1 2 3 4 5 9 | bottom
Quote# 139863

[Flying creatures do not defy gravity nor cancel weight. What do you suppose they have wings for?]

Direction at slow speeds. Really dude? Do you really think a bee can turn left, or right, using their wings: at 20+mph? The "BEE LINE" fight is only perfectly straight! Bees balance their flight using their legs at slow speeds. BECAUSE THEY CANCEL THEIR WEIGHT when they fly! It is actually counter balance and NOT balance. So, they cancel weight only to their legs at slow flight so they can control it from flower to flower using their wings. 

However, from hive to flower and, flower to hive, they weight cancel also using their nasal antennas which disrupts the air mass above the bee so that when they weight cancel, they oscillate up and down, unweight and weighting, to go faster and faster, like a surfer on a wave. They aren't flying--THEIR FALLING HORIZONTALLY! I'm the first person, at least in modern history, to figure this out!

If this ability is un-abled for environmental reasons, such as proximity to Cell Towers: the bee is forced to walk! Because it has no ability to fly other then weight cancelation!

Understanding the relationship of the bee's, scope, pedicel and flagellum allows for weight cancelation. But that type of flight sucks! I now this because I have done it! Besides, it could be turned into a weapon of mass destruction if magnified. Better we understand beetles and their weight cancelation coupled with radiant energy deflection away from the pilot. As beetles use electro-magnetic bubbles to fit within an air mass similar to lightning through an air mass. A flight that has NO speed limit, mass or, G-force!

If you want to talk to me about weight cancelation and dragonflies; then we both better understand subsonic sound and CSE. Yet again, their flight sucks and must be repowered using negative energy(from ground to sky) polarized plants. Or, have you never seen them struggling to balance on the point tips of the leaves of flowers, such as lilies? Did you ever wonder why they do that? Well, I did! 

If I'm EVER as dumb as nature: I'll be way smarter than you!

Haipule, Atheistforums.org 5 Comments [8/17/2018 1:54:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: SteveW

Quote# 139861

@paperplates:
I think my girlfriend was abused as a child.


So last night I was talking to my girlfriend and she was talking about her ex boyfriends. She had mentioned that she only had two before me, one was five years older and one was three. She then mentioned her she had her first boyfriend at thirteen and I made a joke saying I hope it wasn't the guy who was five years older than you then. Which she replied yes..... So she was 13 and he was 18. I lost it.
.....
To me that is fucked up. No right minded 18 year old should be in a relationship with a 13 year old. To put in perspective, that is a college student with 7th/8th grader.

...

Now the hard part. My girlfriend is now defending this guy. She says he is normal, a nice guy, they were more "friends", there is no way he would have been with another girl like that and that they still keep contact with each other. To me that sounds like the typical manipulative behavior of someone who is a sex offender. To me if feels like she is in denial over the whole thing, while displaying other traits that abuse survivors show such as having zero trust in relationships (she is unbelievably jealous of other girls and constantly thinks I am cheating on her), her self-confidence is non-existent (she is stunningly beautiful but thinks she is ugly and fat at a size 4), she has really bad anxiety and cannot face any sort of confrontation without going silent or trying to redirect the conversation.



@maruh:
well, the first thing which comes to my mind is: I had a girlfriend who was 14 when I was 18. I also had no sex with her..but kissing and stuff was on, like the things she / you described. I was just late in my development, nothing of pedophilia there. Later on, with 15, my gf was pregnant...luckily the father wasnt me (since we hadnt had sex anyway) so that was that...^^



@":
People like you, actually do the most harm in cases like this, by badgering and bullying someone into believing they were abused.

Every study has shown that the damage is caused not by the contact, but by the ensuing chorus of people demanding that the child believe they were abused and to act like they were abused for the amusement of the child's supposed rescuers.

In closing, if you are cared about her, you would end the relationship as you don't have the ability to understand the situation and are too brainwashed by society to accept the fact that 13 year old girls find older men attractive.


We create the problem. here is no reason or evidence to suggest that sexual contact - something inherently beneficial that we've evolved with for millions of years - is inherently bad because it occurs between two people of significantly different ages. Hell, bonobo mothers rub clits with their toddlers - you don't see them being scarred for life, utterly mentally destroyed. It's the echo chamber that forces victimization onto these people that really does the damage, making them into pariahs and removing their agency.


Underverse, MMO Champion 2 Comments [8/17/2018 1:51:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 139860

f an underage girl pursued an older male and she initiated sex with him and they both consented, enjoyed it, and she was not traumatized by the experience, then is it still wrong, is anyone really hurt, or is there even a victim at all? The same for an underage male pursuing an older female?


On topic, no there's no damage caused. There's no victim. We just have religious/puritan roots and tolerate sexual interactions to only the most necessary degree.

Can't consent according to the law of most civilized countries.

The difference is that 2 16 year olds have a pretty similar power balance, whereas a 16 and a 21 year old have a completely different one.


Power imbalance is inherent to the vast majority of relationships and is actually a good thing in most cases. It increases the risk of abuse, but it also increases the reward for the weaker party as they are able to obtain extensive resources and knowledge through their power imbalance relationship.

When you consider things like attraction, though, power imbalances generally disappear.

the law dictates that kids are complete absolute 100% dumb fucks.

Kids are deemed so stupidly retarded they cant even answer a simple question 'yes or no' regarding sex

Oh but they can. They can consent to sexual activities with other people their age who are, apparently, just as clueless as they are. An then people wonder why teenage pregnancy and STDs are so prevalent.

