Prince Charles Expressed Concern About The ‘Jewish Lobby’ In 1986 Letter To A Friend

Posted on November 12, 2017 by Luke Ford

The Independent: “Prince Charles blames ‘foreign Jews’ for Middle East turmoil in 1986 letter”

Comments on the Frame Game thread:

* There are days when I can hardly imagine life as a red-blooded Gentile because of how maddening it must be to watch such obvious truths be so sloppily & cavalierly discounted to zero by institutionally powerful Jewish groups.

How could it NOT engender anti-Semitism!?!

* We’re not even allowed to say “Jewish lobby” now. What, is AIPAC ecumenical now? It’s so ridiculous. God damn.

* Why would the neutral term “Jewish lobby” be considered anti-Semitic, unless it’s “pro-Semitic” to lurk in the shadows?

* It’s maddening they think we are not bright enough to look behind the veil. Thank you for showing us not all jews loath us. Besides we’re too cute and funny to go to a gulag.

* I mean, does AIPAC and the ADL do anything other than shout “anti-Semite” when someone connects the dots?

* Can you help us understand the split between many Israeli nationalists and the open borders zealots of the diaspora elites?

Joe* says:

Its interesting that he wrote to Laurens van der Post. Van der Post is one of those men who led a fascinating life although his biographer thinks at least some of it was made up. What we do know about him is that he was born in South Africa, traveled to Japan along with William Plomer in the late 1920’s, was one of the original members of the South Africans who created the magazine Voorslag, worked on South African Newspapers, emigrated to England, fought in WWII and was captured early in the conflict in what is now either Indonesia or Malaysia and spent the remainder of the war in a Japanese POW camp. The men who served under him in the camp (he was an officer) speak highly of him maintaining morale, along with other prisoners instituting educational classes, and his knowledge of Japanese proved invaluable.

After the war he dumped his first (South African wife) for Ingaret Giffard a lay Jungian therapist, did much exploratory work in British colonies in southern Africa in what is now Malawi and Botswana, and became a defender of the Bushmen, a stone age group of persons, different from the other native Africans. He produced a film about them which was aired on the BBC. He also someone or other ingratiated himself with Margaret Thatcher and with Prince Charles. One of the stories is that Charles brought a collection of van der Post’s writings with him on his honeymoon for Princess Diana to read. Some of Van der Post’s books are accessible, others are not so easily understood.

Van der Post himself had some familiarity with Palestine. In his book, the Seed and the Sower, an important scene of the book takes place in Palestine. Before he went to the Dutch or British East Indies, he had been sent by the British Army to help be a camel wrangler to support the anti Italian forces in Ethiopia.

Van der Post was a keen observer of international affairs, although he developed his own stereotypes about nations (as an example that the Japanese are very influenced by the moon) and many of his predictions about post apartheid South Africa have come to pass (although he was an ardent opponent of Apartheid, he was a strong supporter of Buthelezi and the Zulus and a staunch opponent of the ANC and considered Mandela a terrorist since he had been convicted of that and did not consider him a political prisoner/freedom fighter/ moral conscience, although Mandela himself was much more gracious to Van der Post in the messages he wrote upon van der Post’s death.

He did consider the founding of the state of Israel and the British promise (if that is how the Balfour Declaration is construed) to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine a mistake and a wrong done to the Palestinians who lived there. He believed that although the Jews had suffered in WWII that it was morally wrong to impose a new state for the Jews on an existing area that had been predominantly Arab. It seems that Charles’ letter to Van der Post makes a crucial distinction that most Jews are unwilling to look at. Although in many of the Arab (and Islamic) countries from Morocco to Iran to Yemen, the Jews were not treated well, in many of those countries, they were well integrated into the communities where they lived and thrived and prospered there. The creation of Israel had the unintended effect of leading to anti Jewish sentiments in many of these countries where they either had been close to non existent, or at a very low level. I think this the reason that Charles is singling out the European Jews as causing the friction with the Palestinian Arabs. Because he looked at it historically when the Ottoman Empire gave refuge to the Jews expelled from Catholic Countries in 1492 and after.

Jews do not like to think that the introduction of Jews to Palestine in the post Herzl Zionist era, and then in the aftermath of WW II was in any way colonialist. That is why it is so important for Jews to promote the idea that Israel is the homeland of the Jews, as if the 25,000 Ashkenazi Jews in the 13th Century which grew into something like 10 to 12 million at the outset of WWII (including European Jews who had emigrated to America) had any sort of actual historic claim to Israel.

