Category Archives: Regressive Leftism

The “Mouse Utopia” Experiment That Fooled Your Parents and Grandparents

Leave a reply
Dr. John Calhoun, pictured inside the Universe 25 enclosure.

Even with good intentions, what’s stupid is still stupid. So it is when one attempts to thwart a perceived oncoming crisis, but ends up doing more harm than good.

Decades ago, researcher John Calhoun set out to conduct a set of experiments which involved confining rats to enclosures, and observing them as they are continually provided with ample food, safety from predators, and allowing their populations to grow without interference.

The most famous of these enclosures was called “Universe 25”, which was notable for its capacity for housing upwards of 5000 mice. As the experiment progressed, the mice descended into antisocial and violent behavior, and the colony ended up failing when the females failed to care for their young.

This research came to be of particular public interest, as it came at a time when Malthusianism, the idea that the earth was nearing its limit for its ability to support humanity’s growing population, was widely accepted. In light of this, it’s easy to see why Calhoun’s experiments were interpreted to mean that consequences similar to what befell Universe 25 might also befall humanity, if humanity’s numbers were to continue to grow unchecked.

But there was a problem. Calhoun’s experiments did not concern limited resources, nor did it concern overpopulation.

The purpose of the experiments was to observe behavioral sink in rats who were not able to escape one another’s company at any time. This becomes evident when considering the fact that the colony did not want for anything to eat or drink at any time during the experiment, as it was all provided by Calhoun. What’s more, the Universe 25 enclosure came nowhere close to capacity at the point when the colony failed.

Nonetheless, the consensus was that the experiments gave us a glimpse into the future of humanity if humanity’s numbers were to continue to grow without check, further feeding into the Malthusianism that was popular at the time. In a sense, the Universe 25 experiment came to be the “mouse utopia” experiment which fooled your parents and grandparents.

As a case study concerning the National Socialists of Germany may prove, when any misconception becomes popular enough, tragedy is a potential outcome. While Malthusianism may have already been popular in the decades preceding Calhoun’s experiments, a popular misconception regarding them may have played a huge role in the movement’s further popularity. And, wouldn’t you know it, it was the following decade that saw the production of the now popular Jaffe memo.

That’s not to say that there’s no value to be found in Calhoun’s experiments. But to find that value, one would have to look at them in terms of the data that they actually provided. And if there is carryover between the observed behavior of rats made to live in close proximity and human beings, there is a concern which is applicable to today, rather than in a hypothetical future time when human population is far greater. After all, large numbers of humans live in close proximity, today.

The fact is, there is noticeable behavioral sink in rats who are made to live in close proximity, unable to escape one another’s company. Among what’s concerning is that the males in the experiment tended to become hyper-aggressive, often fighting each other, even when there’s apparently nothing at stake. They also tended to become hyper-sexual, with homosexuality becoming rampant.

The behavior of the females also became concerning. The females tended to become more masculine in their behavior, also becoming more aggressive and hyper-sexual. As matters continued, most of them failed to care for their own young, many of them abandoning their young, leaving them to die. And yes, we’re still talking about rats.

Also of interest was the emergence of a special category of male. These were referred to as the “beautiful ones”, because they avoided other rats (and thus fighting), and they devoted their time to self-grooming. Any time they fed, they avoided other rats, often by waiting until many of them were sleeping. These rats were so psychologically damaged that they refused to mate, even after being removed from the enclosure and placed in the company of ideal females.

I’ve been avoiding direct comparisons until now, but I’d like to indulge by pointing out the obvious similarities between these so-called “beautiful ones” and humanity’s MGTOW and Herbivore Men movements. If you’ve never heard of them, they largely boil down to being groups of men who have foregone relationships with women, often over bad experiences.