If anything, age differences in relationships are safety nets.

Besides if any adult decides to mess with my Daughters, regardless of who initiated the contact, they better invest in some soap on a rope. I'll make damn sure that fucker ends up behind bars.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but the parallels with fathers who would say the same thing about a black man 'messing with their daughters' not too long ago are pretty overt.

ut the man opens himself up to a world of hurt should the girl regret her decision, and the law is in place to just give a clear-cut line where it's not any use in saying "but he/she wanted it too!" for the adult. It's to stop adults from taking advantage of young people.


I never understood this argument. When I was younger, I was in a relationship with someone 7 years older than me, for 2 years. I had basically all of the power in that relationship, for a few reasons: one, I could leave whenever I wanted to, and as the object of desire my basis for remaining in the relationship did not involve attraction, but rather behaviors and stability. Two, our culture hates it when older people are in relationships with younger people for some shitty reason, so if anything went wrong I would have the full support of everyone around me. In short, I couldn't be in the wrong, and that gave me a significant amount of power.

If anything, it's the younger person that's taking advantage of the older one. The older one gets some eye candy and maybe fulfills their desire to provide and protect, while resources and knowledge are transferred to the younger one.



The damage people experience as a result of such relationships is largely an outcome of societal condemnation. If you remove a minor's agency and condemn their behaviors - even if they are not responsible for it - you will damage how they view themselves and relationships. That's right - WE are responsible more than the 'perpetrator' of the act for the damage caused by these relationships (in most cases, not all). The only reason I have a solid mental state and positive image of myself and relationships after coming out of that relationship is that I don't give a single fuck about what other people think. I used to, but not anymore after I realized how destructive other people can be just with their opinions, and especially to an underdeveloped mind as my own was when I had to think about these kinds of things at 15.

I want to reduce damage. I also want people to be able to acquire resources and stability if they so choose. Living in a society that condemns relationships with large age differentials and illegalizes them in some cases does neither.

I was in a sexual mentoring relationship with someone significantly older then me. It worked well for me, gave me an edge over my peers, and is party responsible for my success. I'm still good friends with the guy, and though I am not interested in a sexual relationship with him any more he still provides me with guidance. I would not have been able to obtain all of the knowledge and resources I did without the relationship being sexual; it wouldn't have been worth it for him, and I didn't mind/enjoyed it after a few times.


underverse, MMO Champion 1 Comments [8/17/2018 1:47:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Instant happy, just add pedophilia!

Award for discovering new horizons of creepy-crazy

Quote# 139859

That being said, pedophilia is still something that should be legalized. Bonobo mothers use it to calm their children when they're getting out of hand (unlike we humans, who use violence). Human morphology suggests a greater extent of this behavior due to our lowered sexual dimorphism and neotenous traits. If it's approached from a parenting practice and contrasted against the violent tactics we use now, I think it could gain acceptance, and rightly so. People have failed to divorce destructive pedophilia from benevolent pedophilia for too long. It's like conflating sex and rape. The logic is there, people just need to take a moment to consider it.

I am arguing that sexual interactions between adults and children should be acceptable under the premise that they are not inherently harmful interactions and indeed are likely to be less destructive than, for example, using violence to control children when they get out of hand.


Let me ask you. What is your end goal?


The goal is to shift people away from the chimpanzee-like violence-as-a-means-to-everything mindset that we've cultured over the last 15,000 years+, and towards the bonobo-like let's-just-love mindset. A lot of our problems, as a society, come from weak social support networks. Increasing pair bonding via sex will strengthen those networks, and in turn we will see a decline in violence and violent crime, bigotry, hatred, and a vast landscape of actually destructive behaviors.

underverse, MMO Champion 4 Comments [8/17/2018 1:39:47 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139858

Drug for pedophiles to be tested in Swedish trial
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/swedish-trial-examine-drug-men-pedophilic-impulses


Underverse: "This is a testosterone lowering drug. You're not just reducing pedophilic behavior. You're reducing sex drive across the board. This is parallel to chemical castration. Immoral, borderline depraved.
If someone actively agrees to it, it's hardly immoral.


Consent does not determine morality, especially considering that individuals often lack complete information or can be indoctrinated to perceive information in a certain way. For example; if someone consents to be sacrificed to the gods the that they will bring the rain, that individual's slaying is still immoral.

Why is chemical castration immoral?The pedophile deserves no sympathy. When you sympathize, you get people who want to protect and even enable pedophiles.


Do you not see how disgustingly immoral this is? What you're advocating for is something worse than a witch hunt. There is zero evidence to suggest that sexual interactions between older and younger individuals are inherently harmful. In fact, there are logical arguments to suggest the opposite. So without evidence that this activity is inherently destructive, you want to go around killing people simply because you disagree with them. That is the worst kind of vigilante justice; it's barbaric and unfounded.

You are the racist of the new generation. "



Broods:"This is a god damn OUTRAGE.

It's almost impossible to get testosterone replacement therapy in Sweden and there is very little research done in regards to the effects of testosterone yet the hormone is integral to the well being of men and low Testosterone levels and hypergonadism has shown to adversely effect the quality of life and mental well being in men. I surely hope if this catches on it will be on a strictly voluntary basis and never offered as a part of a plea deal to get a lesser sentence.
Maybe they should offer this to homosexuals too? If you say homosexuals are born that way then you are obligated to extend the same courtesy to pedophiles.

