Of late in the news is a scheme, allegedly cooked up by one Rick Singer. Singer is now cooperating with the U.S. Department of Justice, and says he plans to plead guilty to all charges, so I guess the “allegedly” in the last sentence is sorta silly.

The scam was apparently multifaceted; but, basically, if you were in the top tiers of the upper middle-class, you could pay old Singer to rig the admissions process at schools like USC (known, in my day, as University of Spoiled Children …) and Yale (home of the pseudosatanic frat house Skull and Bones which boasted the George Bush dynasty as members).

So, if you have a million (or two) dollars you can spread around, and a useless cunt of a daughter, who needs to get a gold-collar sinecure someplace, this is how you get her out of your house.

Singer had multiple ways of getting the idiot kids of the UMC admitted to ritzy schools. He was friends with various coaches, who would waive little Janie into school for her supposed athletic merits. Janie would never play a single game on the women’s volleyball team, of course. Once admitted, she’d immediately quit the athletic club, and be allowed to stay on as a student, with no questions asked.

In some cases, Singer hired smarter kids to take the standardized admissions tests in place of his clients. He’d also hire physicians to sign notes, so that his customers got extra time on the exam. Hoaxed high school records were also a possibility.

Skank-ho wimminz and their thot daughters used to be less of a problem, since women got married early, and were expected to stay married to their husbands. This particular young woman is quite attractive and could have found a simp easily; but, marriage is no longer fashionable. She had to have a good (low effort) job, at a good salary, to “find herself” (by riding hundreds of cocks). That gold collar job is only available after a stint at a prestigious academic institution. Singer’s con was the means to this end.

A few thoughts:

1. While the UMC is a problem, a similar problem also exists with the American ruling class. George Bush Jr.’s daughters were drunken whores. Guess where one of them went? (That’d be Yale University, where many of Singer’s clients got in.) You can bet that Barbara Pierce Bush didn’t need to cheat to be admitted. Her daddy simply ordered the college to open their doors. The same surely happened with Malia Obama, who spent her college years at Harvard embarrassing her family and acting like a common skank.
2. This scam would have been impossible only ten years ago. Believe it or not, when I started teaching, it was common for idiot kids who somehow found their way into university to be failed out in short order. Part of the problem is the increasing trend of treating students as “consumers,” and being pressured to pass kids, even if they don’t merit the honor of a “C”.
3. Some of the fallout from this scandal may be pressure to deprecate or do away with standardized tests. That would be a disaster. I’m sure I’m a minority in the manosphere, but diversity is a good thing. Competence is also a good thing. Very few university students enter their school with the skills necessary to succeed, but the SAT ensures that most of them have the ability to pick up those skills. Scrapping the tests leaves us no way of identifying people who will benefit from a bachelor’s degree, or screening out people who would be happier doing something else. There are kids from poor and minority families who would do well at USC and Yale, and the SAT is how we find them.

In the end, this is just more evidence of the corrosive effect of uncontrolled female sluttery on society. All the little skank-hoez in training who got the Singer scholarship stole slots that would have been better filled by the sons of working men.

Someone pointed me to this comment, which seems to mesh well with Derek’s local commentary.

Credit to Dalrock for not deleting this comment. I realize he’s doing it merely to bait the usual suckers into dogpiling, but it’s still admirable to allow your critics a voice.

Vox Day, a character best known for filing frivolous lawsuits when people make fun of him on the internet, is apparently some sort of hero to the goons on Dalrock’s comment section. Vox Day’s accomplishments including losing a debate to a goony net-nazi, and writing an insipid, whining screed about Jordan Peterson’s success. Vox Day would never allow anyone to disagree with him on gab, much less on his own blog, so why he should be treated as some sort of authority is an unanswered question.

It strikes me that Warhorn Media has actually treated Dalrock far better than he has treated many of his own contributors. It’s also becoming something of a farce to see this argument continue to steamroll on, though I’m sure it’s successful in driving traffic to both camps.

