Monday, June 27, 2016

- On The Abortion Ruling

I know nothing about the law, and am therefore not qualified to comment on this most recent ruling striking down Texas's abortion restrictions. But on society I can comment the same as anyone else, and you take it for what you think it's worth.

If there is a single imperative that is driving the leftist agenda - a P1 principle component so to speak - it is the determination of women to shatter all constraints on their continued sexual profligacy. The women in our society will sacrifice absolutely everything to ensure it. Anything that discourages them from sleeping with whomever they like, whenever they like, utterly without consequences either physical or moral, must be destroyed. They will happily see whole cities reduced to dust and the earth salted afterward, than submit to even the most mild constraints on their sexuality. Reason itself will be turned on it's head if necessary, in the interest of achieving that goal.

The risk of pregnancy has always been foremost among the various concerns regarding female promiscuity. Therefore, according to women, society must be twisted and turned however is necessary in order to eliminate it. That's really all the abortion debate is. It's a debate on making sure women can sleep around as much as they want, for as long as they want. That's it.

Now obviously there are a number of men who will support increased female promiscuity as well - and for obvious reasons. But when women are allowed to sleep with whomever they like, they all end up choosing the same few highly attractive men. Those few men go through a great many women than they otherwise would, and the men who are somewhat less desirable to women, often end up with no one at all. So for all their support of Feminism and the female sexual prerogative, they are really only participating in the destruction of a system which was probably already best for them in the first place. And in the end, it's this female promiscuity initiative and it's long term effects on our culture, and our demographics, which will inevitably destroy the west.

Women are not the same as men. They never will be. And so long as we treat them like they are, the end will be approaching much faster than we think. You cannot speak reason to them about this - they will not have it. So unless we find a way to control them and in the process restore some semblance of monogamy as the most acceptable standard for relationships, all will eventually be lost.

- Game Of Nations

I had too much wine at dinner last night, so my thoughts are all jumbled this morning. I seem to be getting my contemporary politics confused with the Game of Thrones finale.

The way I remember it, Hillary used dragonfire to blow up Bernie Sanders and his unwashed barefoot brethren, taking out a few normal Democrats in the process. Donald Trump locked up his nomination as ‘king in the north’ and his the convention is about to be surrounded by a bunch of unthinking zombies from the other side of the wall. Meanwhile, a huge foreign army of unwashed savages is crossing the ocean all at once to try to start a war, and every eunuch and dwarf in Westeros is already on their side.

There are precious few whole men left in Westeros, only monstrous creatures with male appendages. Since the 'pride' parade took up much of the day yesterday, there were precious few in Manhattan either. And I don't know why I seem to recall Hillary chaining up Monica Lewinsky in the basement of the Whitehouse (blue dress and all) so she can be used and defiled by the creature that used to be Bill Clinton. He may not be what he used to be, but that part of him still seems to work just fine.

On the republican side, after spending the entire Obama administration ignoring the real fight of the left, the knights of National Review have refused to work with the wildlings of the Alt-right, because they believe them to be savages. Maybe some little girl can talk some sense into them, but I can’t see ‘Littlefinger’ Rich Lowry ever being happy about it. And why do I recall Arya Stark doing violent things to George Will?

I don’t know where I got the idea that Angela Merkel was making a deal with the foreign Army to help them overthrow the West, or why I keep hearing the phrase “K├Ânigin der Dornen“ in my head. I don’t even speak German. In fact, for the two stories to become one, all that’s really left is for the sand snakes to decide that their best defense is a sword ban for the general public, and for them to be subsequently raped en masse by Dothrakis at the community pool in the Watergarden.

That was obviously far too much wine for a school night.

German President, "The People are the problem!"

Oi Vey!

Below is evidence that revolutions are at times prudent.  In particular when you are ruled by men such as this:

Friday, June 24, 2016

- A Brexit Note

When they were putting together the Euro, I was working at Moore Capital, Louis Bacon’s pressure cooker for profit generation. Exceptionally smart people went in one door along with a ton of information, and piles of money and the stressed wreckage of what used to be human beings came out the other. Working about 10 feet from me at the time was my long time friend Drew Matus, now the megabrain Senior Economist at UBS. If you’ve been watching Squawk box for a while, you’ve certainly seen him. Smart cookie that Drew.