Van der Post who was quite familiar with the Dutch and English colonization of South Africa in particular, recognized this for what it was and I am sure this the reason Charles was willing to confide in him in this letter which I am sure he never thought would be made public.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Prince Charles Expressed Concern About The ‘Jewish Lobby’ In 1986 Letter To A Friend

Bobby Riggs, The Mafia and The Battle of the Sexes

Posted on November 11, 2017 by Luke Ford

I just watched the silly 2017 movie The Battle of the Sexes about the 1973 tennis match between Bobby Riggs and Billy Jean King.

The movie never mentions that Bobby threw the match to satisfy his gambling debts. Instead, it presents Billy’s victory as some great triumph for women and gay rights. As Wikipedia notes: “According to an extensive article by the ESPN program Outside the Lines,[26] Riggs took advantage of the overwhelming odds against King and threw the match to get his debts to the mob erased. This would confirm the suspicions held by many of Riggs’ peers, including Don Budge.”

Slate:

This lack of preparation—and Riggs’ uninspired, error-riddled play during the match—fueled speculation that the old hustler had intentionally thrown the match, perhaps because he had bet against himself, perhaps at the behest of the mob. (The strongest such claim came in a 2013 ESPN story by Don Van Natta Jr.)

Riggs made no effort to hide the extent of his gambling habit (a July 1973 Sports Illustrated profile described Riggs and his best friend Lornie Kuhle betting “on everything from tennis games to memory contests, from the turn of a coin to the flight of a robin”), and according to A Necessary Spectacle, he annoyed both King and his own support team by spending the break after the first set trying to negotiate a change in the odds with his bookie up in the stands.

The fact is that most any man among the top 100 players on the senior circuit would beat the top female tennis players of any age.

ESPN reports:

It seemed a certain payday for him. Four months earlier, Riggs had crushed Margaret Court, the world’s No. 1 women’s tennis player, 6-2, 6-1, in an exhibition labeled by the media as the “Mother’s Day Massacre.” Court’s defeat had persuaded King to play Riggs. Nearly everyone in tennis expected a similarly lopsided result. On the ABC broadcast, Pancho Gonzales, John Newcombe and even 18-year-old Chrissie Evert predicted Riggs would defeat King, then the No. 2-ranked woman. In Las Vegas, the smart money was on Bobby Riggs. Jimmy the Greek declared, “King money is scarce. It’s hard to find a bet on the girl.”

But by aggressively attacking the net and smashing precision shots, King ran a winded, out-of-shape Riggs all over the court. Riggs made a slew of unforced errors, hitting soft returns directly at King or into the net and double-faulting at key moments, including on set point in the first set. “I don’t understand,” Cosell said after a King winner off a Riggs backhand. “He’s been feeding her that backhand all night.” Midway through the third set, Riggs looked drained and complained of hand cramps. After King took match point, winning in straight sets, 6-4, 6-3, 6-3, Riggs mustered the energy to hop the net. “I underestimated you,” he whispered in King’s ear.

Posted in Sex | Comments Off on Bobby Riggs, The Mafia and The Battle of the Sexes

Parasha Toledot (Gen. 25:19–28:9)

Posted on November 11, 2017 by Luke Ford

This week’s Torah portion tells us the story of Esau and Jacob.

Listen here.

I am joined by Vivian Veritas, Dennis Dale and the Professor.

* I think the allegations against Roy Moore are true. I don’t think they reflect well on him. I don’t think they’re an abomination either. I’d rather someone did this than something gay. I think Roy’s behavior is common. If I were in Alabama, I would still vote for Roy Moore.

* How old was Rebecca when she married Isaac? According to Rashi and other medieval rabbis, she was three (because she required a wet nurse when she traveled to meet Isaac), but Isaac waited until she was an adult before he had relations with her. Others say Rebecca was ten, possibly 13.

According to Wikipedia:

Early-teen marriage was possible in Judaism. In Judaism girls reach adulthood at 12 and boys at 13. According to the Talmud, a father is commanded not to let his his daughter marry anyone until she grows up and says, “I want this one”.[73] A marriage that takes place without the consent of the girl is not an effective legal marriage.[74]

Despite the young threshold for marriage, a large age gap between the spouses was opposed,[75] and, in particular, marrying one’s young daughter to an old man was declared as reprehensible as forcing her into prostitution.[76]

A ketannah (literally meaning “little [one]”) was any girl between the age of 3 years and that of 12 years plus one day;[77] he could arrange a marriage for her in her best interests.[77] However, after reaching the age of maturity, she would have to agree to the marriage to be considered as married. If the father was dead or missing, the brothers of the ketannah, collectively, had the ability , as had her mother.[77] In these situations, a ketannah would always have the right to annul her marriage, even if it was the first.

