Counter-Currents
2,279 words
Young men who are both healthy and sane must often keep in check the sexual predator that lurks inside of them. For some, it’s easy. For others, however, it’s the hardest thing they can do. But they do it, not merely because not doing it violates multiple laws and taboos and would violently separate one from society, but because they appreciate the inherent value in human life. This is what separates civilized people from the uncivilized. This is what some would say gives many of us the spark of the divine. This is also what torments young men every day.
When I was in my twenties, I was baffled at how so many young women were either completely oblivious to this, or just didn’t care. Every time a girl said she preferred to be friends with me, it made the torment worse. Every time a girl realized my intentions and suddenly grew cold, it made the torment worse. It also made me resent girls a little bit. For more on my pathetically non-misspent youth, check out “In Defense of Losers, Part 2.”
I am sad to say this, but this is what produces the perfect petri dish for porn: Lonely, resentful young men looking to escape the torment at least for a little while. They are willing to grant the opposite sex the minimum of human rights, of course, but beyond that, all’s fair. Serves them right for not appreciating the difficult trials many young men face every day. And when it’s not real-life women being degraded but mere images of willing adult participants on a screen, then it’s win-win, right?
Porn as torment-escape, however, comes at a steep price that may not be obvious right away. Over time, it produces a dysgenic effect by encouraging young men to remain in the feckless rut of not engaging with women in real life. Of course, I’m not talking about single men with viable social lives who indulge in porn as a rare and guilty pleasure. I’m referring to incels: the sad, involuntary celibate young men who are so discouraged by rejection and loneliness that they’ve decided not to compete with other men for the attention of women. And by offering them a modicum of comfort and relief, porn makes it easier for them to do this. Worst-case scenario: a plethora of immediate gratification in exchange for a fruitless lifetime.
What are these incels going to do at age 60, when the torment is greatly alleviated and they still lack all the comfort and stability of a family? What will our population and our people do as tens of thousands of perfectly viable young men become separated from the gene pool? Or, just as bad, what will these incels do in their 40s when they finally get over their troubles and start building families late in life? There’s an increased likelihood that children of older parents will have autism, Down syndrome, and a host of other serious medical issues.
It’s not a pretty picture.
There are other reasons to ditch porn, of course. First of all, it’s obviously a waste of time. Why do in an hour in front of a screen what you can accomplish unassisted in five minutes? I mean, they both lead to the same happy ending, right?
Even less obvious is the effect porn has on the brain. It’s addictive, it alters one’s brain chemistry, and can potentially produce brain damage. In fact, too much porn can actually cause the brain’s frontal lobes to atrophy. According to Lasha Darkmoon of the Occidental Observer:
Recent research has shown that pornographic images become permanently embedded in the brain, releasing large amounts of naturally occurring chemicals into the bloodstream: e.g., dopamine, epinephrine, oxytocin, serotonin, vasopressin, prolactin, and enkephalins or endogenous opioids, i.e., the brain’s own endorphins. People who view porn obsessively become literally intoxicated: drunk with an overdose of psychotropic chemicals. These mind-altering substances are now known as erototoxins, a relatively recent neologism meaning “sex poisons”.
Taking this further is Dr. Donald Hilton in one of the most fascinating articles on this subject I have ever read:
It’s the overuse of the dopamine reward system that causes addiction. When the pathways are used compulsively, a downgrading occurs that actually decreases the amount of dopamine in the pleasure areas available for use, and the dopamine cells themselves start to atrophy, or shrink. The reward cells in the nucleus accumbens are now starved for dopamine and exist in a state of dopamine craving, as a downgrading of dopamine receptors on the pleasure cells occurs as well. This resetting of the “pleasure thermostat” produces a “new normal.” In this addictive state, the person must act out in addiction to boost the dopamine to levels sufficient just to feel normal.
As the desensitization of the reward circuits continues, stronger and stronger stimuli are required to boost the dopamine. In the case of narcotic addiction, the addicted person must increase the amount of the drug to get the same high. In pornography addiction, progressively more shocking images are required to stimulate the person.
The constant barrage of sexual imagery eventually alters enough of the brain, according to Hilton and others, that the brain’s frontal lobes — a person’s judgment centers — begin to shrink. The same can happen with any addiction.
There’s also the exploitation angle: Rashida Jones’ 2015 Netflix documentary Hot Girls Wanted explores how the porn industry, where it is unregulated, often tricks teenage girls looking for modeling gigs into entering porn. Sadly, you put $500 in a young woman’s face and there is a lot she will do. But many of these girls are abused, both verbally and physically, and they often contract STDs and are forced to do things they don’t want to do, even things that are physically harmful to them.
From Berlin Sylvestre’s Ranker review of Hot Girls Wanted:
There’s only one Hot Girls Wanted confession in which a young woman’s tough-as-nails facade cracks. It’s when she speaks about a $300 oral scene in California wherein she walked into a situation she didn’t know how to leave — it was a video in which she actually had to act like she was being forced. According to performers, if you turn on your heels and leave, it could be your last job in the industry. One performer, who goes by the stage name Ava Taylor, expresses her fear of this lose-lose situation:
“I was terrified. I didn’t know what to do. I didn’t know if I could tell him no […] or the fact that we’d already recorded 15 minutes of it, if I could just […] leave. It’s like, then what?”
You can buy Spencer Quinn’s novel White Like You here.
Exploring the sheer depravity and degeneracy behind the porn industry will revolt just about anyone. It’s pure money-worship and corruption. And by corruption I’m not merely referring to the exploitation on set and the financial chicanery off it, but also corruption of the viewer by creating content which presumes that ubiquitous and unmitigated lust is the new normal.
Sylvestre:
Later in the film, viewers are privy to a scene being filmed in which Ava is playing the role of a girl losing her virginity to a much older man. The male actor is playing a “friend of the family” who is preying on the family’s daughter. When he goes upstairs to her room under the ruse to use the restroom, the male director instructs the actor to touch her as she lies in bed. The director continues:
“And you kiiiiind of, without getting a yes, you almost start to like, keep going with it. Then eventually, you can just tell her, like, ‘Move over’ and you kinda of start taking [her pants] off. It’s like you never even got that full ‘yes’ but you’re kind of getting little ‘yesses’ to the big ‘yes.’”