Anyway, we were doing like everyone else at the time. Working through the complexities of trading derivatives in a brand new currency, which had no actual trading history. There were no rules for it, but eventually the industry settled on a consensus of a GDP adjusted synthetic price history. But the discussions to get there caused a lot of talk about the vices and virtues of such very different cultures all working together as closely as they would be.

Of all 20 or so econo - derivatives guys who were involved in our discussion, only 2 thought the Euro was marked for death the day it was formed. Drew Matus, and myself. So I’d like to give a shout out to my former brother in arms over at UBS. We were right (of course) but as usual, we didn’t know when. We were arguing (at the time) that you couldn't get the Italians and the Germans to think about public finance the same way because of cultural differences, and without it the effort was doomed. We never saw the immigration thing coming, or that the real dichotomy would be between the Brits and Greece. Still ... we were on the mark in principle.

Brexit will add some global friction to trade, and lower GDP’s in the near term. I could see that possibly sending global rates negative, but that's an outlier and not the way to bet. Politically it will also allow both the Euro and the UK to be as stupid as they want to be without the interference of the other. How stupid is that? No idea yet. But most bottom up economic philosophies don’t function nearly as well in practice as they look like they would on paper. You just can’t enrich people from a distance, they can really only enrich themselves. But the UK will now have a chance to pump the brakes regarding Islamic immigration. Whether it will be enough to keep them from going over the cliff is anyone’s guess.

The big winner in last night’s Brexit vote was … Donald Trump. It’s now seen as possible to overturn the globalist power structure, and it wasn’t before. Even what looked like a strategic error for him until very late last night – going to the UK instead of campaigning in Ohio – has turned out to be a complete score for him when sentiment defied the polls and went for exit instead of remain. He’s either some kind of evil genius, or the luckiest man alive. I’d bet on luck.

What do the post deconstructionist and enlightened girls over at Slate think of the Brexit vote? According to a young lady by the name of Jordan Weissmann, they think what girls always do about change... they're afraid.

Thursday, June 23, 2016

- A Gun in 15 Minutes or Less

As we all know, to Journalists everything that goes bang is a super deadly assault weapon specifically designed for the express purpose of murdering innocent children during nap time. (What... yours didn't come with the 'nap time' adapter to make it extra deadly?) When I was a NJ resident I was able to buy an AR15, but the permit process took about 100 days. The process in NYC is even more onerous. I can't have an AR15 here at all, and even if I want to buy a shotgun (even one which is specifically designed for my perfectly innocuous hobby of shooting orange clay disks) the process is so prohibitive that I've had to hire a lawyer to get me through it, and he tells me to expect it to take a minimum of 6 months.

To those terrified of guns, this is a good thing. To those of us who are less historically illiterate, it seems a travesty. But the law is the law, and the fact that I care about the law is really the whole point.

Still, I found this just hysterical:

Following the release of a video by CBS claiming that a reporter purchased an AR-15 assault rifle in only 15 minutes, Twitter users created a new meme to ridicule the liberally biased video. The video became extremely popular among liberal media publications who quickly jumped on the story and aggregated it across multiple websites, repeating the standard leftist rhetoric in relation to gun control. Social media users, however, found the story hilarious and began tweeting their own versions.

The pics and twitter links are a riot, and are an accurate reflection of the 'facts' known by 99% of our deeply knowledgeable journalism grads. Thank god we have such a clear thinking cadre of courageous newshounds. Where would we be without their telling insights and carefully gathered facts?

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

- Feminism And "White Privelege"

This is kind of an apology to all the woman haters out there. I get it now. Women can be, and often are, completely horrible. I apologize for not being more sympathetic about it. It’s never really been an issue for me personally. But since my divorce and my engagement in the manosphere, I’ve been learning about what a curse it is to be an average guy in the American dating market. I hate to divulge my own guilelessness, but the fact is, it never occurred to me how good I had it.

I’ve described myself so many times here that I don’t see the need to bother again. It should suffice to say that in many ways I’m ‘above average’ in attractiveness to women. So much so that 2 weeks ago I got cold approached in a restaurant by two modestly attractive young girls who obviously wanted to go home with my friend and I, but until they contrived a reason to talk to me I hadn’t noticed them. It happened to me again in a shop on Sullivan Street this past weekend (this time from a very cute young girl – a solid 9). She was closer to my daughter’s age than my own, and I didn’t take her seriously.