* According to Torah and to the Talmud, an uncle can marry his niece in Judaism, but this ceased to be the practice when Jews moved to Europe. Why? Because the rabbis decreed that Jews could not do anything that made them look morally inferior to the gentiles around them. So while polygamy continued among Sephardic Jews until the 20th Century, it was forbidden to Ashkenazi Jews by Rabbi Gershon around 1000 CE.

* Abraham is the only Biblical character described as dying “content.”

* Gen. 25:23: God said to Rebecca: “Two nations are in your womb.”

Artscroll: “The Sages teach that the two of them will never be mighty simultaneously; when one falls; the other will rise. History has demonstrated this prophecy in practice.”

The realist approach to foreign policy says that power determines how far a nation will rise. As one nation grows stronger, other nations around it become comparatively weaker. As one group within a nation grow stronger, other groups become comparatively weaker. Life is a competition over scarce resources between various forms of life.

* Gen. 26:4: God tells Isaac: “All the nations of the earth shall bless themselves by your offspring.” Is that true? Is that real? Is that your experience?

* Gen. 26:6:

So Isaac stayed in Gerar.

7 When the men of that place asked him about his wife, he said, “She is my sister,” because he was afraid to say, “She is my wife.” He thought, “The men of this place might kill me on account of Rebekah, because she is beautiful.”

8 When Isaac had been there a long time, Abimelek king of the Philistines looked down from a window and saw Isaac caressing his wife Rebekah. 9 So Abimelek summoned Isaac and said, “She is really your wife! Why did you say, ‘She is my sister’?”

Isaac answered him, “Because I thought I might lose my life on account of her.”

10 Then Abimelek said, “What is this you have done to us? One of the men might well have slept with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us.”

11 So Abimelek gave orders to all the people: “Anyone who harms this man or his wife shall surely be put to death.”

* Gen. 26:14:

…the Philistines envied him. 15 So all the wells that his father’s servants had dug in the time of his father Abraham, the Philistines stopped up, filling them with earth.

16 Then Abimelek said to Isaac, “Move away from us; you have become too powerful for us.”

So why do goyim hate Jews? Because we’re excellent.

* The survival of the Jewish people depended upon Jacob getting the birthright, so whatever he does to nab this is then ok? Why did Jacob fear Esau? Because he knew that he stole the birthright from him. Why do we fear people? Because we know we’ve harmed them and thus created an incentive for them to get revenge on us. If we go around harming people, we will develop a worldview that everyone is out to get us. For example, Harvey Weinstein hired ex-Mossad agents to go after his accusers.

* Optics. Are you gents dressed in a way that makes the white cause look good?

* NYT: Louis C.K. Is Accused by 5 Women of Sexual Misconduct

In 2002, a Chicago comedy duo, Dana Min Goodman and Julia Wolov, landed their big break: a chance to perform at the U.S. Comedy Arts Festival in Aspen, Colo. When Louis C.K. invited them to hang out in his hotel room for a nightcap after their late-night show, they did not think twice. The bars were closed and they wanted to celebrate. He was a comedian they admired. The women would be together. His intentions seemed collegial.

As soon as they sat down in his room, still wrapped in their winter jackets and hats, Louis C.K. asked if he could take out his penis, the women said.

They thought it was a joke and laughed it off. “And then he really did it,” Ms. Goodman said in an interview with The New York Times. “He proceeded to take all of his clothes off, and get completely naked, and started masturbating.”

* Does society have an interest in slut shaming? Friend: “Basically this: some men use their power and fame and wealth to gain access to sex with beautiful women, and that’s bad. But also, some beautiful women use their sexuality to gain access to power and fame and wealth. And that’s also bad. Put another way: is prostitution a sin? Or is it only a sin to solicit a prostitute, but not to be one?”

* Friend: “I got banned in /r/history this week for replying to a poster’s question about why there is a third world with a recommendation to check out Rushton’s 1995 book. Banned. I submitted a request to the moderator about why… I wanna talk about this kind of soft/moral censorship of ideas.”

* Some of my friends have problem with positivity. It’s a reaction to wishful thinking. Many of my friends reject the 12-Steps, finding it too hard and the sayings too trite. Many Jews reject belief in an Afterlife because it is too positive. They want to be rational. They don’t want to be like Christians.

* The 2017 movie Detroit shone a light on police murder in 1967 at the Algiers Hotel. Do I prioritize my white interests over Godly principles? It depends on the context. Ethics are both situational and absolute. The situation determines the absolute. Sometimes empathy for out-groups can be a disadvantage to your own people’s survival.

Steve Sailer wrote:

The key moment in the self-destruction of the once great American city of Detroit over the past half century can be dated precisely to July 23, 1967, when blacks began the Detroit Riot. Before 4,700 paratroopers from the U.S. Army’s 82nd and 101st Airborne divisions finally halted the orgy of criminality, African Americans had looted 2,500 stores and burned down 400 buildings in their own neighborhoods.

The next year, 80,000 whites moved out of Detroit. (In 2017, the total population of Detroit is almost a million lower than fifty years ago.)

Of course, today we are instructed to think of these white refugees from black violence not as victims but as perps. Almost nobody is interested in the stories of the millions of Americans whose lives were literally dislocated by the huge surge in black urban crime during the peak years of American liberalism, 1964–75.

For example, the opening text for the new movie Detroit, which opens nationally on Friday, pins the blame for the black riot of 1967 on the economic devastation caused by the 22,000 whites who had presciently left Detroit the year before, apparently taking all the magic dirt with them, leaving only the tragic dirt.

In reality, the Detroit Riot had little to do with economic decline. Instead, it was a classic example of how rising expectations fuel resentment. Detroit in 1967 represented the apogee of working-class prosperity, which Detroit blacks shared in due to United Auto Workers’ leader Walter Reuther’s profound opposition to racial discrimination. Perhaps no black community in the history of the world had yet been as broadly prosperous as Detroit’s in 1967. To blacks across America, Berry Gordy’s Motown record label, named after the glamorous Motor City, represented black affluence. Economist Thomas Sowell observed:

“Before the ghetto riot of 1967, Detroit’s black population had the highest rate of home-ownership of any black urban population in the country, and their unemployment rate was just 3.4 percent. It was not despair that fueled the riot. It was the riot which marked the beginning of the decline of Detroit to its current state of despair.”

Moreover, intensely pro-black white liberals, such as President Lyndon Johnson, Governor George Romney (Mitt’s dad), and Mayor Jerome Cavanagh, were pouring taxpayer money into Detroit’s black neighborhoods.

* Steve Sailer writes:

Following up my Taki’s column on Larry David, “Curb Your Self-Awareness,” here’s a self-aware excerpt from a 2001 interview by Emma Forrest with Rachel Weisz, the lovely Oscar-winning Jewish-British actress:


EMMA: Well, it’s that Jackie Mason joke about how no Jewish woman wants to look Jewish: “‘You think I look maybe a little Italian, I look a little Russian, perhaps I can be Spanish?’ … ‘You look Jewish!’”

RACHEL: Hollywood’s run by Jews. I was advised by an American agent when I was about 19 to change my surname. And I said “Why? Jews run Hollywood.” He said “Exactly.” He had a theory that all the executives think acting’s a job for shiksas.

EMMA: Of all the self-loathing Jews in the world, the most self-loathing are the Hollywood Jews. They don’t want to see images of themselves on screen. That’s why Lauren Bacall had to hide her identity, and Winona Ryder changed her name from Horowitz.

RACHEL: In some way acting is prostitution, and Hollywood Jews don’t want their own women to participate. Also, there’s an element of Portnoy’s Complaint — they all fancy Aryan blondes.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Although there is a tendency for Jews in the US to market themselves as a ‘race’, when you look at British Jews versus US Jews, the British Jews such as Sascha Baron-Cohen (Borat, Ali G) Sid James, Leslie Howard, Lawrence Harvey, Warren Mitchell (the original model for Archie Bunker), Daniel Day Lewis, Anthony Newley seem to have much more in common with their fellow Brits than with US Jews. As did Harold Abrahams, chairman of the Amateur Athletic Association, and the sprinter whose early life story became Chariots of Fire, a movie whose title is drawn from a phrase in Britain’s second national anthem, William Blake’s Jerusalem.

Growing up in the UK I was aware that certain politicians like Clement Freud, Sir Keith Joseph, or Nigel Lawson, father of the even more famous Nigella, or moguls like Robert Maxwell were Jews, but certainly never thought of them being a different race. We would have thought of Maxwell (born Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch) more as a Czech import than as someone who had sympathies with Israel, although after his death there were some claims that he was an agent of Mossad.

So maybe British Jews are more integrated than US Jews, or is it all an illusion?

* Perhaps its because they aren’t nearly as powerful as US Jews so they behave a bit better.

* The intellectual antecedents to Nazism.

Posted in Torah | Comments Off on Parasha Toledot (Gen. 25:19–28:9)

How Do Hollywood Moguls View Shiksas?

Posted on November 11, 2017 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes:

Following up my Taki’s column on Larry David, “Curb Your Self-Awareness,” here’s a self-aware excerpt from a 2001 interview by Emma Forrest with Rachel Weisz, the lovely Oscar-winning Jewish-British actress:


EMMA: Well, it’s that Jackie Mason joke about how no Jewish woman wants to look Jewish: “‘You think I look maybe a little Italian, I look a little Russian, perhaps I can be Spanish?’ … ‘You look Jewish!’”

RACHEL: Hollywood’s run by Jews. I was advised by an American agent when I was about 19 to change my surname. And I said “Why? Jews run Hollywood.” He said “Exactly.” He had a theory that all the executives think acting’s a job for shiksas.

EMMA: Of all the self-loathing Jews in the world, the most self-loathing are the Hollywood Jews. They don’t want to see images of themselves on screen. That’s why Lauren Bacall had to hide her identity, and Winona Ryder changed her name from Horowitz.

RACHEL: In some way acting is prostitution, and Hollywood Jews don’t want their own women to participate. Also, there’s an element of Portnoy’s Complaint — they all fancy Aryan blondes.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Although there is a tendency for Jews in the US to market themselves as a ‘race’, when you look at British Jews versus US Jews, the British Jews such as Sascha Baron-Cohen (Borat, Ali G) Sid James, Leslie Howard, Lawrence Harvey, Warren Mitchell (the original model for Archie Bunker), Daniel Day Lewis, Anthony Newley seem to have much more in common with their fellow Brits than with US Jews. As did Harold Abrahams, chairman of the Amateur Athletic Association, and the sprinter whose early life story became Chariots of Fire, a movie whose title is drawn from a phrase in Britain’s second national anthem, William Blake’s Jerusalem.

Growing up in the UK I was aware that certain politicians like Clement Freud, Sir Keith Joseph, or Nigel Lawson, father of the even more famous Nigella, or moguls like Robert Maxwell were Jews, but certainly never thought of them being a different race. We would have thought of Maxwell (born Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch) more as a Czech import than as someone who had sympathies with Israel, although after his death there were some claims that he was an agent of Mossad.

So maybe British Jews are more integrated than US Jews, or is it all an illusion?

* Perhaps its because they arent nearly as powerful as US Jews so they behave a bit better.

* “RACHEL: Hollywood’s run by Jews.” She said this in 2001 and as far as I know, she wasn’t condemned for saying it.
But the ADL said this about Gary Oldman making the same observation in 2014: “[Oldman’s] withering remark that Hollywood ‘is a town that’s run by Jews,’ was nothing less than stomach-churning anti-Semitism.”
Maybe MS Weisz’s remark was overlooked because it was in a relatively little-known publication, whereas Oldman’s was in a Playboy interview, or maybe the fact that Oldman isn’t Jewish and MS Weisz is Jewish is a factor, or etc.

* EMMA: Well, it’s that Jackie Mason joke about how no Jewish woman wants to look Jewish: “‘You think I look maybe a little Italian, I look a little Russian, perhaps I can be Spanish?’ … ‘You look Jewish!’”

Geekettes of any community generally aren’t lookers. Most ethnic and racial groups don’t produce a lot of smart intellectual women. So, we don’t associate most communities with geekettes.
But Jewish community produced lots of geekettes, and most of them aint pretty, and so, the when people think ‘Jewish woman’, they think of someone like Betty Friedan.
But Susan Sontag was beautiful.

Another thing. Women of most communities knew their place. If they didn’t have the looks or charms, they didn’t dare to put themselves forth as Star Material. They gave up their ambitions.

But Jews had chutzpah. So, even those without looks put themselves forth as star material, and Barbra Streisand was a classic case. A good singer but no looker. But she was gonna make herself a star and even sex symbol. If looks couldn’t do it, it was comedy and antics. It worked in FUNNY GIRL.
And Bob Dylan couldn’t sing in the conventional sense. But that didn’t faze him none. He was gonna be a rock star when most people would have laughed at the notion. He combined wit and personality and vision. It worked for him.
At least Streisand had genuine talent as comedienne and Dylan was a great composer and fascinating personality.

But sometimes, we get second-raters like Amy Schumer. The chutzpah is there but no talent to compensate for deficiencies in other departments. And with Jewish royalty in Hollywood and power of legacy, we’ve been getting more of these second-rate Jews in entertainment recently. No hunger, just a sense of entitlement. But chutzpah loses its punch and vulgar nobility without struggle. People rooted for Streisand as the underdog who would be princess. But Schumer never had to pay any dues. She feels entitled to be a star, but with what?

Of all the self-loathing Jews in the world, the most self-loathing are the Hollywood Jews. They don’t want to see images of themselves on screen. That’s why Lauren Bacall had to hide her identity, and Winona Ryder changed her name from Horowitz.

I don’t really buy this. It was common for any number of ethnic groups to Anglo-ize their names in the 2oth century. Not only Jews did this.
Also, movie stars wanted glamorous names. Also, she didn’t just change her Jewish name but very gentile-sounding names as well. Betty Joan Perske. She lost the Betty and Joan along with Perske.

In some cases, name change just made good common sense, as with Rudolph Valentino whose full name was Rodolfo Alfonso Raffaello Pierre Filibert Guglielmi di Valentina d’Antonguella .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Valentino

Also, even Anglos and gentiles changed their names.

Marion Morrison became John Wayne.
Archibald Alec Leach became Cary Grant.
Lucille Fay LeSueur became Joan Crawford.
Norma Jeane Mortenson became Marilyn Monroe.
And so on.

It was just part of the Hollywood game of not only playing mythic characters but reinventing yourself.
It’s like how Jimmy Gatz became Jay Gatsby… with people still arguing whether he’s supposed to be Jewish or not.

Also, Winona Ryder was NOT hiding her identity. I mean it’s NO handicap to be Jewish in America. If anything, it’s a plus. She got rid of ‘horowitz’ because it’s not Star-name.
Plenty of people knew she was Jewish, and it never threatened her popularity.

I think Emma and Rachel are over-analyzing this. Their views may have been more relevant in earlier decades but not in the 90s and 2000s.

And there has never been a shortage of Jewish actors and actresses. Paul Muni, John Garfield, Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis, Hoffman, Hackman, Peter Sellers, Allen, Brooks, Wilders, Dreyfus, Clayburgh, etc.

It’s news to me that Jewish bosses tried to prevent Jews from being actors.

Also, there’s an element of Portnoy’s Complaint — they all fancy Aryan blondes.

If this is true, where are they? How many blonde superstar actresses had we had in the past 30 yrs?

Even in the golden age of Hollywood, most female stars were brunettes, not blondes.
Marilyn Monroe was the most famous blonde, and she was a dummy and a joke.

This notion of Jewish women still taking a backseat to Nazi Aryan goddesses is not supported by reality… any more than the notion that Aryan jocks rule Harvard while Jews are underdogs.

* How many blonde superstar actresses had we had in the past 30 yrs?

Meryl Streep, Kim Basinger, Jennifer Lawrence, Cate Blanchett, Reese Witherspoon, Charlize Theron, Jessica Lange, Jodie Foster, Helen Hunt, Renee Zellweger…

…and those are just the ones who have won Oscars…

…blonde female nominees include Naomi Watts, Glenn Close, Laura Linney, Felicity Huffman, Elisabeth Shue, Sharon Stone, Michelle Pfieffer, Laura Dern, Melanie Griffith, Uma Thurman, Rachel McAdams, Virginia Madsen, Kate Hudson…

…BTW, Oscar winner Gwyneth Paltrow isn’t a natural blonde, but one-time nominee Winona Ryder is.

