Aug 182012

I have been thinking a lot about the importance of male spaces.  There has been a feminist war on the existence of any and all male spaces based on the principle of if men are doing something, no matter what it is, without women, then they have to be stopped immediately.  This is also applies to predominantly male spaces like STEM employment, video games, “geek culture”, etc.  It’s no surprise that we have seen a feminist/female assault against these areas such as the constant blather about sexism in video games and Obama’s attempt to apply Title IX to STEM.  Whiskey has talked about how (female) Twilight fans (including the “Twi-moms”) took over Comic Con and ruined it.

We are running out of male spaces.  The feminization of game is being attempted.  There have been several attempts to turn the MRM into being all about women.  (The most recent attempt was the LadyMRAs reddit which was supposedly about women helping the MRM ended up exposing its real agenda when they became rabidly insane against MGTOW.)  The only real space that has managed to completely resist and fight off feminization and feminist invasion is MGTOW.  At least one reason for this is because women in general see the MGTOW as hostile to women (regardless of what men in the MGTOW space are actually doing).

Knowing that MGTOW has been the only male space to resist feminization and feminist invasion because it is (de facto) hostile to women, then is the only way to preserve male spaces by making them hostile to women?  8ball commenting at SWAB’s blog thinks that this could be the case:

I’m starting to wonder if it’s even possible to have a male-only space that isn’t hostile to women. And contrary to popular belief, this isn’t because I think any gathering of men will inherently turn misogynistic, rather the opposite.

Any space that isn’t completely alienating to women will eventually be …. “invaded” (for lack of a better term) by women, who will then insist that it conform to their sensibilities. Look at Geek culture for example.

You can see this happening in places like The Good Men Project. Most of their readers are women, a good percentage of their articles are not even remotely about men, and another significant percentage are about how men’s lives affect women. And even when the article is about men… often it is written by a woman.

I’m not sure how good of an example The Good Mangina Project is since it was started by male feminist men, but in thinking about it, 8ball has a point that even The Good Mangina Project now has a much higher percentage of women authors and women commenting and less articles even tangentially relevant to men than when they started.  In a way, this does show that male spaces have to be hostile to women to defend against feminization and feminist invasion.  While The Good Mangina Project didn’t start out as a true male space, it shows that any space that is feminized will become more feminized over time.

I’m certainly willing to listen to ideas on how to protect male spaces without making them completely hostile and alienating to women, but at this point, I can’t see any other solution to protecting male spaces.

Aug 112012

This week the NASA landed the curiosity rover on Mars. Forbes magazine decided to ignore most of the people who made this historic achievement happen, namely men, in favor of congratulating the few women involved.  The male scientists and engineers who made this happen and did all of the real work are being ignored in favor of women who are doing “important” tasks like providing a twitter feed of the rover.  (If the government was serious about saving money, it could start by having the curiosity rover could easily do its own tweeting without a “social media team” on Earth.)

What would happen if you reversed the ratio of men to women involved with the curiosity rover?  Would the men get any congratulations?  Of course not, but that is a trick question.  If the ratio of men to women was reversed, there would be no curiosity rover.  Instead there would just be a lot of tweets about it.

Aug 062012

I found this article about how “girl power” is producing Android apps.  Apparently, there was something called the Technovation Challenge for high school students where various teams were competing for prizes by producing Android apps.  Only high school girls were allowed to participate.  Here is an excerpt from the article of what it is all about.

Some of the mentors had worked closely with the finalists, eight of whom came from the Bay Area. And for 10 weeks, women in computer sciences, programming and even venture capital volunteered their time and expertise to help the girls build self-esteem while they fine-tuned their concepts. The point of it all is girl power, said Tara Chklovski. She’s founder of Iridescent, the science education nonprofit that runs the Technovation Challenge, now in its third year and growing fast.

Did all of this self esteem building produce Earth shattering apps that will change the world?  Clearly not as one of the apps the article brags about is called “Simply U”, and it is an app to prevent teenage pregnancy.  If that app works all it needs to do is display a message saying, “keep your legs closed”.

After reading about that app, I knew that my career as a software developer was completely safe (barring government mandates to employ these girls).  “Girl power” software development isn’t going to be able to compete in the real world.

Jul 302012

In my last post about sex bots and VR sex, there was some talk about how governments might start banning internet porn.  That might be something that various governments try to do although I doubt such laws will pass.  Even if such laws do pass, there are still plenty of ways around it.  For example, porn servers could be located offshore.  Not all countries would ban internet porn.  Even if governments tried to ban porn server IP addresses, there are tools to get around them like proxy servers and TOR.

If you want an example of how porn servers would survive when a government bans them, take a look at The Pirate Bay which still survives despite all of the legal challenges against it.

