November 22, 2017 Hostiles Is A Very White Movie Luke Ford No sacred cows.

Hostiles Is A Very White Movie

Posted on November 22, 2017 by Luke Ford

I loved this 2017 western but noticed how I was emotionally manipulated to increasingly side with the Indians against the whites.

A friend says: “The trend of having the audience root against the white man began with Little Big Man, then reached its high point in Dances with Wolves and most bizarrely was applied to the human race as a whole as opposed to the aliens in Avatar.”

The white protagonist played by Christian Biale starts off hostile against the Indian Chief he has to transport but as the movie goes along, the white guy gets close to the Indians he’s guarding until the penultimate confrontation in Montana when with the Indians, he kills four white guys protecting their own land. When the white protagonist scalps the white land owner, you are manipulated to cheer. You just feel it is awesome that he identifies more with the noble Indians than with the pedantic white guys (including white guys who saved the protagonist’s life in past battles with these very Indians).

I don’t think you’d find a Jewish movie glorifying Jews siding with Nazis to kill their own kind.

I don’t think there’s anything that whites are encouraged to find more moving and exciting than siding against your own people in a fight.

From Yahoo:

The three are forced to band together to overcome the punishing landscape and the Comanche bandits on their tail during a 1,500-mile trek across the perilous American frontier.
“For me really it was about two disparate men with very different world views who come together over the course of the narrative to offer one another a bit of reconciliation and hope. God knows, we need that in America now,” Cooper told AFP.
“I hope, if anything, it sparks a conversation about how we all need to come together and understand each other a bit better and the story is truly a journey of the soul for the characters.”…
Not all critics, however, have been convinced about the movie’s progressive bona fides, with several pointing out that the white actors get all the best lines and complex characterization.
The point is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that, in a story about fractious white-native relations in the American West, it is English actors Bale and Pike who are attracting all the early Oscar buzz.
Variety reviewer Peter Debruge accused “Hostiles” of treating its native characters as little more than one-dimensional “abstract plot devices” depicted as “ruthless savages or as stoic sages.”
Critics have also called out the movie for drawing a false equivalence between individual native attacks such as the Comanche ambush in the prologue and government-sanctioned genocide.
Cooper, however, insists he went to great lengths to understand the “language, customs and mores” of his native characters, employing Cheyenne cultural advisors to ensure he got it right.
“It was very important for me to represent Native American life in an extremely authentic but dignified manner,” he told AFP.

Posted in Hollywood | Comments Off

Gender Offenders

Posted on November 22, 2017 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes:

The founder of the Skunk Works, Kelly Johnson, America’s most famous aeronautical engineer, married a girl in the Lockheed accounting department in 1937. When she was dying in 1969, she explained to Kelly that he was too busy to take care of himself, so she had arranged for him to marry his secretary, which he did. When his second wife was dying, she in turn found a third wife for him.

When my mother was dying, she told my father to marry his secretary when she was gone, which is what he did.

Posted in Marriage | Comments Off

JPOST: SWEDISH DAUGHTER OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR FACES DEPORTATION FROM ISRAEL

Posted on November 21, 2017 by Luke Ford

From the Jerusalem Post:

The Swedish daughter of a Holocaust survivor faces deportation from Israel next week, based on claims that she was baptized as a baby and has ties to a messianic organization.
Rebecca Floer, 64, has been living parttime in northern Israel on a renewed tourist visa for the past three years. But after she applied to immigrate to Israel, not only was her application denied, but her tourist visa was shortened and she received notice that she must leave the country by this coming Sunday.

Comments at the Jerusalem Post:

* She’s a missionary. She’s not wanted. And whats more she should be violently resisted.
* This woman is not Jewish. By Jewish law she is not Jewish , and she never lived Jewish life. What more, she is a missionary. That is a no no in Israel.
* If it’s true that she’s a Christian missionary hiding in “Jewish” clothes, she should be booted. But if she’s a Jew returning to her roots, she should stay. The facts should dictate this.
* What a distorted, lying article ! Not only that she is not jewish, she is a christian missionary, working hard to decimate the jewish people through conversions. She is an enemy.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* As the Israeli supreme court ruled in the Brother Daniel case (back in 1960 or so), Jewish converts to Christianity are an existential threat to the Jewish people and can be prevented from immigrating.

