Tag Archives: sociopath

Sex matters…

Image

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sex-matters-drugs-can-affect-sexes-differently/

I catch a lot of flack for my ideas about the differences between men and women and a lot of that flack comes from feminazis, gomers, vagina worshipers, highly educated idiots and children that have been indoctrinated into man hate.  The reason that happens is because this is America the most feminized country on the planet.  The problem is this, it doesn’t matter how many morons agree with one another, it doesn’t make them more correct.  The tyranny of the stupid majority cannot go unchecked.

You have been propagandized into thinking that there is no difference between masculinity and femininity and this creates a disparate impact in favor of femininity.  This prejudice is not only dangerous for relationships and to the stability of america it is dangerous for individuals.  Women in america think that their is a magickal force that protects them from evil and bad things happening to them and they are right, that magickal force is American men.

Image

deviant art

If you are familiar with my theories on the male brain and the female brain you know that I consider the true uncorrupted male brain to be sociopathic (not the pussified western male mind)  and the female mind is psychopathic, and the psychopath is an over coddled child.

Aristotle’s views on women

“The slave is wholly lacking the deliberative element; the female has it but it lacks authority; the child has it but it is incomplete”

Differences between male and female[edit]

Aristotle believed that nature ordained not only physical differences between male and female but mental differences as well. By comparison to man, he argued, woman is “more mischievous, less simple, more impulsive … more compassionate[,] … more easily moved to tears[,] … more jealous, more querulous, more apt to scold and to strike[,] … more prone to despondency and less hopeful[,] … more void of shame or self-respect, more false of speech, more deceptive, of more retentive memory [and] … also more wakeful; more shrinking [and] more difficult to rouse to action” (History of Animals, 608b. 1-14). Moreover, in accord with his society’s custom of allowing girls and women to eat only half as much as boys and men, he added that woman “requires a smaller quantity of nutriment” (History of Animals, 608b. 14) [2] Aristotle wrote extensively on his views of the nature of semen. His views on how a child’s sex is decided have since been abandoned.[3]

He wrote that only fair skinned women, not darker skinned women, had a sexual discharge and climaxed. He also believed this discharge could be increased by eating of pungent foods. Aristotle thought a woman’s sexual discharge was akin to that of an infertile or amputated male’s.[4][5] He concluded that both sexes contributed to the material of generation, but that the female’s contribution was in her discharge (as in a male’s) rather than within the ovary.[4]

His idea of procreation was an active, ensouling masculine element bringing life to a passive female element.[6]

While Aristotle reduced women’s roles in society, and promoted the idea that women should receive less food and nourishment than males, he also criticised the results: a woman, he thought, was then more compassionate, more opinionated, more apt to scold and to strike. He stated that women are more prone to despondency, more void of shame or self-respect, more false of speech, more deceptive, and of having a better memory.[7]  wikipedia

Book cover of an edition ofOikonomikos from 1830.

Therefore it befits not a man of sound mind to bestow his person promiscuously, or have random intercourse with women; for otherwise the base-born will share in the rights of his lawful children, and his wife will be robbed of her honor due, and shame be attached to his sons.And it is fitting that he should approach his wife in honor, full of self-restraint and awe; and in his conversation with her, should use only the words of a right-minded man, suggesting only such acts as are themselves lawful and honorable. Aristotle’s thought that a wife was best honored when she saw that her husband was faithful to her, and that he had no preference for another woman; but before all others loves, trusts her and holds her as his own.[12] Aristotle wrote that a husband should secure the agreement, loyalty, and devotion of his wife, so that whether he himself is present or not, there may be no difference in her attitude towards him, since she realizes that they are alike guardians of the common interests; and so when he is away she may feel that to her no man is kinder or more virtuous or more truly hers than her own husband.

I might remind you that every civilization that stopped studying Aristotle fell into the dark ages.  The word Oikonomikos is where the English word economics comes from and the word oikos means house.  How is our economy doing?  As women have increased in “rights” and by rights I mean power without responsibility, the right to wage a propaganda war against masculinity, the right to get divorced on a whim, the right to have disposable relationships with men and sell themselves to the highest bidder while at the same time not wanting to be thought of as sex objects, the right to not suffer or struggle for the success of a relationship, how has our American economy fared?  How has the marriage unit fared? How is relationship doing?

Men and women are not the same, when you make a false forced equality between them you upset the flow of energy between the poles.  Rain does not fall up, and water does not flow up hill.  Women enter into relationship and immediately start turning the man that they are attracted to into a woman, and when they have succeeded they move on to the next man.  It is a conquest of the ego.  But you are sabotaging yourselves, historically there is a pattern that repeats, women that turn their men into women have no defense when foreign invaders come and take the women and rape them.  The men have no incentive to defend the women having had a life time of abuse from women and having been successfully turned into women they also don’t have the ability to wage war even if they wanted to.  The women, now having a child, kind of want to keep and raise the child and they are thus assimilated into another culture.  I am not making this stuff up.  Genghis Khan is related to more people on the earth than any other single person, and he was the most prolific rapist in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0214_030214_genghis.html

American women, you are not winning a victory over men, you are defeating yourselves…

Women are fickle emotional creatures incapable of being reasonable an analytical consistently, when you make a woman’s emotional thinking the equal of a man’s intellectual reasoning, you destroy the possibility of a rational relationship.  This pattern is destroying the educational system, the economy, America and the world, it is ruining everything that was good about America.