With better and better 3D graphics, it will be possible soon to create porn on your computer that looks completely realistic.  It won’t matter if you can’t download internet porn.  You will be able to create your own porn on your own computer.  This is what will eventually become VR sex.  Technology in general in moving to an area where you can create things yourself bypass any laws that might exist in the process.  Recently, a gunsmith was able to build a gun using parts created by a 3D printer.  One of those parts was the lower receiver of the gun which is the legally controlled part.  With a 3D printer, anyone will be able to create guns without a license bypassing any laws that might stand in the way in the process.  There is going to be no stopping this since governments aren’t going to be able to ban 3D printers.  There is just too much money behind them and too many businesses who want to use them to reduce manufacturing costs.

It’s similar with porn and VR sex.  The movie and TV industry wants to be able to computer generate photo realistic movies and TV programs.  The video game industry wants to create photo realistic video games.  Both of them need virtual humans indistinguishable from real humans to do this.  Those industries will spend the billions of dollars required to get there.  They already have spent billions of dollars on this just to get us to the point we’re at now with computer generated TV and movies and video games.  Like how the government isn’t going to piss off industries with many billions of dollars behind them to ban 3D printers because they can be used to make guns, the government isn’t going to piss off the the movie/TV industry and the video game industry just to be able to ban porn.

These technologies are coming and in the end, government isn’t going to be able to stand in the way.

Jul 202012

Roissy had another post on sexbots, and it is clear that the opposition to sexbots (and by extension VR sex and related technologies) is getting desperate.  There are links to sites that make false claims like porn causes erectile dysfunction and attempts to link sexbots to pedophilia.  Those things don’t beat the attempt to claim that sexbots will never exist because it’s impossible to replicate a woman:

I think it’s improbable that sex robots will be a satisfactory sexual surrogate for women. All the minor discrepancies between a sexbot and a woman – such as skin texture, movement, and smells – will be perceived by the male brain. This will ruin the fantasy. Even if scientists manage to produce a carbon copy of a very beautiful female, the knowledge it is not real will spoil the experience.

The senses and the dick have been working in unison for many centuries, and they’ll figure out soon enough that there aren’t any eggs in there.

If this was true, no guy would be looking at porn because porn is obviously not interaction with a real woman.  Plus, for a lot of women, there aren’t any eggs in there now in any meaningful sense between contraception and STDs, but that doesn’t stop anything.  In a post about sexbots being porn raised to the 100th power, this comment is refutes itself.  Later the guy who wrote this comment admits that his idea that guys aren’t going to want something that doesn’t exactly replicate a woman is just a belief, and he has done no research into the subject.

The myth that porn causes ED gets expanded on elsewhere:

Eh, but remember: After a certain point in the cycle of porn/sexbot addiction, erectile dysfunction sets in.

So the question is: What will men do when they find they can’t get it up any more? It’s pretty hard…uh, that is to say, it’s pretty *difficult* to continue getting sexual dopamine fixes from porn and sexbots when, for the life of you, no matter what you try, you can’t get out of limp mode.

I grant that this mostly happens with real women in the early stages, even the best porn produces this effect eventually.

This, after all, is the reason for the (now well-documented) escalation cycle. When a guy can’t get hard from Playboy any longer, he tries hardcore; when that stops working, he tries younger or older or gayer or trashier. The neurochemistry is straightforward: When sheer sexiness is no longer powerful enough to make an impression on one’s desensitized neural pathways, a combination of other sharp sensations (distaste, disgust, fear, hatred, aggression) can temporarily provide the necessary stimulus-boost to stab one’s insensate nerves out of slumber.

The stories at YourBrainOnPorn pretty well show the trajectory: If he doesn’t come to his senses, before long your average nice cornfed Iowa boy, your kind and polite Sunday School graduate, is archiving rape fantasies and bondage fantasies and that weird Japanese stuff with the tentacles and the girls with dicks. It’s a five-year process for some and a fifty-year process for others, but the human body works the way it works, and there comes a point when no more hair of the dog is available and it’s time to sober up. (Sorry for the mixed metaphor but you get the idea.)

If any of this were true, regular old sex with women would cause the same problem for the same reason.  Since it doesn’t, porn doesn’t either.

All of this shows us that many people can’t handle the changes that are going to come with technologies like sexbots (and VR sex which will be here long before sexbots get here).  Expect to find people getting more desperate and promoting more absurd reasons why these technologies are eeeevil.  The problem is that they have invested too much in the idea that women are unique snowflake fertility/sexual goddesses.

The comments to Roissy’s post weren’t all bad.  Here is an interesting one:

Be an alpha. Have a threesome with the girl and the sexbot.

Jul 142012

This week was the 50th anniversary of the first broadcast from Telstar, the first commercial satellite in orbit.  This was the beginning of all the satellite communications technologies from satellite phones to GPS that we use today.  It’s also an example of some of the things that men do such as solve problems and advance technology.

Telstar was built in an era when there weren’t any government imposed roadblocks to men getting involved with science and engineering.  The men who produced Telstar didn’t have to worry about leftists like Obama using Title IX to impose quotas to limit the number of men who can get science and engineering education and bragging about how fewer men than women get college educations.