This reeks of chemical neutering. The very notion is repulsive to me. What's the next step? Chemically neutering homosexuals or any man that is perceived to be too aggressive?

Statistics show that between one in 20, and one in 35 men are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. Due to the high rate of the figure, researchers believed it could be as a result of orientation in the same way as homosexuality or heterosexuality
The very notion is repulsive to me and it sets a scary precedent. Testosterone is what makes men in to men.

Then again if these pedos volunteer for it i'm not going to try and stop them i'm just scared it will become a thing when they see how effective it is. As soon as a man "acts out" or is too aggressive or have a too high libido they will try to get him on a hormone treatment to make him in to a prepubescent boy.

Is it effective? Sure, ask any bodybuilder who has ever been on a supra physiological dose of testosterone what happens when he goes of the drug. No libido, no sex drive. This is something bodybuilders try to avoid which is why they take other drugs to combat the shut down and help their natural test production. Living with low testosterone levels is a nightmare and have very adverse physical and psychological effects.

Not that there is any research being done on male hormones these days because testosterone = bad. Makes men aggressive and sexual.

I'm sure the feminists of this world would be overjoyed if they could control men in this way. Just read some of the articles where they say how "testosterone makes men aggressive, lowers empathy (lol what?) and heightens libido. Like it's some kind of disease they need to cure.

Sure why not, they do their time in prison then go out and rape some more. If catration could make it so they dont feel the need to go rape someone, what harm would it do? other then to the filthy rapists ofc. The world would be a better place with less rapists out there no?

so pretty much anyone convicted of rape then? A 17 year old who has drunken sex with his girlfriend who later claims he raped her. Lets say that he technically did rape her as there wasn't any consent but the circumstances were so that the man could feasibly have inferred consent. Should he get castrated too?
What about if a husband forces himself on his wife? Immediate castration?

I'm starting to think many of you guys would have been very happy to live in a benevolent totalitarian police state. Scary thought

. "


underverse, broods, MMO Champion 1 Comments [8/17/2018 1:38:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 0

Quote# 139850

(=His response to being called out on persistently harassing others across two sites, even after getting blocked=)

What are you, a troll ? You shouldn't take the side of liberals or trolls. It isn't good when you side with them.

Mark Jones, Religion News 0 Comments [8/17/2018 1:27:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 139849

If they said no, no is no. That is all there is to that. It doesn't matter if it's enjoyed because it's completely biological.

Saying no is most likely rather pointless if the girl is moaning or showing physical signs of enjoyment. The campus offers escorts at night for anyone and during the day it is just a matter of either being with other people or making sure you are in a rather public place (even if it means taking an extra 5-10-15 minutes to get to class)...

Some women are to be partially blamed for this. They know the area, they know what happens, and yet they choose to dress up in provocative outfits..

I also wonder what the % of hispanic people that got raped are... based on a paper I read a while ago, hispanic women tend to keep such matters private even if it occurs to them several times.

Wowaccounttom, Reddit 0 Comments [8/17/2018 1:27:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139848

of course victims are to blame to.

for the person with the intent to rape, there has to be a rapee.

this said rapee either:

knowns the rapist and has aroused him/her by acting/talking flirtatious or wearing provocative outfits
doesn't know the rapist and put himself/herself in a stupid situation (i.e: drunk at a party, accepted a beverage from a stranger, walked alone in a dangerous place)
and a few others but i got bored of typing

Wowaccounttom, Reddit 3 Comments [8/17/2018 1:26:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139842

I don’t think there’s a metaphysical superiority in those qualities, only a material difference in outcome. Also Asians are smarter than whites on average but I don’t want an Asian society replacing the one my people passed on to me. I reject white supremacist as a label because it’s just a slur meant to poison the well rather than a meaningful descriptor. I don’t want to rule over non-whites or go out of my way to arbitrarily attack them. Their biological differences from whites aren’t a matter of my desire to be superior just a reality to acknowledge and understand.

Edeassail, Reddit 5 Comments [8/16/2018 11:18:26 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 139839

Human footprints are found alongside dinosaur footprints in the rock formations of the Paluxy riverbed in Texas. This obviously shows that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time and the same place. But evolutionists claim that dinosaurs became extinct about 30 million years before `man` supposedly began to `evolve`.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 7 Comments [8/16/2018 11:17:58 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

"What The Hell Are You Doing You Motherfukers?" Award

Quote# 139838

Harry Potter is not a Christian story it's about a little boy that survived a voldermort. Which is a very nasty sex crime .look up on the search engines what the sex act called volder Mort is

In the story Harry gets his lighting shaped scar from a magic wand blast.

But once you read what's really going on.

You see Harry Potter is a story about parental murder . child molestation! And really not a story for your little kids to be fantasy and playing!!

?, Y! answers 16 Comments [8/16/2018 11:17:54 AM]
Fundie Index: 11

Quote# 139837

Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, says in a public speech, "America was NEVER great..."

This underscores what I've been saying about Democrats all along; they HATE their own country!

If you vote Democrat in 2018, then you are Anti-America scum; no excuses!

#MAGA #Ghost

https://youtu.be/bJECaXs-pZA

Ghost, Gab 9 Comments [8/16/2018 11:17:37 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 139836

Will You Still Call Me Lord?

Death comes behind the Wind of Change that approaches in the storms I have shown to you. Death comes in the form of war, and in the form of famine, and in the form of plagues, My children. A terrible plague approaches in the storm (Suddenly I felt short of breath, as if something filled my lungs) that will claim many lives.

