I am not like other people, I relax into philosophy and thinking.  The problem is that every time a read a book or study a new science I get smarter, and then the world looks stupider and more evil to me.  And then I see things more acutely and whereas I would like to be wrong about a lot of things I find that I am actually more correct than I knew which then makes me more depressed.

A few years ago I became interested in microexpressions and I bought a bunch of Paul Ekman books.  Now I am so sensitive that I can read peoples faces like books and I find this more depressing than ever.  It was useful to plug into my theories on relationship and philosophy but it is one of those things that you can’t shutoff.  I get to see how everybody is in relationship with me.

It is interesting if you consider that our brains are hardwired to recognize faces and read faces to a certain extent.  So every time something repeats it creates neural myelination in your brain, it reifies something.  So when I see a repeated reaction to myself it characterizes me to myself.  It becomes part of my sense of self and who I feel myself to be.  At least it would if I was normal and gave a single fuck what people think about me.  Fortunately for me I know that the vast majority of people are insipid fools so I don’t take their reaction to heart anymore.  I kind of use it against them in a way which I will get into later.

They have found that facial expressions of contempt and disgust are the single biggest factor in signaling the end of relationships.  So it is interesting when people meet me for the first time and know literally nothing about me and they react with contempt and disgust.  I know that relationship is not even an option.  It is over before it began.  All they know about me is how I look so I know that they are prejudiced.

Some functional psychopaths usually with histrionic personality disorder like to scream with their faces to “communicate a state”(my term :D) to people, to manipulate their emotions to make them feel bad about themselves or to make them think they did something wrong.  I get this all of the time.  Instead of modifying my behavior I repeat the “offensive” behavior and then I repeat tautologies of that behavior.  I look for exactly what their trigger is and then I put it on fully automatic.  My feeling is that if you can be offended you need to be offended.  If you don’t want to see homosexuals kissing on the street or you think that my 7 pound cockapoo is the devil because a black dog prevented Gabriel from finishing a mission, your ass needs to stay inside where you are safe from the dirty, dirty, world.

I want you to consider something, all of your experiences are tainted by the fact that you are the one having them.  Everything that has ever happened to you creates a normative bias and a sense of who you are.  People react differently to you and relate differently to you than they do to anyone else.  In the yoga sutras of patanjali this is discussed although I say it more plainly than most.  My psychologist ex gf used to chide me about my approach to people, I constantly explained to her that people don’t react to me like they react to her so I will not get the same results with her strategy.  I have to use the strategy that gets the most positive results for myself.

Ekman says that being in a permanent refractory state is the same as being crazy and indeed I have driven people insane that tried to communicate to me that I was annoying them and therefore I must modify my behavior.  The hidden subject is that they feel I am attacking them by existing in the universe being visible to them.  So the only way I can be part of the solution is if I died or disappeared and that is not going to happen.  I am not responsible for your emotions.  You do not get to win by being a victim or feeling victimized or being mentally and emotionally damaged and not wanting to be sane or mentally healthy.  If people want to be obsessed with me and to dedicate themselves to my destruction and silence, well then….


…but seriously, you don’t know what kind of mental kung fu I have and if you want to antagonize me you will find yourself fighting a tidal wave or a hurricane.  That is how your mind compares to mine.  So do your worst mental midgets.  But I digress, I have driven people mad that fucked with me, not even joking, we are talking asylums….

I am not responsible for your emotional reaction to me.  You are responsible for your own damn emotions.  Grow the fuck up.  Take some fucking responsibility for yourself.Image