When I look back though, it’s always been this way with me. I know this seems like shameless bragging but it isn’t. I’m just trying to give some perspective on a guy who totally unbeknownst to himself, always had things exceptionally easy in a game that for most people really isn’t so easy at all.

The truth is, I have never had to try very hard with women and even now, fairly deep into middle age, I still don’t have to. That ease and almost complete lack of rejection is what’s defined my general attitude toward women. Feminists may call me a misogynist all the time, but I don’t hate women. I adore women. And the vast majority of them have always adored me back. But having never been on the receiving end of women’s cruelty and betrayal, its left me with a very different view than most. I’ve seen that now more clearly in the stories of others, and I’m beginning to realize what it’s like for most men.

It’s also pretty deeply affected my perspective with other men. On the northwest corner of 41st street and Lexington Avenue is an excellent pizzeria where I often have lunch. It’s owned by an affable blue collar Irish American guy from Long Island, but his workers are almost exclusively Mexican. These guys are all legal residents, all speak accented English, and work like nothing you’ve ever seen. I don’t know if they like it or not, or if they aspire to greater things. But they make one hell of a pizza.

I’m not at all threatened by these men. I’m never going to compete with them for a job or with women. They would have no shot with the women I’m normally involved with. Though their individual sizes and shapes vary a bit, as a rule they are shorter and squatter than average, and much more so than me. My Anglo-Norman genetic stock looks to most women like I’m among the men who rule the world, while they look like the guys who tend to the horses. That sort of thing matter to women a great deal. But for those men who might have to compete with them for jobs or dates, I can see why they might not particularly want to import a bunch more of them. things are tough enough without any new competition.

The woman I’m dating these days is 12 years younger than me. She was born in Oregon, but is the daughter of two Taiwanese immigrants who have 3 PHD’s between them. She works for a boutique Investment bank that specializes in M&A and she reports directly to one of the founding partners. She owns her apartment in the best part of the village (Alec Baldwin lives next door), and in terms of looks, she most closely resembles a particularly cute and Chinese version of Kelly Ripa. The site of her in her Dolce & Gabbana heels can cause traffic accidents.

She likes to joke that my lack of average-ness is my ‘white privilege’. At the sight of me people assume a high income, high IQ, and all the things that go with it. And since the dating opportunities for middle aged men greatly outshine those for women over 30, with my newly single status I’ve become the New York City equivalent of the hot cheerleader from high school. She says that’s what ‘privilege is’. People naturally assume I’m better than average, because guys that look and dress like me so often are. Women will maneuver into my line of sight, and men will treat me with courtesy and respect in case there is some circumstance where I can help their career one day.

All this is kind of funny to me, especially since I am far more trailer park than yacht club and have never had any real privilege in my life. But that stuff doesn’t show. Judging people by appearance is all the rage in New York these days, and all my appearance says is that in spite of my humble origins, I won the genetic lottery. No one saw the 100 hour weeks I put in at JPMorgan, or all the 3 AM calls I took from Billionaires assistants after working a 15 hour day. No one saw the paralyzing stress or the enormous responsibility. All they know is that I look the part. and looking the part is the whole point. It makes women find you more attractive, and "that" she says, "is the real privilege".

I don’t look down at anyone who doesn't look like me, and though I confess to being an ‘intelligence’ snob, I don’t see myself as being any better than anyone else. Of the people who do think worse of me for appearances, the only reason they assume I’m looking down at them is that they've been taught that when they look at me they're looking up. But it isn’t my fault that people who look like me have an established reputation. We built it by working hard, being polite, being generally smart, and by being creative, ambitious, and enterprising. To the degree that I deserve the accusation of "white privilege", I actually earned every bit of it.

The fact that the girl I mentioned is Asian has actually given me an interesting perspective regarding how non-white people view the concept of ‘white privilege’. White men like me are what all the white women want - and all the Asian women - and all the Latin, black, and Eskimo women. We are the ‘in demand’ gene pool among men. Take every woman in the top 1% of attractiveness for her subspecies of human, and what they want their kids to look like when they grow up is me. Cultural norms have grown up around that, but it has nothing to do with culture. It’s a genetic preference to the traits that white men have demonstrated. All that has given me an enormous advantage when dating that until very recently, I was blissfully unaware.