Thanks to Jack Dorsey’s unwavering support for this blog, I’m back on twitter. One of the first stories I ran across on that open sewer was the sad tale of rape victim Martha McSally, the CONservative republican senator from Arizona. McSally ran as a Trump supporting politician, and makes a number of hot-button issues a feature in her political life.

Those hot button issues include feminism.

And McSally has also made a rape accusation against a superior officer.

It is notable that Senator McSally has refused to identify the man that she claims has raped her. Why would a sitting U.S. senator protect a dangerous criminal with a history of raping defenseless subordinates? We have to wonder.

Of course, thanks to feminists like McSally, we don’t really know what ‘rape’ means, since the lexical range of that word has been widened to include things like smiling and nodding at some dumb wimminz on an elevator, or holding the door for an elderly granny. Nearly every interaction with any wimminz can be spun into a rape, at this point, and that is how feminists like McSally want it.

More generally, what was McSally doing in the U.S. Air Force? If anything, this sad tale ought to be a reason to expel every wimminz from military service immediately.

According to the senator, the armed forces are being used as a rape camp by degenerates. This wimminz, now a powerful political figure, and friends with the president, is in the perfect position to investigate and push for changes. Why is she doing nothing about this dreadful problem?

Lots of fellas around the manosphere insist that the feminist rot is restricted to Anglo-American wimminz. These same fools will tell wild stories about emigrating to Latin America, where the women are all sweet and respectful. This video is for those dolts.

For those who don’t speak Spanish, here’s the story:

1. Bitch lures her boyfriend to a cheap motel, where she stabs him repeatedly in the chest.
2. Dude somehow escapes the scene of his murder, stumbles into the street, where passersby start calling the cops.
3. Bitch runs out, pretends to be distraught, starts alluding to him being attacked by others.
4. Someone starts documenting the incident. Apparently the owners of the hotel fingered the wimminz as the killer, and the camerawoman claims she has photos of the knife.
5. Bitch starts holding “her love” while wailing dramatically. In reality, she’s trying to open his wounds and kill him before the ambulancia arrives (it’s late, and this is a tense video).
6. Throughout it all, bitch puts on an incredibly convincing show of being a “victim”.

This story really shouldn’t be funny…

From Faux News:

A jaguar won’t be punished for a woman whose selfie went horribly wrong.

 

The jaguar that attacked an Arizona woman — who jumped a barrier to snap a selfie with the feline — will not be euthanized, zoo officials said Sunday.

 

Wildlife World Zoo officials told social media users the jaguar “won’t be put down” after a woman in her 30s suffered injuries to her arm following the Saturday incident. The woman jumped a barrier at the Litchfield Park zoo and reached out to take a selfie when the big cat dug her claws into the visitor’s hand.

If you hop the protective barriers at the zoo, you might get attacked by the wild animals. I had no idea!

[Editor: I was going to write some more shit about Dalrock’s laughable entitlement complex, but Derek beat me to it. Because I’m a lazy fucker, I’ll just cut and paste his work into the front page. Take it away…]

So here we are again lads. Dalrock is complaining again. In light of the absurdity of it all, I’m going full snark on this review. You’ve been warned.

Dalrock states the following:

“Nathan’s edited version of the exchange leaves out our agreement to have a back and forth exchange, and it leaves out the part where Nathan wrote:”

Ah ha! Surely we have him here! The very best evidence so far of the Warhorn duplicity worth half a dozen posts! Pitchforks out boys!

“I’d like to sincerely understand and present your point of view, even where our camp diverges.”

Wow. Devastating.

Let’s put our learning hats on and do a little analysis, shall we? Let’s see what Nathan wanted to do:

1) To understand Dalrock’s point-of-view.
2) To present said point-of-view.

In other words, “I want to understand your point-of-view so I don’t misrepresent it.” Gah! My eyes!

Nathan made his best attempt at understanding Dalrock. The point of the discussion was to make a best-effort to get it right, but that didn’t mean he couldn’t have gotten it wrong. So, did Nathan present what he viewed Dalrock’s point-of-view to be? Yes, of course he did. He even presented what he thought Dalrock’s full point-of-view was by posting the transcript of the email exchange which he referenced in the podcast (!!).