A Talk with Joxua MourningStar
Lynn: A lot of people don’t realize how much time you have spent observing people.  You feel that in understanding other people you understand yourself better.  I wanted to ask you about some things that sounded very interesting to me.  It was about your observations on western women and how because of their indoctrination into what I agree is corrupt feminism they have this uncanny ability to ignore their true instincts.  How was it that you were able to observe women and figure out the pattern?
Joxua: Well, I was raised Jehovah’s Witness and my father was very ambitious and domineering.  I was raised with the perspective that the first person one dates should probably be the one a person marries.  It’s like expecting somebody who has never played baseball to step up to the plate in the ninth inning of the World Series and hit a home run over the green giant.  So obviously, my first serious relationship was a colossal fuck up and I promised myself that never again would I get involved in an exclusive relationship with a woman until I understood women.  After leaving home and moving far away without telling friends or family I realized that I needed a venue where I could study women so I became a stripper for three years and a bouncer for five years which all together made seven years because they overlapped.
Lynn: What was it that you learned about women in that period of time?
Joxua: I was moderately attractive and exceptionally talented.  Fonzie used to say “Some guys are great lovers and some guys are great fighters.  I happen to be both.”  I was the complete package so I couldn’t understand why I constantly got the reactions that I got from women.  I experimented for years, changed my style over and over, changed my approach, my demeanor, my presentation, my appearance; the results were always the same.  I observed it more with bouncing than with stripping.  It was easier to see then because bouncing is less overtly sexual but I figured out how women make choices.  Women always say that men are arrogant or conceited and in my experience, the truth is actually the opposite.  What I observed over and over and over again is that women that were attracted to me, fearing that I was a player because I was so talented and good looking and needing to be the dominant sex object in the relationship would force their affections and attention toward an uglier, less talented male.  Feeling less intimidated and less threatened by him they had the upper hand but sentimental thinkers delude themselves.  I also knew and was observing the guy who they were jocking.  The hilarious fact of the matter was that all of the women evaluated things in the same way so instead of having sex in a relationship with a guy they were attracted to physically they defeated themselves by getting played by an ugly player.  Some of these guys were way older than they looked some of them had wandering eyes, some of them were fat and engaged or married but the woman needed to feel like she needed the upper hand, that she was more attractive.  It was lulzy.
Lynn: That boggles the mind so not only did women not enjoy the sex, they put themselves in the very relationship they were trying to avoid.  I want to get more into the psychology of the female mind when she is making these choices.  What can you tell me about the processes?  Mental and emotional that she goes through.
Joxua: Well, women edit their consideration set in a certain way.  They approach relationship entirely different than men do.  The female mind presupposes pleasantness and participation with moral authority which creates a disparate impact in favor of women and children.  Who would fail to survive in a natural environment which was described as the war of all against all-Bellum omnium contra omnium.  Men on the other hand, being in relationship with reality and nature realize that women do not want to hear the truth, the ugly truth, they don’t want to know what turns men on and what they desire.  They don’t want to hear about or think about ugly things.  You can’t tell the truth to a woman.  She doesn’t want to hear it.  That’s why she gets into a relationship in the first place so that the man can help protect her from reality.  In the bible, it refers to women as the complement.  Pimps wrote the bible, philosophical pimps.  The word compliment is a mathematical term.  It refers to an angle that is less than ninety degrees of a circle.  The anti-thesis of the compliment is the supplement which is in an angle more than ninety degrees of a circle.  The woman is the complement and the man is the supplement because the female mind presupposing a pleasant environment  and myopically editing her consideration set to focus on emotional pornography which she enjoys predisposing itself to failure at life and in reality.  Like a pea hen she assumes the nest which is created by the male mind.
Lynn: How does this play out in the modern western world?  What kind of patterns is it creating?
Joxua: Women have a conceit that no man can understand themselves and if you don’t understand yourself you can’t understand how you’re being manipulated.  Women are incapable of self-scrutiny because they need to have smoke blown up their asses.  They only want to hear positive shit about themselves and they are attracted to men with money, a surplus of money as positive survival data for the female mind.  She can spend the man’s money, sharing it with herself because women believe strongly in sharing on clothes, possessions for the nest, babies, puppies and charities.  There are these psychopathic men out there that know how women think and will tell them whatever they want to hear to get what they want and some of these men understand how women are emotionally in relationship with money so they do whatever it takes to have the most money so they can have the most bitches or the hottest bitches.
Lynn: I am starting to see how your concept of the passive cause and the active cause plays out in your psychological model.  What’s the solution?  What should women do?  What do they have to do in order to not get played or manipulated by psychopaths?
Joxua: Well, as you know I believe that the problems we are experiencing in our economy and in our government are caused by emergent properties which come from the over-emphasis of feminine values and narratives we’ve basically managed to turn capitalism into communism by counter-incentivizing masculinity “From those with greater ability to those with greater need “creates desperate impact in favor of femininity people have an incentive to be needy so instead of being strong, smart and wise, they act victimized, weak and stupid, therefore they are more deserving because they are more needy.
Lynn: That’s kind of more about the problem I want to know from your perspective how women should be and what should they do?
Joxua: What sexually attracts a woman to a man is that on a subconscious level or maybe even an unconscious level woman want more in the world of that man.  They want the world to be more like that man, more of his form, more of his values, more of his thoughts, more of his words.  When women try to be strategic and they think about other factors besides these: money, power, and status.  That is my definition of a slut because they are ignoring and being false to their innate animal intelligence.  It is because of their strategic behavior that they expose themselves to being manipulated and taken advantage of which creates incentives for ugly, lying, social climbing, thieving, gomer males.  The hidden subject of which is that women by being false to what attracts them, refusing to stay in relationship with the man that arouses them are making the world a shittier place to live in, in an attempt to expand feminine authority and usurp and suppress masculine values on which they depend for survival and the fulfillment of their needs.
Lynn: Wow…mind blowing.   So much to meditate on, you connected so many dots right now.  Thank you.





