One of the things I’m most grateful to have studied is comparative politics. When it comes to a state and how it functions, everything is reducible to a primary ideology. I though I’d neatly synthesize critics and criticisms of liberalism. As to the solutions? Well, I don’t have them, but emerging and new hybrid regimes in Eastern Europe might be worth examining over a long-term period, if only for more data on how states behave in relation to an ideology.

1) Conservatives (as a general category)

An advanced liberal democracy has progressed from general inclusion to radical inclusion. Therefore, everything has been legitimized and we are left with no loosely objective gauge of positive values. Or what philosophers would call the pursuit of the “good life,” man’s individual journey in trying to embody virtue.

Relativism and statism cannot simultaneously exist. By saying there is no “truth,” we cannot inculcate the love for liberal democracy necessary to preserve it. Additionally, various interest groups drain state resources. By striving towards hyper-inclusivity, we have destroyed liberal freedoms and the form of individual responsibility it rests on.

2) Multiculturalism

Identities will always be partially group-based, and one way of defining this is of course on ethnic divisions. Deeper solidarity comes from cultural collectivites, and the basis for liberal democracy is individualism. Group rights are intrinsically conflicted with liberal individualism. Also, the question of “reasonable accommodation” to minority groups is put into question. To what extent and how much should a state cater to minorities and interest groups?

3) Welfare State vs. Market

The welfare state creates an inactive class of people, in addition to generating a “nanny state”, which destroys the basis of liberal freedoms and the responsibility over one’s self. Lower taxes would generate more investment, and less public services.

Globalization also erodes the welfare states and state autonomy.

4) Environmentalism

Environmentalism is a project centered around sustainability and conservation. Capitalism, in contrast, functions on the creation of new needs. The solution lies in redefining what luxury means and what role that should play in regards to the individual.

5) Feminism

I’m going to restrict this to feminist critique of liberalism, even though I can say a lot more on the general subject of how it impacts liberal democracy. The feminist criticism is that the power imbalance of the patriarchy is replicated in the existing political order. They strive for a society that “integrates their differences,” which basically means liberalizing the state further in accepting and being sensitive to even more individuals. There are enough feminist sub-groups that call for an incorporation of feminist values into government like pacifism and nurturance.

Be wary of women who say they “don’t get along with girls” or whose circles are predominantly male. These women are irreconcilable bitches. The majority of my friends are female; the few males friends I have are ineligible (gay, married, asexual, etc.). I have never had a fight or any kind of drama with a woman, and I can extend this truth to every individual female within a group of about ten or so.

Anecdotally speaking, every woman I have encountered who has boasted about their number of guy friends or has issues getting along with other women are drama queens who thrive on sexual validation provided to them by the periphery of guys they string along.

I used to work with this incorrigible slut when I was in New Zealand (the only country in the world where the sexual partners of women outnumber that of the men). Every one of her Facebook pictures was with a different guy “friend” in spite of having a boyfriend. It was a transparent plea for some jealous reaction from her on/off boyfriend. On/off because he used to dump her every other weekend, then get back together with her on the Monday (presumably after he cheated on her). She had a pallid complexion, an aggressive countenance and a really contrived flirtatious manner. For example, texting her boss about her personal issues in an attempt to get close with him or hugging up on generally undesirable electronics store guys to flatter herself.

Don’t trust a bitch who has more male friends than female ones. She is self-centered and nothing will trump that priority. You are merely a satellite being dictated by her planetary gravitational pull.

Dilbert creator Scott Adams wrote a post referencing MRA in a not wholly negative light on his blog. Naturally, this had feminists in uproar.

The reality is that women are treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone. You don’t argue with a four-year old about why he shouldn’t eat candy for dinner. You don’t punch a mentally handicapped guy even if he punches you first. And you don’t argue when a women tells you she’s only making 80 cents to your dollar. It’s the path of least resistance. You save your energy for more important battles.

How many times do we men suppress our natural instincts for sex and aggression just to get something better in the long run? It’s called a strategy. Sometimes you sacrifice a pawn to nail the queen. If you’re still crying about your pawn when you’re having your way with the queen, there’s something wrong with you and it isn’t men’s rights.