As large numbers of humans live in close proximity, it’s easy to see a certain disregard for one’s fellow man. Those who manage large numbers of humans tend to see less value in them as individuals, instead viewing them as statistics, and numbers to be managed. There is an Asian saying: “A frog at the bottom of a well knows nothing of the ocean.” Indeed, a limited perspective can lead one into making wrong assumptions, even as far as to interpret disparate data as supporting their own preconceived notions. Get out of cities.

Former Loudoun County Superintendent and School Official Have Been Indicted

Leave a reply

Remember just last year, when Loudoun County school officials waved off criticism of a transsexual school policy by insisting that no sexual assaults by such individuals had taken place in their public schools, all while covering up a couple such sexual assaults by the same offender? (Pepperidge Farm remembers!)

The incident brought to national attention the downsides of opening to transgenders the public restrooms of their choosing, parents concerned with the safety of their children began to fight back, and the pendulum finally began to swing the other way.

Just yesterday, indictments against two school officials concerning the incident were unsealed, and one of those indicted was former superintendent Scott Ziegler, who was fired over the incident just last week.

The indictments against Ziegler read as charges of typical left-wing abuses of power:

  • misdemeanor false publication,
  • misdemeanor prohibited conduct, and
  • misdemeanor penalizing an employee for a court appearance.

Retaliating against an employee for a court appearance is a classic abuse of power. And in this case, it sets a particularly bad example, considering the charges relate to a cover-up of sexual assaults. Many people who have been sexually abused are afraid to report it to the proper authorities, because they are made to believe that they might face retaliation. When I was in college, a student complained about a sexual offense committed against him by another student, but school officials regarded the complainer with suspicion. Let’s not kid ourselves here, schools can do a hell of a lot better in this regard.

The felony indictment was against the school spokesman Wayde Byard, which was for felony perjury. Related point of advice: The government may be lying to us all the time, but if you lie to them, they’ll make you pay!

While people are cheering over Ziegler’s termination, his termination was classified as being “without cause”, making him eligible for a year’s pay (about $300,000). Once again, a member of the ol’ boys club gets his golden parachute.

The crime that the school officials attempted to cover up was when a boy in a dress forced himself upon an actual female student. While the act of covering up the crime did more than enough to endanger other students, the offender got off apparently scot-free, giving him the opportunity to victimize yet another woman in a vulnerable situation by abusing the school’s lax restroom safety policies.

Which is exactly what he did. If he wasn’t punished the first time, who would be surprised when he commits the exact same act of violence a second time?

The fact is, those who are out of touch with reality when it comes to their own biological sex are more likely to commit a sexual faux-pas (to put it mildly). And that’s giving the offender the benefit of the doubt. There are certainly many predatory individuals out there who would gladly don a dress and welcome themselves to the women’s restrooms, taking advantage of relaxed policies that previously existed for the safety of women and girls, so that they can take advantage of them when they are in a vulnerable situation. In a sense, they’re kind of like the wolf who wanted to eat Little Red Riding Hood, but instead of acting out of hunger, the predators in question want to act out their sexual fantasies.

It should be understood without saying, but in the culture war, don’t get on the same side as perverts, groomers, and sexual predators. Those are the people against whom the backlash will be the strongest when the pendulum swings the other way, which is already beginning to happen.

Hey Pennsylvania, What Is Wrong With You?

Leave a reply

The midterms are mostly over. Votes are still being counted, and Democrats are acting as though they’ve won just because they didn’t lose as catastrophically as they deserve. Georgia is looking at a runoff, and we’re still awaiting some results. No surprise there. There wasn’t much expectation that it would all go smoothly.

But what I’d like to zoom in on now is Pennsylvania. Oh, Pennsylvania. What is wrong with you?

I do live in Pennsylvania, so it’s not like some criticism from the outside looking in. But just because I’m here, doesn’t mean I know what the people here are thinking. Especially those to the left.

It’s not as though I don’t hear what they’re saying. Every now and then, one of them meanders out of one of our three major cities, expresses wonder and awe at all the “unused space”, then proceeds to bloviate about what he thinks makes a successful society.