Let’s also talk about the pedophilia angle. If there weren’t laws protecting children from this kind of abuse, I have a feeling that at least some of these unscrupulous porn producers would gladly take advantage of children, if the money were right:
In one scene from Hot Girls Wanted, a man off-camera enthusiastically says, “She’s 18, but looks like she’s 12!” According to this guy and his associates, looking 12 years old is a bonus in their corner of the adult film industry. “Every day, a new girl turns 18,” says Riley Reynolds, a then-23-year-old Tampa, FL, talent agent. “Every day, a new girl . . . I will never run out.”
Disgusting, right? Then Ms. Sylvestre drops this nasty tidbit on us:
There’s actually a site that specializes in “facial abuse,” and it’s famous for taking oral to the extreme. By extreme, the goal is to penetrate a woman’s face so carelessly and vigorously as to make her vomit. These abuse porn sites rack up 60 million hits per month. Hot Girls Wanted contends that 40% of online adult video sites are comprised of violence against women.
Off camera, a man with a high-pitched voice offers his own brand of what Ava calls “Latina abuse,” which is stereotyping her personality all the while telling her he hates that. He addresses her using expletives and derogatory terms. Then he slaps her and spits on her face as he instructs her to say degrading things about herself. He verbally and physically abuses her with a sex toy until she vomits.
In another facial abuse video, Belle Knox (who later went on The View to talk about her experiences as a Duke student by day and an adult video star by night) is choked and dragged off a couch while crying expletives at her attacker, who’s more than eager to slap her confused face. The violence is all part of the film’s direction.
And they say thousands of post-high school girls sign up for the porn industry every year. Why? Because there are millions of men worldwide who consume it. Is this what we want to contribute to? Is this the world we want to live in?
If not, then tune out and help starve the beast.
Finally, there are racial reasons to quit porn — and this being Counter-Currents, I would be remiss if I did not include them. It is common knowledge that Jews are behind much of the porn industry; see Mark Collett’s comprehensive analysis of this depressing topic and two Counter-Currents articles, here and here. As many of us know, there has always been an unscrupulous, profiteering portion of the Jewish diaspora population which seeks fortune at the expense of gentiles’ weaknesses, oftentimes exacerbating them. And rarely does the mainstream Jewish community speak out against or police these predators.
Chapter Three of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together describes how the poet and senator Gavrila Romanovich Derzhavin, in the late eighteenth century, observed a devastating famine in what is now Belarus. Here is what he reported, according to Solzhenitsyn:
Derzhavin discovered that the Jewish schnapps distillers exploited the alcoholism of the peasants: “After I had discovered that the Jews from profit-seeking use the lure of drink to beguile grain from the peasants, convert it into brandy and therewith cause a famine. I commanded that they should close their distilleries in the village Liosno . . . I informed myself from sensible inhabitants as well as nobles, merchants, and villagers about the manner of life of the Jews, their occupations, their deceptions and all their pettifogging with which . . . they provide the poor dumb villages with hunger . . .”
This has been going on for centuries: alcohol, usury, prostitution, and now porn. The pattern here is unmistakable. And once one sees this pattern by which Jewish pornographers rake in billions every year at the expense of the health, humanity, and biological success of whites, this becomes a piece in an even bigger puzzle in which we can perceive the enemy’s actions.
Jews are the driving force behind Bolshevism, non-white immigration, radical Left-wing politics, the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, anti-white racism, gun control, the LGBTQ agenda, vulture capitalism, censorship, and many other culturally corrosive projects.
Of course, there is always the NAXALT caveat. I am aware that there are Jews who oppose many of these things. For example, the late Judith Reisman campaigned indefatigably against pornography, as well as against the good reputation of sex “researcher” and incorrigible pervert Alfred Kinsey. Since her death this past April, her institute carries on her work.
But the fact remains that these are minority voices — and have always been minority voices — in the greater Jewish diaspora community. This justifies my claim that “the Jews” were behind this or that, while not justifying flagrant racial insults from influential Jews like Noel (we must abolish whiteness) Ignatiev and Donald (whiteness is a parasitic condition) Moss when the mainstream opinions of whites in the West range from tolerating Jews to outright philo-Semitism.
Further, let’s do the following thought experiment. Can anyone name something that is eugenic for the white race as a whole that the majority of diaspora Jews either energetically support — or at least doesn’t energetically fight against?
Add your answers in the comments below. I don’t think I will have too many takers — from Jew or Gentile alike.
Nevertheless, once a white person realizes what has been perpetrated against him and his people, everything changes. What was black is now white, day is now night, up is now down, and — for me, at least — I felt I was living in Bizzaro World for several weeks. As I have reported elsewhere, when reading Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique, I could feel all my philo-Semitic angels dying one by one. I could hear their screams.
Once one gets over that, however, and sees porn and other aspects of the ongoing anti-white demographic war for what they really are, then it becomes a lot easier to get off the junk.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
54 comments
I think porn is a good outlet for guys, particularly those not sexually attractive in their youth. I see it sort of like birth control—a tool that we are happy to have but which has some negative side effects. These should be dealt with through self control, not through eliminating the tool. Fast food is good, but must be taken in moderation.
part of the problem is that the male ego thinks it deserves the woman of its dreams but doesn’t.
Sorry, didn’t mean to post yet. But a lot of times males seem to think they deserve beautiful women out of their league, but then are taken aback to discover—shock horror!—girls have standards too! I had this friend who was disgustingly obese, but he had the idea that he should get these petit lovely girls. I tried to explain to him, but he would get enraged and yell “ I don’t think fat!” Lol, that’s not the world’s problem bro!
But still, the world is kinder to guts because there’s a lot they can do to improve their sexual attractiveness, whereas for women not so much. Males can perfect their body image by losing fat and grooming, but also working out gives an advantage that is not innate.
More importantly, I would give the advise Iago gave in othello: “put money in thy purse!” Seriously, women over the age of twenty five are interested in one thing—the bulge where your wallet is, not any other. They are very practical creatures.
Your simping and lack of awareness in the woman question is just unbelievable. The two simple facts of the matter are, first that women are hypergamous and will only ever be interested in the top 20 percent of men. Back in the day, when monogamy was enforced (no premarital sex) this was not a problem. Now, all women go for the top 20 percent of men polygamously, while never marrying and having some children as single mothers or no children at all. The 80 percent of men come in later once these women have hit the wall in their 30s and are now less attractive.