It just so happened that when I was studying Deborah Tannen’s material on male and female communication rituals and plugging it into my philosophy and psychology I was also reading THE GENIUS FACTORY by David Plotz, which is about the first sperm bank ever the one that all other sperm banks were modeled after.  It sold nothing but Nobel Prize winner sperm and not a single baby was spawned from the bank until it lowered its standards, a lot.  I have spent years figuring out why what happens does happen and how people make choices and the emergent properties of those choices and judgments.  

In just about every other culture in the world women do not choose their mates by themselves.  There are arranged marriages, there are matchmakers, etc. but in the United States women get to choose their mate without any direction based entirely on their whim and fancy.  So, how do women make those selections without guidance and without any analysis and strategy when left to their own resources?  Well, returning to the Genius Factory we find that women didn’t choose Nobel Prize sperm because they didn’t want their children to be freakishly intelligent so that they would stand out and attract attention to themselves.  They wanted their babies to blend into the herd.  

This is so interesting for so many reasons, it is telling of the female mind and the concealed contempt it has for masculinity and masculine virtue.  It wasn’t that women didn’t want their babies to rise to the top of the herd, they just wanted them to social climb in a less obvious manner, in a more manipulative manner.  Also, women naturally try to reify, and expand their personal authority.  I have observed women that will not date a man whom they can’t control or dominate, or a man that is more attractive than they are, or a man that is smarter than they are, why?  Because of the collective judgments of the herd.   Women have a hierarchy as far as importance of opinion goes. 

  1. Their own opinion
  2. The opinion of their children
  3. The opinion of other women
  4. The opinion of society
  5. The opinion of their mate

I am sitting here watching the United States go to hell every day, moving in the wrong direction, making the wrong choices, while children get stupider and stupider and I am thinking to myself “why is this going on?”  Whose sperm did women choose to get pregnant with?  SCUM!  LYING, MANIPULATIVE, PSYCHOPATHIC, STRATEGIC, SCUM!  It wasn’t until the invention of the sperm bank that people realized there was a type of man known as an “opportunistic reproducer” .  Men whose life goal it is to have as many progeny as possible and these men were pathetic losers that looked good on paper.  One pale, bald, freakish, fuck basically considered donating sperm as his “job”  he had never had another job besides that.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunistic_breeders

What is so funny is that women deliberated over their choices for long periods of time and they failed with infinite precision almost every time because they forgot to account for something in their decision making process, and that is the fact that…. wait for it……..


Because of the way women edit their consideration sets they make terrible choices when it comes to relationship.  They predispose themselves to being manipulated by psychopathic men.  Because they are hostile to the things that men value they react negatively to male opinions and perspectives and avoid these.  Not only that women have auto-appraisers that look out for masculine things to attack and avoid.  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100105050917AAUWwrV

Some of these pathetic men had as many as 26 children from multiple sperm banks.  That is a lot.  The men that thought the least of women but would never tell them that.  The men that figured out exactly what women wanted to hear and told them that.  The men that manipulated women ruthlessly without any concern for their desires, those are the men that bred the most children, and they didn’t even have to pay alimony.  Sigh….