Average guys have a very different experience, and it explains why so much of America’s political discussion is based on envy. If I were shorter, bald, had trouble managing my weight, or was particularly unappealing physically, I’d have had none of the positive experiences with women that I have. Women are actually horrible to one another and to any man they don’t feel meets their individual standards for dating. And the percentage of men they are horrible to, seems to be increasing. Where it used to be a girl who was a 5 would only be nasty to a man of 4 or below, 5’s now insult 7’s as if they think that would be settling. 7’s insult everyone but 9’s and 10’s among men. The self-delusions of women when it comes to their own quality as a mate seem to be getting worse not better.

And we’re not talking garden variety rudeness here. Troll around the redpill reddit just a little bit and you’ll see what I mean. Women aren’t just discouraging men when approached in a bar, they are stringing them along and toying with them like cat who’s decided to ‘play’ with a mouse. Subjecting some men to weeks or months of pointless cruelty for no reason other than the inflation of their own egos. It's just inflicting harm for shit's and giggles.

You can find literally hundreds of stories of what I can only assume are more or less average guys, who have all had women be far more cruel and vicious to them than I ever really knew women could be. The way these women behave is enough to make you understand why feminists equate hurtful words with hurtful acts. It’s the way they mean it when they speak to each other and to men they are torturing. It’s their proxy for violence, and they assume it’s the same for men. It really isn’t, but they don’t see that.

I still don’t understand the concept of Men Going Their Own Way. I can’t imagine being so disconnected from the flow of human life that you would consider giving up the whole idea of engagement with 50.1% of the population, however cruel they are to you. (Especially when the biological incentives are so strong.) But I do now appreciate how difficult it is for some guys. It’s not exactly the kind of thing that can be managed by ‘manning up’ and being courageous. And I want to apologize again if I’ve ever made it seem differently.

I do think there is a lot to be said for the process of focusing on self-improvement. It’s that old Hal Moore quote: “There is no such thing as three strikes and you’re out. There is always something more you can do.” You can lose weight, change your style, become better at being charming. All those things will help you gain more success with women. You can even focus on building your career, and as we all know, there is no such thing as an ugly man to women so long as he’s rich enough. But even if they do reject you, at least you’ll then be rich.

But the real thing you all need is to help in some small way to destroy Feminism once and for all. It’s a toxic belief system unsupported by objective evidence, and is the source of most of the irrational views of women in the dating market. And if we manage to convince no one but other men, I think that might be enough because fi they have no one to torture, they’ll have no choice but accept reality. We can let the air out of the balloons of their inflated egos.

- An Open Letter To Opponents of "Gun Violence"

"An AR15 is not a weapon designed for 'killing people', it is a weapon designed for protecting people from being killed."

The police carry them. The Army carries them. And I would carry mine in many situations if the government would let me. Policemen are not blood thirst psychopaths, the Army are not blood thirsty psychopaths, and neither am I. And there are a great many people in America who are just like me.

There are blood thirsty psychopaths in the world, but I am not one of them. It would be a safer world if more people like me were armed and allowed to carry arms with them in their daily lives, anywhere in the country. If you want to keep guns away from people who would harm you for Allah, or for hatred of homosexuals, or psychopathy or anything else, that's fine. But I am not that person, so don't try to disarm me.

People like me are not fooled by your platitudes. Your real motives are obvious. You want all Americans disarmed because you're afraid of guns. You don't trust your own emotional judgement, or the good judgement of others. That's fine. I know I can't dissuade your fear so I won't try. But you need to recognize that not everyone who is a gun owner is inches from a killing spree. Stop insulting us by pretending that we are.

You say you only want to disarm the unstable, the fanatical, and the psychotic. Fine. We all know you're lying, but let's assume you're not. Then set some standards for national concealed carry. Make it a high bar. Make the fee's exorbitant, the required training excessive, and the qualifications difficult to achieve. Include psychological exams. Include live fire shooting tests. Include competition against police or soldiers, or anyone else you think is 'responsible' enough to carry a firearm. Set your bar as high as you like and make the process as unfair and demanding as you like. All these are things that I and the dreaded 'gun lobby' are willing to discuss.

But what I will not discuss is being lumped in with all the murderous fanatical Muslims, deranged social misfits, and drug dealing gang bangers who are actually committing crimes with a gun, just because I own one. I am not like them. We are not the same. Leave me the opportunity to prove that I am a better more responsible citizen than they are, and let me carry a firearm legally once I do, and I and the gun lobby will be perfectly happy to discuss more gun regulation.

But so long as you assume that all gun owners are the same as all others, there is nothing to discuss.