But what I don’t have an explanation for is why about 2.6 million of them became party to sending John Fetterman to the Senate.

I know that it’s usually inspirational for a person who suffered from an illness to succeed in spite of that. However, when the illness leaves a person less capable of performing a task where many people are counting on him, then the better choice is to have someone else do the job.

The poor guy suffered from a stroke. During his debate with Dr. Oz, he could barely string a sentence together, and frequently failed to form a coherent response.

Were the Democrats of Pennsylvania simply unaware of this? A lot hinges on the answer to this question. Either the Dems were unaware of the capacity of their own candidate and were therefore uninformed voters, or they were so vote-blue-no-matter-who that they’d be happy to hand a rubber stamp to a seat warmer.

It’s not as though they’ve done Fetterman any favors. Can you imagine the unintelligible internal monologue of someone who has not fully recovered from a stroke? Can you imagine how confused and disoriented such a person would be as they are ushered from one place to another and told what to say?

Considering that the current presidential administration is basically Weekend At Bernie’s, I think we can say that a pattern has been established.

But as bad as that is, it gets worse. Democrat Tony DeLuca won reelection. In spite of being dead.

You may be wondering how a dead man found his way on the ballot. His passing occurred last month, at which point, it was too late to remove him from the ballot. It’s been decided that a special election will be held.

While it’s possible that DeLuca’s reelection was on similar reasoning as Fetterman’s (ignorance or sheer tribalism), it may be that the people voted for DeLuca in an effort to force a special election, not wanting the victory to go to his opponent, who was a third-party candidate.

Third-party candidates sure do have it rough. Their run for office is usually little more than a cynic’s quest. Unless there’s some prize to be won for throwing tons of time and money into an endeavor that ends up going nowhere.

In any case, it’s refreshing to see the Democratic voting base so accurately represented.

Bulbagarden Founder Posits Theory That New Gym Leader Is Trans and Non-Binary, Gets Debunked Less Than 24 Hours Later

Leave a reply

It seems like with every new major media release, someone from the questionable sexuality community will come forward with speculation (often stated as fact and foregone conclusion) that a character depicted represents their favorite flavor of sexuality.

As Bounding Into Comics points out, this time around, the speculator is Liam Pomfret, the founder of Bulbagarden, who posits his theory that the newly-revealed gym leader in Pokémon Scarlet and Violet, Iono, is non-binary and transgender.

Here is the promo video featuring Iono:

Upon what is Liam basing his theory? The initially ambiguous use of pronouns, and her choice of hair dye:

Image from Bounding Into Comics

One would expect the use of such flimsy inferences from an undiagnosed schizophrenic who believes that their TV is communicating secret messages specifically for them, not a Doctor of Philosophy. Our education system is fucked, isn’t it?

Because he was tripping over himself to find trans representation in a Japanese game marketed towards anyone in the family, he looked at the soft blue and pink hair (kinda looks lavender to me) and immediately thought of the trans kid flag, rather than the recurring red/blue coloration of Pokémon’s flagship games, Scarlet and Violet included.

Less than 24 hours later, Nintendo dropped supplemental promotional material concerning Iono. It’s the kind of thing that looks like it would have been released simultaneously with the promotional video that originally featured Iono, so maybe it was hastily thrown together after the fact.

The promo specifies Iono as having the feminine pronoun of “her”. Iono is female. Because we’ve already established that speculation is fun, maybe Nintendo threw this out there because they knew what Liam Pomfret was saying, and were all like “Nope. We’re not having that.”

If “Bulbagarden” sounds familiar, then you’ve been following along back when I pointed out how inappropriate it was that they used their Pokémon fan platform to soapbox about an immigration policy that they blamed on Trump (the problem was actually Obama’s fault, and Trump resolved the matter through an executive order).

This was Bulbagarden’s forum header at the time:

Fucking creepy.