It is simple, common sense: the Nation — every nation — should determine which other religions, races, and ethnies are a threat, prevent them from immigrating, and expel them if there is any way possible.

* The comments in this newspaper article are so revealing. If one takes them them at face value there are plenty of (Israeli) Jews who hate gentiles and if it was the other way around have opinions which would be characterised as hate crime in Western countries.

* How do the open borders whack jobs in Congress square these two facts:

1. The United States cannot be allowed to adopt an Israeli-style immigration policy because that policy is racist.

2. The United States should continue to send Israel over $3 billion/year in foreign aid.

If I propose reducing legal immigration and enforcing laws against illegal immigration I am a racist. And if I propose eliminating US aid to Israel, even if it’s on the grounds of objecting to their immigration policy, I am also a racist.

I dare an American politician to use the term “illegal infiltrator.” Democrats, of course, love to pretend to be anti-Israel when it suits them, so that wouldn’t work. The proper place to use it would be in front of open borders Republican – perhaps Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham or Sheldon Adelson.

* Israel is the first First World nation north of eastern Africa on the land route.

* This brings back traumatic memories of the year I spent in East Orange, in the early middle 1970s, as the city began its decline from a pleasant White suburb to a mostly Negro hellhole. When I first got to East Orange there was a pleasant and well-stocked urban supermarket. Then, a few months after my arrival, I noticed the appearance of Negroes, openly stealing and vandalizing as they “shopped”. Before I left the market shut its doors but first not before newly arrived Negroes had trashed the place into a shambles. When I first arrived I felt comfortable walking along Prospect Street, a main drag, at any time of the day. By the time I left Negro harassment might occur at any time. To anyone who has not experienced it, the rapidity with which an influx of the Negro underclass can destroy a neighborhood or city is incomprehensible. The Oranges were once renowned for the quality of their schools. My guess is they began a steady decline starting at about the time I left.

* My point is to close ranks like the Jews do. Jews are successful for a reason. Be ruthless about in-group interests like the Jews are. Conceal advancement of group interests behind something like tikkun olam.

The challenge for Whites will be how to employ the double strategy that Jews do — claim they’re “White” when it’s advantageous, then claim they’re “Jews” when it’s not. Hard for a White to claim he’s a Somali or Paki.

* I recall a post from a while back, where Japanese that spoke English were much friendlier to globalism than those that didn’t. Perhaps the Israeli Jews that only speak Hebrew are disconnected from the liberal English speakers in America.

* Their [Israel] Supreme Court is notable in that its is the only government branch where Arabs have representation. The Arabs in the Knesset obviously don’t count when even Labor won’t agree to appoint them to the Cabinet should they win.

It should not be outrageous for the US right to demand that Israel appoint even a token few Christians into the Israeli Cabinet, as the price for continued military subsidies. It would be even better to demand that Arab Christians in Lebanon are not legitimate military targets, as they were in 2006.

* Our host with the most, Steven Sailer, has pointed out that even affluent black neighborhoods have lousy schools, e.g., Prince Georges County in Maryland.

* Jewish religious doctrine, although fascinating, is not my main interest. I’m more keen to observe (and emulate) how Jews create a strong in-group orientation and obtain positions of privilege living as aliens in an ostensibly hostile society. That would be useful for my group as we become a minority in Diversity America.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off

Revolt of Fox’s Hens

Posted on November 21, 2017 by Luke Ford

By Sheelah Kolhatkar • 10/25/04 on Observer.com:

TV news is a generally inhospitable place for women to work. It often involves unequal pay for comparable work. It nurtures and inspires sexual harassment in a pressured, heightened environment filled with risks and rewards, highs and lows, and often staffed by malleable younger women producers and assistants assigned to the care and feeding of outsized male egos…

Even in Ms. Mackris’ telling, her part of the dance was to coddle, to enable and—after leaving Fox for CNN—to return to Mr. O’Reilly despite her creepy feelings about him, which led to an incessant, seamy courtship of dinners, dirty telephone calls and exposure to what she described as his preoccupation with loofas and vibrators.