A time of great sorrows is upon you, America, though you know it not. Even My people who serve Me daily are not prepared for this end. Even My people who walk closely with Me are not prepared to see loved ones gasping and dying in front of them.
Will you rail and shake your fist at Me then? Will you turn your heart away and refuse to believe any longer? What will you feel if you lose everything and everyone from your life?
Will you still call Me Lord?
Will you, like My servant David, bow down and worship Me even when your prayers are not answered?

Glynda Lomax, wings of prophecy 4 Comments [8/16/2018 11:17:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 139834

Do you think it's a simple ordeal to be crucified? Jesus lived for thirty three years likely knowing he would be subject to an agonizing death. He came to earth knowing what had to he done.

He also left a perfect existence in Heaven with his father, to descend to a grimy, tortuous world.

Do you, question asker, think you could say, it's only an extended period of torture, but I'll get through it? Do you think, as a father, you could watch your son be tortured by sadists, when you have the power to wipe them out? Could you love these people, ask your father to forgive them while they torture you?

The aspect we commonly see, is only the physical pain, which is bad enough. There's so much more, I'm completely sure, that had to make it much worse for Jesus that we can't even understand. He was pure, perfect, innocent - taking all sin upon himself. We can't know what that feels like to perfect God. And... I can't possibly know this, but maybe Jesus will always have those scars in his hands and feet?

Finally, no matter how hard it is to accept something more important than ourselves... Jesus is eternally superior to us in worth, even though he shares his glory with us, his blood. We can't compare Jesus with anything man has done. Any terrible thing that has happened to man, any good thing a human has done, it can't compare to one iota Jesus has suffered, it can't compare to one step Jesus takes out of heaven for us. Jesus is deserving of all glory and praise, we are deserving of death. Yet still Jesus came down and let himself be tortured, he gave his life through us. God, who rules over all, who has perfect joy, who doesn't know time or inability, became subject to pain, became the suffering servant. He owes nothing to us. Yet he sacrificed his son in love.

Lest you think I can't empathize, I've asked this question before. I've struggled with it. I still can't understand how much Jesus really did sacrifice himself ultimately.

But when your next sacrifice comes along, think about this. Would you be able to go through with something, that literally makes you sweat blood in knowing what horrible pain is to come?

Timothy Lokker, Quora 12 Comments [8/16/2018 3:51:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 139832

on r/jailbait

Would you explain something to me? I know this is gonna be buried like most of my comments in this subreddit, but I'd like to ask: what do you think should be done with pedophiles?

First of all, I'm not interested in jailbait at all, only the arguments that are going on about it. Yes, these guys are attracted to kids: what makes that more "sick" as you say than being attracted to guys? Didn't liberalism achieved (or tried at least) to make people understand that gay people were born that way and it's not a choice?

People have weird and "disgusting" fetishes, but I don't think I'll ever see you fight with a group of guys who are attracted to ghosts (even though they are out there). I think the fear from pedophiles comes from those crazy kidnapper-stories and cases, and in no way do I support any of those sick crimes, nor the theft of personal images. But if you're liberal, then you should understand that these guys have a sexual urge, and they have to fulfill it somehow. If we force them to repress it, then I think it'll most likely "explode" out from them, and make them actually do something horrible. But as of now, at least they have a place to "live off" the pressure.

If there would be stolen pictures of 7 year olds or something, than I'd fully be against jailbait, but browsing through it's front page I've got the impression that most of those girls look like they were intended to make those photos for the exact purpose of getting someone aroused. The way I see it, there is no real harm done. Of course if the author requests it or if it doesn't look like a public photo, then it should be removed immediately.


Then what is the alternative? As I've said, I believe that shutting it down would be even less peaceful on the long run. Mind you: I'm not on their side, and if I could just make pedophilia disappear, I would do it without hesitation. But shutting off their community is not going to achieve that: in fact, that way they won't know that there are more people like them out there, they'll feel like outcasts, and I believe that feeling is the first step of becoming an actual serial killer or something.


eastern_eutopean_guy, reddit 3 Comments [8/16/2018 3:49:08 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 139831


I am 26 and am turned on by /r/jailbait. Am I fucked up?


you are not a perv. My husband was 25 and I was 17 when we got together. Before that, I was 15 and he was 23 when he took my virginity. He was not a perv. He was practically my age because of the differences in the maturity of men and women.We mature differently and women mature faster than men. Hence the r/jailbait. If they are younger than 13, you are a perv because they can't possibly understand what sex is or even know the repercussions of their actions or others. While I don't necessarily agree with r/jailbait, I'm pretty sure that almost ALL men are attracted to young, virile, fertile girls. It is not unnatural because 100+ years ago, if you started your period, you got married. But now, it's considered pedophilia. Don't let all the haters get you down. You are one of about 3 billion that like teens too. You go younger than that, then you have a problem.

night_writer, reddit 5 Comments [8/16/2018 3:47:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 139827

The Bible teaches that children ought not be punished for the sins of the parents. Neither ought parents be punished for the sins of their adult children. Ezekiel 18:20, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.” Adult children have their own free will from God. Whether they live for God and do right is solely their decision, which will largely be affected by the company they choose to keep. Wrong friends is a sure recipe for destruction! This is why attendance in a good Bible-believing church is so important, where you are likely to make godly friends. Only attend a church that exclusively uses the King James Bible. Only attend a church that teaches the simple Gospel, that is, the Biblical truth that a person is saved by admitting they are a sinner and believing the Gospel, apart from all works. Turning from sinful behavior, following Christ, surrender all to Jesus, inviting Jesus into your life, or any other type of self-righteous works for salvation, is not the Gospel, and is of the Devil. Run from such false churches!