And a fantastic opportunity to warn parents out there that there are some predatory actors in fan communities who use their positions in their respective communities to pressure younger members. Oftentimes, their activities involve performing “favors” over video chat. Of course, there are many ways that bad people can take advantage of children online.

That PSA aside, it can also be pointed out that there is a certain obsession with pointing to Japan’s status as a relatively advanced, orderly, and peaceful society. Oftentimes, someone on the radical left will attempt to glom onto a form of Japanese media, in a sad attempt to make the case that the Japanese are actually just like them.

What these attempts overlook is how Japan as a society got to be as advanced as it is. Japan is a heavily structured and stratified society that favors family, career, merit, and respect. To further reduce that, Japan is conservative. In fact, it’s one of the most conservative societies in the world.

Sometimes, a weeaboo pops up who thinks of Japan as being their kind of society, probably because they got ideas as to what it’s like from anime and manga. The fact is, Japan is a society of norms. If you move to Japan, you’re expected to conform to the norms. If you don’t want to, then you don’t belong in Japan. It’s as simple as that.

Red light districts aside, Japan is an advanced, peaceful, and orderly society. If your thinking is different from theirs, that might have a lot to do with it.

Iono is pretty far from the first character from Japanese media to have gotten this kind of attention. It wasn’t long ago that Shiver from Splatoon 3 came under scrutiny as possibly non-binary, but it turned out she was female. Nanachi from Made In Abyss is a frequent target of this, because author Akihito Tsukushi prefers to leave Nanachi’s sex as unknown. Or, more famously, there’s Bridget from Guilty Gear, who is male.

That’s not to say that there are no “non-binary” characters in Japanese media. However, such characters are seldom portrayed as sympathetic. But why would they, when there is something obviously wrong with their thinking?

Iono is merely a character in a work of fiction. She’s just made up, therefore nothing about her has any bearing on the reality of any matter. It doesn’t matter whether she represents anything, except maybe in the deluded thinking of those who lack the ability to parse reality without the assistance of a fictional construct. If this describes you, then you need to seek help. And get over yourself, while you’re at it.

Microsoft Drops NPC Update With New Pride Flag (seizure warning)

Leave a reply

Here it is, the new pride flag, according to Microstiff:

I can only imagine the headaches that this new design will cause. An ocular migraine doesn’t look this intense.

What’s more, this new flag looks like a logistical nightmare. Can you imagine all the colors that would have to be used to print these flags, which could end up outside the porches of homes that we tell our children to avoid all across America? Then there’s all the flags that would be rejected by reason of smudging the colors, which would have a high potential of occurring with all the different colors used.

The flag reminds me of Ancient Greece. Not just for the debauchery it represents, but for how similarly the Greeks handled idolatry. They wanted to ensure that they honored every god that they knew. And with how heavily pantheistic they were, they knew a lot of them. It got to the point that some of their cities were so packed with statues, that cities like Athens were said to have more gods than men.

Eventually, people just decided to set up pedestals with plaques that read, “To the unknown god”, in the hopes that, in so doing, they’d honor any god that they may have forgotten to build a statue for.

Perhaps we’re just months away from seeing a new pride flag that just says, “To the unknown sexuality”.

Webcomic Review: Momlife Comics

Leave a reply

At first, I wasn’t going to comment on these. One-panel comics aren’t usually worth talking about, and these seemed little more than the meanderings of a woman who is bitter about one thing or another. Then these comics blew up, so I was like, “fine, I’ll acknowledge their existence and write up a review.”

For the setting, try to imagine a curious land in which most people don’t have to grow their own food, but meals are already fully prepared and delivered to peoples homes. Not only is rape illegal, there are no roving rape gangs on the prowl in rusty pickup trucks. What’s more, the homes are crisp and cool inside in the summer, and when there’s snow on the ground in the winter, the homes are warm inside, and glowing display screens deliver limitless free entertainment on demand.

