her sons as well as her daughter to be fully rounded human beings, and there have been several times in my life, I’m pleased to say, when these skills have enabled me to cope in situations in which many other men would have struggled.

When it comes to gender politics, equality before the law and equality of opportunity are all that anyone needs to have a fair crack at life, and to at least achieve something close to their full potential.

This would have been my mother’s position and she would at this point have parted company with the modern breed of feminist who is obsessed with ‘Wimmin’s issues’, with advancing women by reversing the perceived discrimination that existed in times past, thereby making victims out of men, by denigrating men and masculinity and by conditioning boys to become gender confused, feminised versions of what they might otherwise have become.

My mother for all her belief in the feminist cause, was a traditionalist who recognised that innate biology means that men and women can never lead lives that are exactly the same. Furthermore, even though she might have wanted men to have a sensitive and caring side to their personalities and not to be afraid to show their emotions, she would not have wanted to achieve these things at the expense of making submissive ‘lady-boys’ out of our menfolk. She wanted strong, capable, caring and independently minded men to be partners in life with strong, capable, caring and independently minded women, and I believe she was right.

In light of the above, I was intrigued to discover that my grand-daughter has recently been given a book entitled, ‘Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls – 100 Tales of Extra-Ordinary Women’, by authors Elena Favilli & Francesca Cavallo.

In its promotional blurb, it states, “What if the princess didn’t marry Prince Charming but instead went on to be an astronaut? What if the jealous step sisters were supportive and kind? And what if the queen was the one really in charge of the kingdom?”

“Illustrated by sixty female artists from every corner of the globe, Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls introduces us to one hundred remarkable women and their extraordinary lives, from Ada Lovelace to Malala, Amelia Earhart to Michelle Obama. Empowering, moving and inspirational, these are true fairy tales for heroines who definitely don’t need rescuing.”

“To the rebel girls of the world: dream bigger, aim higher, fight harder, and when in doubt, remember you are right!”

Some of the individual women chosen to feature among this hundred are rather questionable as role models in my view, however I do not object to a book such as this providing inspirational bedtime reading for my grand-daughter. Seeing the book however spurred me into thinking what one-hundred men might feature in the equivalent book for boys? In the interests of fairness there had to be an equivalent book for boys, didn’t there?

Today, I Googled to find out and knowing gender politics as I do, I was not completely surprised to find that there isn’t a counterpart for boys written by the same authors. Apparently they are only interested in inspiring girls, and they don’t much care for boys. They have even written a second book for girls including another one-hundred high achieving women, but still nothing comparable for boys.

Upon searching further however, I discover a book aimed at boys in a similar format, published by Quercus Books a subsidiary of Hodder & Stoughon. This book however is entitled, “Stories for Boys Who Dare to be Different (Gender and Well-Being)” and is written by Ben Brooks with illustrations by Quinton Winter.

The sales blurb states, “Boys need to know that prince charmings and brave hunters are not the only role-models

“In fact, a whole lot of them out there don’t identify with the idea of being a strong, independent, competitive saviour who never cries. As a boy, there is an assumption that you will conform to this stereotypical idea of masculinity, but what if you’re the introvert kind, what if you prefer to pick up a book rather than a sword…

I’m a bit surprised that Musson finishes this paragraph with the following example:

...what if you’re very sensitive, what if you like the idea of wearing a dress?

Having heard him before state a recognition that a certain percentage of the population will be homosexual, perhaps the example is meant to provide for that; however, I believe the example is a bit extreme to amplify for the general context. And personally, I would say that the boy should be discouraged from wearing dresses until perhaps he is old enough to recognize that he is, in fact, among the small minority of homos (and that he should still be discouraged from flouting straight gender roles in public. Let him have his costume balls in his queer bar if he must). I base that opinion on the idea that there are probably some percentage of boys who are in the balance, who could go either way if society encouraged them; so that while society should not allow for persecution of homos, understanding the fact that some are hard programmed, the normative, calibrated societal bias should encourage straightness in boys and discourage boys from being homos.

That was a digression from an article that was well measured until that moment.

If we visit the Amazon page advertising Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls, we also find in the small adverts a whole host of books aimed at furthering the feminist agenda, again with no comparable books for boys.

On the website, What Children Really Want, Stories for Boys Who Dare to be Different is promoted, with the following strap-lines:

“The girls had ‘Bedtime Stories for Rebel Girls, so now something aimed at the boys…”;

“This wonderful book is a step in the right direction for ‘gender and well-being’”; and

“Gender stereotypes are changing for the better!…”

Yes, gender stereotypes are changing, but that is not what should be happening. If gender equality is truly the aim, limiting stereotypes should be abolished, not changed. The changing of stereotypes merely replaces one limiting stereotype with another, and while the change that books like these represent is positive for girls, the change taking place is distinctly negative as far as boys are concerned.