What’s that you say? Nathan didn’t talk about every topic that was available from the email interview in full detail on a time-limited, tacky-humored podcast? Oh no!

Okay, so in all seriousness, Dalrock is upset that he didn’t get enough airtime on someone else’s show. He’s upset that the editorial discretion of the podcast edited out the majority of content of the interview. He can couch this in terms of “he lied to me” but that’s not a rational conclusion.

Lastly, consider now much time he has now spent not engaging in back-and-forth debate.

Should I, or shouldn’t I? Comments welcome…

Heartiste has a discussion of the cuck lifestyle up on his blog. You can read his comments here. Unlike the Heartiste author, I’m not ready to limit my comments to mocking and deriding the victims of such stuff, so this article will be sufficiently different even to appeal to his readers (most of whom are idiots).

In the first place, when I stumble across such stuff, I find it (relatively) incredibly likely that the author will be Indian or Pakistani. I really don’t know what’s going on over there, but if there’s a subcontinental in the audience who would like to clarify or comment, he’d be welcome. The author of Heartiste’s takedown is named “Sharma.” Here’s “Sandeep,” writing in a totally different forum, to give us a different look…

Sandeep seems to get a kick out of his wife’s exploitation of her students. A quick read also reveals that Sandeep also enjoys fucking his wife’s “bull” in the ass. We can hope the young African-American “bull” wises up, and sues both of these degenerates into penury, but in this troubled world, we know he won’t.

However you look at it, the cuck phenomenon is a deeply dysfunctional trend, and men should resist it by any means necessary.

So, getting back to Quora, we find Sharma giving advice to some married skank as to how best to “open” her marriage (along with her legs).

Your new relationship needs new rules. Make it very clear that if he follows rules he gets rewarded; if he breaks them, he gets punished. The rules imposed should be designed to remind him of your dominance in the relationship. Start with just a few rules (so he can get used to it) and then build them up and up. Common first-time rules are as follows: he must do whatever you tell him, he cannot orgasm without permission, he cannot ask for sexual interactions with you, he must address you as Mistress or Goddess to show your dominant role.

I always try to refrain from passing judgment upon how a brother runs his house. If some man finds it thrilling to let his wife dominate him, then I suppose I’ve got nothing to say about it. It is important, however, to identify the tools a filthy wimminz will use to subvert a healthy man’s masculine ego.

It is your goal to get your husband to gradually relinquish his manliness. Give him a boyish or a feminine name. For example, if he is called Christian, you could rename him, Chrissy or Christine. You should command him to begin wearing female clothing too. He can start by wearing female underwear.

Allowing your wife this level of disrespect begins to cross the line into public nuisance. Your father gave you a name. If the bitch wants to name you something else, then perhaps she should simply be addressed as “hey cunt” until she gets a clue.

Let him know, constantly, that you no longer view him as a real man, more of a girl. His “manhood” is too small to make him a real man. Therefore, you no longer allow him to have sexual relations with you. The most you let him do is, perhaps, perform oral – as a woman would.

Every wimminz I’ve ever fucked has been fine with my tiny penis; however, if I ever did get a complaint, I’d probably retort with something like…

Bitch, you’ve taken so much cock that a bull elephant would feel small to you. Now shut the fuck up and start sucking these nuts.

The greatest power you wield over your husband is your sexuality. When you take sexual relations away from him, he will want it all the more. To make him want it even more, you can dress sexy, work out, and act in a more sexual manner, and flirt with other men to remind your husband of your sexuality and his position in the relationship. As rewards for good behavior, you can reward your husband with threats of a sexual nature, but never allow him penetrative interactions.

Actually, your skank-ho wife has no power in this regard. She pissed it straight down the sink when she started running her mouth about the size of your johnson.

Make no mistake: The minute a wimminz withhold sex from you, she is inviting you to get your needs met elsewhere. That means it’s time to fire up the Tinder app, read my operating instructions, and start playing the field. Whores like your skank wife are easily replaced, and within a week you will be banging tons of new wimminz, all of whom will be more pleasant than the bitch you’ve been dealing with.