And, according to Ms. Mackris, his threats: “If any woman ever breathed a word I’ll make her pay so dearly that she’ll wish she’d never been born,” Ms. Mackris said he told her in a telephone conversation. “I’ll rake her through the mud, bring up things in her life and make her so miserable that she’ll be destroyed. And besides, she wouldn’t be able to afford the lawyers I can or endure it financially as long as I can. And nobody would believe her, it’d be her word against mine and who are they going to believe? Me or some unstable woman making outrageous accusations. They’d see her as some psycho, someone unstable. Besides, I’d never make the mistake of picking unstable crazy girls like that.”

…“They love their women dolled up,” said another former Fox News staffer who had worked in the D.C. bureau. “It’s not saying they don’t like women who aren’t smart. But women at Fox were in trouble if they were on air and they weren’t dressed like a hooker. Everybody at Fox is painfully aware of that.”

…The CNN producer described a young woman co-worker at the cable network who had strategically slept with older, more powerful men to advance her career—which wasn’t something the producer could judge with pure moral clarity. After all, it worked. “It was her goal to get on the air,” she said. “And she made it. She got what she wanted. It’s a very tricky—it’s murky. It’s very murky.”

Other women professionals described a recent shift in the stylistic choices of college interns invading the stations: girls in shorts skirts and high boots, who were clearly aware of the power their looks afforded and were willing to work it—up to a point.

Many women said that for young females looking for mentors in the business, older men were much more willing to dole out attention and guidance than were the jaded, established women who were working against the clock, juggling face-lifts to prolong their television careers—which, of course, put the younger women into the very compromising positions that inspired harassment.

“I do think in network news, it’s so incredibly cutthroat—for a woman to get to that level, she loses all sense of what she was like as a young woman,” said a former Fox News staffer who didn’t want her current network affiliation to be known. “She had to sacrifice so much—why should she help a young woman?”

Said another female CNN producer, “There aren’t that many female executive producers. And they’re mean to those girls who are pretty and want to be on television.” One cable news producer said that the most verbally abusive boss she’d ever had had been a woman…

The TV news business offers a unique setup for the kind of behavior that Mr. O’Reilly is accused of: Aging, highly paid, powerful men dominate on air and behind the scenes, while armies of ambitious, underpaid, beautiful young women serve as their foot soldiers—the producers and bookers, assistants and interns—who scramble for guests and keep their bosses’ egos inflated.

Most of the on-air and off-air TV news people said that the way network and cable news is produced—from the basic flow chart in your average production to the required hours—creates an atmosphere primed for power relationships to exert themselves. Often, staff find themselves working late in close quarters, traveling from city to city, hotel to hotel, bar to bar.

One prominent and current male on-air host described his view of the social and sexual dynamic of the television news world:

“At the producing level, it’s all young women,” he said, “99 percent of whom have no chance of being on TV. They like being in TV and they like powerful men. Each host has around him lots of good-looking, unmarried women. Women are excited by power, let’s be totally clear. The temptation to fuck your staff is overwhelming—literally, almost overwhelming. You just can’t imagine how sexually out of control it is. A quarter of the women are bisexual. They’re good-looking, they’re totally without restraint. Nobody has family around, you’re on the road traveling, and you’re making $7 million a year and they’re making $65,000 a year. That’s three grand a month to live in the big city. You’ve got all the money—in every way, you’re the sheik, they’re the harem. You can’t overstate how true that is. That’s a natural dynamic.”

The news personality said that the job descriptions of most of the behind-the-scenes staff—including the producer—is to focus positive attention on the on-air personality, to make him look and sound smart and handsome and to keep his ego well-inflated.