But, there’s a catch: human nature remains mostly the same. The human adaptation to conflict that has been cultivated over the course of aeons still remains. Therefore, the people started questioning their idyllic peace and halcyon luxury. Then, grumblings came, acknowledging first world problems as though a prize awaited the cynics: “My coffee is too hot”, “thirty seconds is too long for an initial boot up”, “my delivery was delayed until tomorrow”.

At the center of this maelstrom of abject ingratitude is one housewife and her adversarial relationship with her husband. That’s right, we’re reviewing Momlife Comics.

Momlife Comics was written by Mary Catherine Starr, who gives us the first hint of her politics by listing her pronouns in her bio. Because her pronouns apparently weren’t already evident from the fact that she’s a mom. She also made a BLM statement, so you know that she’s not racist.

Wow, how stunning and brave, considering the current political zeitgeist!

Mary’s IRL husband is aware of the comics, and is okay with them, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he did a Jack Murphy and wrote up an article touting the benefits of cuckolding.

Let’s start this review off with the most famous cartoon in the series so far:

Both are valid uses of the peach, and the one who gets to it first decides what happens to it. But notice that the build-up is the woman thinking about someone other than herself. How dare that man want to eat something that he paid for, from a table he paid for, in a house he also paid for!

Wow! Look how much more work that woman is doing! Patriarchy and such mushuggunah!

The missing context: the woman took all the bags, leaving the man to bring back just one. Was she aware that she could take multiple trips to the car? She’s likely to smoosh something if she tries carrying in that much at once.

Pattern established: Woman imagines some rule, but doesn’t tell man about it. Woman then gets angry at man for breaking the rule he didn’t know about.

Another pattern established: Woman gathers everything to herself, leaving nothing for the man to do. Woman then complains that she does everything.

Mary also does comics where she reverses the gender roles, which is supposed to be clever because she leaves us to determine the irony without beating us over the head with the obviousness of the point that she’s trying to make.

Get it? Because men are generally more career-focused, and women tend to be more family focused? Though it’s hard to say definitively whether Mary intended to throw shade on the fact that men and women are different, and that because of these differences they tend towards different life choices. It might be that she’d prefer a world where they made similar choices, even if that meant less excuse to hear the sound of her own voice, complaining.

I wouldn’t put it past her to complain about the rain as though she’s blaming someone for it.

Mary is such a victim in her own mind that she even sees herself at fault for bringing her own children fast food. Or are her children the only ones in the universe who would complain about fast food? Sure, it’s garbage, but kids don’t know that.

It was my intention to review this webcomic, but I instead feel tempted to psychoanalyze the author, as her comics have given a window into the soul of a troubled woman. It’s obvious that from an impressionable age, someone was able to sell her a victimhood narrative, and this resonated with her life in the hard streets of sheltered suburbia.

Since her webcomic got noticed, she produced this comic in an answer to the trolls:

Along with a notice that she’ll block trolls. Which is a mistake, because it’s a reaction that trolls look for, and they’ll take any that is any indication that they’re getting to someone. And the above comic accomplishes this masterfully.

As far as art quality goes, Mary is evidently of the opinion that if you only do one thing right, you’ve got a comic. In Mary’s case, that one thing is body proportions. Aside from that, everything is wrong. The thick, inconsistent line art, the lack of facial features, everything is just wrong. Maybe Mary can draw better than a toddler. But bring elementary school students into it, and she’s out of her league.

Okay then, let’s grade this pile. Momlife Comics gets a score of 2.6 out of 10.

Gentlemen, I know that the dating game is flawed. But tread carefully. Getting hitched to the wrong woman can be quite taxing.

One of the classic signs of an abusive relationship is joking at the expense of one’s spouse in public. These comics give ample cause for concern.

Jane’s Revenge Are Trolling Victims

Leave a reply
Trolling got its name from the fishing technique that simulates movement. Illustration by Kanzaki Hiro.