Obama has said “Title IX isn’t just about sports,” but also “inequality in math and science education” and “a much broader range of fields, including engineering and technology.  I’ve said that women will shape the destiny of this country, and I mean it.”  Women shaping the destiny of the US in science and engineering means that less science and engineering will happen in the US.  Science, engineering, and technological advancement will more and more happen elsewhere or not happen at all.  I don’t know what the next Telstar will be, but whatever it is, it will be created outside the US (and the West) or not be created at all.

This should not surprise anyone.  Feminists have called Issac Newton’s Principia Mathematica, a rape manual.  That shows how much feminists care about expanding the body of human knowledge.  In other words, they don’t and effectively want us to return to the stone age.  The future will always be developed by men, and if you want a future where people are doing something more than living in caves, feminism must die.

Jun 062011

I found this comment at Roissy’s (thanks to namae namka linking to this blog in another comment):

“Why the difference? *Women are reproductively more valuable than men*.”

I wonder how true this is today though. Clearly in today’s world the need for reproduction is very different than before (no need for more hands on the farm, etc.); and, for certain segments of the population society would probably benefit from their non-reproduction.

In fact, I think the obvious gender-wide frustration of women today can partly be explained by this lowered value of children/reproduction altogether. Women understand that their primary purpose will always be tied up with reproduction and not civilization-altering achievement; now that this purpose has been largely removed, what do they have left? Female claims of males becoming increasingly ‘redundant’ are classic cases of projection: men are as useful as ever, whereas women’s role as child-bearer is rapidly becoming unnecessary and in many cases even harmful.

How much longer will women maintain these privileges after reproduction gas little place in society?

Plus, the older privileges were predicated on women’s willingness to become mothers at a young age to bear healthy children for tribe; how many of today’s women fit this description? If you don’t measure up to the job, you shouldn’t get the benefits…

The bold was added by me.  Namae namka responded to that part with a link to my post on feminist paranoia about artificial wombs and other reproductive technologies and with good reason.  Before even our current level of technology, women were in complete and total control of reproduction.  Women could get knocked up by one guy and claim another guy is the dad and there was no way of knowing what the truth was.  First came increased scientific knowledge about reproduction.  Before that the process of reproduction would have been considered to be almost magical given women room to exercise total control.  This lessened women’s control over reproduction.  In the 20th century came paternity testing so men could know without a doubt who a child’s father is.  Now women have no room to hide except that the law allows for paternity fraud.  Eventually we will have artificial wombs which will allow men to have children without women if they so choose.  The artificial womb represents control of reproduction being wrestled away from women.  This is a pretty direct progression of how women become less and less necessary in reproduction.

However, there are other angles to what is going on here.  One thing technology has done is allow more babies to survive birth and survive childhood.  Before modern medicine if you wanted 2 or 3 children to survive to adulthood you probably would have to have six or more babies.  Having that many babies was the only way to be sure to enough survived to adulthood.  This is still the case in many places.  If you know that to have 2 or 3 children survive to adulthood, you only need to have 2 or 3 babies, then that’s a lot less time spent on reproduction (and associated child rearing).  And we don’t need to breed more hands to work on the farm either.  This is another angle of how women are less necessary for reproduction.

Knowing this the socon and tradcon call for large families becomes a form of white knighting for women.  Having only 2 or 3 kids nowadays leaves a lot of time before and after children.  What are women doing then?  (Sending women to work is obviously not an answer as the last few decades have shown us.)  Large families are the socon/tradcon attempt to (unconsciously) paper over this problem.

The last part of the comment that I bolded says that women’s role as child bearer in many cases is becoming harmful.  This is obviously true.  All the pathologies caused by single mothers do not need to be repeated here.  Beyond single motherhood take a look at younger women in their 20s.  How many of them would you really trust to be mothers even if divorce wasn’t an issue?  Take a look at the current crop of teenage girls, and it’s clear they will be even worse for motherhood than women currently in their 20s.  Don’t forget all the misandry that these women carry which will have a negative impact on any sons you might have with them.  I have taken flak for talking about alternatives for men to have children such as artificial wombs in the future and surrogate mothers in places like the Rotunda clinic in India.  All things being equal the two parent family is probably better for raising children, but all things are not equal.  Because of divorce the two parent family can become single motherhood at the drop of a hat.  Single fatherhood from the beginning is better than that.  Even without divorce women are increasingly unqualified to be mothers. Consult only the best Scottsdale AZ lawyer for child custody cases in the event a divorce does take place. And if you have sons you will be introducing misandry to them in your home.  We are getting to a point where single fatherhood may be the superior system of raising children, especially when it comes to raising sons.

May 242011

The University Of Cincinnati is likely to not be the only university getting rid of its computer science major. Western Washington University is considering getting rid of its computer science department too. Of course, departments that are actually useless like womens studies are not on the chopping block.  Add Western Washington University to the list of universities that will be as dead as Antioch College soon for embracing leftism and feminism over real knowledge and learning.