“All they do all day long, they’re job is to serve you,” he said. “That’s explicitly their job. How you look, how you sound—everything is focused on you.”

Most of the women interviewed had a pretty easy time reciting tales from the TV-news locker room of unwanted touching and groping, compliments on “fuck-me” shoes, invitations to return to hotel rooms, clunky and incessant sexual innuendo (e.g., “I’d like to help you get a-head, ha ha ha!”), unwelcome shoulder rubs, shameless requests for dates, three-way orgies and oral sex—all by well-known male on-air personalities and powerful news executives at the top of network and cable channels.

Posted in Abuse, Fox | Comments Off

The Use Of The Self

Posted on November 21, 2017 by Luke Ford

Johnie comments:

It took me the best part of 15 years to figure out direction and inhibition – everything I needed to know was in “Use Of The Self” which is the first AT book I purchased years ago.

I needed the help of “Don Weeds – What you think is what you get” to actually believe what I was being told in UoS. Don’s book was not so much a source of new information but an enabler to allow me to actually have sufficient faith in UoS to commit properly to it.

Alexander rated his best teacher as his brother whom he taught verbally – unless he held back on us we have to assume that UoS contains all we need to know or at least all we need to start off with.

I have been able to parrot FM [Alexander] aphorisms for many years but it was only after Don Weed’s book told me that I was already looking at the answers in UoS (Use of the Self) that I understood them properly. We can do what Alexander did if we do what he did – problem is it takes around 15 years to get to the level of belief and commitment that we are actually really prepared to do even a fraction of what he did.

Verbally – put into words my AT knowledege has not increased greatly over the years, I could parrot the major texts then and I could parrot them now – the only difference that has really happened is that I finally learnt to believe and trust and follow what was written in UoS.

I am glad to say I now do what he did about 20% of my waking time and even that has advanced me more than any of my other countless AT books. UoS is the knowledge. We are all familiar with telling someone something when they go “Yeah yeah yeah yeah” after each sentance we say ( impatiently) and then they try to stop us and say “Yup I get it – you can stop now” and we walk away knowing that they did not get it – they heard the words we said but they did not hear what we said because they thought they knew better, they thought they could fast track or use our experience to spring board forwards without having to do the study or discipline. That person is me for the last 15 years although I never heard myself say “yeah” and I thought I held FM’s wisdom in high regard but the truth is I did not hear what he said because I preferred the fast track versions that others offered.

Regards Inhibition – I think it is helpful not to STOP because we are entering the area of conflicting instruction ( STOP and yet give the order to GO – the classic hit the accelerator an brake pedal at the same time ). I prefer to view inhibitition as the refusal to act immediately not the refusal to act – that causes less conflict in the orders and so less tension.

Posted in Alexander Technique | Comments Off

Rep. John Conyers – Sexual Predator

Posted on November 20, 2017 by Luke Ford

He’s featured in the 2017 Detroit movie as the good guy.

Has there ever been a black civil rights leader who was not a scumbag? Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, John Conyers, etc. All scum.

Buzzfeed:

Michigan Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat and the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives, settled a wrongful dismissal complaint in 2015 with a former employee who alleged she was fired because she would not “succumb to [his] sexual advances.”

Documents from the complaint obtained by BuzzFeed News include four signed affidavits, three of which are notarized, from former staff members who allege that Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the powerful House Judiciary Committee, repeatedly made sexual advances to female staff that included requests for sexual favors, contacting and transporting other women with whom they believed Conyers was having affairs, caressing their hands sexually, and rubbing their legs and backs in public. Four people involved with the case verified the documents are authentic.

And the documents also reveal the secret mechanism by which Congress has kept an unknown number of sexual harassment allegations secret: A grinding, closely held process that left the alleged victim feeling, she told BuzzFeed News, that she had no option other than to stay quiet and accept a settlement offered to her.

“I was basically blackballed. There was nowhere I could go,” she said in a phone interview. BuzzFeed News is withholding the woman’s name at her request, because she said she fears retribution.