It is imperative for you to be strict. Never weaken your positive by giving in to demands. Take away all of the things in life that give your husband pleasure and ONLY return some of them when he earns them. And, thus, take them away as punishments. Be strict in all your interactions. Do not be afraid to shout at him or put him over your knee for a spanking.

You asked yourself “how to cuckold my husband” and these are the most common steps to doing just that.

Make sure you document any physical abuse that your skank-ho wife attempts to inflict. There will be no “putting you over her knee,” and if she tries any shit like that, it will come out in divorce court.

In the end, articles like these are just more evidence that we live in a deeply troubled society. No man should put up with any of this shit, and every wimminz should know the consequences of attempting it.

Now that the horse has been beaten to a brown stain on the side of the highway, I figured I’d zoom out and make a few observations.

Bayly’s angst about “the manosphere” is largely a reflection of his feelings about his own evangelical movement. Bayly suspects, at an emotional level, that Christianity is a historical failure: a cul-de-sac, a dying project. The difference between Bayly and us is that we knows that Christianity is a corpse, and some of us are attempting to revive it (or at least to save the Christian men within its ranks). For this good deed, Bayly and his crew hates us.

Bayly is a very shallow thinker. Like most people, he feels that something is terribly wrong, yet, as so many of his Christian brothers, he doesn’t understand the underlying currents which lead to the blossoming forth of so many aesthetic horrors.

Bayly can not handle honest criticism, even on the very website he laughably labels as “the reformation,” in which he begs for “discussion.” He runs his web page like he runs his church, no doubt: permanently detached from everyday reality. He criticizes people for their anonymity, when it’s clear he has none of what Taleb calls skin in the game himself.

Dalrock has, at least in the past, gone to bat for Christianity against the feminist enemy. Bayly resents this because he’s the same type of real-world failure I have occasionally seen in my day-to-day life. We all know that one guy who seems to desperately need help, and who simultaneously lashes out at anyone who tries to help him.

An effort to help such a person is wasted. In the attempt, the good samaritan exposes the flaws and failings of the poor sap to the light of day, where his own ego must confront them. The confrontation illustrates to everyone (and most importantly, to the patient himself) his complicity in his own failure. It’s easier for such people to just keep failing, than to face the fact that what they’re doing isn’t working.

Bayly and his gaggle of losers prefer feminists to us, because this doesn’t threaten the illusion of Christian hegemony (not to mention the ego of each whiner). If Bayly and his crew of miscreants weren’t total losers, they’d ignore Dalrock (and us) and spend their energies mocking our common enemies.

One can listen to as many warhorn media podcasts as he likes, and I’ll bet he’ll never find these cretins lampooning single mothers or abortionists, the way they sneer at us. This is not a coincidence.

As men with a goal of a healthy, patriarchal society, our first instinct is to build bridges and form coalitions (even temporary ones) with disparate peoples and groups. Unfortunately, Christians are at best unreliable, and usually treacherous. People like these will never be part of anything healthy or useful. As Nietzsche might remind us, they’re masochists who are centered on death and negativity, who cling to a slave morality. Such creatures have nothing positive to offer.

(Bolton UK) Crazed slut Carla Couperthwaite, 22, chased random men through the streets, waving a sharp knife. When detained by police, the crazy wimminz explained that she had been motivated by the idea that these men had been “looking at her.”

The attack occurred at 6.45pm on February 4 after a full day of binge drinking. Bitch was seen attempting to batter down the door of a quickie-mart to get to the first man, before turning her attention to another man who was innocently walking past her, minding his own business and bothering nobody.

From Metro News (no link for this tabloid trash)

The bitch managed to tackle this poor schlub, and hold a knife to his throat while screaming and “frothing at the mouth.” When the cops arrived, bitch admitted that “she had been drinking heavily before going on the rampage and said the way the first man had been looking at her was ‘troubling’.”

Welcome to the new normal, fellas.