It is not traditional gender stereotypes that have caused the recent epidemic in delinquency, mental illness and suicides among young men, because this epidemic did not exist fifty years ago. It is the denigration of the male role in society and the disaffection this causes, and the lack of direction and wholesome role models that leads to the despair that many young men currently feel.

It is not traditional gender stereotypes that cause these problems in males, but it is the fact that the modernist and traditionalist either/or of the facets of individuation and gender differentiation are not flexible enough to negotiate the post modern circumstance. The topoi my post above discusses are required.

The pendulum has most definitely swung too far. We don’t need aggressive feminism that is uncaring of the needs of masculine boys and which promotes submissiveness and dysfunction in our men. As my mother would have said all those years ago, we need ‘strong, capable, caring and independently minded men to be partners in life with strong, capable, caring and independently minded women’ and that can only come from offering boys the same kind of wholesome role models and the same kind of inspiration that we are offering our girls:

“To the rebel children, and especially the rebel White children of the world: dream bigger, aim higher, fight harder, and when in doubt, remember you are right!”

Yes, Max, we need those strong role models for both male and female self actualization. But we also need the grounds that provides for that strength, namely Being/Midtdasein - Being (and being amidst one’s people) that a protectively bounded racial/social group allows - and the further stabilization that respect for routine and sacrament allows.

Post a comment:

Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me

Next entry: The problem of the Establishment mentality – Part 3
Previous entry: Ancient and Modern - Part 3

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem



Endorsement not implied.


Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks






Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties


Europeans in Africa

Of Note


Ieva Baltmiskyte commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 21:39. (View)

Are The Finns European? commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:44. (View)

Green Sleeves commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:40. (View)

Jerry Cantrell commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:59. (View)

Nutshell commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:41. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:32. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'The New Religion Exclusively for Those of Indigenous European Extraction' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:29. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'The New Religion Exclusively for Those of Indigenous European Extraction' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:16. (View)

Blue on Black commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:12. (View)

2016 commercials commented in entry 'WHITE WOMEN FOR SALE!' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 06:27. (View)

Like a bad neighbor, State Farm is there commented in entry 'WHITE WOMEN FOR SALE!' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 05:40. (View)

2018 Olympic Hockey Tournament commented in entry 'Winter Olympics not diverse enough for US media' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 03:38. (View)

Taken For Granted commented in entry 'WHITE WOMEN FOR SALE!' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 02:42. (View)

Commercials: "resistance is futile" commented in entry 'WHITE WOMEN FOR SALE!' on Mon, 19 Feb 2018 01:10. (View)

The Mountain Between Us commented in entry 'WHITE WOMEN FOR SALE!' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 23:27. (View)

Kristy Boden commented in entry 'Two more London attacks' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 15:54. (View)

JF interviews Todd Lewis commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 11:26. (View)

The Rooster commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 11:06. (View)

Uncomfortable Bear commented in entry '4 things we learned from the indictment of 13 Russians in the Mueller investigation' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 09:23. (View)

Nikolas Cruz commented in entry '"What We Don't Know - Motive." Likely: revenge against societal incoherence, lack of accountability' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 02:09. (View)

Maccabees commented in entry 'The alternative right's big tent, already too inclusive - includes Jews as well' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 00:57. (View)

Max Musson article mapped commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on Sun, 18 Feb 2018 00:14. (View)

8,606 fake refugees so far in 2018 commented in entry 'More Than A Thousand Illegal Immigrants Reach Europe In First Week Of 2018' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:52. (View)

Orson commented in entry 'Serial killer white-out' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:58. (View)

Toba commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 11:02. (View)

Allman, Wetton, Coryell, Holdsworth commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 10:14. (View)

Invisible men commented in entry 'Dark Side of Self Actualization & Incommensurate GenderAgendas' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 08:28. (View)

Uncomfortable Bear commented in entry '4 things we learned from the indictment of 13 Russians in the Mueller investigation' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 07:23. (View)

Twins, one black, one White commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 02:02. (View)

Distributist vs JF commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:22. (View)

Reactionary Expat commented in entry 'The New Religion Exclusively for Those of Indigenous European Extraction' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 18:54. (View)

On the Obama portrait artist commented in entry 'Obama portrait artist's past work depicted black women decapitating white women' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 17:39. (View)

KM on proprietory modules of mentation commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:32. (View)

Andrew Torba at RI commented in entry 'FCC doubles down on dead-wrong definition of how internet works' on Fri, 16 Feb 2018 01:26. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Corrected: After sorting confused language: check points of hermeneutic of racial stasis/homeostasis' on Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:15. (View)