Image

Image

Image

Image

What is funny is watching this ugly feminazi stonewalling Leslie, she is operating on a slippery slope, seeing years of feminist propaganda being flushed down the toilette where it belongs.  Her entire empire that was created for her by man hating women that she wants to pass on to all of her Amazonian little man hating daughters is going bye bye.  The subjugation of the American Male is coming to an end, or at least it better if we want to survive.  Stop homogenizing the sexes, they were created different for a reason, respect it.

Mung (computer term)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mung or munge is computer jargon for a series of changes to a piece of data, which are often well defined and individually reversible, but which transform the original item into an unrecognizable form. The changes may be destructive, for example by corrupting a computer file, or simply concealing, for example changes to an email address to disguise it fromspambots.

The term was coined in 1958 in the Tech Model Railroad Club at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1960 the backronym “Mash Until No Good” was created to describe Mung, and a while after it was revised to “Mung Until No Good”, making it one of the first recursive acronyms. It lived on as a recursive command in the editing language TECO.

Usages of the term appear in munged password (a strong, secure password created through character substitution), data munging (cleaning data from one “raw” form into a structured, purged one) and address munging (disguising an e-mail address).

Munging may also describe the constructive operation of tying together systems and interfaces that were not specifically designed to interoperate (often using the Perl programming language). Munging can also describe the processing or filtering of raw data into another form.[1]

Munging implies destruction[dubious – discuss]—to make large-scale and irrevocable changes to a file and to destroy it. Hence in the early text-adventure game Zork, also known as Dungeon, the user could mung an object and thereby destroy it (making it impossible to finish the game if the object was an important item).

Advertisements

EMERGENT PROPERTIES IN HUMAN JUDGMENTS.

Image

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.http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/?p=1772

girls-playing-doll1

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.

image2

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]

law-offices-charity-bar

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.

baby-turtle-eats-strawberry-big

http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/organic-computers-definition-by-joxuashiva/ https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/deuchebag-nation-womans-world-part-2/ http://finscribeofwisdom.blogspot.com/2012/10/unsustainable-emergent-patterns-in.html http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/armchair-philosophers/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/histrionic-co-morbidity-psychopaths-at-work-part-2/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/emotional-pornography/

THE COVER IS THE BOOK: How Women Predispose Themselves to Manipulation by Psychopaths

Image

 

For those of you that don’t know Toms gives shoes to poor kids through out the world for each pair of shoes you buy.  Now lets say that you are a woman and you want a sensitive man.  You see a man wearing these shoes and you think, “OHMIGOD, HE IS SO SWEET AND SENSITIVE!  I LOVE HIM!”  Well allow myself to inform you that I work in retail and TOMS shoes are the most stolen item, I swear for every pair sold another pair is stolen, and probably mostly by young men looking to impress girls with them.  If you don’t actually buy the shoes then that little starving kid in Africa doesn’t get any shoes.  So where did these scathingly brilliant female creatures go wrong in their decision making process?  Superficial aesthetic snap decisions.  

Image

The book is not the cover!  There is no law anywhere that says that people have to portray themselves accurately!  It is easier to manipulate a woman than it is to tell her the truth because she will whine, and complain, and judge and nag until you change your narrative.  The conceit that one must have to think that everything should be dumbed down accurately for your benefit, that you yourself are not responsible for knowing who is around you, and the presupposition that you would have this shallow relationship with a person based on the fact that they look stunning on your arm and compliment your eyes.

 I am reminded of how my ex-girl friend used to say after knowing me for a year, “where is that sweet man I used to know.”  The reason this is so infuriating is that she is comparing me to myself when she didn’t know anything about me.  Women don’t want to understand their man, they don’t want to put ANY mental effort into their man.  If the man attempts to tell her what he thinks instead of what she wants to hear she will punish and torment him.  It is much easier to lie to them and manipulate them.  Women are their own worst enemy, and they don’t take responsibility for their terrible decisions and they don’t scrutinize their decision making process.  

The male mind and the female mind are mirror images of one another.  Women are oppositelanders.  They think that everything should be done for them and the person should read their mind and give them what they want.  They think that the relationship is about their happiness and they are the judge of the state of the relationship.  I am trying to help women realize how they are screwing up America and they hate me for it.  They would rather live in pleasant oblivion than be self aware.  Wake up women, your world is crumbling around you faster than you know, and you are responsible, more responsible than anybody else.  