Fairness is an illusion. It’s unobtainable in the real world. I’m happy that I can open jars with my bare hands. I like being able to lift heavy objects. And I don’t mind that women get served first in restaurants because I don’t like staring at food that I can’t yet eat.

If you’re feeling unfairly treated because women outlive men, try visiting an Assisted Living facility and see how delighted the old ladies are about the extra ten years of pushing the walker around. It makes dying look like a bargain.

The Jezebel commentary was a series of sarcastic, snarky remarks not actually directly addressing anything Scott Adams said. Adams responded to the criticisms by saying:

That’s the reason the original blog was pulled down. All writing is designed for specific readers. This piece was designed for regular readers of The Scott Adams blog. That group has an unusually high reading comprehension level.

In this case, the content of the piece inspires so much emotion in some readers that they literally can’t understand it. The same would be true if the topic were about gun ownership or a dozen other topics. As emotion increases, reading comprehension decreases. This would be true of anyone, but regular readers of the Dilbert blog are pretty far along the bell curve toward rational thought, and relatively immune to emotional distortion.

Ironically enough, feminists became angry and didn’t articulate any kind of logical de-construction of his argument. The Jezebel article was entitled “Dilbert Creator Deletes Misogynist Rant,” which bothered me for the same reasons. Using words like misogynist, racist or sexist not only connotes an intrinsic bad, but halts any sort of candid discussion about a topic that has suddenly become too sensitive. All this without even justifying why something is misogynist (meaning genuinely and unjustifiably hateful towards all women), racist or sexist. The word “sexism” doesn’t necessitate something that is irrational or untrue.

If I ever attempt to have an honest conversation about how biology dictates gender, not social constructionism, it prompts a reactionary response of “misogynist!” or “sexist!”. The same indignant accusers suddenly cannot respond to why that makes a certain claim irrational.

On the whole, I’d have to agree with Scott Adams assessment of Men’s Rights Activism. It’s important to address issues like paternity, alimony and the disproportionate amount of social support (financially and culturally) directed towards women. As a woman however, I don’t experience indignance or offense to the same issues feminists react so strongly to, and I think responding with an equal level of sensitivity reduces MRA to an absurd eye-for-an-eye mentality. There are ways to address the same issues without adopting the feminist response in reprisal. It marginalizes the importance of the cause in the way that hippies with dreadlocks absurdify environmental issues.

This recent article featured in the witches coven popularly referred to as Jezebel, irked me on so many levels I didn’t think it sufficient to excerpt selections, but rather conduct a full-blown exegesis. (I abridged it very restrictively.)  Essentially, this woman euphemizes her sexual defectiveness as a need to “set boundaries”, and vilifies her boyfriend’s natural impulses (and occasional missteps). Clarisse Thorn, the author, melodramatizes her below experience, in true histrionic fashion, that you would suspect she was physically abused:

I guess I’ve had a pretty good sense of my boundaries, historically, but there have been times when I have not set them well.

This is hard to write about, because it happened years ago, and the memories aren’t fun, and I don’t like writing negative things about people I know unless I think there’s a good reason for it. But there are few people in my life, now, who are likely to identify the person I’m discussing. And I’ve asserted before that we should be more willing to write about our screwups; I was writing about BDSM at the time, but I think it’s true of all kinds of relationships.

There was a gentleman in my life, lots of years ago, who I was extremely in love with. We had an on-again, off-again relationship that lasted a very long time. We had an extraordinary mental and emotional and creative connection. We understood each other very well. There is zero doubt in my head that he loved me too.

Our sex life was really terrible, though. (It was not a BDSM relationship. I hadn’t yet come into that part of my sexual identity.) And there were some emotional boundaries he simply wouldn’t respect. At first I was too inexperienced to really recognize how bad it was, though I knew some things were messed up — then, as I got older (and dated other people in the interstices of our relationship), the problems became clearer and clearer to me. Want some examples? Here’s a blatant one: he never went down on me, though I regularly went down on him; he never even offered to try and figure out something else I might enjoy equally. Oh, I knew that was messed up from the start, but I didn’t have the vocabulary or the self-esteem to negotiate something different.

There’s this steep climax where you assume she’s going to say “he asked to conduct painful procedures on [her] clitoris for his sexual satisfaction” or that he violently choked her in order to ejaculate. If a guy refused to go down on me, I’d definitely be disappointed, but it wouldn’t traumatize me sexually. In fact, if I felt so strongly about it, I would break up with him – factoring in my general givingness in bed and how much of a priority sex is in a relationship.