Second, there is genetic determinism. As a man you can’t just ‘improve yourself’ to become better. Your success is determined entirely by your genes and environment. Genes are what they are, while your environment is a bit variable. For example reading counter currents is a positive enviromental factor. But if you are some in incel, son of a single mother, you are basically fucked. Since you are already and incel your genes are not supreme and your environment is fucked. There are exactly zero women you can get.
So, the solution is not for men to improve, but for women’s rights to be taken away. Monogamy should be enforced again if you want to avoid the incel problem and further women shouldn’t have a say in their mate choice. Her father if much more capable of selecting a good husband for her. Further the welfare state for single mothers should be taken away as well as no fault divorce. Women should also be banned from the workforce as well as from voting.
Finally I want to say that only patriarchy builds civilazation. If porn wouldn’t exist, incels would have already burned the world down.
You sound like the type of guy the Right doesn’t need.
You are the type of “Right” White Nationalists have no use for.
You went full evola on me. I’m a child of modernity. Yes, certainly there is genetic determinism for males too, but I’m saying there are things guys can do, eg getting ripped abs, to improve themselves significantly in the eyes of womens, whereas for females it’s more there or it’s not. I suppose you can argue that the creative impetus to sculpt ones body is also in itself genetic, but that gets into complex questions of free will.
I might have been too disagreeable to you sir. Certainly, young men should be encouraged to work out and build themselves up. But I believe this should in a way such that the reality of female nature is also discussed. At the end of the day even though there is genetic determinism and one’s environment is also determined by their genes if they can choose it, encouragement does provide a positive environmental influence.
I mistook your comment to a kind of boomer con point which sees no problem with the general way things are and claims it is all individual man’s problem.
That was just boilerplate redpill talk, nowhere even remotely close to full Evola. There are so many subjects I thought were “settled science” for the Right that apparently aren’t. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter who uses porn, who participates in it, or what it’s effects on society are. It is simply an inherently evil activity that a decent society should not tolerate.
Genetic determinism is not absolute and we as individuals should not be deselecting ourselves on what we deem to be fit or worthy. Much of the black pill phenomenon is because of trauma, abuse and neglect. We’re losing good people through no fault of their own.
once these women have hit the wall in their 30s and are now less attractive.
Less attractive than what? A 16-year old, maybe? There’s plenty of women in their 30s who are attractive if not outright beautiful. Where do you see all these already-hit-the-wall women in their 30s? They’d probably have to be druggies, alcoholics, or bulimics to appear undesirable in their 30s.
Look on the bright side. There are clearly some very young men who read Counter-Currents.
The two simple facts of the matter are, first that women are hypergamous and will only ever be interested in the top 20 percent of men.
Demonstrable lies.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/109402/age-24-marriage-wins.aspx
So, the solution is not for men to improve, but for women’s rights to be taken away.
That’s not going to happen. Misogyny is going, going, gone, even in former strongholds like Saudi Arabia. This movement will accept that or face oblivion.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1882746/saudi-arabia
Back in the day, when monogamy was enforced (no premarital sex) this was not a problem.
Ah, yes, the good ole days…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Maiden_Tribute_of_Modern_Babylon
This is unintentional comedy gold. The fact the writer doesn’t have a clue how much like a caricature he sounds.
So, the solution is not for men to improve, but for women’s rights to be taken away.
Yes. “Women’s rights” are a way of socializing hypergamy by minimizing its costs through taxpayer-funded abortion clinics, no-fault divorce, public assistance, rape shield and sexual harassment laws, and by subsidizing its benefits (from the perspective of women) by funding public coeducation and imposing quotas. These have changed the cost structure of society and made provider status irrelevant. Women no longer have to worry about getting pregnant when they can abort their children and if they decide to keep it the state will give them housing vouchers, free university tuition, maternal leave and track down the man to pay child support. In some countries, it pays to be a slut.
So “improving” now doesn’t mean demonstrating that you are a decent, responsible, financially secure man who is able to provide for a family because the state is the provider. Improving means being an exciting character that turns women on. That’s not going to lead to more white families; it’s going to lead to more single moms, divorce and young guys not caring about the future of society. Tl;dr: men are not going to “improve” for sluts.
Seriously, women over the age of twenty five are interested in one thing—the bulge where your wallet is, not any other. They are very practical creatures.
Women don’t care about that as much as they did a few decades ago. A greater percentage of women outearn men today than at any time in history. In some cities, there are more women homeowners than men. Most companies provide paid maternal leave and some European governments do as well.
Women don’t need men to provide for them anymore.
I find it encouraging that, especially on places like twitter, drawn porn has become vastly more popular than porn featuring real actors and actresses. No Jewish directors or human garbage that sold their dignity are involved, just artists and their (misspent) skill. It victimizes no one. It allows men (and women) their recreational masturbation without supporting the satanic porn industry, rewarding creative individuals instead. And since mankind has been beating it to facsimiles of the real thing since at least the neolithic age, I don’t see anything unnatural about it. The only importance is to limit its use -but this goes for all masturbation.
That might have more to do with the need for different kinds of stimulation that comes with addictive behavior.
The question raised here: “Can you name something that is eugenic for whites that is promoted?” is a very good one. Indeed, even if one makes it a bit less tailored to counter-currents, and apply it without referencing Jewish influence or the target being whites, it’s a useful exercise.
It’s fair to say that parenting and family life are routinely made more expensive, inconvenient, and unappealing through policies, media, and living conditions, and that this negatively affects thoughtful people more than the thoughtless.
You get what you incentivize, regardless of what your intent is. I think the first domino that has to fall is that people acknowledge that genetics matter, because almost all modern policies can be rationally defended if you don’t think they do.
Like Steve Sailer has been saying for years:
The number-one predictor of GOP voting among Whites is LIVING IN A REGION WHERE FAMILY FORMATION IS AFFORDABLE.
There is a (female) scientist doing the rounds currently at The Guardian & co., who is trying to rehabilitate genetic research in the progressive world. Whilst it was nice to think that they were so stupid to ignore the research altogether and be completely doomed to failure, it seems that we are bound to tap into this new development and untangle the sophistry that they are weaving around the topic of genetic research. I am curious to know what the writers here think of this development.
