If you don’t know what a spectrum is, I suggest you research it. For example, the color red can be classified with a spectrum of many different types – light-red, magenta, orange-red, fluorescent-red, brown-red, bright-red, metallic-red, etc., etc.. This article pertains to the spectrum of female sexuality – antiquarian, heinous, unrealistic, which puts masculinity in an unhealthy state due to her bubble, treacherous, while male sexuality is mostly procuring of her to exhibit it as a body & parts – direct, pellucid eye-candy (even when males are circumcised, it’s still mostly that).
Confirming what people like me have already been stating, DNews – a subsection of Discovery, which condenses documentaries quickly, has done a piece: ‘Why Psychopaths Turn Women On’. I suggest everyone search for it. Availability of it is not of my control, especially because it’s a popular piece. If M.G.T.O.W. & related use this as a reference, it’s going to make them infamous. &, of course, I predict that other males, because they’re too stupid & cowardly to hate what they should hate, will replace all that confusion & hatred on to what’s more convenient – the deliverers. Be cautious of Copyright issues if you do. It’s a disgusting piece done in a “fun” manner, but if the popular science is willing to acknowledge this, this is really going to change things if it makes critical mass.
The policies of choreography are maintained by schemers. They say all this stuff & impress the crowds with well-dressed posturing, but it’s obvious what they’re doing. What really happens in the halls of power is more about moneymaking than lawmaking. Not really about policy, but extorting money. Commercialism allows passing, or threatening to pass, certain laws. The two opposition parties only appear to be enemies in the media. They benefit from each other for commercial means. Politics is somewhat like the sensitive & immature appearance rating of job-interviews. It’s mostly choreographed acting. What appears to be arguing over policy is actually a partnership of extracting money from the audience by entertainment. It doesn’t even really matter who wins because they all get paid. Division, conflict, & calamity is also good business for Washington.
The reason the American tax code is such a maze & changing frequently is because it’s a crafty tool for extortion to enrichment of the political class, even a commissioner, D. Shulman, admitted on a public affairs network that his tax returns is just too complicated. Laws are hiding things. Laws are delivered in such a cloud of legality that bills aren’t even read by members of congress, which allows easy extortion practice.
During 2011 – 2012, the media interpreted an issue of piracy of the internet as a problem, but the point was missed. For the political class, this would be another opportunity to raise funds from both sides of the supporters of the proposed battle. As presidents are great actors, appeasing to the trendy, young generation of texting retards, while pausing the business of the apposing entertainment industry, it was proclaimed on right timing that no support would be given to undermining global internet innovation. This was delivered after large sums of money was already collected from both sides, funding brands & corporations. For the political class, the game is pitting demographics together over agitating news items, watching them respond, then conquering by extracting money from the public-private divide.
Organized crime had always been involved in the Vegas gambling industry. Using various crafts to move assets around, front-men acting as the face of the casino would collect money for hidden associates.
There is no need to use illegal mob techniques when you can employ such crafts legally.
Creating panic by the media is another means of garnering more attention from the public & converting them to support politics.
Greasy bong-shops are managed by degenerates who want to do business independently – never hiring, &/or family owned, & so many traitors support this, causing a bombardment of more stupidity for those who don’t need it, which then spawns more of “ricochet” effects: I enter a vape-shop for a simple cashier job, they’ve joined the trend of thinking their exceptional people – “Do you have experience with using vapes?” Why would I need experience to press a few buttons a day & just stand there, & how much training is even required anyway to know the mechanics of smoking a portable cigarette?
The Mafia has the city of Palermo on the island of Sicily to have 80% of the businesses [reported in 2013] to pay protection money – pizzo, or else be harassed, have business burned, or even lose life.