Last week the Washington Post reported that the office paid out $17 million for 264 settlements with federal employees over 20 years for various violations, including sexual harassment. The Conyers documents, however, give a glimpse into the inner workings of the Office of Compliance, which has for decades concealed episodes of sexual abuse by powerful political figures

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off

Somebody should do a literary analysis of the mea culpas of Al Franken, Charlie Rose, Leon Wieseltier, Louis CK etc. I truly believe I am pursuing shared feelings here.

Posted on November 20, 2017 by Luke Ford

A friend says: It is a remarkable set. If it were a scene in a movie, I would suspect that the uniformity of this—the getting accused and immediately confessing and apologizing—was all staged by power players (all at retirement age anyway)… who, for some reason, wanted to ensure the final victory of the matriarchy. I mean, it’s like a Lifetime movie. It’s penitence for secular materialists. You just have to apologize for doing it and for the party line to be forgiven.

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off

February 2007 Radar Piece On Toxic Bachelors

Posted on November 20, 2017 by Luke Ford

From Radar magazine:

They used to be called cads, or playboys, or Kennedys—randy skirt-chasers who could be trusted to mind their manners and get their girls home by 11 p.m., even if they sometimes left them with a mild burning sensation. Jack Nicholson, the patron saint of this brotherhood, claims to have bedded an estimated 2,000 women in his lifetime. And at 69, he’s still going strong. “In terms of age,” he bragged to Rolling Stone in 2006, “you could say that over the last year, I’ve probably covered the territory from 21 to 61.”

But lately, a new strain of scoundrel is on the prowl—one that shares all of Jack’s oversize appetites and little of his lethal charm. You can find these Don Juans locked in bathrooms at Bungalow 8, hotel-hopping in St. Barth’s, or, if they’re really dedicated, forcing beauty queens to belly dance in desert sex compounds. Generally over 30, defiantly single, and immune to public ridicule, they use fame, power, and expensive sailing vessels to pursue their quarry, only to leave heartbreak and paternity suits in their wake. Call them lotharios, womanizers, or heartless bastards—just don’t expect them to call you back.

COLIN-FARRELL-71526551.jpg
MCNASTY Colin’s pipe is calling
COLIN FARRELL
Age: 30
Occupation: Actor
Notable Assets: Gaelic brogue; smoldering gaze; Marlboro breath

“When I come to town, I [bleep] everything I can”Farrell burst onto the scene as one of the hardest-partying bad boys to hit Hollywood since Jack himself: smoking, drinking, cursing, trashing, and screwing anything he could focus on long enough before passing out. Since his arrival stateside, he’s worked his way through the young and trashy set, from Paris to Britney to Lindsay, and a battery of models, including one who bore him a son. As he told W magazine, “When I come to town I [bleep] everything I can.” On the set of Alexander, Farrell—or “Cock-Out Colin” as he was affectionately known—famously showed Rosario Dawson the trailer door when pouty-lipped sex priestess Angelina Jolie turned up hungry for fresh meat. Yet for all his dirty deeds, he comes off like a teddy bear. On his sex tape with Playmate Nicole Narain, for example, Farrell describes her vagina as a “beautiful little flower” and lays on the Irish sweet-talk: “If a fucking camera could blush it would be fucking red because you are so fucking pretty.” Due to archaic bylaws, the performance cannot be considered by the Academy.

CHARLIE ROSE
Age: 65
Occupation: PBS talk-show host
Notable Assets: Massive Rolodex; Southern charm; Mini Cooper convertible

Many men are pigs at heart, but in Charlie Rose’s case, it’s not just a metaphor. Last March, surgeons replaced his mitral valve with that of a swine, his second such porcine-related transplant. Rose, whose no-frills, upper-middle-brow interview show has aired on PBS since 1991, is a notoriously avid admirer of the female form. Or, as one longtime friend puts it, “He’s just a straight-up horndog.” Divorced since 1980, he favors women of substance, like Wall Street Journal publisher Karen Elliott House, LTB Media chief Louise MacBain, and Marybel Batjer, a former cabinet secretary for Arnold Schwarzenegger. From 1993 to 2005, he dated socialite Amanda Burden, though he was frequently rumored to be pursuing extracurricular interests.