Porn isn’t the cause of low fertility, nor is it a serious barrier to white family formation. It is the death of patriarchy in the West, our unwillingness to restrict female hypergamy and the legal weapons given to women against men, specifically in the realm of divorce law and rape allegations which cause low fertility and prevent family formation. In the modern day, porn is a (poor) substitute for the sex the vast majority of men aren’t getting.
This is not to be understood as an endorsement of porn or excusal for watching it, but it’s good to keep our feet on the ground when discussing this most important of subjects.
“excusal”? you couldn’t just say “excuse”?
love your work by the way.
I’m no fan of porn either, but I agree with you on this. I believe it is more of a symptom rather than a cause of what plagues us. If the other issues you mentioned were dealt with properly, I don’t think porn would really be on anyone’s radar very much, or at least nowhere near to the extent it is now.
Sorry about the book-length manuscript.
I think this is one of those meaningless wedge issues that probably appeals to Christian and moralists to raise hopes without actually doing anything substantial towards the real problems faced by White people.
I agree that porn isn’t the cause of the problem of low White fertility and family formation.
I am certainly not going to make a case for obscenity either.
But I think it is a bad idea to start running the slippery slope of censorship. We have to be very cautious about how to address these nasty issues.
One of the main arguments that Holocaust hoaxsters use is that they claim to be all for the freedom-of-speech. What they are against is “obscenity,” they say. And Super Jews think they they are the ones who should define what is obscene. By their way of thinking, Holocaust Denial/Revisionism is obscene.
Even if porn were banned somehow, it would still require some means like competent juries to decide what is obscene and what to do about filth. In the United States juries can’t even settle the most blatantly obvious questions. I would be in favor of screening potential jurors with IQ tests but that would be Rayciss.
As has been mentioned, Jews have an overwhelming control over mass-media, the push for wide open-borders, promotion of race-mixing and just about every other degenerate influence. It does not give me any pleasure to say this.
It may be that (like the Nazis) we have to cancel Jewish citizenship at some point to regain an organic control of the mass-media, academia and many other institutions of our own nations, if we ever hope to end the dysfunctional subversion.
However, as a White Nationalist who has known that something was very rotten in Denmark since I was a kid, I will say that I find 99 percent of the so-called Manosphere to be utter cringe, and I am unpersuaded by most of the arguments usually mentioned.
I can only speak for the United States, but the way I see it, family-formation is complex at best and it is very difficult for people to start out living paycheck-to-paycheck as they do nowadays.
The prospect of owning a home is not even going to be part of that cliché called the American Dream. Wages have not kept up with inflation since 1968 when a couple making minimum wage could buy a modest home and start a family.
Today it takes a college degree to get a bugman job, and if the applicant is White he will have to affect the Social Justice vocabulary and rhetoric learned from Trotskyite professors and rainbow-haired scolds just to have a chance at being hired.
Unless you can weld mufflers like King Midas or tend bar like Banksy, that college diploma will be more vital than ever ─ more expensive than ever, and nearly worthless ─ and everybody except for the lowliest will already have one stuck up where the sun don’t shine.
The economic situation is THE major problem as I see it, but it is not a question of more affluence but quality of life and healthy ties to family and extended family. They are many facets to this. The entire system is designed for debt and consumption and an extended adolescence, but not for raising a family. That isn’t even a social goal.
We just had a fine CC essay from Mark Gullick on Orwell’s monumental 1984 and love being subversive. There is a question one hears as to which dystopian model we are subjected to ─ the repressive tyranny where fornication gets you killed or the promiscuous one where all woman are whores and most men are incels.
I submit that we have both.
Sir Thomas More, “the man for all seasons,” beheaded by his King over his principled stance against the royal divorce and later canonized. Saint More was a superlative Catholic who otherwise served the Defender of the Faith as his Lord Chancellor, happily burning one heretic after another at the stake.
I have no doubt that Hank VIII was a bastard, but I find little to admire from his zealous Lord Chancellor, who btw penned the book Utopia.
Read More’s Utopia again through a different lens and maybe it starts to look like a Christian dystopia.
In the movie dystopia, THX 1138, the people are drugged to reduce carnal thoughts and to focus the mind for demanding drone labor. His drugs don’t seem to be working but there is a sort of Memex machine that Robert Duvall uses to get his porn and violence. It works like an interactive microfilm image processor and filing system, but unlike the Internet, this media is not meant to connect people with each other.
Unlike More’s Utopia or THX1138, people are not normally imprisoned for Life for fornication or risking capital punishment. In our media rich world, every fetish and form of degeneracy is officially encouraged except for wholesome relationships. It may soon come to pass with 57 genders that unprotected heteronormative sex becomes a revolutionary act.
In Huxley’s Brave New World it was not a repressive dystopia but one of birth control and birthing chambers and obligatory promiscuity. That more like what the Manosphere types complain about. All the hot women are not interested in dating princes who are toads.
Are the fine women really having that much sex in places like Japan, or is it that the sexes in that crowded land have just forgotten how to talk to each other?
So Incels end up living in Mom’s basement watching anime, choking the chicken tendies down, and consuming edgy Internet whining about female hypergamy and flame-posting.
The girls don’t do any better and will end up hating men, gaining rear-end ballast, collecting cats and skanky tattoos.
White people have political interests as White people, but that is exactly what they are not allowed to address.
We have to find a way to change that. The biggest joke is that Christianity is going to rescue anything. No, that is exactly how we got to where we are.
LDS (Mormons) are doing better but they will not be able to maintain their traditional but modern lifestyles for much longer. The larger society that they are part of is broken. Californian refugees are dumping into Arizona and Idaho like locusts, and they bring their Pozz with them.
I’m not a particularly good writer, but who was it (Mark Twain?) who said “write what you know.” So at the risk of insufferable boredom, I’ll try to draw on some persona observations if I can. I’ll try to keep to the positive aspects but will touch on dicey things like divorce and infidelity.
I am an atheist but I was raised LDS (Mormon) and 3/4 of my extended family are LDS and Western pioneers who settled the so-called Mormon Corridor.
Mormons put great emphasis on Family and this can be suffocating, especially if you don’t agree with the Groupthink or are a Skeptic like me. If they make you miserable it is hard to divorce your family; they are “forever.”
The whole premise of a Faith is that there is some ultimate truth or higher power, and that some sect knows it somehow or has access to the magic beans.