How do such various facades, from micro to macro, actually manifest? Well, if you had read some of what is deemed as important to advertise work by Steve Moxon, author of ‘The Woman Racket,’ it is emphasized that females enjoy watching males stamp themselves among their peers. By taking yourself out, which I fully endorse to progressively counter their influence, of the herd, they have no means of comparison/rating. It’s a soap-opera to them to see various actors/chess-pieces maneuver themselves. The organized criminals, legally-professional or otherwise, don’t even fully realize that their doing it for procreative drives, which is exactly how they are drives. It’s a feminine sex appeal; “It’s dangerous, it’s exciting, & it’s powerful.” Such extortion itself is due to the allegiance to instincts, which is situated on feminine, nebulous demands – cause-&-effect/”butterfly” effects producing an epidemic of anti-/a-rationalism. Authority cancels or inhibits rationalism. Thanks to chess pieces as the pawns, we may have more tools, etc., but it’s mostly to enhance instinctual drives. There wouldn’t even be a need, or reduced, for preceding female sexuality if rationalism took over & created better options. Unconscious & barely conscious biological processes of nature preceded culture, & female sexuality is more aligned with that precedence. The ones controlling most of the media & culture reinforce these primitive anti-/a-rational inclinations.
How long can the act of unswerving composure be given? It can’t really. Women expect the unrealistic facades. Any slight sign of weakness or failure ensures anti-intellectualism. That’s why the divorce industry caused by women is so rampant. However, some males, particularly the ones running-the-show, are very good at imitating & acting.
The subsidiary for women are often the quickest to defend: “not all women are like that.” True; not all women are like that, but most are. Most of those males who want to believe the former have usually just gotten some scraps when they’re about ~40, or something.
Males want substance. The visual “shine” is direct evidence of substance they’d rather hone in on then to have the extra crap.
All of this corruption of policies would be minimized if there was already male-to-female interaction based on partnerships that were much more resembling of friendships with benefits – what males want – than a fleeting rating of male striving or business contract.
Just like how the mafia knows so well how to operate by barely conscious drives by adapting, mimicry, & by the lazy motto: “Money runs the world,” my fear is that if critical mass of the truth happens, rather than a significant imprinting of it, females would just adapt – politely change by the same spur-of-the-moment that females run by, & then others would just continue appeased – erasing rather than recording.
Some captured proof of the spectrum:
Screen capturing made it pixelated. You might have to enlarge on your comp. Press: ctrl + to enlarge. It reads: “Real good sex involves a man my father’s age beating the shit out of me.”
Right, I just make these pieces because I’m like women, & I’m just like a feminist. That makes sense – not. That’s my attempt of being non-literal – like a feminist.
Above reads: I’ve had dreams of being abducted as a prisoner & having no choice, isolated from the world without any possible way of escaping. … I understand the importance of pain for training purposes..”
Above states: “I’ve met girls who wanted a man to hit them & treat them like garbage.”
With the spectrum of female sexuality & psychology, males do such things as liking bad people as long as they’re nice to them.
There is only male & female nature. There is no Feminism, other than it being a derivative of the following. Traditionalism, chivalry, gynocentrism, etc., is just rewarding various personality disorders. While the dumb whore has the opportunity to loot from a good-guy, she also has the desire to eliminate that male from the equation by fleeting to the next idiot. Older men are tricked by women who need nicer guys.
If a male aged in 20s wants to be with a woman who is 47, it will be difficult because women are obsessed with herds – “oh, you can’t do that.” Rules set by the feminine are imaginary & created by their petty emotions & paranoia of what others will think of them, especially other women, so women actually ruin innovation of men by emasculating men/individuality by simple fact of them being women/collectivists. Women use vibrators, but when men are interested in the technology of sex-robots, it’s alarming, it’s “creepy’, it’s “pathetic” because of the feminine, “You can’t do that.”
A male optimist hopes that women are bad. A male pessimist discerns that they’re bad. A male who is neutral is preoccupied & often has a mediocre mind anyway. A male who mistkaes them for good is either ignorant, or got lucky.
I have typed time & time again with scientific references that females are generally less intelligent than males. When the less intelligent also have less ego, it’s not so bad. However, when the less intelligent are combined with ego, there are problems, & that is usually the state of female-hood.
Women beleive the notion that explosiveness is synonomous with masculinity, but when the reality makes them recockgnise men for actually being more linear, that female admiration turns to contempt or boredome. Men who have much more testosterone are more masculine. People will not ask for a citation of that because it’s popularly known. Those types of men are usually not concerned with being reckognised by others as fashionable. Men who seek “happening” things to be accapted by the fashionable are empty enough to not embrace themselves. This is part of the emasculation I type about that women do to men – “You can’t do that”/”don’t show you’re realistic self”. Men are condemned for being too linear, yet women are praised for their bad complexity – “you go, girl.” If a male approaches & he isn’t apart of that explosive herd, then he’ll be called a “pervert,” etc..