The Bible teaches us to “honor” our parents. It is one of God's Ten Commandments to humanity (Exodus 20). To “honor” means “to value” them. It means to place emphasis upon the good and not the bad in our parents. It means to cover their past mistakes if they were Christian parents, protecting their name. Proverbs 10:12, “Hatred stirreth up strifes: but love covereth all sins.” Self-righteous children want to broadcast to the whole world the sins and failures of their imperfect parents, while failing to understand that they are just as sinful in God's eyes (James 2:10; Romans 2:1; Romans 3:10-23; Matthew 7:1-5; James 4:12).

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 17 Comments [8/15/2018 1:27:08 PM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 139735

(In response to: "What would your reaction be if you died and found out that God exists, and so is hell and heaven?")

They do exist. If you'll read the Bible, my friend, you'll see that. They are every bit as real as the sky, or trees. And God is a name, the holiest there is. Therefore, as a name, it should start with a capital "G".

JJ KeisT, Quora 11 Comments [8/15/2018 11:11:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 139716

i'm in league with the queer folk like me.
the world's beautiful monsters, like the author of Sea-Witch, the fairies and freaks and all our glory.
but not just the other monsters like me. but like Jesus Christ, perfect monster. Or monsters like Marie Curie, or monsters touched by madness, like me or Hitchcock. I'm in league with the poor. With the convict. With the tortured geniuses and the other prophets. I'm in it with the redeemers we destroy like MLK Jr. I'm in league everyone you hate. And everyone I hate. And everyone we love to hate when you or I should remember to love. And I'm in league with you even if we sometimes forget that. But also I'm in league with the w h o r e s and and the wretched. The suffering. The ill. And yes, the weird and the queer.
I'm in league with the messy underbelly of humanity we as a society love to devalue or even despise.
As Eugene Debs said so beautifully addressing a court so long ago:
"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

Honey Crisis, Disqus 13 Comments [8/15/2018 7:47:27 AM]
Fundie Index: -7

Quote# 139819

The coming fight between accelerationism and decelerationism

We learned from my campaign that we can't go up against the system directly, and try to make it more patriarchist. If you do that, the feminists will find your vulnerable points and apply as much pressure as is needed to force you out of the race. The leftists have SJWs (for soft power) and Antifa (for hard power) on their side, and they will destroy your livelihood (or that of whoever supports you), among other things. The alt-right, meanwhile, will not defend you, because they're not only too small and weak, they're too busy trying to figure out who among them is legit and who's running a false flag operation. And of course the cuckservatives won't defend you, because they're cucks.

So I see a looming fight between incels and conservative betas. Incels are have-nots, and have nothing to lose from the collapse of civilization; in fact, the collapse would be beneficial to incels because it would make way for a new and better civilization to be built in its place. However, there could be a bloody conflict when order breaks down; or at any rate, quite a lot of apple carts could be upset. Those who have something to lose don't want that. They have a wife and kids and they're afraid of what's going to happen if the status quo is disturbed.

Our only choice, though, is between a quick decline and a slow decline, because the current path society is on is not sustainable. There's no way to reverse the decline, either, because society is too far gone; we've already crossed the event horizon and the singularity is our inevitable destiny. The decelerationists want to slow down the decline, so they can enjoy their lives and hopefully not have to deal with the coming cataclysm in this generation. The "conservative" movement is about trying to "conserve" what exists for as long as possible, even though they can't hold onto it forever. The accelerationists, on the other hand, want to speed up the decline, so they can hopefully reap the benefits of the new order in their lifetime.

As the decline progresses, though, there will be more have-nots who will have reason to want to accelerate the decline. We can expect, for instance, that more men who, in times past would've been betas, instead will become incels. These men will want to hasten the collapse because the current state of affairs is painful for them, and they are eager to build something better, once what exists now is out of the way.

The way accelerationism will work is that we won't give a fuck about what gets destroyed, because it's all going to get destroyed anyway. If anything, we should try to bring about MORE destruction, more quickly. We should wreak chaos and bring about even more conflict between the sexes, so that as more men are rendered incel, they will become radicalized rather than continuing to try to "conserve" a dying system.

A key strategy in doing this will be to elect the most leftist, feminist politicians. Meanwhile, the decelerationists will try to elect more conservative politicians; but eventually they won't have enough votes to get their way any longer. This outcome is inevitable even if we incels do nothing, since the leftists are unstoppable (as evidenced, for example, by the coming blue wave, which will probably bring into office historic numbers of female politicians); but we can take action to speed it up.

Nathan "Leucosticte" Larson, incels.me 14 Comments [8/15/2018 7:39:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139817

So, it appears I’m officially withdrawing from the race tomorrow

I’ll be going down to the registrar and submitting this form. (For an explanation of why I’m dropping out of the race, see my earlier post.)

I’m endorsing Jennifer Wexton for Congress. The reasons are as follows:

First, I think in times like this, when we’re displeased with the direction in which the government is going — and especially when, as now, society is on an unsustainable path — we should vote out the incumbents. The only exception might be when the incumbent in question is an unusually good politician, like Ron Paul, who introduces proposals that, if enacted, could radically benefit our society. Barbara Comstock doesn’t meet that threshold, so she should be voted out.

Either Comstock is a moderate, or she hasn’t demonstrated much political courage. This is dereliction of duty. It’s supposedly the role of a member of the Republican Party — the whiter and more conservative party — to defend our culture against decay, not hasten the decline. But we’ve seen her continually take the side of career women, e.g. by pushing legislation against sexual harassment, rather than advocate that women should be in the home where they will be protected by male family members. For this betrayal of correct moral values, she should be electorally punished, even if it means elevating Wexton to high office. In the words of Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, “If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the traitor have it.”

To advance the cause of patriarchism, we should at every opportunity seek to purge out the female politicians and cuckservative politicians from the Republican Party. The best chance would have been in the primary, when Shak Hill was trying to get nominated; but since that didn’t happen, it will be necessary to get rid of Barbara in the general election instead. Then, in 2020, it will be possible to nominate someone better.

Remember, there’s no such thing as a patriarchist Congresswoman; any woman who runs for office, rather than staying at home to take care of kids, is obviously a feminist. The Independent Women’s Forum, to which Barbara Comstock belongs, is a moderate feminist organization. She spends her time on programs like the 10th Congressional District Young Women Leadership Program, which teaches high school girls to devote their years of peak beauty and fertility to “ambitious educational and career goals” rather than getting married, having kids, and putting family first.

This type of feminist enculturation leads women down a path to worry and unhappiness. Today, one out of five adult women is taking a psychiatric drug, a rate that is double that of men. Women take anti-anxiety pills to help them deal with the stress of shouldering responsibilities that in times past, men used to handle for them; and they turn to antidepressants when they find that having a career is not as satisfying as devoting themselves to taking care of family.

Third, Wexton and her fellow Democrats might be slightly better than Comstock and her fellow Republicans on issues like cannabis legalization that are of interest to libertarians. Many incels and volcels co2uld end up devoting much of the remainder of their lives to LDAR’ing. Given that feminism has destroyed much of the incentive for male success and accomplishment by rendering relations between the sexes so dysfunctional, there will be many men with decades of basement-dwelling, vidya-playing, 2D-anime-masturbating, and shitposting ahead of them; and they could benefit from some relatively harmless copes such as cannabis. After all, it’s not like they have a wife and kids (or the potential to, through betabuxxing, get a wife and kids) they’d be neglecting by spending their time getting high.

But of course, those members of society who are fortunate enough to live a somewhat decent life can also benefit from cannabis legalization by using it to enhance their experiences. A lot of them will probably use it as a substitute for harder drugs like opiates anyway, so it’s actually going to improve public health. There’s really not a lot of downside to pot legalization, but for whatever reason, Comstock never advocated it. Probably she figures, since not a lot of women get busted for pot, legalization is not really a women’s issue, so therefore she’s not going to care about it. That’s how those female politicians roll; but Wexton, being under the dominion of Democratic party bosses, might feel compelled to support pot legalization, as part of their strategy to seem pro-black and pro-Latino while also siphoning some of the pot consumer vote away from the Greens and Libertarians.

Fourth, it seems doubtful that patriarchist libertarians can bring about the more drastic changes we want to see in society by directly pushing back against the leftists. What happened to my candidacy was proof of that. As Roosh V pointed out, as soon as you move beyond engaging in “controlled speech,” i.e. what the establishment doesn’t mind your saying, and into the realm of truly dissident “free speech,” that’s when you will get shut down.

So what we will need to do instead, perhaps, is elect candidates like Jennifer Wexton whose radical (compared to Comstock’s) brand of leftist, feminist, “progressive” egalitarianism will move society toward the brink all the more swiftly. Once civilization collapses, then we can build a new and better civilization along capitalist and patriarchist lines. Wexton is the accelerationist choice.

Right now, the Alt-Right is embracing accelerationism more and more, as they see how hellbent the left is on censorship. The premise behind accelerationism is that our state of affairs has to get worse before it can get better. Andrew Anglin told his supporters, for example, to join the leftists in pressuring the major Silicon Valley tech companies to kick Alex Jones off of every platform. The goal is to force Alex Jones onto platforms that are less-regulated by the establishment, where he can speak more freely. The people who manage to follow him into these darker recesses of the Internet will be a more radical group.

Similarly, when I drop out of the race, I won’t be speaking at forums run by groups like the League of Women Voters or the NAACP, where there’s a left-leaning audience and a left-of-center moderator like Stephen Farnsworth. I don’t mind speaking to hostile audiences, but in the age of Antifa, the era of trying to persuade one’s opponents is obviously over. It’s all a fight for supremacy now.

I’ll be going underground. The darkweb seems to be where the future is at for those who want to share unorthodox views. Anglin had to spend his time there, and apparently, so will I.

What’s isolated from the mainstream can develop without interference from it. Meanwhile, the mainstream’s ability to argue against our ideas atrophies, as they sit in their own echo chamber. Polarization accelerates, as the country divides into rival factions that will meet again when guerrilla warfare breaks out.