But if Truth has any meaning, you can’t just make it up to suit because it’s what you want, e.g., more White people in the pews.
In the end, the Supernatural isn’t even a good argument.
I wholeheartedly agree that family and ancestry, and the enduring legacy of our racial culture ─ or Western Civilization as we used to call it ─ what European peoples have created and what we will create ─ are the most important parts of life. I take exception to those who think that atheists or agnostics are nihilists.
I have four sisters and I find it hard to understand the guys who can’t relate to or understand women. I am not putting anyone on a pedestal either. Everybody has gotten burned in life and made some dumb choices, especially with the opposite sex. I have dodged a bullet or two myself.
Yes, women think differently than we do but they are not space aliens. They are not that hard to communicate with, but it takes some practice and some patience.
I guess in one-child households, especially without a father present, basic socialization might be a challenge for young men. This is a complicated subject but I rarely find Manosphere and arguments from “Generational Astrology” to be of much (or any) value.
So all of my four sisters have at least three or four kids, and all but one have bachelors degrees and worked long enough to establish their families until they became stay-at-home Moms with one exception.
I don’t think Mormons eschew birth control, or at least they no longer do, but they are still having decently-sized families. I am not a big fan of the huge nine-child “peasant” families, but these are pretty rare.
Mormons believe that a wife needs nearly as much education as her husband because it is hard for families to start out, and it is even harder for a single Mom to survive if something happens to the husband, regardless of whose fault that situation is.
I got hit by a drunk driver while riding my bicycle home from work in Phoenix traffic and was nearly killed, so I know how easy it is to get the lights snuffed out by accident. A couple of years ago, on the cusp of retirement, my brother-in-law got killed on the Interstate when his truck hit a patch of black ice after a freak Spring storm.
My oldest nephew graduated from the Naval Academy and then got married; he finished his military obligation as an officer on a nuclear submarine, and now he already has five kids.
Well, this just would not have been possible without the military literally subsidizing his family size and actually providing benefits like housing and healthcare, which is increasingly rare in the modern corporate or gig economy.
I’m not suggesting the military as a career solution, but most people joining up are actually not thinking clearly about long-term career goals. Nearly everyone is pretty clueless about what to do with their life. I know I was.
My nephew was the product of a nasty divorce. My Dad gave my nephew a good example of a male role model and he and his brother and sister turned out great in spite of the split.
My new (now deceased) brother-in-law was a former Naval officer and nuclear engineer from Idaho, so I think he gave his step-son some pretty good career mentoring. He knew what to do and what not to do with a military career.
My sister won her contested divorce largely because of what my Mom and Dad did to back her up and keep her family intact by actually moving temporarily to Arizona.
She also got some moral and financial support from her Church because many of the members were not amused by some of the peccadilloes that my former brother-in-law had been up to. At some point she had had enough, broke the silence, unleashed the Kraken and asked my Mom and Dad for help. They were livid but kept their cool.
The royal divorce was hard to do because if she wanted custody of the kids she had to maintain a separate household at her own expense, and she could not leave the state. She had to scale her lifestyle back immensely ─ and my Mom and Dad, both descended from pioneers, knew exactly how to do this.
Hubby had all the power in the divorce too because as a highly-paid professional he could pay attorney fees ad infinitum. When he briefly got laid off from his job in the Great Recession, the tables turned and he had to settle up.
My Sister did not want any money or the cookie-cutter house in suburbia with the pool and the barbecue and the big-screen TV. All she wanted was primary custody of the kids so that she could move back to Idaho where my parents could help raise them until she got back on her feet.
I think she got two years of alimony until she finished her Bachelors degree (which she did) but the money awarded was nothing to write home about. There was also some child support involved until the teenagers turned 18.
Ultimately she remarried more wisely and became a stay-at-home Mom as before. It is funny how a unhappy woman can’t imagine finding a decent man, but how easily a happy one blossoms.
That is true of the kids as well. Without my Mom and Dad and the support they got from their Church, my Sister’s kids would probably not have turned out so well.
The legal system is an adversarial one ─ and as long as cash is shovelled into the maw, the solicitors can keep the gears turning endlessly in divorces and other litigation. This can be tragic when property is contested and the kids are made into pawns and used as leverage.
My parents were both products of divorce, but at least their parents did not try to use accusations and blame as a lever to turn the children against their former spouses, so they fared much better. And they have been happily married now for 61 years.
If we are talking about marriages and divorce, the most important thing to address is the nature of healthy relationships ─ and if “irreconcilable differences” exist, then a marriage has no hope and no good can come of it.
I simply do not understand these arguments kvetching about No Fault Divorce, hypergamy, patriarchy, etc.
And we don’t need more morality police and frigid bluestockings to set things right.
Thank You!
It is the death of patriarchy in the West, our unwillingness to restrict female hypergamy and the legal weapons given to women against men, specifically in the realm of divorce law and rape allegations which cause low fertility and prevent family formation. In the modern day, porn is a (poor) substitute for the sex the vast majority of men aren’t getting.
Finally, you admit that it is men who don’t want to get married, unless women have no more rights in the relationship than they would as at-will cohabiting sex partners. Of course, you ought to just go ahead and acknowledge that you oppose the institution of marriage as such, rather than complain about “divorce law.” Of course, if you have some specific ideas as to how to make family court more fair, short of hollowing out marriage altogether, please share with the class.
Your contention that the threat of rape allegations reduces White fertility is even more absurd. Like all crimes, rape must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of the defendant’s peers, as it should be. What more do you want?
Nor are men getting accused of rape on college campuses, where the standard of proof is lower. This is a complete fabrication.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/college/2017/05/11/study-89-of-colleges-reported-zero-campus-rapes-in-2015/37431949/
Porn is incompatible with White Nationalism on every level but it probably keeps a lot of White Nationalists from getting violent.
I would say classic Hollywood was eugenic for whites as a whole, and the classic Hollywood studio system was exclusively Jewish. From Birth of a Nation (1915) to about the early 1970s. And remained influential even after that. Also the British Tory prime minister Disraeli was a great defender of traditional England. Confederate secretary of state Judah P. Benjamin should also be mentioned.
I’d like to hear “Trevor Lynch’s” opinion on this. I haven’t seen enough “classic Hollywood”, but I think you’re wrong. From what I have seen, Hollywood has always been a “liberalizing” force – and I don’t mean that in a good way. Birth of a Nation was unusual even for its time. Of course, everything is much worse today.