Normally, when you think of a domestic terrorist, you think of someone who is only fit to be hung, drawn, and quartered. You don’t normally think of them as someone to be pitied. But when it comes to the typical foot soldier for the emergent terror group, Jane’s Revenge, there might actually be something there to be pitied.

If you don’t know who they are, Jane’s Revenge is a domestic terror group committed to attacking women’s support centers that offer services other than abortions. The terror group is sperging out over the Supreme Court’s decision to honor the tenth amendment of the Constitution by allowing states to decide for themselves the legality of abortion, which doesn’t change anything for the blue states where the majority of abortions are conducted. But Jane’s Revenge isn’t happy unless they are making everyone’s choices for them, all while complaining that anyone who disagrees with them are authoritarian. Except that they’re incapable of being happy, in any case.

Since the ruling, they’ve largely kept their bullshittery limited to vandalism, but they’ve also made explicit threats of harm, with phrases like, “If abortions aren’t safe, neither are you”. Incidentally, they still haven’t been officially designated as a domestic terror group, which goes to show that the designation has no meaning. Or that a group isn’t considered a domestic terrorist unless their ideology goes against the deep state and the establishment uniparty.

So, you might be thinking, why pity them? And I admit, they sound just right for the wood chipper. But to get into why they can be pitied: I think they’re being trolled.

Think about it; domestic terror groups such as Antifa are about getting other people to do things. Their online communities are largely provocateurs that want something done, but they don’t want to face the consequences.

So, they put someone else up to it.

And, as it so happens, there is a seemingly-endless supply of stupid people who are easy to exploit. These useful idiots get pissed off that their political team ended up getting an “L”, so they meander over to a community for Antifa or Jane’s Revenge, where they can get their fill of intoxicating rhetoric from the influencers (who might not even live in the United States). These influencers tend to be quite patient, playing the long game as they groom their victims, who eventually reach the boiling point.

Then, all the provocateurs have to do is sit back and watch as someone else commits the crimes. And if that person gets punished for it, the provocateurs find entertainment in this, as well.

And the saddest part of it all is that the useful idiots sincerely believed that they were thinking for themselves, and that the ideas that the influencers fed to them were their own.

Sorry, it gets sadder. Fact is, there are many, many stupid people out there that can be exploited in this manner. So many, that they’re impossible to avoid. Think about all the people who live in cities who collect checks from the government, even though they don’t actually contribute anything of value to society, all while in a sad state of illusory superiority. Most people think of the Army as the place a person could turn to when all other prospects aren’t looking so great, but the Army rejects those with an IQ of less than 83, which is ten percent of the population. One-forth of Americans believe that the Apollo lunar landings were a hoax. One-third believe that the 9/11 terror attacks were an inside job.

See what I mean? Stupid people are everywhere. And for the influencers, that means plenty of chumps to exploit. And if all they get out of it is entertainment, and the knowledge of being the one that influenced a nutcase into actually killing someone, that’s something they wouldn’t lose sleep over.

At Antifa “protests”, it’s not the provocateurs that throw the explosives. Instead, they hand them out, so someone else will have to deal with the consequences that come with throwing them.

Can the chumps be pitied? Considering that they are likely only being used as tools, maybe. Are they still only fit to be hung, drawn, and quartered? I don’t know, but if someone is that gullible, it’s hard to imagine that they can turn their lives around and become someone that contributes value to society.

Diversity Works Better Without Top-Down Control

Leave a reply

One of the talking-points that comes up in politics is diversity. Particularly, racial diversity (though, as my smarter readers are aware of, there is more to diversity than looking different). In this area, the left (particularly Democrats) love to boast that they’re the pro-diversity party, even going as far as to pretend that their rivals are opposed to diversity, as though they themselves were always diverse, all along.

However, that’s a misconception. But it’s a misconception that they’ll feed into, knowing that it benefits them.