Image

The male mind, in it’s unadulterated un-pussified form, is sociopathic.  He lives in nature and deals with reality, conforming himself to nature so that he can survive.  Women presuppose a pleasant environment which is an artificial environment which is created by someone else for them.  The female mind is incapable of dealing with the ugliness of reality, it would much rather indulge itself in emotional pornography.  Men that haven’t been corrupted, perverted, and turned into women by this disgusting elitist, feminist, liberal western mental environment love that which is true and real.  Truth is beautiful because it means survival and success in the world.  Women on the other hand are distracted by superficial beauty, shiny objects, polish, refinement.  

Take a look at this slob, he is hairy, unrefined, mean-spirited, aggressive, he doesn’t wear TOMS, he eats meat,  he is disliked by just about everybody, he uses crass language, the list goes on.  But, he is a stand up comedian, an author, a linguistic philosopher, a psycholinguist, an ex-stripper, an ex-bouncer, he was given shaktipat initiation by Gurumayi Chidvilasananda picked out of 2,000 people, he is an authentic Jnana and Shaktipat Guru with an authentic lineage, he is an artist, he created his own martial art, he created his own psychology, he writes original philosophic calculus, and he has worked for one of the biggest fortune 500 companies that does the most charity for 10 years.  Can you tell by looking at him? 

Image

http://bookedallweek.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/book-abandoned-the-painted-bird-by-jerzy-kosinski/

http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/emotional-pornography/comment-page-1/#comment-57

SOCIOPATH/PSYCHOPATH DICHOTOMY

Image

In my system I have reappropriated the terms Psychopath and Sociopath in order to make them more clear.  If I may quote myself, “all narrative is doxography.”  all thought and speech is essentially narrative, and that narrative is strung together by a character or a story that the person is creating,  I feel that psychopaths and sociopaths have two completely different mind sets, which I will get into later, right now I would like to explain why I changed things around.

Trained psychologists have trouble distinguishing between psychopaths and sociopaths sometimes, a lot of this has to do with the way in which the terms were created.  As psychologists were discovering anti-social behavior, they began to flesh out the profile of psychopath, at some later point it became increasingly obvious that there was another type of anti-social behavior and the term sociopath was created and it started to come into use.  Sociopaths, if I understand correctly, are a sub-category of psychopaths, all aberrant behavior is psychotic, but we have two different personalities in psychopaths and sociopaths.  Also there seems to be some overlap between the two syndromes and I think I can clear that up although it is possible to have traits from both pathologies in the form of shadow syndromes.  I refer to process, patterns, or behaviors as being either a psychopathic process or a sociopathic process. 

Now, here is the psychopath checklist:

The two factors[edit source]

Factor 1: Interpersonal/Affective

Factor 2: Lifestyle/Antisocial

  • Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
  • Parasitic lifestyle
  • Poor behavioral control
  • Lack of realistic long-term goals
  • Impulsiveness
  • Irresponsibility
  • Juvenile delinquency
  • Early behavior problems
  • Revocation of conditional release
  • Criminal versatility

Traits not correlated with either factor

 

Acquired behavioral sociopathy/sociological conditioning (Item 21: a newly identified trait i.e., a person relying on sociological strategies and tricks to deceive

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_Checklist#The_two_factors

This to me points to an over coddled child.  I see the over coddling mother and the child as part of the same mentality, they are comorbid with one another and the mother creates an environment where the child can practice being manipulative and lying and getting away with it.  The psychopaths need a group of people, a herd, in which to socially climb and manipulate others, reputation brokering, strategic communication, rhetoric, passive aggression, etc. 

Image

I found it interesting that in the movie 300, we see the Spartan boy surrounded by images of fire, and attacked by wild animals and having trouble sleeping because of stress, and below we have the sociopathic triad:

The triad links animal crueltyobsession with fire setting, and persistent bedwetting past the age of five to violent behaviors, particularly homicidal behavior.[2] However, other studies have not found statistically significant links between the triad and violent offenders.

 

Further studies have suggested that these behaviors are often the product of parental neglect, cruelty or trauma, and that such events in a person’s childhood can result in “homicidal proneness”.[3] However, the ‘triad’ concept as a particular combination of behaviors may not have any particular validity – it has been called an urban legend.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macdonald_triad

From my perspective it is the neglected child, alone in nature and fending for himself that would experience those behaviors. This is more akin to a male mind, alone enduring the war of all against all. 

In the movie PREDATORS it seems to me that the writers were trying to show the difference between psychopaths and sociopaths.  All of the humans were super predators of one manner or another, the dentist was a cereal killer and he concealed this acting like he didn’t know why he was there.  With his own resources he would have been dead in 5 minutes on the planet, he needed to appeal to the sympathy of the others until he was in a place where he could opportunistically take advantage of the situation, and psychopaths are opportunistic.  They don’t fight you when you are strong, they fight you when you can’t defend yourself.  Everybody was more fit for survival than he was.  He concealed his narcissistic narrative and misrepresented himself bypassing everyone’s threat filter, he was a closeted narcissist.  

http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/bypassing-the-threat-filter-definition-by-joxuashivah/

 

Image

Image

Image

Image