How about teevee and movies with no bearing on it either way? It’s WHITE PEOPLE who are dysgenic, period. White families that turned inward 50 years ago and let their raging boomer children take over. Being competent and responsible and not delusional or idiotic is actually pretty easy and was never that complicated.
“Can anyone name something that is eugenic for the white race as a whole that the majority of diaspora Jews either energetically support — or at least doesn’t energetically fight against?”
Nope.
Ill Bite:
The massive push for the Pozzed, woke agenda across all sectors of society. The fact that the “usual suspects” are following their traditional tendencies towards hubris and “chutzpah”, and are jumping the gun while we are still a majority instead of being patient and continuing to boil the frog.
Its fully supported by our enemies and Its waking us up. Including normies on the margin.
The article is too evangelistic. The incel problem is not with porn in any way but with society. And the problem with society (from an objective anthropological perspective) has been the relatively sudden empowerment of women which has given them too much choice for everyone’s good, including in their own sexuality (not to mention accelerating economic growth far quicker than the deleterious effects of such can be dealt with).
When even dowdy-to-middling women can support themselves without a man they are suddenly (in evolutionary terms) presented with unlimited lifestyle/partner choices and become precious and picky and generally high-emotional-maintenance. Too much choice is a bad thing on the whole and only increases the chances of making a bad choice. I can’t even choose a tie or a pair of socks with any efficiency when there are too many to pick from.
I believe nature selects for all types, purposely, and has thereby always provided someone for everyone. (My theory is that baldness in men is nature’s evolutionary strategy to ensure that even the less-attractive women find a partner – baldness, in effect, relegates a man to a lower league.)
Nature didn’t account for sudden female empowerment though, and partner selection is now suddenly skewed in a woman’s favour, with entirely predictable consequences.
Nature doesn’t do anything “purposely”. HBD types have a bad tendency to anthropomorphize natural processes.
You’re also wrong about baldness. One of the most attractive women I ever dated once told me, the first time I met her and apropos of my mentioning that I didn’t look forward to going bald (as I now am bald, or mostly so, this was many years ago, when I knew someday I would be bald, absent Rogaine or ‘plugs’, both of which have always struck me as pathetic and unmanly), “Oh that! I was just talking to my mom and sister the other day about guys worrying about that, and we laughed. It’s really not a big deal to us [women].” I hate to come off as either cool or an a-hole when I’m neither, but I don’t think you know that much about women.
[To be fair, the observation re baldness might be more valid for young women assessing prematurely bald men – those losing their hair under 40. It might also be a bigger issue for the young today than it was for me and my fellow Boomers (I was a late Boomer, however). I didn’t really go bald until my late 40s. After 40, however, women take baldness in better stride, trust me.]
The rest of your comment, though, especially the second paragraph, is dead-on right.
lol … you must be very young and inexperienced with women. Being a bald man I never thought it effected my chances in getting women.
“Nature didn’t account for sudden female empowerment though, and partner selection is now suddenly skewed in a woman’s favour, with entirely predictable consequences.”
Survival of the fittest. If only women were barred from picking certain partners (those outside their race) there wouldn’t be a problem.
Yet another wise and informative article from Spencer Quinn. Thanks especially for the TOO links (I’m going to have to check them out more often).
Overall, I find porn – all porn – boring. I find the issue of porn boring, too, though maybe I should pay more attention. To me, obsessed with the demographic assault, I always saw [opposition to] porn as more of a “Christian thing”. I also always found porn depressing, the relatively few times I “checked it out”. Whenever I’d see something pornographic, I would be thinking, “This is pathetic; shouldn’t I be with a real woman?”
Anyway, is there evidence that porn is mostly a young man’s issue? I didn’t know that. I thought it was an issue for all ages (at least up to the 60s – though why Quinn thinks male sex drive stops at 60 I have no idea; obviously, he is not yet a sexagenarian (no pun intended).
I think there is more going on here. In my day (and as I’m unmarried, I still date off and on; it’s not such a big deal … really), we understood finding lovers to be a “numbers game”. Unless you were incredibly attractive for some reason, or had incredibly low aesthetic standards (I’ve known both types), you simply had to do the equivalent of salesmens’ “cold calls” or “pounding the pavement”. That is, you had to get “out there” and meet people. And once you entered a “target rich” environment, you had to keep hitting on girl after girl until some “chemistry” happened. Once you got her “digits”, then you had to actually get her out on a date. For me for some reason (which I was once seriously told had to do with my “obnoxious rightwing personality” – and this even when I would be on my best behavior!) , the toughest part was always the second date. If I could successfully get one, and then, the big hurdle, get a third date, thereafter I would be “in like Flynn”. (In fact, it is still pretty much this way for me, though I’m more relaxed about it all.)
The young guys I have known (children of friends) have actually all been pretty cool, as well as prowhite (giving my mostly blackpilled self some measure of future hope for my people). But from what I read and hear about younger men over the past decade, they frankly mostly seem like Generation Sissy. The language they use, the way they interact with the world, their wussy handshakes, simply scream “WEAK!” Whatever women say, their genitalia don’t like weakness (and this has very little to do with pecs and biceps). It doesn’t surprise me that a generation which talks about “trigger warnings” and “thafe sthpathes” (I cannot help lisping that) produces masses of incels. The generation most comfortable with and accepting of every form of sexual degeneracy is also maybe the most sexless of all time. That cannot be a coincidence.
Be a strong (in attitude and self-control), confident man. Approach women (at least ones who look normal; admittedly finding such is a worsening problem) in a friendly but slightly aggressive fashion. They want to be talked to. They have their own insecurities. Trust me: even if you are not especially cool or handsome, women will respond. Do not let women always get their way. Take charge of dates, and keep taking charge. Women like that, even if sometimes they complain. If you do something genuinely offensive or just clumsy, apologize sincerely. But if a woman is being pouty and bitchy for no good reason, or simply because she’s not having a great time, never apologize. It’s a bit like training a stubborn horse or large dog. You don’t want to be actually abusive, but you have to show who’s in charge.