At work, Rose is known for surrounding himself with attractive female producers who have been referred to, inevitably, as “Charlie’s Angels.” And while he’s on good behavior in the office, he loosens up in the Long Island village where he has a vacation home. Sources say the married men of Bellport are afraid to leave their wives alone during the summer, for fear Rose will creep into their gardens. And with good reason, as one startled half of a New York power couple learned while doing dishes after a dinner party. As the woman’s husband was enjoying dessert in the next room, the Public Bawdcaster sidled up from behind, slid a neighborly hand up her skirt, and palmed her buttock like a honeydew. No word if she received a complimentary PBS tote bag.

FLAVIO BRIATORE
Age: 56
Occupation: Entrepreneur; manager of Renault’s Formula One racing team; owner of Cipriani London and the Billionaire Club in Sardinia
Notable Assets: 200-foot yacht; leathery orange tan

The “overweight Italian stallion” has managed to parlay his gratuitous racing fortune and hairy Buddha belly into relationships with the world’s most beautiful women, including Nicole Kidman, Elle Macpherson, and Eva Herzigova. He’s often spotted off Sardinia on his yacht, Force Blue, with bikini-clad ladies half his age. “I prefer younger girls,” he explained to the Daily Mail. “They say thank you for dinner, at least.”

But as Heidi Klum learned, free meals are a lot easier to get out of Briatore than child support or fidelity. After his dalliance with a 19-year-old model cut their romance short, Heidi’s baby daddy refused to offer financial assistance without a paternity test. A friend of Klum’s later told the Post the billionaire never “gave her a dime” to care for their daughter, though Briatore claims otherwise. Klum’s aunt tried to remain neutral, describing him to the Mail as a “wrinkly, worthless old has-been … bastard.” Naomi Campbell may have shared those sentiments when she had a tattoo of Briatore’s initials removed from her arm. Despite Campbell’s accusations of domestic abuse, they’ve continued their cycle of make-ups and break-ups. It seems, however hard he tries, Briatore is unable to commit to just one size zero. “You know how it is with women,” he told the Guardian last year. “The big excitement comes with the flirting. You flirt, flirt, flirt, and then you are there.”

JUDITH REGAN
Age: 53
Occupation: Unemployed book publisher
Notable Assets: A villa in Italy and, by her own account, a clitoris “the size of two fingers”

Regan went on testosterone therapy after she hit menopause. “I then understood how men think and feel,” she confided. “I became a sex maniac”Regan’s peerless potty mouth alone could qualify her as toxic. While she was employed at HarperCollins, her endearing habit of referring to colleagues as “pussies” and “cunts” earned her the rare distinction of being sued by female employees for sexual harassment. But that’s not surprising for a gal who liked to boast of having “the biggest cock in the building.” As if a phantom phallus and the bravado of a bullfighter didn’t make her man enough, Regan went on testosterone therapy after she hit menopause. “I then understood how men think and feel,” she recently confided on her Sirius radio show. “I became a sex maniac.”

By all accounts, she’s as good as her word. Most famously, she had an affair with former NYPD commissioner Bernie Kerik, meeting him for trysts in an apartment reserved for Ground Zero recovery workers. According to one friend, she still gushes that her sessions with the top cop were the best sex she ever had. And it’s not as though she lacks a basis for comparison. One editor, who brought a married friend from out of town to an industry Christmas party, was awed by the speed with which Regan seduced the stranger into going home with her. She also reportedly romanced Pablo Fenjves, the ghostwriter of O.J. Simpson’s scrapped quasi-confessional, If I Did It. “Men should be sexually aggressive with women,” she once told an interviewer. Judith, may we introduce you to Benicio?