May 152011

A clarification might be needed about my last post.  When that fruitcake Warren said that there were government (or NWO or Illuminati) agents in the MRM, it wasn’t about government agents that are here to destabilize the MRM and destroy it.  (While I sure that the idea that government agents would infiltrate the MRM to destroy it has been advanced in the past, that wasn’t what was Warren talking about.)  What he was talking about was closer to the idea that the NWO creates a “fake NWO” for people to attack.  The “real NWO” embeds itself in the “resistance” to the fake NWO so when the fake NWO is defeated, the “real NWO” is ruling everything by default.  Here is an example of a proponent of that theory talking about it.

Feminism fits into this theory as being part of the “fake NWO”.  That means that according to this theory the MRM has been infiltrated by the NWO, and the MRM defeating feminism is part of the “NWO plan”.  Effectively this becomes a defense of feminism, and there is a good example of this from the David Icke Forums: (There is a picture at this link that may be NSFW.)

That IS very disturbing indeed. Also ridiculous, because the elite actually want to destroy women, not men, so they can build the homosexual utopia where men can reproduce without the use of women. As the late Andrea Dworkin said: “As soon as men [this being the NWO] have figured out how to have babies without women, it will be the end of women kind, it will be the coming gynocide.”

This image is a distraction, the elite projecting unwarranted powers onto those they plan to destroy. It will be piles of dead women in the street, with “men” (the NWO) being the post-sexual cyborgs with artificial wombs.

As the MRM becomes more well known and starts having more successes against feminism, expect more misandrist conspiracy theories like this.

Apr 082011

I haven’t talked about the male birth control pill that much.  That’s because I don’t see much progress happening with it in the near term.  Unlike something such as VR sex, the male pill is a very discrete concept and easy to legally ban.  VR sex will be impossible to ban without banning video games in general and there are too many corporations making many billions of dollars to allow it to become illegal.  The male pill will also be like porn where both feminists and socons/tradcons will be against it.

Sooner or later we will have a male pill.  It’s a fool’s errand to try to stand in the path of human progress even if you’re successful for a while.  In theory the effects of a male pill would be massive.  Expect birth rates to fall like a rock even more than they have in the last several decades.  I suspect that the male pill won’t cause a dramatic drop as we would expect because VR sex and other technologies would have already taken a bite out of the fertility rate.

I doubt a male pill will increase promiscuity.  The limiting factors for men having sex aren’t based on women getting pregnant.  Where it will have an effect is preventing “oops” pregnancies.  A man on the male pill knows that if his woman has an oops pregnancy, she has been cheating on him.  This is why the male pill will be opposed by both feminists and socons/tradcons.  Feminists won’t want men to easily be able to get out of being entrapped by women and paying child support for children that are not theirs.  Socons and tradcons will be against the male pill for similar reasons plus they’re paranoid about not having enough babies.  Plenty of marriages happen right now because of an “oops” or unintentional pregnancy.  Without that even more men will never bother getting married (at least not without marriage becoming a proposition that is beneficial to men).  Expect more sermons in churches about how men are not manning up and getting married and having kids.

I suspect you will see some women desperate for babies end up like the following video:

Knowing that such things like in the video will happen, single mothers will have even lower SMV than they do now.  Without being able to find out who the father of a baby is in such a case because there are too many possible guys, who will get stuck with the child support bill?  Any guy that comes after and is around long enough to have a “paternal relationship” with the child.  The best way to avoid that will be to avoid single mothers altogether.

Those men who want kids will really be in the driver’s seat because they will be able to dictate where and when they have children.  Regardless it’s going to be a while before we see a male pill.  I suspect technologies like VR sex will show up first and the male pill will get somewhat overshadowed by them.

Mar 112011

In my last post, Herbal Essence and I were talking about reasons why guys our age get married.  The reasons are really about oops pregnancies, desperation and loneliness, and pressure from their girlfriends and families.  I realized there’s another reason to add to the list, freaking out from minor health issues.  Imagine someone my age or a bit younger.  He’s been healthy all his life so he hasn’t had much in the way of health problems.  Then the first health problem happens.  It’s not worse than say appendicitis.  However, this is this man’s first experience with surgery.  While it’s not a big deal as health problems go, but it’s the first health problem for this man.  It’s a shock.  It makes him feel his age and his eventual mortality.  He might start thinking about what happens to him when he’s older and the thought of having dementia in a nursing home with no one to check up on him scares him.  Out of fear he rushes to find a wife so he can have some kids who will look after him when he’s older.

Of course this can and does happen a lot to older men as well, but Herbal Essence were talking about guys our age.  Whether we’re talking about guys my age or older guys, the problem is the same.  A man feels his age for whatever reason and starts getting worried what will happen when he gets old.  Invariably the answer involves kids to take care of you or keeps tabs on you.  Because he wants to raise the kids right he has to get married (places like the Rotunda clinic in India notwithstanding).  Will this work?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Nursing homes are filled with people who were dumped there by their kids who never check up on them.  If you get divorced you will be right back where you started if you don’t have kids.  If you do good luck since your now ex-wife is guaranteed to get full custody of them.  If you try marrying a single mother later in life do you really think her kids are going to care about you when you get older?  They will be gone. (Scott Adams is going to learn this the hard way.)