I suffered a lot in youth, but it was my own fault. A beautiful high school summer girlfriend, whom I met on an extended vacation with my parents (as she was with hers), really ruined much of my life with a single comment uttered in 1977: “You’d be really hot if you got to be more like my brother.” Her brother, a really cool college freshman and pre-varsity athlete, was a rabid weightlifter and fitness guy (I was somewhat athletic and not nerdy, except for the fact that I was also a top student, for which I caught a lot of grief and abuse by the “cool kids”; but at that age – just under 16 – I was tall and skinny; I got much bigger in college). For a decade and a half after that, I thought that what all women really wanted was a handsome, which meant in part muscular, guy. I never was into porn (which back then meant magazines), but I certainly wasted a lot of time watching myself in front of mirrors lifting weights (it didn’t help that much of this was during the steroidal 80s, the heyday of Stallone and Arnold).
(The real ruin of my youth instigated by this girl was that I spent decades pursuing only the hottest women, with only very rare success. I thought I deserved such, based on her affection, as well as my beautiful senior year girlfriend. I could have settled down with several perfectly acceptable women, but I kept thinking “I can do better“. This was probably true, but only hypothetically: ie, it was possible that I could do better, but in practical fact, extremely unlikely. {Alas, “better” for me also included nationalist ideology, a huge liability.} I wish that I’d had someone to advise me back then.)
Women, especially young ones, don’t dislike muscles and good “bods”. But what they like above all is confidence and “take-chargedness”. Of course, they make trade-offs. The handsomer you are, the more ‘beta’ your personality can be. Ditto for being wealthier (the latter especially so with age). But at least 80% of men can get themselves women, if they try and are willing to accept that a lot of rejection goes with the territory. (I used to party in the 90s with a guy whom many women said looked like Brad Pitt. Not quite, but he was always serenading really fine women. He once confided in me, though, that even he gets rejected sometimes. “I don’t get as much action as everybody thinks.” Women are unpredictable, whatever the HBD statisticians say. Ah well, my own misspent youth.)
I’d like to comment in this apparently all-male thread.
I grew up in the 50s and 60s. No one explained male sexuality to me. I enjoyed male attention (we still went on dates then) and let boys take me to dinner, concerts, bowling etc. with the understanding that they were, as a result, entitled to a kiss and maybe a feel.
As I got older I had no compunction about using boys for my own pleasure. Did they want more than they got from me? I didn’t know and didn’t care.
Now, in my late 60s, I am ashamed of how I used all those boys so selfishly. But: I didn’t know what was going on in their heads or their bodies.
I wish now I could apologize to them all.
Moral: explain honestly the physiology of sex to boys and girls as soon as they reach puberty. Then teach sexual ethics without the Judeo-Christian overlay. That’s where you get the Jewish tie-in: predator and prey.
No one explained male sexuality to me.
Me neither, and I’m glad they didn’t. Otherwise, I probably would have written men off altogether, despairing of ever finding a partner who could be trusted.
I only wish I could unhear much of what I have heard since the sex-obsessed manosphere took over the White nationalist movement.
To the extent one is tormented by sexual desire, getting sex is not the solution. Reining in sexual desire is the solution. It will have to be done eventually anyway if a man who intends to marry and have children.
Men are prone to a shyness and weakness in the face of women which many of them lament and curse, and the “manosphere” types have tried to blame this on feminism. It’s the womenfolk’s fault I can’t look them in the face and ask them out! And for sure, feminism as a doctrine tries nothing more than to sour relations and widen the gap between men and women, to turn the female sex into something unapproachable. However history shows us that male anxiety towards female love interests is of all ages. This shyness serves a purpose. It shuts the man up in the precious moments when first contact is made and it prevents him doing or saying stupid things by making him extremely self-aware. This is not just a mentality. I’m positive this is evolutionary learned behavior, and part of human courtship the same way a specific species of bird has learned its own unique courting dance. Mankind was never the species to club women on the head and drag them off by their hair. Naturally each individual does it differently but the anxiety is always there, as even the most boorish womanizer will have some deep-seated insecurity and fear of rejection.
I think men need to accept this anxiety as a part of life and speak about it openly, rather than just blame women, which is what feminists want. Feminism is a proposition, and it needs men to be the enemy it claims they are. In a way the manosphere types, as reactionaries against radical feminism, give the radical feminists the ideal justification for their existence by fostering open disrespect and unmannered behavior towards women in general. And I’m sure they’re all too stupid to realize it, the same way feminists are.
Men are prone to a shyness and weakness in the face of women
They need to get over it. I have told my sons that I have nothing but contempt for men who lose their wits around pretty girls. Doing so reveals that a man has already decided he’s interested in you before he’s even spoken to you. He thereby admits that his chief concern is how you look. That’s pathetic. Our contempt for these weaklings is, I believe, a natural warning to stay away from men who are spellbound by a pretty face. They are liable to ditch you when a better offer comes around.
Feminism is a proposition, and it needs men to be the enemy it claims they are. In a way the manosphere types, as reactionaries against radical feminism, give the radical feminists the ideal justification for their existence by fostering open disrespect and unmannered behavior towards women in general.
The ironic truth.
This is called the halo effect, where a male looks at a an attractive woman as if she has angelic qualities and associates her with mostly positive traits. Males do this both consciously and sub consciously. If you start dating on a regular basis, say at age 16, this diminishes over time. This is one of the positive aspects of being burnt in relationships. We should teach young men to observe the behavior of attractive women that they don’t date, starting in high school. We should also teach men to observe the behavior of attractive women in the workplace, not only toward men, but to other women as well. The point is not to stereotype attractive women or women in general. Common sense dictates that you should get to now someone before a serious relationship starts, regardless of what the person looks like. As males age and aquire more experience with the opposite sex, this shyness should diminish.
Any who doubt the nature of this business, I urge to watch the 2001 British documentary, ‘Hardcore’, which may be viewed on YouTube. It documents the journey of ‘Felicity’, a young British model from a broken family, as her pimp-like ‘agent’ (also British) attempts to introduce her to players in the US ‘adult entertainment industry’. These persons are seedy and without redeeming qualities, but the most disturbing segment is her encounter with a truly demonic figure, the psychotic rapist who goes by the name of ‘Max Hardcore’. What transpires should be reflected upon by all choose to consume this ‘product’.