BENICIO DEL TORO
Age: 40
Occupaton: Actor
Notable Assets: Played Duke the Dog-Faced Boy in Big Top Pee-Wee

If New York’s Bungalow 8 is the toxic Algonquin, Del Toro is its dyslexic Dorothy Parker. Night crawlers gossip about the “Mafia-style wad of cash” he conspicuously leaves out on his table, presumably for tipping waitresses. He’s also one of the few patrons with the right to bypass the club’s infamous bathroom line, a privilege he frequently exercises with “two and even three girls in tow.” Luckily for Benicio there’s no time limit on his stay. As one potty-goer puts it, “If the attendant knows he’s in there, she never even knocks.”

Decades-younger starlets like Scarlett Johansson and Lindsay Lohan have both reportedly fallen into Del Toro’s beefy clutches: the former in a Chateau Marmont elevator; the latter at the 25th birthday of Sara Foster, B-Del’s girlfriend at the time. Del Toro’s signature seduction tactic is “the unrelenting stare,” a libidinous tractor beam that, once locked on, is almost impossible to escape. Sadly, according to one repeat customer, the actor’s precoital intensity doesn’t necessarily translate in the bedroom: “It was kinky, but lackluster and sloppy.” Or, as another contestant recalls, “He was so messed up, we had to stop so he could go puke.” Benicio might be a boor, but he’s no animal: “He gives you $20 for a cab ride home.”

Posted in Abuse, Hollywood | Comments Off

Charlie Rose Outed As A Predator

Posted on November 20, 2017 by Luke Ford

I could never stand Charlie Rose. His work was pompous. He was a terrible interviewer. (This is a better way.)

I never could stand New York Times reporter Glenn Thrush either. I hate these preening leftists lecturing us about right and wrong.

I’ve always felt creeped out by most of the famous people recently outed as sexual predators — such as Brett Ratner, Harvey Weinstein, Leon Wieseltier, etc. I’ve always loathed male feminists. I’ve always suspected that older men eager to mentor young women were using this pose to try to fuck them. No real man honestly cares about a woman’s perspective (except in rare instances). High-achieving men want female company for one overwhelming reason — sex. That’s it. Real men want to hang out with men.

So far, none of the famous people outed as predators have been conservative (except Roy Moore, and I do believe the accusations against him).

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Nobody can set up a leading question longer than Charlie Rose.

* I first saw Charlie Rose in mid 80s on late night (I think) CBS show. So, I’d be up at 2 am, and Rose would be interviewing some physicist about magnetic something or other.
I liked this Rose. He seemed a straight shooter, just a guy doing his job.

But then, he turned into a brand. He was the serious guy who interviewed thinkers, writers, artists, actors(and not mere entertainers), composers, academics, and etc.
Considering the alternatives on TV, his show was probably one of the best shows on TV since Dick Cavett. There weren’t many worthy interview shows on TV. Bill Moyers used to fill the role, but he was never was hip. After Rose, I suppose there was Larry King, but that was barely low-middle-brow. So, Rose show offered something half-intelligent on TV. But it also got increasingly pompous.

Also, after awhile, there were no surprises. It would have been better if Rose passed out drinks so everyone could get drunk and drop inhibitions and speak honestly. Instead, we got intelligent talk(like on NPR) but the usual talking points on any subject matter. No one came on the show to spill any secrets. It was mostly to stick to official talking points or flatter one another… like actors, director, producer coming on the show and remarking how they are all so wonderful and talented.

But the really icky stuff was the pandering. I recall David Remnick was once on and they were talking about the Serbian-Bosnian crisis. And Rose asked Remnick. “How do you……………….. as a Jew…………. yabba dabba doo…” It was like Remnick, being a member of the Shoah Tribe, was intrinsically privy(“as a Jew”)to some deep wisdom about human tragedy. Those pregnant pauses, the pious gestures, and etc. I mean it was icky.
As for Remnick, he just played along. I suppose people can become morally spoiled too, and guys like Remnick feel morally entitled.
But then, Remnick plays this game too, esp in his tribute to Springsteen the saint of sausaged buns.
Bunch of globbies massaging each other’s egos.