Knowing this it becomes clear that kids are no guarantee of help when you get old.  Since most actions of “I’m getting old so I need to get married and have kids” are based on fear, a logical argument like the one I wrote in the paragraph above will do little good for most men.  This is why anti-aging technology is important.  When I talk about anti-aging technology, I’m talking about real technology, not snake oil nor stuff that makes you look younger but doesn’t stop aging (like plastic surgery).  I’m talking about technology that could potentially let you live for centuries or even indefinitely with the body of a 30 year old (although I’m sure there are limits to what it can do).  (Some good websites for learning for about anti-aging technology research are the Methuselah Foundation and the SENS Foundation.)

How many men are getting married now because they’re worried what will happen to them when they’re old? Quite a few I bet and that includes men who know marriage is a bad idea. Anti-aging technology removes this problem because when you get old, you’re body won’t be old. Even if it does nothing but keep you in the body of a 30 year old until you drop dead at 120, it removes the problem since you no longer have to worry about being old, frail, and having dementia.

When anti-aging technology arrives, it’s going to kill one of the last remaining reasons men have for getting married.

Feb 142011

Often we hear complaints about men playing video games, looking at porn, or masturbating or any number of other things.  The complaints will have the usual shaming language, that men are immature, claims that masturbation is a sin (despite the Bible never saying that) etc.  What do things like video games, porn, masturbating, etc. have in common?  For the most part they don’t involve women.  Sure there are women who play video games and there is mutual masturbation and women look at porn too but none of these things NEED a woman.  This is the real reason for the complaints against video games, porn, masturbation, etc.

Anytime men start doing something that doesn’t involve women directly there will be women and manginas both feminist and not screaming, “STOP THOSE MEN!!!!!!!” Anything men do by themselves either individually or with other men only is a threat to female supremacism.  To female supremacists both of the feminist and non-feminist variety you are supposed to be slaving away all the time for a woman or women in general.  You are supposed to make stupid financial decisions like buying overpriced houses for women and pay for rugrats that may not even be yours.  You are supposed to save away so that a woman can take your hard earned assets via divorce or other means instead of buying the occasional video game and saving your money for yourself.

Trying to get men to not play video games, look at porn, masturbate, etc. is a lot like the feminist campaign against male only clubs and organizations.  Feminists couldn’t stand individual men doing something for themselves or gathering with other men only to do something that had nothing to do with women.  Something this basic regardless what these men were doing was a threat to feminism.  Since a lot of the complaints against video games, porn, and masturbation come from conservative female supremacists this provides another example how (supposedly) anti-feminist women are really feminist.

Various people have said that VR (virtual reality) sex and (later) sex bots won’t have any effect and that men won’t go for them.  If video games, porn, and masturbation are such threats to female supremacism (particularly considering that video games are in no way intended to be a woman replacement) then there is no way that VR sex and sexbots won’t have a negative effect on all forms of female supremacism.

Feb 092011

Those of you familiar with transhumanism have most likely noticed how many of my ideas are transhumanist.  I have said at least a couple of times that despite this, I do not call myself or consider myself a transhumanist.  The reason for this is that the extra baggage that comes along with it, namely the leftist ideology that lots of transhumanists believe in.  The Antifeminist had a Dialog With A Transhumanist that demonstrates this problem. Too many transhumanists are enamored with leftist ideology, feminism in particular.  The good news is that most of these transhumanists are idle prognosticators so they will not be actually developing any technology and can’t develop towards feminist ends.  Despite that, I can’t call myself a transhumanist because while they may not influence technology, they have influenced what is called “transhumanism”.

Oct 232010

I know FB has asked us to stop paying attention to manboobz but I have a point.  Manboobz decided to comment on my last post completely missing the point. (And he managed to do it very quickly.  I would assume that he had some sore of government-feminist job except that he’s still a guy and a ninth class citizen under feminism regardless of his views.)  Manboobz said at the end about my prediction of an anti-feminist Stuxnet:

Well, that’s one way to win the war of ideas.

To manboobz feminism vs. mens rights is some sort of debating and mental masturbation society.  Manboobz has does not truly grasp the destruction feminism has caused in men’s lives.  To someone like manboobz its all an academic argument or at most is about getting laid.  (This is a problem shared by others such as Susan Walsh.)

Men are sitting in jail for crimes they did not commit because of feminism.  Men have had their children taken away from them because of feminism.  Men are paying child support to children that aren’t theirs (paternity fraud) because of feminism.  Men have had their lives destroyed by divorces forced on them because of feminism.  Men have had their jobs destroyed because of feminism and a hostile feminist government. Men are losing their freedom because of feminism.  Men have been murdered because of feminism.

All of these things show us how this is not a “war of ideas”.  This is why I talked about how there will probably be an anti-feminist Stuxnet in the future.  Manboobz focused on how I said the worm would take down feminist blogs and websites.  That would be at best a secondary goal (and more difficult than its primary goal).  The primary goal would be taking down the computers and networks of feminist groups influencing the government to destroy men (i.e. NOW) and various organizations and government agencies that exist to destroy men.  Men my age and younger have seen how their fathers, brothers, uncles, grandfathers, male friends, male business associates, etc. have been destroyed my feminism if it has not already happened to us.  We have been forced to sit through (attempted) feminist indoctrination at public (and even private) schools.  To many men this ceased to be a “war of ideas” a long time ago and is one step away from being an actual shooting war.  This isn’t a war men are planning to start.  It’s a war that was already declared on men, and the only question is when groups of men will still fighting back in such a direct manner.  In such a situation where it’s a war or almost one, new and interesting weapons to fight feminism will be created.

The Stuxnet worm has provided an example of how malware can attack specific targets.  Instead of nuclear reactors the same principles can be used to create a worm that attacks feminist organizations and feminist created government agencies that destroy men.  The men who write this malware will not be concerned with silencing feminists as if they were anti-free speech.  They will be concerned with taking down the array of groups who are currently successfully destroying men.

Oct 202010

There are many computer viruses and worms out there.  Stuxnet is an evolution of the computer worm in a sense.  It’s the first worm to spy on and reprogram industrial systems.  Stuxnet does this by attacking Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems used to control and monitor industrial processes and reprogramming Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs).  It’s possibly the first worm to have a specific target which is believed to be the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.  It’s believed that only a country could have produced it.  This is likely if for no other reason that it would be next to impossible to find a malware programmer with knowledge of SCADA systems.

A future Stuxnet will not need to be created by a country since the conceptual knowledge (at least) is out there now.  Plus, the target of a future Stuxnet may not need specialized knowledge of systems like SCADA.  Imagine what an anti-feminist Stuxnet would do.  It would specifically target computers belonging to NOW (the National Organization of Women) and other women’s groups, child support agencies, family/divorce courts, women’s studies departments at universities, etc.  Perhaps it could target something as specific as feminist websites and blogs (although for maximum effectiveness that would require advancements in natural language processing and machine learning that will not happen in the near term).

Critical systems like the Bushehr nuclear reactor are much better protected than the computer systems and networks feminists use.  Truly critical systems are not even put on the internet.  That is not the case with most of the computers that an anti-feminist Stuxnet will target.  An anti-feminist Stuxnet would be much easier to create.  Unless it seriously wants to attack databases, an anti-feminist Stuxnet does not require even a minimum of specialized knowledge besides being able to identify its target systems.  Creating an anti-feminist Stuxnet will be within the skills of at least a significant fraction of malware programmers (if not most or all).  This means that in the near future there probably will be an anti-feminist Stuxnet.

Sep 202010

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

Recently, Christine O’Donnell, a candidate associated with the Tea Party, won the Republican Senate primary in Delaware who among many other things sued a former employer for “gender discrimination” claiming that she suffered “mental anguish”.  What O’Donnell is also known for is her views on sex particularly her anti-masturbation views.  O’Donnell appeared on MTV back in the 90’s explaining her views of sex and masturbation which is available here on youtube.

Watch the youtube video and take note of the end.  Except for a token guy, it’s a group of women.  O’Donnell even says about her presumably future husband masturbating, “If he already knows what pleases him, and he can please himself, then why am I in the picture?”  This quote exposes the undercurrent behind anti-masturbation attitudes.  It’s not so much anti-masturbation but anti men masturbating.  People against masturbation have a fear that men might actually have an alternative to women.  The answer to O’Donnell’s question should be obvious.  A woman would ideally be providing more than a man’s hand both sexually and not.  When it comes to a woman who can’t/won’t contribute to a relationship non-sexually (a growing group of women particularly among younger women), and is planning on trying to control a man through providing a minimum of sex, then she has a lot to worry about when it comes to men realizing that their hand will do more for them than a woman will.  The obvious answer to this is for women not to be harpy that withholds sex as a means of controlling men but that answer will not be used by women.  Instead we will see more anti-male masturbation shaming language.

For anti-masturbation shaming language, the Bible is used as a justification.  However, anything about masturbation does not appear in the Bible.  What is used is the story of Onan.  This has a serious problem as a Biblical statement against masturbation.  In the story Onan never actually masturbated.  What happened in the story was that God ordered Onan to impregnate his dead brother’s wife, Tamar.  Onan disobeyed God by pulling out during sex so he would keep having sex with Tamar.  This has nothing to do with masturbation but disobeying God under a very specific set of circumstances.  Nothing in the story even casually references masturbation.

Anti-male masturbation shaming language is not limited to religious conservatives.  When women use vibrators they are praised for taking control of their sexuality.  When a man uses a fleshlight he is attacked for being a loser who can’t get laid.  This is very similar to the anti-male masturbation shaming language used by religious conservatives.  Both groups are worried that men may not be sexually dependent on women.  That is what they are really afraid of.  Masturbation by men, fleshlights, and futuristic technologies like VR sex and sexbots are all attacked because they have to potential to give men more options when it comes to sex.  Anything that even temporarily can replace an actual woman’s vagina is or will be the subject of shaming language.