Nathan "Leucosticte" Larson, Nathan Larson, private citizen 10 Comments [8/15/2018 7:37:36 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139816

As an accelerationist, I actually believe an incelocalypse is likely to happen someday

By "incelocalypse" I mean, the day when incels seize pussy by force. All the incelocalypse is, is the abolition of feminism (a fairly new innovation), and the restoration of patriarchy. Patriarchy is a system in which foids are treated as property to be transferred from father to husband; typically this will be done when they are in their jailbait years, to maximize their lifetime value to the husband and minimize the expense of the father's raising them in preparation for marriage. This is how it works during peacetime; during war, of course, foids may be seized by force as war brides.

We could just as easily use a neoreaction-inspired term, and call the incelocalyptic event the Restoration. A Restoration is when a monarchy is brought back to power. Since patriarchy is just monarchy on a familial scale, all we are really doing is restoring men to their rightful position as kings of their households.

When I look at politics, I see no signs that there's going to be a switch back to patriarchy through the electoral process. We've gotten to the point where even the cuckservatives who timidly put some pro-family idea out there (e.g. "maybe we wouldn't have so many school shootings if there weren't so many boys being raised by single moms") get shamed. They can't even talk about specific proposals for reducing the number of single moms, since all the workable ideas would involve giving men authority over foids. Even the third parties, like the Libertarian Party, are a bunch of bluepilled cucks when it comes to relations between the sexes, despite the fact that they hardly ever win elections and therefore have little to lose.

Moreover, there are no signs that the trend toward doubling down on feminism is going to stop any time soon. On the contrary, in 2018, more foids have been nominated for Congress than ever before in history. This is going to be a self-perpetuating cycle, in which feminist policies lead to more female officeholders, who then enact more feminist policies, etc. They're going to be training the young foids to be "leaders" as well.

Eventually, the whole system will collapse under its own weight, because it's going to be impossible for any group of male dissidents to put a stop to the advance of feminism. Till the bitter end, they're all going to be frantically scrabbling for whatever pussy they can get (or think they can get), rather than wanting to stick their necks out and demand change. We never see men organize and protest in the streets for patriarchy, the way that foids do, because men don't create male-only spaces anymore that would be conducive for setting up a united front like that. It's foids who are always setting up "women's leadership programs" and other female-only groups, where they can freely plot against men.

Once foids are in charge of everything, even the state will stagnate and eventually collapse, just like what happens to every other big enterprise run by foids. The state will not be able to carry out its functions properly when so much of its energies are devoted to feel-good stuff like inclusivity codes of conduct and endless new measures against sexual harassment, designed to eliminate intelligent but unattractive men from the organization and better facilitate the alpha-fucks/beta-bucks feminine imperative. High-quality people will not be attracted to an organization like that, or allowed to remain in it.

Meanwhile, the demographic situation will continue to worsen. The fertility rate will continue to plunge, and humanity will retrogress to a more primitive state due to the dysgenic effect of feminist practices. Since this is unsustainable, it will have to end eventually. Maybe the bulk of mankind will regress to a subhuman state by the time of the final collapse, and it will be like the Planet of the Apes.

When you see historic events like foids gaining more power than they've ever had before, you should rejoice, because it means we're not standing still; we're making more progress toward the collapse and rebuilding. When the end of civilization does come, the new civilization will have to be built along patriarchist lines, because that is the fundamental human instinct and what we always go back to, whenever the state doesn't get in the way. The male wants to be dominant and the female wants to be submissive, so people will revert back to that when they have the opportunity.

Maybe the new order will also get corrupted by feminism and collapse, but hopefully in the meantime there will be a golden era that we can enjoy. The new society could very well be monarchical or otherwise undemocratic, since those types of systems seem to promote manliness more than democratic systems, which are arguably feminine in nature. Democracy is about diffusion of responsibility among the legislators, much like what foids do whenever anyone tries to hold them accountable.

The cool thing is, you don't necessarily have to do anything to make the incelocalypse happen. You just have to watch the signs of the impending collapse and at the appropriate time, make the preparations to survive and be in a good position to scoop up that jailbait pussy when it becomes available. Till then, it's mostly just a matter of LDAR'ing or whatever.

Now, am I just saying all this to try to cope with the fact that I can't be in politics anymore, and am unlikely to go ER? Maybe. But it seems like almost everyone else is the same way. Maybe as we get closer to the incelocalypse, and the state's grip on power begins to weaken, and perhaps the means of providing food and other necessities to the people begins to break down, there will be more ERs and Minassians. Like communism, feminism is an egalitarian system that has unlimited potential for fucking up both government and private industry, so I wouldn't rule out such possibilities.

Nathan "Leucosticte" Larson, incels.me 7 Comments [8/15/2018 7:34:16 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139814

(Note: Regarding an article of a Christian in a polymorous relationship - this comment is also part of a thread)

Andy Cain: And this is why there are no such thing as "Progressive Christians". They are all unwilling to follow the Word of God's clear teaching of hetrosexual monogamy to not only support homosexuality, but polymory as well.

Chad Hansley: And before you bring up David and Solomon's marriages, these two where clearly condemned for their other wives and conqubines. Everything went wrong for them because they practiced polygamy!

Andy Cain & Chad Hansley, Facebook 14 Comments [8/15/2018 7:33:51 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139812

he most significant thing about this story is not Bernier's gutsy comments, but the predictable reaction to them. The nauseating cant issuing from Scheer's spokesman Brock Harrison, and Michelle Rempel's tightrope walk over both sides of the fence was to be expected. Unless an organ donor steps forward to offer his brain, I can’t help Harrison. But I can help Rempel. If Michelle wants data to support the argument that ours is not a “functioning pluralism”, if she sincerely wants to learn about the costs of diversity, she only need to google Robert Putnam + Bob Birrell + a myriad of other studies related to theirs. Or if it would be more convenient, she can take a look at this or this or a comprehensive reference list like this.

There is even a University of Victora statistical study conducted in 2010, led by Zheng Wu, that found that many new immigrants feel comforted and protected by settling into ethnic neighbourhoods and that they are less apt to feel loyalty to Canada by doing so. Or as Wu put it, life in ethnic enclaves reduces immigrants' "sense of belonging to Canada." So voluminous is the data that even a casual perusal of it would lead any impartial researcher to assert that the onus of proof is clearly on those who promote diversity, rather than those who question its benefits. The game is over and the final score is Evolutionary psychology 1, Social Engineers 0.

As if we needed more proof, the “Bernier” incident reveals once again that the Conservatives are a a "Me Too" party. Liberals dressed in blue who share the all-party consensus that rapid immigration driven population growth and continuing ethnocultural fragmentation is self evidently good for the country. Rather than follow the Ford formula, rather than tap into the vast pool of disgusted non-voters, Scheer prefers to compete for the favour of the 5% swing voters in the middle because pundits tell him that this is the only way that a political party can win. Accordingly, he is desperate and determined to silence mavericks like Leitch, Belak and Bernier so that they can't provide Trudeau with the ammunition he needs to brand the Conservatives as party of bigots and extremists. In effect, Scheer and his coterie of strategists are allowing the CBC and the MSM to determine what kind of Conservative is fit to lead or speak for the Conservative Party.

Conservatives need to understand that the number of people who cast ballots in federal and provincial elections is not fixed. It is not a certainty that more than four in ten of registered voters will continue to stay home on election day. The only reason they do is that they understand that all the main parties are mere factions in a ONE PARTY state. They realize that parliament is a closed shop. And that as long as there are party whips, as long as there are virtually no free votes in the House, political parties will not feel obliged to listen to the feedback of their constituents. While it has become the fashion of politicians of all parties to hold "town hall" meetings in their constituencies, they do so only to give constituents the false impression that their views will be decisive in determining how their parliamentary "representative" will vote on any given issue.

Four in ten of us recognize this charade as a fraud, and we register our cynicism by abstention on election day. It is not about voter apathy, it's about voter rebellion. Some rebels spoil their ballots, some formally refuse them if they can, and some stay home. Instead of chasing after swing voters with a progressive mentality, instead of working within the closing Overton window of acceptable PC discourse, instead of conceding more and more ground to anti-Western cultural demolitionists, Conservatives should appeal to the rebels. They should think and campaign outside the box. They should weaponize the muzzled majority.

Here is some unsolicited advice to Tory strategists and convention delegates. If you want to know what leadership candidate to select — the candidate who has the best chance to win the next election— pick the candidate that the CBC and the MSM vilifies most, the one they say has no chance of winning, the one who would, they warn, lead the Conservative Party to oblivion or permanent marginalization. The one who dares to challenge the shibboleths of multiculturalism and immigration. The one whom they say does not represent "Canadian values".

That would be the candidate whose victory will send them into shock and horror and prove, once again, that the political class hasn't a goddamn clue about how the masses think, or any concept of what "values" guide them.

There is a reason why "outsiders" and "extremists" like Ford and Trump win. It is because they are not outsiders or extremists. They are "insiders". They dwell inside the world and thinking of ordinary people. The real outsiders live in bubbles. In newsrooms, broadcast studios, and ivory towers. And the real extremists are the ones who have pushed the extreme agenda of hyper-immigration, demographic displacement, quota hiring, transgender ideology, runaway political correctness, censorship, the criminalization of speech, and the conscription of tax payer dollars to subsidize those who lobby for this agenda — most particularly the radical ideologues in the CBC.

Progressives on both sides of the border contend that Trump's victory emboldened "haters" and "normalized" hate. But the truth is that haters have long been emboldened, and hate speech has long been the norm. The only reason that Leftists didn't notice it is that the hate was coming from their direction. It was looking at them in the mirror. Hating white people and Western civilization is quite the norm these days, and those who spew such hatred are rather bold about it, don't you think?

The sad thing about this affair is that Bernier's twitter comments are treated as controversial, instead of what they should be. A statement of the blatantly obvious.

Tim Murray, Eurocanadian 2 Comments [8/15/2018 5:32:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139811

The Genetic Similarity Theory claims that parents of mixed race kids love their offspring less than parents of monoracial children.
Of course it is taking place mostly on a subconscious level.

This is caused by fact that a mixed race child has a lower genetic similarity to either of his/her parents than a monoracial child.

An ethnically mixed child is autosomally less similar to his/her parent, than any random member of this parent's ethnic group.

"Perhaps the most important conceptual breakthrough in On Genetic Interests is to recognize that loyalty to one’s ethny — Dr. Salter prefers this term to race, nation, or ethnic group — is just as valid biologically as loyalty to one’s children. This is because each ethny is a storehouse of its members’ distinctive genes, just as children are carriers of their parents’ genes. A person’s children are very concentrated stores of his genes, but his ethny is a vastly larger, though more dilute, pool of the same genes. Given the size of most ethnies, they are repositories of far more copies of a member’s distinctive genes than even his own children, and therefore have a theoretical genetic claim to loyalty even greater than that of his children."[6]

Frank Salter, Metapedia 14 Comments [8/15/2018 5:29:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
1 2 3 4 5 9 | top