* He is a terrible interviewer. How did he ever get an interview show and keep it for decades? It never made any sense.

* Then when the guest started answering Rose would interrupt mid-sentence.

* The man, a lawyer by education I think, was the worst questioner of all time–two thirds of his interviews were him talking while the guest waited for him to finish. He simply sucked at his so-called profession and especially compared to guys like Frost or Cavett.

There was never anything confrontational or tense about a Rose interview–just another sign of the decline of public discourse and intellectual rigor.

That he slithered around and acted like a cheap imitation of Christopher Walken doing the Continental guy on SNL just makes it all that much more satisfying.

* According to Roger Waters, Rose once told him that he can’t discuss certain matters because of orders from upstairs.

And Charlie Rose show had value as platform for cultural figures in their twilight yrs. The last of Mailer, Sontag, Vidal, Sarris, and etc were featured on his show. No other TV shows would have them. To that extent, it respected Age in a culture that generally doesn’t.

* Or it could be that journalism as a profession tends to attract hypocritical sleazebags like an elementary school playground attracts pedophiles and politics attracts narcissists.

* Yes, he acted like a lecherous old goat and they kept showing up for more. Why are the rest of us supposed to care, under the post-’60s rules? Shouldn’t we all be celebrating Charlie is so comfortable with his sexuality? Shouldn’t we be glad he’s not uptight about this stuff?

* It should be remembered that part of the reason we even have large numbers of women in professional environments that were once exclusively or overwhelmingly dominated by men is due to powerful older men like Charlie Rose. The prospect of lots of younger women in professionally subordinate positions and fewer male competitors is no doubt irresistibly enticing to powerful older men, whose support has been critical for promoting feminism and female participation in professional careers. It’s one of the tacit perks of men above the glass ceiling. Without the sexual opportunities that this change afforded, there wouldn’t have been support for it by powerful men. The headache and hassle of women in the workplace wouldn’t be worth it, and having more women would be a competitive disadvantage. There was basically tacit collusion and cartel like behavior by powerful men whereby they all agreed to allow their companies and organizations to become less competitive by hiring weaker employees, in exchange for the perk of having lots of younger women around you in subordinate positions.

Now it looks like this perk is being taken away, removing the original rationale for powerful men to even support feminism.

* Old man – young woman is not a particularly good strategy around which to organize a society, for a variety of reasons. We do well to discourage it.

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off

The Obsession With Sin

Posted on November 19, 2017 by Luke Ford

A friend says: I think if a society DOES NOT obsess over sin and depravity… then that leaves it vulnerable to the allure of idols. It’s only when you think less about good and evil than Hawthorne and the Puritans that you start to believe there might be individuals who are better than you — “good” people — celebrities, politicians. But there aren’t. No one should be in charge more than me. They’re not better. All men are gods. Guessing Orthodox Judaism is less prone to idol worship (in the form of persons) than Hollywood worshiping reform or atheist Jews.

Like when I hear Marc Maron fawn over President Obama, that’s grotesque to me. I don’t think anyone deserves that level of moral prostration. Trying to argue the upside of an obsession with sin. Even Obama would be there at Young Goodman Brown’s black mass.

Men worship the category “women” only when they assume women are more moral. And this worship gives women power. Same with Christians and Jews. Christians will only give Jews power if they worship Jews—and they’ll only worship Jews IF they think Jews are more moral.

So a person either focuses on sin and depravity or he is prone to hero worship and clings to one false prophet after another.

>>Japs seem to be doing ok without sin obsession.

You said there was no Illuminati level depravity in the SDA Church—nothing as bad as in Orthodox Judaism or Catholicism. But couldn’t that be *because* they obsess about sin? It makes them less prone to sin.

Hmm. Japs. Good question. Maybe it’s cuz they’re more communal… shame as opposed to guilt. Honor is not lost upon committing a sin. In Christianity, honor is beyond the reach of the world.

Posted in America | Comments Off