The fact is, both sides of the American political climate are for diversity. The difference between them is in how diversity is achieved.

First, the right (usually represented by the likes of Republicans and Libertarians). The American political right believes that diversity should come about naturally, and to this end, a person’s race should not be considered in their endeavors.

Ideally, an employer should consider a candidate based on their merits. If this were the case, people of different races will be present in a large enough business by virtue of the fact that no race is being purposely excluded. Likewise, a college considering an applicant should consider the potential student based on the likelihood that they’d succeed in the environment, without regard to the applicant’s race. Under these conditions, diversity on campuses wouldn’t just be likely, they’d be expected.

Practices that discriminate based on race, such as racial steering and block-busting would be illegal, as they would exclude qualified candidates and applicants based on race.

The left, as exemplified largely by Democrats, has a different approach when it comes to diversity. Their difference in approach provides an excellent illustration in how their political philosophy as a whole differs from their opponents.

The left’s approach when it comes to diversity involves achieving diversity through top-down intervention.

Rather than allowing diversity to occur naturally, the left prefers to pressure employers and institutions to achieve diversity with quotas. As the left would have it, the representation of each individual race in each setting must be consistent with their own ideal of how each race should be represented. Whether this is through equal representation of each race, or consistent with each race’s representation in the general population, the left isn’t always clear.

When you understand the left’s tendency towards top-down controls, even on the societal level, you’ll have an easier time understanding why social engineers tend towards the left.

When you consider the left’s tendencies towards top-down societal controls, the implications should give you the chills, especially if you’re of the opinion that each individual should have the freedom and autonomy to determine for themselves how they live their lives.

And I would think that most people would prefer to make choices for themselves, such as which car to buy, without having the selection limited by a governing body they does not understand the nuances of an individual’s decisions. And, for that matter, an individual should have freedom of choice as to who their spouse would be, without having their selection limited based on race, provided their selection consents. And the couple should be free to produce the number of offspring that they choose, without external manipulation or intervention.

In fact, any form of external manipulation or intervention in any of these choices should absolutely not be tolerated.

However, the left is of a different mind. They are generally more favorable of the idea of top-down control on the part of the government, even as far as engineering society into the shape of their preference. This is in stark contrast with the right, which favors limited government, by principle.

The right tends more towards libertarianism, while the left tends more towards authoritarianism. As one examines their respective policy positions, this becomes evident. The moniker of liberal really doesn’t fit the left very well.

If we were to examine the American political right in good faith, it would be apparent that they desire diversity. Not only that, they have a far superior way of achieving it, which involves a stronger society, by reason of important roles going to the best qualified, rather than to diversity hires.

The left might try to paint this as a pretext for racial discrimination, but there wasn’t much expectation of an argument in good faith from those lacking moral absolutes. While that may sound like a cheap shot, it holds up with the observation that a larger representation of leftists are of the idea that human government is the highest level of authority, and that there’s no truth but power. But that’s an issue for another essay.

Study Finds That Testosterone Treatments Turn Democrats More Conservative

Leave a reply

It’s not going to surprise a whole lot of people that the chemical that makes men more manly also makes men tend more towards conservatism. But now, we have a study to prove it.

The study, published by Professor Paul Zak of Claremont Graduate University, demonstrates a clear connection between testosterone levels and the political preferences of males. The 136 males participating in the study disclosed their political affiliations, then were either administered a synthetic form of testosterone or a placebo.

In an outcome as surprising as the setting of the sun, the Democrats participating in the study that took testosterone felt less warmly about their own party by 12 percent, but felt more warmly about Republicans by 45 percent.

Democrats happen to be the most compliant people, and compliance in males correlates with a lack of testosterone. I’m stating the obvious, of course. But maybe a study is already underway which will demonstrate the connection.

Come to think of it, it was mainly the Democrats that insisted on shutting down gyms and confining people to their homes during the Coronavirus Apocalypse. An apocalypse that I survived, by the way. And you probably did, too.