As for celibacy, involuntary or otherwise, consider this: the primary natural purpose of sex is the begetting of children: it is not a human right or inherently a necessary form of self-expression. Many people in long term relationships, after a flurry of months or years will settle down to something resembling long term celibacy, especially as one enters middle age. This would have been a perfectly normal expectation in prior epochs, at least where monogamy was the norm. And all the more so in old age, where physiological constraints dominate, despite the nonsense about ‘horny old couples’ promoted in the media. To men and women in the great classical classical civilisations this was even seen as a release from a tyrannical urge, and an opportunity to turn the mind to higher matters. The obsession with sexual activity as a badge of social worth is simply another of sign of the Kali Yuga, wherein the natural creative drive is reduced to a token in the power/money game, and ‘incels’ are in receipt of ‘punishment’ for being on the wrong side.
Well said! I don’t agree with EMJ on many things but his book Libido Dominandi shed ample light on this question and who is behind it.
Porn is vile, but why the moral panic?
Asceticism is degenerate. Full stop.
Is this really where one should be seeking moral guidance?
Angels don’t eat. They don’t urinate or defecate. And they certainly don’t copulate.
Sex is strictly for the icky beasts to procreate, so hold your noses, close your Proletarian eyes, and grimly do your “duty.”
Or Ascend.
Saint Paul was not too keen on marriage. It was a necessary concession since the flesh is weak.
When the Afterworldsmen take oaths of celibacy, they might as well be openly avowing their penchant for pederasty. Touchin’ the lucky charms, they will.
— “Revelations about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church have been emerging for decades. But in the seemingly never-ending stream of investigations and accusations, some stand out.
─ “That will likely be true of the report released Oct. 5, 2021, which estimates that more than 200,000 children have been abused by clergy in France since 1950.”
Scores of thousands of Roman Rite pederasts cannot be dispatched to oblivion fast enough.
As I see it, the JQ is the WN priority ─ to end race-mixing and Trotskyite subversion ─ because the desert tribe now grip the neck of institutional power.
And time is very short. The ramparts are left wide open to the tidal waves of color.
The next Kulturkampf is long overdue, regardless.
🙂
You have me wrong: I am not advocating Catholicism or abstinence! The natural purpose of sex is for children and secondarily, bonding stable relationships: putting the natus into nationalism.
Porn turns all that into slime and filthy lucre, and those who are ruled by their appetites will be devoured by them.
Agreed.
🙂
Reading the comments, I really don’t see how anyone can defend pornography or dismiss the problem it has created. Certainly there has always been pornographic imagery since the days of cave drawings. The juxtaposition of a 2500 BC phallus on an Egyptian hieroglyphic vs grandma interracial gangbang bukkake. I don’t think a reasonable comparison can be made.
Oftentimes the comments are better than the articles. But not this time; I think the article gave some valid reasons why we guys (my apologies to any female readers at C-C) should look at less porn. I’m older, but not as old as I could be. After my divorce I am on the market again looking for females after a hiatus stretching back to the Romantic Period.
— from Wiki:
“The Romantic Period began roughly around 1798 and lasted until 1837.”
Gonna have to plead “dissident” on this one.
I think it’s a mistake to insist on viewing everything strictly through the imaginary and unquantifiable lens of “left/right.”
This seems much more like an issue of libertines v. prudes.
It’s no coincidence that scads of hysterical feminists have the same quaking, point-and-sputter reaction to porn that many commenters here do. And they’d also probably agree it’s destructive to both men and women.
I think a much better case can be made that alcohol is far more socially destructive than porn is. All the drunk-driver deaths, broken families, the fact it’s involved in 40% of all violent crimes, the healthcare costs, etc.
Then again, alcohol is considered “traditionalist” and therefore “right-wing.” After all, Jesus didn’t turn paintings into beaver shots, he turned water into wine.
You’re going to turn away millions of potential allies by going full Amish about these things. Been saying it for years.
Well, there’s a difference between saying, “Porn is bad, here’s why you shouldn’t indulge in it,” versus “If you indulge in porn then you can’t join our club. ” I’m certainly in no position to make the latter statement and likewise would never want to. If a person has something to contribute to what we do and watches porn, that’s fine. I wouldn’t judge them. Some people are better at managing their vices than others. But that does not negate the overall negative impact porn has on our population.
I think a much better case can be made that alcohol is far more socially destructive than porn is.
Geeze, Jimmy! Who’s making this into a porn VS alcohol debate anyway? It is true that you have to get drunk only once in order to kill someone or ruin your own life for good (the nasty effects that you correctly list), but that doesn’t mean watching porn is a good idea, either. I’d say that people with a normal level of sensitivity and decency and no disturbed feelings about sex just don’t want to look at it – they don’t have to be lectured out of doing this. They find themselves turning away from watching people having sex. I sometimes wonder why so many folks seem to need to look at this. Maybe once they’ve seen enough they’ll stop wanting it?
I find the anglo-american sexual neurosis boring and see in itself the very root of the over-sexualization of said society.
I also remember from my Twitter days, it seems a thousand centuries ago, following the Facial Abuse account who was using alt right memeology and language, and i have a suspicious they are aiming for outright accelerationism.
Anyways; i am not revoltet by how sausages are made. These girls are literal attention whores and for many of them porn and prostitution, where they make good money by the way, are the most stable enviorment they ever gona get.
Public shaming seems to be the most effective way to prevent porn viewing.
Fewer people go to strip clubs, buy nudie magazines, use prostitutes, and go to sex shops and adult video stores than watch porn online because no one can see them clicking on porn sites whereas despite parking in the rear of a dimly lit parking lot, people can still see them going into places. People can also see them meeting prostitutes.
To kick a porn habit, bug your home or apartment with video cameras in all rooms except the bedrooms and bathrooms. Make the feed viewable by someone who hates you/wants to embarrass you. Ensure that every night, you put your smart phone and any laptops below one particular camera, say, one aimed at a desk in a living room. Ensure that you never bring a smart phone or laptop into your bedroom or bathroom at any time. Ensure your WiFi can detect any new devices you might try to smuggle in. You may be able to secretly evade having a new smart phone detected, but if some device could detect smart phone data use within the confines of the home or apartment, then you could prevent yourself from doing that. If God’s judgement isn’t enough of a deterrent, then maybe that of a devil ratting you out to society would be. Maybe this is too 1984 for most people, but it’d work. I mean, you’d have to be willing to be a potential reality TV star. A rather straight-laced one.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment