Category Archives: EIHRT & SSTOC



Downward spiral of emotional morbidity.

Women are Aggressive Communicators


All of the nastiness and aggression that men are accused of can be found in the communication behavior of women.  I have spent a lot of time studying relationship and patterns in relationship and events in the world and how they are allowed or created by how people relate to one another.  Ever since I was a child I was hypersensitive to sounds and communication styles.  I used to get sick to my stomach listening to live music, and I developed a psychosomatic response to the sound of Diane Chambers, Shelley Long‘s character on cheers.  It wasn’t until I read A. R. Luria‘s book THE MIND OF THE MNEMONIST that I truly started pondering my sensitivity to sound.  I have an almost autistic level of sensitivity to sound, Diane Chamber’s timber made my heart race and I became agitated and my eyes dilated and I wanted to kill something.  I am not like other people, my mind is always working.  I relax into philosophy and higher thought, I am not happy if I don’t have a good conversation or learn something new every day.  This caused me to ponder the difference in communication styles between men and women.


I recently watched this documentary on Seaworld and noticed something interesting, they said that Tillikum was harassed by the two females he was originally put in the tank with, they would bite him for no reason and leave bloody marks on him.  Tillikum was a larger than average male killer whale.  After studying Deborah Tannen‘s male and female communication rituals and coming up with my theory that male and female brains are actually two different type of intelligences with different approaches to life, value systems, and strategies in relationship I found it interesting how similar Tillikum’s experiences were to my own.  Women will henpeck me and provoke me with no provocation on my part just as they did to him.  I began to ponder if this wasn’t because as a large male he represented a potential threat to them so they started testing him or trying to gain psychological leverage over him.

All of the nastiness and aggression that men are accused of can be found in feminine communication rituals and strategies.  When left alone the female mind acts like a parasite to the male mind.  Women are aggressive in passive ways, they are passively aggressive, covertly hostile.  I have always found it fascinating how over time the woman eventually manages to leverage herself to the point where she takes complete artistic control of the relationship and the man while in it is not allowed to be himself or to be interested in what he is naturally interested in.  Women indulge themselves in female pornography, puppies, kittens, babies, but men are judged as bad for being interested in the type of pornography that creates they pornography she enjoys.


As I become aware of the subtle processes and strategies that women use I realized two things, society in general doesn’t detect them because they are considered normal.  Society has been trained not to scrutinize women or look for them to be the cause of the bad.  Society in general has a feminine bias.  Society will blame other things for the behavior of women.  If somebody says, “man that lady is a bitch, she really did a number on me.”  Somebody will respond, “she must have really gotten screwed over by some man.”  Not only is she rescued from her own behavior, blame for her behavior is put on some imagined male scape goat and she is allowed to go on her crazy way, unscrutinized or blamed, working her evil will on the universe.  The ancients didn’t keep men and women separate to protect women, they did it to protect masculinity from femininity.


Millions of years of gender reinforcement create neural myelination that passes down through cellular memory.  Men are insensitive to their own feelings because life is hard and they have to do unpleasant things so that they and their women and children can live, and women have to be sensitive to their own feelings because they need to feel that feelings are valid in order to be good mothers and take care of horrible little maggot poop factories that wine, because babies communicate no analytical data and only emotional data.  Women and men and children are insensitive to men.  Go figure.

Not just that, you can see that women have adopted communication strategies designed specifically to manipulate the male mind which is sensitive to sound.  They speak in a high pitch, with a rapid cadence.  Persian women have adopted the behavior of speaking in low manly tones to communicate dominance and to turn men off sexually.  All of this works on a subliminal level, women don’t realize they are doing it, and neither do men.


Women ask for mercy from their man, they beg for quarter, they start the relationship by asking him to tell her a lie or perform a herculean labor and then when he fails or fails to protect her from reality of the truth she blames him for a situational problem.  Women use leading questions herding men in certain directions.  “Why don’t you play with the children?”  and then when they start liking him more than her, “How come you spend so much time with the children?  are you some kind of freak?”   Women use humiliation rituals.  “How come you spend so much time with your boyfriends, are you gay?”  She tries to define a real man by what he does for her and what he puts up with from her.  How is it that women are the arbiters of what it means to be “real men” are men the judge of real women?  ‘Cause I have some ideas, just sayin’…

Anatomy of the Female Mind


When I say “the female brain” I am referring to several things: the emergent patterns in the way women as a group behave and make judgments, men that have been indoctrinated into the moral superiority of women, and in a conflict or a relationship the more irrational person or psychopathic person, male or female.

I will give a brief synopsis of my theory on “organic computers”, Neural Myelination is passed on through cellular memory, successful techniques are passed on by people that survived, patterns that were repeated are neural myelinated, this myelination influences the way we perceive reality and make judgments, our judgments were informed by the need to survive of our ancestors, those patterns were created in situations where survival was difficult, those instincts in modern times can be out of touch with reality.


Now, Nature, for lack of a better word compartmentalized functions into male and female functions.  The consideration set of the female mind was edited to be concerned with and for babies, to presuppose an environment created for her in which she could indulge herself in the concern for which her brain was created.  In doing so the female brain makes certain presuppositions and ignores certain factors.  Those concerns which would not be conducive to taking care of a child but would be useful in providing a safe environment for woman and child were the business of the male mind.

Men and women are essentially the same, but compartmentalized by nature to deal with two different concerns and topics in two different ways.  I discovered this when creating my psycholinguistic philosophy.  My philosophy states.

“All narrative is doxography.”

Which seems innocuous at first but it is much deeper than one might expect.  All narrative is point of view, which means that everything said characterizes the person speaking *(assuming you know how I deconstruct narrative).  It wasn’t until I started studying Deborah Tannen‘s research on Male and Female communication patterns that I realized there were two completely different consciousnesses talking to one another.  She refers to this as complimentary schizmogenesis, I think it is more like two alien species that have different values and speak two different languages.


Babies start off as objects, entirely dependent on their mothers, incapable of doing anything for themselves.  They can’t defend themselves, think for themselves, or provide for themselves.  Babies communicate no analytical data and only emotional data, so from the perspective of the female mind emotions have to be valid.  That which has NO value or negative value in the heat of battle is valid to women.  Deborah Tannen refers to the interpretation of the emotional data by these little piss and shit factories as “ventriloquizing”.  Where the woman acts as the pythian oracle to interpret the omens sent to her through the medium of the squirming and whining of the child.

The mother protects the child’s psychosis and aberrations as well as the child.  She doesn’t care if the child is insane, or is capable of dealing with the world at large, that has never been a concern for her, she has a man for that.  She just wants the child to live and be as happy as possible.  This is why historically there was an age or a trial to mark the end of the authority of the mother and the beginning of the training and teaching that would make the child suitable for their transition to the world.

The mother manipulates the child to do things and to think that it was the child’s own idea.  Women use these exact same strategies on men if they can get away with it.  That is just how their brain works.  Women also keep on bringing the attention of the child back to a subject and then communicating emotional data to try to influence the way the child feels about the object.  When women do this to men it is called nagging and whining, or henpecking.  I call it jingling the keys.


Due to the feminine bias that is innate in the human organism, and due to the nature of superficial, aesthetic, snap decisions coming from the feminine part of the brain.  We judge the flow of negative emotional data as good or bad.  Negative emotional data flows from the child to the mom and from the mom to the dad.  We have a negative reaction to seeing the negative emotional data flowing in the opposite direction.  This patter in collective human judgments creates emergent properties that create disparate impact in favor of unreason, women, and children.  What looks good is not always good for you.

Allow me to illustrate in this way.  The Neural Myelination created over millions of years predisposes us to think that foods that are more densely packed with Macro nutrients are good for us, because that neural myelination was created in an environment in which survival was difficult.  The more packed with positive survival data it is, the better it tastes, to the point where the animal will never eat its natural diet if it has the option.  This makes the horse fat and sickly to the point of death.  Neural Myelination wasn’t created in an environment where survival was easy so our instincts are WRONG!  We as a society redouble our efforts in the wrong direction, compounding the problem because we are not aware of the organism through which we experience life and we are thinking sentimentally instead of analytically and logically.  If you don’t know the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases you can’t keep yourself from making them. 


*It always annoys me when I tell people that everything said characterizes the person speaking and then they start trying to psychoanalyze me without knowing my method and having NO experience themselves, and never having thought about it until I brought the subject up.  What a bunch of idiots. 

Huge Copyright Infringement Scandal and Retraction


Lynn:  Ohmigod, this is so Gnarly.  I can’t believe that this guy is actually making a big deal out of this.  You are always saying that it is best to use specific incidents to deconstruct with your philosophical and psychological models.  Can you please deconstruct this and show us how you interpret people?  Mr. Mindhacker, lol.

Joxua:  Absolutely, and I agree that this is a good example to use for this.  First of all he has started the conversation with his mind closed, he is not open to relationship or negotiation.  He is calling the use of his unprotected image, “theft” which is an exaggeration on his part, which is technically correct.  Remember that the Pharisees and Scribes used the letter of the Law against Jesus since they couldn’t debate him and win any other way.  Jesus knew more about the spirit of the law.  So he is taking a semantic truth and exaggerating the gravity of the situation, positioning himself as a moral authority.

Now let’s examine his hyperbole of theft.  I did an image search on the word archery, to illustrate one of the golden verses of Shivastus Solomonicus, the literary character I created to reintroduce philosophy into western literature.  I was looking for an image of a Zen archer done in an ancient Japanese style, but I couldn’t find one that was minimalist or simplistic enough.  I settled for what turned out to be his, an unprotected silhouette painting, done in two colors, red and black.  How much value did it have for me?  Very little, I won’t even notice when I find another image to attach the saying to.  How much damage did I do to him?  Practically none, other than more people were exposed to his art and he could have used the photoshop I made to increase the perceived value of his lackluster painting.

Lynn:  Yeah, I mean the guy is totally over reacting, at first I thought he was talking about Patrick Whelan‘s painting, who is my friend and I have permission to post that.  He was trained in the Master’s Tradition which isn’t taught anymore and he sold two paintings to Michael Jackson.  When I saw what he was talking about I had to laugh.  Patrick even used quotes on his images increase perceived value like you said.

Stardust- Whelan Gallery

I keep on thinking about what you say about moral authority and the punitive verses educational relationships.  People have never seen you work.  I have seen you having 3 conversations with different pop ups, while doing photoshops, while engaged in a knock down, drag out debate, and composing a blog at the same time.  This guy acts like you were studying his style and plotted and schemed to steal his art, lol.  Ohmigod, and he was so rude.  Tell me more about his personality based on his behavior, please, with your philosophical system.

Joxua:  Well if you remember what I have said about moral authority and how it presupposes an up down relationship, and how moral authority blocks Sapiential authority, you see that he was using this paradigm to force an up down relationship with himself on top.  He entirely missed the meaning of the quote as he would have to do in order to have a sense of victory.


I was referring to the etymology of the word “sin”, and I was arguing against moral authority because it should be subordinate to sapiential authority or the authority of wisdom and reason, and that can only be arrived at through conversation of a Socratic and equal nature.  He was arguing for moral authority so he could punish and attack.  If you remember my whole concept of punitive societies and educational societies and how structure of authority attract psychopaths, and how psychopaths have innate feelings of superiority this should all be making sense now.

New Image

Lynn:  I feel like something else is going on here.  Something stimulated his butthurt.  He is concealing something.  What do you think of that?

Joxua:  Well, I could get much farther into his head with my psychological models.  What I refer to as “Conquests of Gomers” is that Gomers in doing what they think is establishing dominance basically communicate that they are gomers.


You see that he refers to the Nagual tradition in his spiritual name, it is possible that he noticed that we were also spiritualists.  With spiritualists, if they have issues, they like to think of their tradition as the ONE TRUE tradition and wisdom can come from no other source.  They are threatened if they hear any other person speaking with authority on spiritual topics because it falsifies their world view.  Now this guy might be smart enough to realize that most Mexicans that harbor resentment against Europeans for forcing their culture on them also speak Spanish a European language and are Catholic a European religion, so he went back to an older native religion to validate his world view.  He might think of us as his natural enemy.

Now I don’t have resentment against any people based on sex or skin color.  I identify with reason, and I believe in equality under reason.   Not to mention I took 4 years of spanish, I was a Testigo of Jehovah, and I peer tutored spanish speaking children in high school math.  I was trained not to be racist, but many latino children aren’t, their parents tell them, “Siempre, llama me en espanol!  Recuerda tu gente!  Tienes respeto para tus abuelos!”  Mexicans don’t refer to themselves as A race they refer to themselves as THE Race, La Raza, THE People.  I have gone to restaurants where they have pictures of Emiliano Zapata to communicate that latinos will get preferential treatment, but I have never been to a restaurant that had a picture of Custer.

HermesApollonius (1)

That is why Shivastus says, first comes the philosopher king.  Until you know the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases you can’t know if you are making them, even more so if you are emotionally and mentally damaged and you don’t want to be well.  If you are in relationship with your issues and trying to prove that your issues are correct you simply cannot ever approach the realm of spirit.  This is known, first you have to become the philosopher king and then sorcery begins to happen.  Then siddhis and spiritual phenomenon begin to unfold.  Until you have killed the ego out of yourself and you are egoless you simply are not spiritual, everything that comes through you comes from the ego and not from god.

Lynn:  Wow, brilliant, that answers so many questions.  Yeah, and that is what you were saying in the holy trinity of the psyche, Mary represents moral authority and the ego, not superego.  It thinks it is channeling god but it is channeling the feminine perspective.  Until you learn to recognize ego and prevent it you can’t channel anything else and nothing else will come through but your mental diseases and issues.  It is brilliant!

This guy is such a putz, some day he is going to be bragging about how you used one of his crappy paintings.

Joxua:  Yes, he is a vagina worshipper.  He establishes dominance by pandering to a feminine audience with his crappy art.  He makes up for what he lacks in talent by catering to the bad taste and lack of discernment of his audience.


Lynn Marie Le and fans of Patrick Whelan wearing his stardust t-shirts. 



Ponder this, how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a bewb?  Now how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a penis?  The vast majority of people are not analytical philosophers, they don’t know the logical fallacies and they don’t know the cognitive biases and as such they can’t stop themselves from making them.  Furthermore I have found that neural myelination accounts for 90% of the decision making of human beings which means cellular memory.  I refer to humans as organic computers because they are predictable.  In their judgments there are certain patterns that emerge, such as a pro female bias.

Contemplate how many more people spend on breast cancer than veterans or prostrate cancer and the fact that Veterans charities are rampant with fraud and theft, which is not tolerated with breast cancer awareness, people are much more hyper vigilant.  But women didn’t sacrifice themselves for us.  Every person that served protected the entire nation from threats.  A woman having breasts is not necessarily a mother or our mother.  Yet we are far more sympathetic to feminine concerns than masculine concerns.

Every year at least $1.5 billion is spent on breast cancer research.  Some of this money comes from an ever-growing number of breast cancer non-profit organizations, but the vast majority comes from government organizations such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Defense (DoD).  The funds go largely to preventionand early detection.


Men women and children have the same bias, choosing in favor of femininity and weakness.  Men are even insensitive to their own desires.  Men don’t even question this when asked to sacrifice themselves for women and children, they just presuppose the validity of it.  Women also don’t question it.  Women have gotten so arrogant and so expectant that men will sacrifice their desires and wishes for women and children that even after not having contributed anything meaningful to a man’s life women finding they don’t have enough of what they want will turn to the man and expect him to sacrifice himself so that she can have more.


The manliest men go off to war, they are in relationship with death and the threats and the ugliness, they create the outside perimeter, the grizzled, gnarly, rind, the crust, the tough outer layer.  That is why I say the male mind is sociopathic.

Inside that are the effeminate men, the champions of normalcy and pleasantness, captain save a ho, the white knights, the arm chair philosophers, with their feminist, elitist, bias.  It is the guy that is not fit to go into battle.  He acts as a moral authority protecting the women from the manly men, but also gaming the system for his own benefit.  He is to cowardly to do what the manly man does.  He is a champion of femininity.


The butch women essentially perform the same function as the effeminate men, protecting women from the truth, reality, ugliness, and death.  Lying to women about themselves.  Telling them they are equals to the men and not to worry.  The butch women are closer to the women and children then the effeminate men.  Women have an innate feeling of inferiority to men, Sigmond Freud got that right.  If you observe women in their reasoning, arguing, and behavior, they want to control the penis, they want to own it.  They want to direct the activities of the penis.  They want to send it to attack their enemies.  They want to control how it thinks and they want to be the focal point of its attention and the only source of its happiness.

Penis envy in Freudian psychoanalysis refers to the theorized reaction of a girl during her psychosexual development to the realization that she does not have a penis. Freud considered this realization a defining moment in the development of gender and sexual identity for women[1] — the parallel reaction in boys to the realization that women do not have a penis being castration anxiety. In contemporary culture, the term sometimes refers inexactly or metaphorically to women who are presumed to wish they were men.[2]


What is the most fascinating is how the behaviors used to champion negate their own arguments.  The manly women copy the behavior of men, therefore demonstrating that they tacitly believe that masculinity is dominant.  Fritz Perls said that you copy what ever behavior you believe is dominant when you want to win.  So the fact that they use masculine behavior when they want to win demonstrates that they believe masculinity is dominant.  You have to understand the psychosis that the individual must have to use a means different from their argument in order to obtain a sense of victory.  Women do this because it is a natural psychopathic/female strategy to expand and increase feminine authority.  Women think of themselves as a group, WOMEN.  Whereas men do not think of themselves as MEN, they think of themselves as a man.  Men do not feel that their position is increased by being men, while women do, and this comes from the fact that their need recognition was stimulated in that they closetedly feel inferior to men, thus the need for the repeated conquest against men.

The effeminate man will argue that the woman is the equal of man in mental function and ability, but if that is so why does she need the protection of the effeminate man?  The effeminate man argues against reason, and the participation therewith to increase the amount of poontang he has available to himself and not being able to compete with the manly man in manly endeavors, he adopts a strategy flying in the face of reason he presupposes that women need protection from the manly man and that they are incapable of dealing with reality and handling the truth.

The fascinating thing about people’s judgments, when they are no analytical philosophers, is that their judgments always make themselves correct.  It always justifies why they are good for wanting what they want.  Because their are so many weak, stupid, and incorrect people out their all of these strategies and judgments create a disparate impact in favor of weakness, stupidity, and failure.  Why are we attracted to emotional pornography?  Puppies, babies, kittens?  because they are harmless, because we feel like we could protect them and contribute to them, that has positive survival data for us, it means we are surviving well and that we are capable of providing for another.  If we were really secure we wouldn’t judge so hatefully and immediately against things that pose potential threats.   We wouldn’t be controlled by our emotional reactions and pre emptively attack people because they appear strong or smart.


Evaluating Greater Minds



Imagine that you are a big game hunter and you have hunted all of the deadliest animals all over the earth and you want an animal that will challenge you and give you a thrill.  You have hunted grizzly, great white shark, and rhinoceros.  You decide to hunt the man eater, the Bengal tiger.  For a year you stalk this wraith never catching sight of one, it imagines to allude you.  Determined to succeed or at least to have an interaction with the creature you redouble your effort.  Convinced that you have the drop on the creature you slide into position and raise your rifle, suddenly you hear a low guttural vibration, not even a growl, just a little noise to let you know it is right behind your ear.  Not until that moment do you realize that you were hunting a creature that was smarter than yourself.

For the sake of the story the tiger is made   smarter, but in actuality it is probably just the better hunter.  I was trying to illustrate a point however.


There is a similar concept in comparing different types of minds.  A plane can only know a sphere as circles.  At the first introduction and the last contact the plane would know the sphere as a point that expands and then retracts and then disappears, but the plane could never know anything about the SPHERENESS of the sphere.  It could only evaluate the circleness of the sphere.  You can’t comprehend a mind greater than your own unless you become equal to that mind or superior to it.


To put it another way, what can the plane know about the coneness of the cone?  The cone can grasp the planeness of the plane, but the reverse cannot happen.


The reason I began to ponder this is because I am constantly the subject of scrutiny and judgments and attacks by people who can’t understand me and are not inclined to do so.  I understand them, and they understand their own perspective, but they do not know that I understand their perspective and they are not capable of understanding my own, not because I am concealing it, but because they are not capable of grasping it.  They presuppose the superiority of their opinion without testing it, and they start to attack, they don’t use Socratic dialogue or scientific method, we don’t have experiments, they just begin attacking, and not until the end do they realize that they never had a chance, they never saw me coming, I wasn’t even on their radar…

Everybody bets against me.

Understanding, Building a Psychological Profile


When I am trying to understand a person I see how far their personality deviates from the stigma that would be associated with them.  Some people can be perfectly happy fulfilling their stigma.  Some people go out of their way to fulfill their stigma. They feel it is some manner of duty to spout cliches and use shibboleth’s.

When a person deviates from their stigma it can be a sign that they are reasonable and they identify with reason but it might not be.  Lil Wayne and Dennis Rodman both deviate from their stigma in many ways, adopting behaviors that aren’t typically black and male, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that every deviation is towards reason.



In my system we observe over time how a person is in relationship with the world and with the phenomena in the world in order to create a 3-d picture of their soul.  I will explain how I use my thought technology and what it means to a certain extent.


I am not going to get too far into this but it is pretty self explanatory, the uses overlap however, it is innocuous but it is formidable when you see how I apply it.  Shared states are in a way a meditation all in themselves you can see what a person has in common with others and how they are comorbid with other people.  It gives you an idea of where they are going and what they are going to do.   What they know and what they don’t know.


These tell you about a person’s judgements.  People say, “things should be like this,” or, “you should do this,”  and this always benefits them in some way.  People’s judgments always make them correct.  


Everybody needs to change the world.  They want to make the world better according to themselves so they have some manner of repeated conquest that allows them to improve the world incrementally.  This is their pattern, it shows you how to predict their behavior and lets you know what they will do in certain situations and given certain opportunities. 


The sum of a persons actions has to take them closer to their goal.  Regardless of what they say they are doing observe the results they get and continue to get.  If they keep getting the same result ask yourself if they are really trying to put themselves in a position to do something other than what they are saying.  This is a great technique for recognizing psychopaths who almost always conceal their bias and their endgame.


We expand and retract our sense of self unconsciously and arbitrarily.  Shared suffering, shared desire, shared addiction, combine this with the 7 states and see what patterns emerge. What do they identify with, what are they sympathetic to?


If I might quote myself, “all narrative is doxography.” (p.o.v)  Every person is a character in their own novel.  Which character are they playing?  This is the narrative they use to tacitly judge and interpret events.  If you know the narrative they are using you know how they will string facts together and react to certain events.


How do they edit their consideration set?  Why are they looking at what they are looking at?  Why do they accept information from certain sources and not others?  What do they think about?


What do they compare themselves to?   Do they constantly use the same comparison?  Do they compare everything to the same thing?  is there a recurring pattern in their analogies?  An idol?  A character?  A movie?  A book?


What stimulates their need recognition?  Lack of money?  Hunger?  Sex?  What is their motivation?  What gets their attention?


What are they in relationship with?  When they change states or their narrative changes, what or who precipitated it?  Do they immediately change tones with you?  Or switch narrative?  or make an agreement and then without communication do something else?   This technique can also be used to figure out the gestalt of other people near them.  People who don’t feel like authority figures in their own lives will often try to be an authority in someone else’s life.  If they have a rich parent that constantly threatens to remove them from their will or sever their allowance they might not respect themselves because they didn’t individuate properly from their parents.


Terminclature….the new thought technology

Thought Technology

A term created by Joxua/Shivah taken from the Greek meaning “to return to relationship”.  It con notates a return to reality, return to the source, a return to inspiration, re-reading a book, staying in relationship, staying loyal to those things that increase your value and cultivate your soul.*It became necessary as we were recording the philosophy of Joxua Luxor/Joxua MourningStar/Shivah Solomon to define his terms as we found that he re-appropriates, redefines and creates his own thought technology in the form of vocabulary which is consistent with natural linguistic processes common in sophisticated philosophy and necessary to convey understanding.


View original post



I created this term to describe a behavior I noticed that nobody else seems to have made reference to.  I eavesdrop on conversations and I have noticed this in my own and it is really annoying.  I believe that conversation should be solution oriented, you recognize the problem, solve it, and get on with it.  If you can’t solve the problem and you can’t learn anything new about it you stop talking about it.  You don’t bring it up again unless there is no information, things have gotten worse, or their is a possible new solution or experiment that can be performed.

But this is not how people talk, there narrative is whiny, it clings to the problem it circles around it like a turd that refuses to flush.  It wallows in emotional morbidity, mourning the existence of the problem.  Revolving around the problem is not the solution, and you will never arrive at the solution through that verbal and mental behavior.  Srsly, it makes me want to start slapping people with a shovel.


“Excuse me young man.  Do you have those delicious gluten free, vegan, fair traded, organic, non-gmo chips?”

“No mam, they didn’t come in today, I think they are having problems with distribution.”

“Are you sure?  I came all the way to get those.  They are in a yellow bag.  They are usually right here.  Would they be in the back?  They are so yummy!  It is so sad that they aren’t here.  The other store didn’t have them either. … little yellow bag….crunch…nummers..”

*It became necessary as we were recording the philosophy of Joxua Luxor/Joxua MourningStar/Shivah Solomon to define his terms as we found that he re-appropriates, redefines and creates his own thought technology in the form of vocabulary which is consistent with natural linguistic processes common in sophisticated philosophy and necessary to convey understanding.



I created this image to demonstrate my theory on how the female brain is in relationship with the male brain and emergent properties in peoples normative judgments.  Women presuppose their own moral authority to judge the male mind.  While the man defends the woman and child from the world, she defends herself and the child from the man.  Women presuppose their moral authority and their right to judge the male mind and correct at will the masculine narrative and perspective.  While the male stares into nature and contemplates the world, the woman scrutinizes the man and judges him, concealing her narrative from him, but mistrusting him.


This happens because of neural myelination from nesting rituals that was passed on due to cellular memory.  Evolutionary psychology shows us that the man creates a surplus, a nest, to attract the female, and she feels that she and her children will be well taken care of.  The man’s mind becomes a room.  The woman enters the room and moves objects around to suit herself, to make herself comfortable.

The male mind relaxes into chatter, noise, because this has positive survival data for her.


it communicates to her that she is surviving well because people are happy, the babies are breathing and their are living bodies in the house.

Men on the other hand relax into silence.  This has positive survival data for them because they know that nobody is attacking from the outside, and nobody is dying inside. So he is doing a good job.  But because of the way in which the male and female brains relax the woman can coerce and irritate the male mind by nagging and whining bickering and complaining.  Woman use guilt and shame to manipulate the male brain, moral authority.  Women use an invasive narrative.  Women even pitch their voices to be more irritating to the male brain as a subtle form of abuse.  This hadn’t occurred to me until I read Mind of Mnemonist, and he spoke of how because of his synesthesia, when he was remembering something to himself, if he heard a loud or irritating noise it made a blur in his memory.  I experienced something similar, I also have synesthesia.  When I was younger I developed a psycho-somatic panic reaction to the sound of Shelley Long’s voice on Cheers.  Men speak as little as possible and women think outside their own heads.

If you examine the diagram above you will realize that their is a flow of negative emotional data that we judge as correct and appropriate.  The baby complains to the mother and the mother to the father, but we don’t like negative data moving in the other direction, the mother yelling at the baby or the father yelling at the mother. Image

The existence of the baby reifies the authority of the mother.  Allowing her to block the communication from the father to the child.  To corrupt the message.  To protect the child’s diseases mental and emotional.  The mother doesn’t just protect the child she also protects it’s delusions and fantasies.  From the perspective of the female Moral authority is the highest and only authority, her own authority.  It flies in the face of reason.  That what you must do in order to survive.  Women argue for mercy and charity, they protect the weak and the cute and the destitute and everyone that shows them a harmless face and tells them what they want to hear.  Women protect and expand feminine authority.

Men do not feel that their value is increased by being men, but women do.  Men will not defend another man because he is a man, but women will.  Men will defend another woman against a man because they know there will be more eligible pussy available for themselves.


Women also take advantage of their position, being closer to the center of the herd to manipulate and influence the reputation of their man if they can’t control him.  They use their relationships to spy on him, to deny him entrance to the herd if they are not pleased with him.  How many times have you had your girl ruin all of your friendships when you broke up with her?  Women consider this their prerogative.

Women argue for quarter, you have to be pleasant with them and then they are as aggressive and ruthless with their men.  Remember this, women are submissive with the herd and aggressive with their men.  From their perspective the herd is more important than the man, women are natural social climbers.  Remember to that people make judgments in a predictable manner.  The same way that herding animals choose who gets to die first in the presence of a threat.


The gomer men get to stay at home while the manly men go off to war….