As more sex technologies become available for men in the future there will be more anti-male masturbation shaming language.  Some will be religiously based.  Medical myths such as masturbation giving a man hairy palms will likely make a reappearance.  None of it will be rooted in medical facts, and they will claim that this is only limited to men.  Whatever the method of shaming language, it’s all for the same reason, to protect the pussy cartel from competition.

Jul 012010

I got a strange and silly comment to my previous post about why we need transhumanism:

It worries me to see transhumanism invoked to bolster male supremacy. My own project has exactly the opposite focus. I wish your anti-feminist agenda the worst of luck.

I took a look at her website.  She wrote this post about mine (when she’s not worrying about how the patriarchy is going to use brain scans to read her mind):

That’s what some men’s rights activists are angling for. Combined with the male-supremacist piece that Valkyrie Ice let me know about, it’s enough to make me worried. For transhumanism to have any hope of effecting positive change, it’s got to be pro-feminist. We’re talking about a global human rights crisis here, folks.

The “male supremacist piece” that she refers to is The Misandry Bubble.  Two random guys on the internet, other MRAs and myself, have her “worried”.  Maybe its because she convinced herself of something as crazy as the idea that other MRAs and I can cause a “global human rights crisis” all by ourselves.

I did a little more looking around that blog and came up with this comment from that Valkyrie Ice:

Don’t know if you read it, but I was violently offended by a post made back in Jan. It was titled the “The Misandry Bubble”


This comment was written a week ago.  The Misandry Bubble is was posted in January.  This sounds like that woman from last year who kept getting “rage blackouts” from my science fiction post.

It gets even “better” with this guy:

I’ve been pretty strongly dissatisfied with the suboptimal ethicality of my heterosexuality for as long as I can remember (as opposed to a more inclusive, less visually locked pan/bi)

He also says:

I was raised in an obsessive socialist-feminist bubble ridiculously disconnected from the outside world (absolutely no tv, magazines, leaving the school environment, etc), yet I strongly triggered on a certain range of thin female forms the moment I hit puberty and it certainly wasn’t reflective of something like how they carried themselves.

If you ever needed proof that socialism and feminism cause mental illness, here it is.  This guy is filled with self-hate and self-loathing.

We really have nothing to worry about from people like these.  It’s like all of the articles about how “men are obsolete”.  Whether its these lunatics or the authors of the “men are obsolete” pieces none of them are doing any real work to advance technology.  They’re writing blogs and magazine articles instead of being scientists and engineers.  All they can do is complain how the “scientific establishment” disagrees with them or complain about sex bots.

Jun 252010

A commenter recently said (in response to how murder suspect Joran Van Der Sloot is getting massive pile of marriage offers):

That is why we need transhumanism.

When women reward serial killers far ahead of, say, engineers, women are the obstacle to civilizational advancement.

Sure, NAWALT. But that there are even some women who put gina tingles ahead of their own safety (let alone the safety of others) casts serious doubts about their fitness to make decisions.

I don’t like talking about “transhumanism” because it has some philosophical baggage I’m against but a lot of my ideas about using technology to liberate men are “transhumanist”.  The commenter is right that women are the obstacle to civilizational advancement but the problem is worse than that.  Women are threatening the foundations of civilization.  This is why we need technology to buttress the foundation of civilization, anti-aging technology, artificial wombs, sex bots, VR sex, considerably more advanced genetic engineering, etc.  All of it will help.

If you still don’t believe this, just consider the effect of paternity testing and where we would be without that technology.

Apr 092010

If you need a refresher course on the internet, watch this video:

Steve Jobs doesn’t understand the internet.  Someone asked him a question at an event for the latest version of the iPhone operating system:

What about running unsigned apps?

This was in reference to how Apple is in the process of locking down everything they control.  Steve Jobs’ response was:

You know, there’s a porn store for Android. Anyone can download them. You can, your kids can. That’s just not a place we want to go.

Not only did Steve Jobs completely avoid the question he was asked, he also fails to understand the internet.

Mar 312010

Today is an important day.  It’s the 15th anniversary of when Microsoft Bob went on sale.  Some of you may not be old enough to remember Microsoft Bob.  It was supposed to produce a “non-technical interface” to MS Windows.  In reality because synonymous with complete and total failure because it was a total flop.  The project was led by Melinda French who you know better as Melinda Gates, Bill Gates’s wife.  You could look at this as a bizarre form of bailing out a woman.

Despite being a total failure, Bob stayed around in Microsoft software.  The annoying paperclip, Clippy, that used to be in MS Office several versions  ago is a direct descendant of Bob and a total failure as well.  In fact it wasn’t until Vista that Bob was completely eliminated from all Microsoft software.

Go out and be happy you aren’t using Bob.

Feb 252010

I already told you why Apple is the SWPL computer company.  Here’s another reason.  The COO of Apple said, “the iPad’s maxipad’s magical properties will seal the deal…When they play with the iPad maxipad and experience the magic of using it … I have a hard time believing they’re going to go for a netbook.” Yes, a corporate officer of Apple is claiming that the iPad maxipad will succeed by “magic”, not by features or price, but by magic.  (I suppose Steve Jobs’s reality distortion field might fit the bill of “magic”.)