Ponder this, right now there are women reading this article that hate my guts and want me to die.  Not because I am wrong, but because I am right.  They want me to shut up and go away, they want my voice to be strangled and shut off.  They don’t want my perspective and knowledge in the world.  And the funny thing is, I am not the psychopathic person pleasantly manipulating them.  I am pecker slapping them with the truth about themselves, and that my friends is the unforgivable sin. 



ImageAre you 
my Shakti?
My Shechinah?
My Tripura Sundari? 
My Tresante Trinosophia? 

Are you my rainbow that I take from the sky and slay my enemies? 

As the seeker seeks the truth, and the serpent the tree I cannot repent of thee.


I hate to love you, 
I love to hate you,
let me hate for you my love.
I’d kill to love you, 
but I’d love to kill you. 

My Queen of Sheba we had an agreement, you would take nothing from the castle before your morning departure and I would not know you as the ice cold water knows the perspiring vase on a hot summer night. You have not kept your end of the bargain and I am exempt from mine. 

You are Salome, I John the Baptist. You do your strip-tease. All seven veils, all illusions gone, no more lies, I lose my head, but I glimpse the naked truth, I become one with all, married to the universe, the alchemical marriage.





I have always found this interesting, because if you examine the modern rhetoric the 1950’s would be the ideal time as far as women are concerned if you believe what they tell you about what they want from relationship.  It was also the hay day of the color chartreuse, which is interesting because according to a witch I once studied under, it was used in insane asylums to keep the patients calm.  Yes, chartreuse keeps you sane when you are about to go fucking nuts apparently.  What I am getting at is that women should have been very happy.  Men were loyal, families were big, everything was in its proper place and everybody knew their duty.  The only problem is that women were not getting laid.  Oh, noes!  What to do???




The phenomena of rape fantasies started popping up.  The reason that this is interesting is what it tells us about the female psyche.  Women do not and will not take responsibility for their sexual desires.  Due to the innate feminine need to be pursued, to be the object of desire, the rape fantasy was constructed to remove from herself responsibility for the sex act.  She was not initiating it.  She was not pursuing the man.  It was the fact that she was so sexy he could not contain himself, he had to force himself on her.  In a way her desirability was to blame.  This is fascinating too because women reify their attractiveness and (we will get into this later as I keep on writing down my theories) the value of their vagina.  Yes, women associate their vagina with monetary value.  If she enjoyed it a little she can’t really be held accountable because she didn’t have a choice. 

So what were the men doing?  They had hobbies, they were being fathers, they were involved in intellectual pursuits.  My grandpa was an ex-navy architect with 5 children when my grandma banged her doctor, she was a nurse by the way, and they were Jehovah’s Witnesses……  Even when women have everything exactly the way they want it, they still are not content.  What is interesting to me is that women desiring their own sexual fantasies at the same time judge and refuse to participate with male fantasies.  And don’t talk to me about porn because women get paid like 10 to 100 times what men get paid.  That has NOTHING to do with satisfying a man, that has to do with getting paid.  

You can read more on an article I wrote on the subject that talks about how women rationalize this and thoughts like these here…






This is my personal philosophic calculus, so please do not plagiarize me.  If you are going to quote me give me credit.  It is hard enough in this psychopathic, social climby world to get any recognition.  


It is important to understand that two different people can be in relationship differently with the same state.  One person wants to experience it again, the other is avoiding it, still another hasn’t experienced it and they either desire it or want to avoid it.  

You communicate whatever state you are in.  If you feel thwarted you communicate thwartedness.  You want to share the state you are in.  You want to thwart others.  Cognitive psychology has linked the feeling of anger to feeling thwarted.  

Right now we are communicating through a shared states.  We were both schooled in the english language and the letter “A” means the same to me as it does to you more or less.  The word “language” means the same to you as it does to me, more or less.  

The problem with the “general will” of Jean Jacques Rousseau is the problem of being highly and equally educated.  For example if you had to serve two years in the military after high school as they do in Israel and Northern Europe, you would make decisions differently and that would be a state that you share with others that had the same experience of having to take PERSONAL responsibility for the defense of the nation.  So that feeling when everyone knows what is the right thing to do is possible, it is just not an experience we as americans have because of our specialization and our not being highly and equally educated we cannot unleash the “highest common good”. 