I’ve got sexual-emotional baggage from that relationship to this day. And yes, I do resent it. Still. Despite knowing that he loved me, and despite valuing many memories from that relationship — when I look back on my time with him, it feels clouded and toxic. I remember that one night, years after I broke up with him, I had one of the worst nightmares of my life: merely a dream that he and I were back together. I woke up shaking, almost in tears.

During an argument, he once said to me, in a voice both angry and wounded: “I just want to feel that you love me more than you love yourself.” And my reaction was not to walk away. My reaction was not to laugh incredulously. My reaction was not to dump him on the spot. My reaction was to cry, and tell him how hurt I was. Hurt: because how could he think I didn’t love him more than I loved myself? Of course I did. What did I have to do to prove it?

For the record — just in case it needs to be said — that is ridiculous. Anyone who demands that you love them more than you love yourself does not have your best interests at heart. My reaction was just as ridiculous. I should not have been looking for ways to prove that I loved him more than I loved myself. I should have been out the fucking door already.

I always thought the premise of a truly loving relationship for a woman was altruistically loving your partner more than you love yourself. In fact, in my current and past experiences of love, I treated them as a part of my subjectivity, whilst still loving them more than I ever loved myself. The hormones traveling to one’s brain within limerence essentially translate to a relaxation of ego boundaries. To not experience that, is to not experience romantic love or to be emotionally flawed in some capacity.

Towards the end, we went through a period where we were living together, but we weren’t “officially dating” and we weren’t having sex. So I had sex with him. Of course. It took me a few weeks, but I did it. I did it because I was in love with him. I did it because I felt guilty, as if having a strong emotional connection with a man is wrong if you don’t “pay” him with sex. (Hey, “everyone knows” chicks have sex in exchange for relationships, right?) I did it because I thought it was “worth it”, I thought it “wasn’t that bad”, even though I hated every minute of it.

It’s hard for me to put myself back in my head, back then, but I think my BDSM identity was playing a role, too: I think part of me had concluded I could never have a “healthy” sex life. I craved BDSM — which meant I was a fucked-up pervert; sex I really liked with someone I loved was not for me. (Don’t believe their lies, kids! BDSM can be love sex too!)

(I have always related so strongly to this quotation from the submissive writer violetwhite: It’s ironic that the most perverse manipulations of power in my life occurred in a past vanilla [i.e. non-BDSM] relationship, where I tolerated tyranny because the normative structure of our relationship obscured the fact that that is what it was.)

This is the most disturbing passage. She acknowledges her BDSM identity (I wonder if she’s submissive or dominant?), but tries to subvert more common sexual practices as “manipulations of power” even though those roles are clearly rooted in a biological basis. Feminists are often uncomfortable with the assumed relationship dynamic because on an intellectual level that are attempting to subvert and deconstruct it for the intrinsic sake of it, without considering why those dynamics exist in the first place. In this case, I think she obviously just has an inbuilt revulsion, but she doesn’t recognize that she’s part of a minority, and for most people sex and “heteronormative” relationships aren’t a horrible, tyrannical experience.

Can I teach other people to set boundaries in situations like that? I don’t know. The feminist ideas and gender analysis I was exposed to as a kid didn’t prevent that experience (although, again, maybe those things would have helped if the situation had been more obvious: if he’d been physically abusive, for example, or more overtly controlling). Maybe it was a lesson I had to learn, maybe I needed to be put in that situation, maybe it’s good for me to have that example in my past. Maybe everyone needs personal experiences like that and we can’t figure ourselves out without them. I don’t know.

She then concludes with how much happy BDSM sex she’s having and how she still struggles with “setting boundaries”. I think her struggle with “setting boundaries” speaks to how unnatural it is to approach sex in such a clinical, methodological way. Sex is by nature visceral, animal and there have to be extents to which it can be sterilized. What disturbs me the most is how feminism has taught us to approach every issue like this – including this one, which constitutes a minority of people – with the utmost sensitivity and to then “normalize” the degree of sensitivity in regards to every relationship dynamic. It isn’t normal and shouldn’t be treated as such.

This is just one more case of a feminist who’s (not so) incidentally sexually and emotionally defective. (It vaguely reminds me of this post I wrote about “Makeout Sluts“, who again, are not so incidentally feminist.)

The original Jezebel article is featured here.

***

Sofia’s personal blog can be found here.

This is the second in a two-part series, the first entitled “Archetypes of the Craigslist Female Population“.

This sample is an attempted distillation of the three primary categories of men: Alpha, Beta and Omega. Of course, the intrinsic bias of Craigslist is that Alpha males of have no necessary use of the site, and if they do, it is anomalous and likely for laughs or on a lark. It’s hard to distinguish the Beta and Omega on a forum such as this, and they generally become a homogeneous entity. Craigslist tends to reflect a dystopic vision of the dating market, a handful of choosy – in this case – single moms, “BBW”s and women over 30, sifting through a haystack of your ‘average chumps’.

1. Guys who advertise, in as many ways as possible, that they’re nice guys whilst basking in self-pity.

CAN A REAL GUY FIND A REAL GIRL HERE? – 30

Im 30 Years old. Soon having a Birthday. Therefore older… Duh!! Im a Truly NICE person On the inside!!
Im the kind of guy that if you see me walking down the street and knew I was single, you would say Not a chance!
Im the kind of the guy, that when you get to know me, and realize Im single, you think to yourself, nah, he’s got all kinds of girls!

BUT I AM A Guy, who is currently Single!! Lol!! I am a REAL Kind of guy! Have SO much going for me, I DEFINATLEY Know how to treat a lady like GOLD! I Always try my best to make sure that special someone feels GREAT! Im an intelligent person, very smart, but not in a geeky way. Im Very cute, easy on the eyes, taller, caucasian, eastern Euro Background, Short Brown hair (Sometimes longer) Deep Hazel/Green eyes, 160, 5-10. Im really affecionate, talk a lot, very interesting… I have led a very interesting life, and have many interests. Have a great career, that allows free time, I like to travel, fine diners, nice wine, yet can “roll” with regular common folk..Lol!! Im not into bars or clubs anymore, but into pretty much everything else.

I am a GOOD GUY! EVERYONE says Im a GREAT CATCH!

ALL I ASK FOR:
Is Under 36
Caucasian
Rather Intelligent and |Mature
Appreciates a Nice Guy
Comes from a decent Background.
NONE of this BBW Stuff, Please be proper size
Attractive, etc..
and Basically a SWEETHEART! an ANGEL! A NICE PERSON, a NICE GIRL!

IS This tOO Much to ask Here???

Remember THIS guy IS DIFFERENT! VERY SPECIAL! VERY REAL! And Will ALWAYS Treat you with RESPECT! Just APPRECIATE ME, and I will do same!

Looking forward to hear back from that SPECIAL GIRL! You WOnt Be dissapointed! I Promise you!

EAF

The capitalization cries out “desperation!”, the poor grammar a frantic plea! He spends the first paragraph extolling his negative virtues and then poorly convinces his female audience that his flaws are really just the makings of a “nice guy”. Nietzsche, in On the Genealogy of Morals claims that this self-perceived meekness, humbless are not virtues because they are merely passive and reactive. There is no intrinsic praiseworthiness in those that discuss those qualities of themselves, because it comes from a place of ineptitude. This guy is clearly euphemising his general undesireableness as ‘niceness’.

The use of “real” in the title is interesting. I’ve noticed people call themselves “real” when their list of bad traits overwhelm their good ones. Aggressive, low-class women often tend to proudly advertise the fact that they’re “real” as opposed to saying “bitch”.

Moreover, he just seems to have a corny sense of humour and he resorts to begging near the end. To invisible online girls nonetheless. An overall sinister quality about this ad. I wouldn’t be surprised if he saved strangers’ nail clippings.

2. Guys trolling for sex.

You will get 30 for a fast bj in my car – 38

I am normal,clean and healthy. You will get 30 for a fast bj in my car.

Is the incentive for the woman supposed to be the thirty dollars? Anyway, 90% of the men on Craigslist are looking for casual sex outright. Obviously, there’s no tact but the basic impulse is still there. I have a linked a few that expressed their frustration outright to Roissy, and got a couple thank-yous. I know it’s possible to hook-up via CL because I once made a mock ‘m4w’ ad and got a few responses, but not with an ad like the above.

Summarily, “nice guys” and men looking for sex are the bulk of what you’ll find. There’s a fair amount of freaks looking to satisfy a particular sexual fetish, but I feel that it’s legitimate to turn to an online forum to satisfy those needs. It’s definitely possible to hook up through a venue like that overwhelmed with men if you don’t reek of desperation. I went on a singles hotline with my boyfriend Aaron, who’s actually from New Zealand. Except, in his “ad” he advertises being Aussie (more obvious) and played up his accent quite a bit and we got a lot of responses. I suggest having some kind of status gimmick.

***

Sofia’s personal blog can be found here.

Lately I’ve been trolling Craigslist personals on the daily to unwind and gawk at the devastating losers who choke the site with their drivel. It’s become a more profound activity ever since being exposed to the game sphere, because it serves as a perfect concentrated microcosm of everything that prevents people from engaging in relationships. I’ve tried to distill a few archetypal gems without picking ads with excess verbiage.

1. Thirty year old women who have yet to realize the cliffdive of their market value. Ad follows:

Cerebral, Mercurial, Complex Woman – 30

Slim and attractive enough. Sad. Strong. Resourceful. Resilient. Inspiring. Academic. Damaged. Fragile. Full of contradictions, faith, passion.

Seeks a gentle man who has also experienced and overcome longstanding adversity. Must be of equal curiosity, drive, compassion, depth…

Like men intellectually athletic, physically smart. Preference given to PROGRESSIVE Christians (feminist/ libertarian/ socialist type) with a strong core faith. No evangelicals, non-feminists, grammatically-challenged, or conservatives. I eat them for dinner. It makes me sad, but it gets the job done.

Mercurial enough? Be kind. I have a fork and know how to use it.

Translation: Desperate, likely belligerent and demanding aging feminist who romanticizes her mental health issues in the hopes that will someone see her as a distressed damsel and not a headcase who can’t sustain a relationship. Likely because, in addition to the above things, her terms of interest implicate a beta male whom she can never feel truly attracted to. She also perceives herself as some creative, intellectual type because she tried to edge in some wordplay. Her ad is saturated with cuntiness. Full of contradictions? That’s her only way of reconciling her inflated self-perception with her inability to find a mate.

My runner up for this category was a woman who included these promising words in her ad: Dated more men than you, even if you’re gay. Literally a man-eater. But classy. Like cannibal-style, except I use a napkin.

Ugh, same shit, but I bet she thinks she’s a snowflake.

2. Fat girls who have a full realization and acceptance of their market value

Sifting Craigslist for BBW ads is like sifting through a haystack for hay. There’s too many ads to choose from, and only collectively can they best demonstrate the desperation and easiness of BBWs as a category. They are often brief as the women are often aware they can’t be overly choosy. Here’s a good one:

Seeking a tall black man – 25

I m looking for a nice tall black man.. Between 24 – 35. Im looking for friends first.. Nice casual romantic dates (Toronto Zoo, ROM, Crepe Cafe etc) then whatever happens happens.. Please be D&D Free.. No expectations! I am 25 curvy with long black hair and green eyes! Your picture gets mine! Lets see whos out there!

She’s seeking a black guy, and with her green eyes she’s statistically & presumably white. The high testosterone of the average black guy means they’re non-committal and likely to give anyone a try once. She knows what’s she’s in for, but hoping for more. Hence her contradictory proposal of seeking a romantic date, whilst simultaneously prematurely asking he be drug and disease free. She doesn’t explicitly express that’s she’s a BBW unlike the majority of ads, she merely says “curvy”, but in Craigslist-speak this reads “not morbidly obese (at least)”.  Solo mums generally have the same criteria.

***

Without being presumptuous, there are a disproportionate amount of black women also on Craigslist, and I suspect it’s a combination of naturally high aggression and disagreeableness, and the fact that a lot of black guys are simply non-committal so they have to have a broader filter via Craigslist. Not to mention there tends to be a lot of overlap in the BBW and single mom categories. Feel free to speculate as you will.

I fear that is this is lengthier than intended, so stay tuned for my analysis of male Craigslist population.

***

Sofia’s personal blog can be found here.