Even the terms “Beta” & “alpha” themselves are contrived by women. Sure, men coined these terms, but only due to the implication that you have to entertain women. True, I didn’t invent cloth, but the point is is that masculinity has the potentiality to start something, but females disallow masculine individuality to flourish because of all the pretending that you have to do for them.
Aging women complain that aging men become gentler. It’s the most inappropriate & inconsiderate time for him to do that, just when she wants more. Womens’ petty whine is that she never gets what she wants when she wants it. Their innate aggravation increases.
Women still have some of the immaturity of little girls, while men still have some of the innocence & discovery/exploration of little boys.
“50 Shades Of Greed’ broke the records for weekly sales rates with 20 million copies sold.
According to physiological points, the dopamine of ’50 Shades of Greed’ is one of the neurochemical accessing of wanting. The theme is give pleasure, take it away, make her beg for more – cause discomfort, then more pleasure, causing her to be more addicted. But even by this unhealthy logic, there’s other points that a clitoral orgasm is much different from a vaginal orgasm, which has a much better & healthier way of causing her to want. Marc Rudov, author of ‘Under The Clitoral Hood’, knows about this in a very basic way, & he’s not even a physiologist. He’s just a business-man. This has also been my saner & healthier sexuality as well – stimulate her outer vaginal anatomy orally, with hands, or objects to the point of making her insatiated, (continuously switching) then work on inner, & if you had read my other Neuroscientific article: ‘Switching From Indifference To Idealism’, females’ petty addictions is spanning time for males & ordaining primitiveness, which could be used to more rational things, while males just want her to be fit, pretty, or alright face, & non combative.
I rethink as to why other females started to suddenly treat me differently when I had an extremely attractive girlfriend by starting to come to me & doing favors, etc.. It’s because after the first thought of me as a symbol of authority is the projection of what they would do with that situation – they will switch to other deals, even though it was implied I already had want I wanted, which many of them actually hated – again, heinous female sexuality.
Hosting some absurd profiles, I only use dating sites just a little for something extra because I’d rather actually do it live. The feminine thing is is that women aren’t even cognizant of how their own interaction works. They want to see live confidence, but you can’t display that very well on the internet, so I think it’s feminine that they’re wasting not only others,’ but also their own time while not even realizing it. One thing that is really frequent on such sites is that the women on those sites don’t like men sending them easy starting messages of “Hi, how are you?” Men don’t try to come saying “Hi, how are you” because they’re “simple”. They do it that way because men compartmentalize & they know that there is actually no depth with a relationship with a woman. It’s just two people “eating food together”. They say: “Don’t come just saying hi, how are you”, & then afterwards a guy doesn’t do that, they imply he’s “too nice”, or something stupid. They don’t know how interaction works. The other reason they do it by starting with the simple: “hi, how are you”. etc.. Is because when they are pausing from “technical” mode when doing more abstract things, they switch their minds back to “humble” mode, which, of course, women hate, hence the petty politics, trying to seem like something more than on a social networking site, & stupid opinions they form because they don’t do the things that actually matter that men do.
If you’re a male trying to seriously be with females on internet dating sites & you don’t succeed, don’t feel bad. Females of internet dating sites tend to be even more self absorbed than even other whores. Think of it this way, you would think that an extremely sexy female would tend to be harder. Not necessarily. The loser females, mediocre, overweight, etc., due to not having it, tend to actually have much more craving for something farcical & they also tend to be less friendly because they’re less happy. Sexiest females are often actually friendlier because of the fact that they’ve had more
I think it’s really funny how people on dating sites & fetish communities like to portray themselves as like experts on sex, yet they don’t even the basics.
To most females, intelligent males are either “making excuses”, or they are inaccurately called too-nice.
So considering that if a male is sexual & he isn’t popular, he’s called a “pervert”, & that women will condemn men who are also more sexual on his own terms rather than hers, females basically want a “vicious, castrated guard dog”.
Controversy is good for recognition. We also start to shame females for what they are.
‘Extortion – How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes & Line Their Own Pockets’ by Peter Schweizer, pg.:8, 9, 38, 124
“What Do Women Want – Adventures In The Science Of Female Desire’ by Daniel Bergner, pg.:181, pg.183