Physical proximity also might be a shared state in so far as you look from the same vantage point or you experienced the same event.  But the problem that we run into is that life has experiential data, which is to say that we tacitly interpret and judge reality in our experiencing of it.  

There is also something I realized with psychopaths in that they can communicate a state.  In order to do this you have to know how something will be interpreted so it deals in a way with hermeneutics.  Interestingly though, psychopaths don’t have to be particularly smart to do this.  They can see someone use a behavior and adopt that behavior.  Human beings are acquisitively mimetic.  I have heard people copy arguments that they personally did not understand because it sounded good and winsome.  They copy winning behavior.  This is known as strategic behavior. 

I studied trolls for years when I was creating my theories on psychology.  When I realized that my theories were descriptive and predictive I started using them prescriptively to manipulate the trolls I was trolling.  I psychologically destroyed them.  I trolled entire groups of trolls off the internet.  I realized that I could communicate to them I was in a state that I wasn’t in and as I got better I could communicate to them that I was a person that I am not.  

“All narrative is doxography.”  ~Joxua

That means that all narrative is point of view.  So I would say things that appeared to be coming from a person that I was not.  I would be in character, so to speak.  






A little about my friend, I read his book a long time ago, I am sure that it influenced me and I am sure that I probably swaggerjack his style.  He writes in plain approachable, irreverent, speech, like the parr hesia of the ancient Greek philosophers.  I was contemplating calling him the F-bomb Guru but I will just think of him as that in my own little mind.

Here is a picture of him with my business partner, Lynn Marie Le.


Strange story, one of my first paintings was of a cabbalist secret, it was of an ahimsa.  I knew when I painted it that I would end up giving it to a rabbi, but I had no idea that rabbi would be one Rabbi Lamed Ben Clifford.


His writing style gave me permission to be myself.  In a world where people have categories like garbage cans where it can’t be philosophy, and comedy and occult, it has to fit nicely in it’s little box and have all of the corners sanded off so dumb little babies don’t gouge their eyes out on it, he gave me the courage to say, “fuck it!”  I just gotta be me.


Baba Lon like me was demonized and ostracized because of being not normal.  Maybe a little difficult to understand.  Possessed of a creative intelligence, and an understanding that makes everything pregnant with meaning.  He is a Jnana guru, a yogi of philosophy.  We will leave humility to those who are endowed by god to be humble.  Hoist with his own petard he might be but it is commensurate with his stature.  I will defend his honor as i would my own, perhaps more vigorously so as I am privy to guilty knowledge about my own doings.  I remember Osho, Bhagwan Shri Rajneesh, once said,  “there are two ways people will make you irrelevant, they will crucify you or make you a god.”  I might add, they will turn you into the devil, but I guess that is a kind of god too.

He is part of an authentic Western Guru lineage, in line with Aleister Crowley.  I have felt for a long time that Jesus was trying to bring the guru tradition to the west and that he succeeded, not so much through the Roman Catholic Church but through Mary Magdalene.  After Jesus died she went to France.  9 french men went to the holy land, dug under Solomon’s temple into a secret chamber they knew was there and whatever they came back with made the Church grant them sovereignty over themselves and the sanction of the religious authority.  They started the first knightly order and the Freemasons are of their descendants.   Lon, as part of his heritage, and possibly unbeknownst to him, has knowledge of kundalini yoga, he is a bit of a tantric siddha, and he is also a taoist.  Crowley merged all of these religious concepts in his teachings with kabbalah.

Spoiler alert, I heard this is going to be the cover of his next book.


Let any of his antagonists show that they can shake a spear as well as he.  I heard that he killed two Vatican Assassin Ninja Warlords with a flick of his middle finger.  They were so distraught that he thought poorly of them that they committed suicide, one of the guys chopped off his own head and then his mates.  I heard that he taught Charlie Sheen how to talk awesome.  The most interesting man in the world was modeled after him, and Chuck Norris wears a beard because of him.

Why did the Chicken Qabbalist cross the abyss?  I don’t know where to go from here.  Should I go with the pure rhyme and say, “for a kiss”  or should I say “for a wish”?  Or should I forget about rhyming altogether and say, “to be one with everything”?  I don’t know.  These are the jokes folks!  I will be here until the end.



Original, Analytic, Philosophic, Creative and Humorous Content.