This video is a great example of why I laugh at TED Talks. TED is simply shorthand for femistatists jerking each other off. In this video Dr. Terry Wahls talks about becoming healthy by eating real food instead of the shit pumped out by corporations. Talking about eating real food earns her video the following warning:
Note from TED: This talk, which features health advice based on a personal narrative, has been flagged as potentially outside TED’s curatorial guidelines. Viewer discretion advised.
Not swallowing the cum of Monsanto is “outside TED’s curatorial guidelines” and requires “viewer discretion”. Good thing the government is protecting us from the corporations.
It’s not hard to figure this one out. Once again science reminds us that diversity is not strength and women should not have jobs.
We study the effect of likability on female and male team behavior in a lab experiment. Extending a two-player public goods game and a minimum effort game by an additional pre-play stage that informs team members about their mutual likability we find that female teams lower their contribution to the public good in case of low likability, while male teams achieve high levels of cooperation irrespective of the level of mutual likability. In mixed sex teams, both females’ and males’ contributions depend on mutual likability. Similar results are found in the minimum effort game.
Our results offer a new perspective on gender differences in labor market outcomes: mutual dislikability impedes team behavior, except in all-male teams.
Many people will rush to point out that China, with it’s $11 trillion economy, most of which is producing PHYSICAL TANGIBLE ITEMS (not services like the US) is a better candidate for the world’s reserve currency than the US. It has less debt, much higher economic growth, and on paper is a superior candidate for the world’s reserve currency. There was even talk about a “BRIC country” cartel (consisting of Brazil, Russia, India and China) issuing their own currency to dethrone the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency as these economies actually have more legitimate production of valuable stuff compared to the US. But there is a problem with all of these potential rivals to the US, and that is corruption.
According to The Corruption Perceptions Index, the US has a score (out of 100) of 74. This is not perfect like the squeaky clean, goodie two shoes, ass-kissing, teacher’s pets of Canadians, New Zealanders, and Scandinavians, but it’s CERTAINLY and DRASTICALLY better than any near-candidate competitor for the world’s reserve currency:
Russia is HORRENDOUSLY corrupt with a corrupt score of 29. While China, India and Brazil all score 40, putting them on par with Jamaica, Mexico, and Turkey.
This strikes at the heart of being a world reserve currency because it’s all about trust. It’s all about faith. And if you are so corrupt that you don’t know if the Russian mafia is going to force you into an insurance arrangement, or the Chinese government may revoke your license at anytime, or the Turkish government may declare you an infidel and imprison you, then what value does your currency have?
Ergo, the purchasing power of Gen Xer’s future social security checks does not so much depend on the US’ sucky economic fundamentals, as much as it depends on the rest of the world just plain sucking. And given the entrenchment of communism in China, corruption in Russia, and socialism in Brazil, there’s not going to be any viable contenders against an albeit imperfect Western nation that accounts for 30% global GDP.
That being what it is, I’ve set these two concepts together here for a reason. First we have a set of Red Pill women seemingly desirous of Red Pill aware men that serve their imperatives within their acceptable frame of what “Red Pill” ought to be for them. Second we have a parallel between Gregg’s take and YaReally’s take on what women are honestly seeking in an ‘improved’ man – a more perfected slave; one who can embody the worst contradiction to positive masculinity (from Gregg’s perspective), and one who despite his performance burden is really only required to provide emotional polarity to generate tingles and genuine desire.
. . . . .
Toxic masculinity is yet another narrative buzz word the Feminine Imperative has made endemic in the same way it repeats the “rape culture’ meme. By adding the term ‘culture’ to any article you find offensive you make that article an endemic phenomenon – Rape ‘culture’, Bro ‘culture’, a ‘Culture’ of Corruption, etc.
‘Toxic’ Masculinity is another such exercise. It presumes a universally agreed upon definition of what exactly is toxic – very similar again to the good and bad uses of Game in the Dark Art / Dark Triad associations I made at the beginning of this article. And in Liz’s exchange that definition is whatever male-specific behaviors women find “distressing”.
However as we see in Gregg’s example of ideal masculinity, those distressing attributes are in fact the most arousing attributes of men. I’ve used this example before, but the most pussy I’ve ever enjoyed, the most freely given and most genuinely sought after of myself by women was when I was virtually penniless. I didn’t need to signal parental investment and provisioning cues to get women’s sexual interest, I just need to fit the bill for what YaReally defines as the “fun guy” – or as Sheryl Sandberg agrees, “the bad boy, the crazy boy, the cool boy, and the commitment-phobic boy in order to prompt a woman’s genuinely inspired sexual best.
In the inverted order of humanity, the weak (socially focused) attack what is strong (reality focused) so that they change meaning of “weak” and “strong.” The weak becomes the strong, and the formerly strong becomes the weak. This is the fundamental error of civilization and of humanity, in that our humanistic intent leads us into weakness because of our fear of strength.
Democracy formalizes this by allowing the baboons to attack the weakest party indirectly by nominating instead the popular and by doing so, obscuring the actually strong who are now seen to be weak. This allows the human monkeys to form a little clique where they all agree on what is true, and exclude upsetting realistic thoughts and replace them with happy stupid bovine social thoughts.
To this, we can only say that the human monkeys have too much power, and the herd needs to be thinned:
War is good, AIDS is good, mass murder is good, gang violence is good, crack cocaine is good. Anything that contributes to depopulating the Earth is good.
Many writers on the alt-right ponder just why the masses of progs believe in ridiculous concepts such as climate change, blacks being special people who need special help from whites, the mystical unrealties of multiculturalism, the self hatred that manifests itself as white privilege, the enthusiastic public support for sodomites being given the sacraments of marriage, and so on and so on.
But these are simply their way of being good. The term virtue signaling is a wonderful summation of this, but the truth is that humans have always virtue signaled in place of actually doing good and living a good life. In previous generations it was the act of going to church. You gave up the greater part of your Sunday and you went on a public display of ‘look at me, I am good.’
When I lived in a little Italian mountain village I used to occasionally observe the column of locals going to worship each Sunday morning, and it was a source of wry amusement as the greater part of the worshipers were the nastier elements of the local society. They would gossip, and undermine, and cheat in business, and backstab you without a moment’s hesitation, but then they would go to church and their sins would be absolved and all would be well. They were pious, in their own minds.
I used to think that this was rank hypocrisy but I now I understand the wisdom of the ancients. Because a public display of collective worship in this way is effective at containing the act of virtue signaling. People believe in climate change not because they understand the science, but because they want to be seen to be good, and because the greater numbers are with climate change believers then that is where they are going to stay.
The people who discriminate against women are not those who expect women to perform on merit against men but those who believe women are too mentally and emotionally weak to manage that.
Oxford University clearly thinks women are pretty pathetic.
. . . . .
What I don’t want and have never wanted is special treatment — a leg up because I’m a woman. It’s insulting. If I’m not good enough to compete against men (or other women), I’ll either work harder till I get good enough or do something else.
This guy says it so perfectly:
Aaron J. Howell
@CHSommers @CollegeFix So Oxford History dept. says women are dumb and are best when in the home? Hmmmmm