Moderates United

There is a profound difference between a man who has sexual fantasies about other men, and a man who has fantasies about being a woman.

At issue is not what we might term “cultural effeminacy”, which is to say ACTING feminine according to our expectations of what that means.  Many homosexuals act effeminate to the point of calling each other bitch, and of course there are heterosexuals like Prince–I assume he was a heterosexual, mainly–who act effeminate as well.

What transgender people, so called, want is to BE the opposite sex.  They play act because they are forced to, but the animating vision and dream is to BE the opposite sex, complete with appropriate organs.

But this is impossible, at least with current medical science, and it is hard to see how an identity that exists down to the cellular level in XY versus XX can ever be changed.  Nor is it clear why this should be necessary.

You can cut off a penis, but that does not become a genuine clitoris.  You can cut a hole near the perineum, but that does not become a vagina, and you cannot insert a uterus, and it cannot be impregnated, as far as I know.  Women will never spontaneously produce semen filled with biologically active sperm. I am belaboring the point.

Psychologically speaking, transgenderism is, in my view, an addiction to the impossible idea of being something one is not.  It is not different from the anorexic who dreams of weighing 10 pounds, or even nothing.  It is not different from the bodybuilder who cannot get big enough, who does obscene and deadly things to get every last inch of muscle, knowing full well that death is the likely and quick result.

We read that transgendered people, so called, commit suicide at 20x the rate of normal people.  Why not?  They are attempting to divert attention from primary psychological processes they are avoiding with their obsession, their addiction in my terms,  but there comes a time when reality has to be faced: they will never truly BE the opposite sex.  Not in this lifetime.

We have always known that homosexual men use the men’s room.  My local swimming pool felt the need to to post signs saying it is illegal to film people changing clothes.  This is vaguely creepy, but they have to use something, and the women’s room makes no sense.

So the issue is not whether or not they will be possible sexual charges in the bathrooms, but whether or not the slightest SHRED of common sense will remain in this benighted nation, plagued by imbecility, cowardice, ignorance, and thoughtlessness.

As Bill Maher put it, in a rare commentary with which I agreed in the main, “if you look like a woman, use the woman’s room; if you look like a man, use the men’s; and if you are a bearded man in a dress, wait to use the bathroom until you get home.”

I personally have signed the “Boycott Target” petition, and will take it seriously.  I read they have installed urinals in LA in some of the women’s bathrooms.  This more than validates this decision.  Statistically, there are more REGISTERED sexual offenders than trannies of both sexes.  Given that an unknown but presumably large number never get caught, this should give sane persons of good sense pause.  The women of this nation–the girls of this nation–have rights too.  You cannot make everyone happy, so why not 50% of the population–less some nominal amount obsessed with politically correctness, and cultural suicide–relative to roughly one half (accounting for the men posing as women, who are the main concern) of .03% of the population?

Most of the curses I received as a young child were, I think, conceived and executed as blessings.  Here is the thing: a Christianity consisting in fear, hatred, repressed rage, blind submission, and physical violence is more suitably called Satanism.  It is more Satanic than Satanism because Satanists ACKNOWLEDGE the object of their worship.  Such Christians lie to themselves and others about what they do, and why they do; about who, in the end, they are.  No honest Satanist should ever tell the truth about their creed.  This much has always seemed obvious to me.  Satanic Christianity is a double removal: truth is removed from public display, and from private consciousness.  This second removal perhaps makes it slightly less odious, but the reality is that Satanists themselves lie to themselves as well.  They pretend that the feeling power they seek is possible for more than moments, and that they can escape the horror within them by attempting to satiate it.  They cannot.  This, too, is addiction.

But I do think we need to be very clear that the word “Christian” implies absolutely nothing about the character and conscience of the person professing to be one.

Power without life is worth nothing.

Pema Chodron introduced a concept new to me, that of non-theism.  The
idea is simple: we can reject, based on our personal experience, the
notion that some spirit can be relied upon to protect and help us,
without rejecting with it the notion that some unfathomably large and
incomprehensible connecting power still underlies the universe, in
roughly the sense the Deists took God. 

Most of us have
had inconsolable nights where there was no angel, no spirit of God.  We
have had things happen that we fervently wanted to avoid, and overall
have had no experience of benevolence from a higher power.

And
I was thinking that for some people, the asking from God is all too
close to the asking parents for help–protection, consolation,
guidance–that never materialized.

There comes a
psychological point for many, I think, where emotional stability and the
possibility for separation from a painful emotional linkage with past,
REQUIRES rejecting this notion of an omnipotent father who can be relied
upon.  The rejection is imprecise, but one typically based upon the
sense I still see often, that the choice is between No God and a God
which is purportedly described in a book somewhere, with the God of the
Christians the most typical target.

These are the
dogmatic atheists.  For them, I feel, to reconsider the idea of God is
to reopen an emotional witches brew of conflict and pain, even if
empirically something like a Deistic god–or more likely an interactive
universe with rules we don’t yet grasp–seems to be what science most
strongly supports, from the data.

The truth is that one
can easily assert that the True God has never been described, and that
no religion has a monopoly on truth, and that most of its most sacred
tales are simply myths–in both senses–rooted in primal unconscious
psychosocial realities.

So much of life is clearing
underbrush, space, for thinking and feeling clearly.  The more barriers
you find, the more barriers you find.  Most of us exist in very small
spaces, and what we call freedom is perhaps a slightly larger prison
cell than our neighbor.  Spirituality is nothing more or less than
dreaming of leaving the prison entirely.

The path to superiority–and the very concepts of moral and emotional and spiritual growth depend upon and arise from sensing the existence of such a state–does not lie through FEELING superior.

If you are superior, you are separate from, and if you are separate from, you have lost most of life.

Addiction may be defined as focusing all attention on what is impossible. It inherently arises from a lie.

I really do feel that guilt quite often precedes, in the form of existential shame, any actual cause.  I further suspect many crimes are committed to relieve this sense by justifying it.

And I feel one of the primary crimes which is committed is that of judgement and hatred.  If you feel personal shame you cannot justify, you relieve it by judging others.  In my own case, I think I was broken violently so that I would be a “good”, which is to say compliant and obedient, person.  This creates shame, which creates anger, which creates hostility, which creates emotional and social alienation, which is something I am only now in my middle age coming to grips with.  I think this sort of thing is relatively common, but that most people never truly come to grips with it at all.  It is sufficient to simply exist complacently within the social system you were born into.

Christianity and Islam, certainly, are systems of political  and social oppression contained within theological systems, themselves based upon the assertions of those long dead.  Whatever they have to do with an actually existing God is accidental, and originates in individuals exercising personal wisdom and spiritual discrimination.

Let us suppose that the continuation of Western civilization is possible, despite the best efforts of the Left to destroy it.  What does Europe need to do?

They need to destroy most mosques.

They need to treat as criminals all people calling for Sharia law, attempting to implement Sharia law, or who talk in any way of living under a LAW other than that of Germany, France, Britain, etc.

They need to stop letting in economic refugees, and if they want to do “good deeds”, make an effort at letting in ACTUAL refugees who they think likely to largely assimilate.  Certainly, the Christians and Yazidis could use some help, as could the people traveling in families from actual war zones.

They need re-enable discussion of public morality which permits judgement.

I’ll likely have other ideas, but I have to scoop.

I like this guy: http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/22/is-milo-yiannopoulos-the-face-of-tomorrows-political-right/

I posted a week or two ago somewhere that I am increasingly of the opinion that offending people is our present patriotic duty.  The Left is doing everything in its power–not to protect decency and courtesy, since they have clearly rejected both vigorously and without hesitation–but to prevent the public discussion of their bad ideas.  The whole POINT of a truly Liberal political order is dissension, argument, and the airing of unwanted truths.

People like this give me hope.  I have been wondering where the fucking testicles are.  You can’t blow over every time somebody looks in your direction and claim to stand for anything. And if he wants to double up on the balls from time to time, well that’s his bedroom, and his business.

Money quote (thankfully not a money shot):

“For the [past] 30 years, the Left has just said ‘oh if there’s an argument we don’t like, they’re a hateful bigot so don’t listen to anything they have to say,’” he told TheDC. “They seek to delegitimize the speaker instead of actually presenting an argument while I force them to bring their A-game. They just realized they don’t have one.”

“Trump and I represent something that scares the Left — the utter, wholesale rejection of political correctness. Total defiance. The idea you don’t back down, you double down. When somebody comes to my event and says they’re offended by a joke, I rack my brain for a more offensive one… Trump does the same thing,” he said.

“He has shown the one thing that no conservative politician or pundit or anybody really on the political Right in American public life has done for some 30 years. He has shown fearlessness, he’s not afraid of [the Left]. And that inspires terror in their hearts and I’m the same, I like to think.”

I ventured into a bastion of ex-hippies yesterday.  My reasons were sound, and my purpose was accomplished, but I felt the whole time like a wolf in a pack of sheep.  Not a sheepdog: a wolf.  I am not yet required to wear a Yellow Cross–or Scarlet R–to identify myself as an ideological dissident or accused Racist, but it felt weird all the same.

Old hippies can be cool, but a very great many of them are still self important, focused on being “hip” (hence the name), highly judgemental, impatient, and more than a little crazy.  I know the breed well: remember, I went to Berkeley.  I lived there.  I breathed the air.

And I was thinking about it: after all the promise, after all the “revolution in the air”, what do they have to show for it?  What have they accomplished?  They put a no-name, second rate soap opera actor in the White House, who started several new wars and added our grandchildren to the national debt (our children were already in up to their eyeballs).

They have made it socially impossible for traumatized women to object publicly to sharing bathrooms with biological men.  They have that going for them.

They lost the Vietnam War for us, after it has been won–at great cost–on the ground.  This is one thing I have never understood: they shed huge tears watching some show about black slave families being broken up by the cruel slave-masters, but don’t even KNOW that hundreds of thousands of families were broken up in South Vietnam alone, sent to separate labor and psychological torture camps, and many of them were never reunited.  The people who loved Kunta Kinte did not give a flying phuc about anybody named Nguyen.  All that got disappeared, much like the desaparecido’s of Latin America, with the difference that nobody is talking about those horrors even today.

The fucking hippies still think their victory over national interest, common decency, empathy for the suffering of others, and political sanity counts as a great accomplishment.  I don’t.  It think it is a scandalous shame.

What do they have?  They accomplished something close to nothing.  Holotropic Breathwork has done me some good.  Peter Levine did some time in Esalen.  They brought yoga back from India.

But what I see, now, is that mostly what membership in this tribe provides is not vision, but membership.  That is the benefit.  They know one another.  They recognize one another.  When they meet–and I have the young imitators in mind here–they have an instant bond.

But the original hippies literally thought that if they shouted loud enough and did enough drugs, the world would spontaneously conform to their notions of the way “things ought to be”.

If we see kids now shouting about the way things ought to be, we can see the path back to them.  And we can easily see an identical but more fully developed narcissism, childishness, lack of understanding of how the world works, lack of a plan for actual long term improvements in the condition of any living human beings, and, most importantly, the same self congratulation based upon nothing more substantial than shared feelings.