The study showed the strongest shift in Democrats that were weakly affiliated, and the effects waned among those with stronger Democrat leanings, and among weakly-affiliated Republicans.

Come to think of it, many of the Democratic policy positions tend to decrease the testosterone of those affected. When men pretend to be women, there isn’t much expectation that those men would have high testosterone. And of course, those men have a home in the Democratic party! When men become obese, their T-levels tend to crater. But they’d still find company among Democrats who tout the “healthy-at-any-weight” bullshit that actually kills people.

Also, consider the fact that Democrats are the ones actively trying to trick young boys into having themselves neutered. Could it be that Democrats are trying to castrate for themselves a set of lifelong loyalists?

Considering the role of the gonads in testosterone production, it would follow that the fastest way to turn a man Democrat is to have him de-balled and de-pricked. And who knows how many professing Democrats have already underwent the process?

Win: Netflix Adopting Anti-Censorship Policy, Encourages Woke Employees To Take a Hike

Leave a reply

In a major culture war victory, Netflix is updating its “culture memo”. In addition to updating the title to “Netflix Culture: Seeking Excellence”, the company has announced a stronger freedom of expression stance, as noted in the document’s Artistic Expression section:

“Not everyone will like — or agree with — everything on our service,”

This nicely sets the tone for what’s to come. Free expression means there’s going to be a wide assortment of entertainment options on the table.

“While every title is different, we approach them based on the same set of principles: we support the artistic expression of the creators we choose to work with; we program for a diversity of audiences and tastes; and we let viewers decide what’s appropriate for them, versus having Netflix censor specific artists or voices.”

As I pointed out before, if there’s a work of artistic expression that’s not for you, you don’t have to consume it. You curate your own entertainment choices. Notice how Netflix stated their support of artistic expression, and are now allowing consumers to tailor their Netflix experience according to their own preferences? That’s in stark contrast to the woke position, which involves curating everyone’s experience for them according to the mentality of the vocal few.

While that already says plenty, the concluding paragraph of the section drives the point home:

“As employees we support the principle that Netflix offers a diversity of stories, even if we find some titles counter to our own personal values. Depending on your role, you may need to work on titles you perceive to be harmful. If you’d find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you.”

While this is progress by reason of the fact that Netflix is now adopting a baseline free expression policy, this becomes a huge game-changer with that closing sentence:

“If you’d find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you.”

Netflix is now telling its staff that if any of them have the woke mind-virus, and it could interfere with their ability to do their job according to their updated principles of artistic expression, then those employees can take a hike.

Obviously, Netflix is making this move because they’re recognizing that siding with the woke is a bad idea. For one thing, Disney went woke to the point of becoming politically involved, and as a result, they ended up losing Reedy Creek. That was an important turning point, as companies looked on and saw that taking certain positions could result in consequences that might hurt their bottom line.

In fact, it was just days ago that PR firm Zeno advised clients, including Coca-Cola, Hershey, Starbucks, Salesforce, and Netflix themselves that it would be a better idea not to make a public statement on controversial topics, and to avoid discussing such sensitive topics with the press, if they were to seek comment.

This development also comes in light of Elon Musk’s planned purchase of Twitter, with Musk planning on restoring the platform to free speech principles, and restoring the accounts of political figures who were unfairly banned, such as Donald Trump.

Of course, the change is likely financially motivated, as in Q1, Netflix saw it’s first decline in subscribers in over a decade. Obviously, siding with the woke hasn’t been helping them, but neither is the fact that alternatives like Daily Wire have sprung up, determined to compete with the likes of Disney, considering that Disney is determined to present dubious sexual content directly to minors.

It was a few months back that I anticipated that institutions would turn against the woke, realizing that the woke ideology isn’t benefitting them. What I didn’t anticipate is that the change would begin to come about so soon!