I found this comment in response to that statement:

Well, you see, with the iPad, there is:

No keyboard.
It’s more expensive than an introductory laptop
Has lousy processing and RAM compared to same
Made of low quality parts.
The OS sucks on small screens


It’s from Apple, therefore, all those points are either irrelevant or actually features. You see, it is not the actual hardware or software quality that makes an Apple an Apple. It’s the brand. No other brand produces nearly the same sense of smug satisfaction and gloating superiority. Besides owning a large truck that is never used for hauling or off road sporting, nothing says “I have a small penis” like owning something from Apple.

Feb 162010

By now (especially if you have a GMail account) you have already heard of Google Buzz.  As a minor aside if you wish to turn off buzz in your GMail scroll down to the bottom when logged into GMail and there is a link to turn off Buzz.  Needless to say there have been some privacy concerns with Google Buzz.  I’m not surprised.  At the same time Google Buzz came out, there was an update for Google Maps on my phone which included a layer for viewing Google Buzz.  Each buzz was geolocated.  Many buzzes also had addresses with them.

I’m all for Google making Buzz more private, but you have to have some responsibility for maintaining privacy if you wish it.  Intentionally broadcasting your location (especially with an address) gives you no right to complain about privacy.  It’s like those idiots who put up photos of themselves engaging in underage drinking, using drugs, etc. on to Myspace or Facebook, and then complain when there are consequences such as losing their jobs.  Here’s an idea.  Don’t post photos of yourself doing questionable things for public consumption.  This reminds me of a Monty Python sketch, “How Not To Be Seen”:

Notice what happens to the first two people.  All of their work at not being seen was for naught since they chose to stand up and make themselves visible.  The third guy realized that if you want not be seen, you don’t let yourself be seen.

It’s the same with privacy.  Privacy advocates will correctly point out that everyone should have privacy available to them.  They will use examples such as taking a dump which everyone does, but does not want to be visible to the outside world.  However, this leaves out something, namely that if you decided to take a dump in the middle of Times Square you have no right to complain about not having privacy (as well as no right to complain about not getting arrested).  Privacy with social networking sites operates on similar principles.

Feb 132010

Steve Jobs iPad Koolaid

Here is paradise, you will find no hardware from Apple.  There are no macs, no ipods, no iphones or any other Apple hardware in paradise.  If you own any Apple hardware, you are not in paradise.

You should know by now that Apple is the SWPL (Stuff White People Like) computer producer.  It’s number 40 on the Stuff White People Like list.  Just look at the picture of Steve Jobs with the new ipad maxipad above on the left.  (Don’t ask me if I think the maxipad will do well.  I don’t make predictions based on a man with his own reality distortion field.)  He is wearing one of the SWPL uniforms.  In addition to being very SWPL, Macs are now very female (which is connected to their SWPLness) at least according to fellow Spearhead contributor Whiskey:

Finally, Apple stores. They used to be (2001-2007) male dominated places where geeks and nerds and the tragically hip all mingled. NOW? Its a total estrogen fest. I went there recently and helped out a guy buying a new Mac. About 75% of the salespeople were women, and about 85% of the customers were women. Macs are very “girly” now. Which is sad.

The kool aid part of the picture above came from this link that has a similar view as mine about Apple hardware.  (I recommend you read that page.)  He talks about someone who is excited to be a part of the “mac community” after 35 days of owning a mac and correctly points out that its a computer and not a social movement.  This is an extension of the SWPLness of macs.  I’m not going to own a mac because I’m not interested in being part of that kind of a “community”, especially when its led by a man with a reality distortion field (hence the koolaid pic).

As Apple becomes more SWPL it’s no surprise that Apple hardware is getting more locked down.  Apple is declaring war on tinkerers. If you want to do something that isn’t approved by Apple (or AT&T in some cases because Apple decided to hog tie themselves to AT&T in the US) you’re out of luck.  Some people will claim that Apple is associated with “free thinking creativity”.  They’re wrong.  All of the supposedly “free thinking” artists, musicians, and “creative professionals” are not free thinking.  They have beholden themselves to political correctness and SWPL thinking.  It makes them a perfect fit for Apple.  Groupthink runs deep in the Apple world which is why Apple can’t allow iPhone apps that mention Android and Steve Jobs flings shit at Adobe and Google.

I know quite a few people who are really into things like free software and open source software.  Being extremely into software freedom, they avoid Apple whenever they can.  They might want to use their computers in non-Apple approved ways.

I know I will might be accused of being PC, Microsoft, Intel, Linux, Adobe, and/or Google shill for writing this post.  It’s not that I’m pro any of those things.  I’m against the Apple way (a SWPL way) of doing things.

Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale Football Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NHL Jerseys Wholesale NHL Jerseys Cheap NBA Jerseys Wholesale NBA Jerseys Cheap MLB Jerseys Wholesale MLB Jerseys Cheap College Jerseys Cheap NCAA Jerseys Wholesale College Jerseys Wholesale NCAA Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys
Translate »