* Here’s a party at Roland Emmerich’s house (a few years old). It apparently had to do with ‘pride’.

https://www.queerty.com/content/docs/2009/06/emmerichparty1.jpg

https://www.queerty.com/los-angeles-a-gays-gather-at-roland-emmerich-bryan-singers-post-pride-party-20090615

https://twitter.com/FioSargenti/status/456985527120453632/photo/1

See also: http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readreplies.aspx?msgid=29497539

Here is Bryan Singer with some friends.

http://i48.tinypic.com/2bpjsl.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/caLJFv5.jpg

https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2014-04/campaign_images/webdr08/18/18/heres-bryan-singer-dressed-as-a-priest-with-three-2-347-1397861831-0_dblbig.jpg

Oh look, it’s Gandalf

View post on imgur.com

* Sarah Silverman said something similar, I believe along the lines of: “The Jews who run Hollywood think acting is not a career for good Jewish girls, it’s for those trashy Shiksas.”

Might be true, but that might be rationalization. It might also be that the Jewish men in Hollywood find shiksas way more attractive and think that Jewish girls don’t have the looks to draw, and want to be polite to Jewish girls about it.

Winona Ryder changed her name for the same reason most performers change their name: they want a name that sells, not one that necessarily excludes or makes them typecast as “ethnic.” Bob Hope changed his name to have broader appeal, and he wasn’t Jewish.

* British Jews and American Jews both assimilated, but in different contexts. British Jews assimilated into a demographically overwhelming, self-confident “founding stock”. So, in school, little Benjamin lined up with little Nigel, little Edmund, little Winston, etc.

American Jews assimilated into a context where the founding stock was, locally, in demographic retreat. There weren’t a lot of “founding stock Americans” around in the big immigrant cities. So little Benjamin lined up with little Tony the Italian kid, little PJ the Irish kid, little Stan the Polish kid, etc. Ellis Island America was a composite of more-or-less harmonious tribes, who reciprocally influenced each other against the background of inherited Anglo-American culture.

* Watching the news last night i observed out loud (as others apparently did) that scoldings about sexual harassment disseminated by ugly people of indeterminate gender are hilarious.

Posted in Abuse, Hollywood, Jews | Comments Off on How Do Hollywood Moguls View Shiksas?

Therapist Breaks Down Trend Of Celebrities Allegedly Masturbating In Front Of Women

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Luke Ford

From the Daily Caller:

James Olsen, a therapist that specializes in sex addiction, told The Daily Caller Thursday that the accusations “generally fit within the framework of exhibitionism.”

“For many, the thought of being seen and wanted sexually is erotic and stimulating. This is not always pathological, but when it rises to the level of offense behavior, it gives rise to very serious clinical concerns. Many exposers experience significant struggles with their self-esteem and the search to be seen and wanted has often become a powerful drug for them,” Olsen told TheDC.

“Exposers are often highly compulsive in their sexual behavior and gaining control of their exposing can be difficult, even for those who desperately want to stop,” Olsen continued. “The act of exposing is also highly risky and engaging in such a brazen act tends to result in a massive dose of adrenaline being injected into the blood stream. For some, this sensation adds to their high and when mixed with the other sexually gratifying elements of the behavior, can have the effect of a uniquely intoxicating cocktail of stimulation, anticipation, and excitement.”

Touching on the celebrity status of these accused men, Olsen said: “It is fair to hypothesize that individuals in positions of power and notoriety may be more likely to receive the response they desire than would the average person. Some may comply out of a desire to fulfill their own fantasy of being close with such a person. Others may respond in the way the perpetrator desires out of fear, shock, or a hesitancy to confront a powerful or influential person.”

Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly and Louis C.K. were both also accused of masturbating while on the phone.

“I have treated many clients who have masturbated while talking on the phone with others, often believing (rightly or wrongly) that the person on the other end was unsuspecting of their sexual activities,” the therapist stated. “This too is a form of sexual assault, in that the other person has not consented to be used for sexual gratification, regardless of their awareness of the activity. The person engaged in masturbation while on the phone with a seemingly unsuspecting person is likely to experience a rush from the experience.”

“They are covertly engaging in sexual activity with the person on the other end of the phone. The risk of being caught is akin to the rush someone might feel from having sex in a public place, but there is more. The close proximity of the person on the other end of the phone can create a faux intimacy that feels gratifying for them in the moment, despite its superficial nature,” Olsen continued.

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off on Therapist Breaks Down Trend Of Celebrities Allegedly Masturbating In Front Of Women

‘Meet Your New Boss’

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Luke Ford

Claudine Ko writes about Dov Charney of American Apparel:

After a month of watching Dov wheel and deal multimillion-dollar real estate, explain the minutiae of two-needle and blind hems, patronize full-service massage parlors before skipping over to an evening of fine kosher dining, and “pleasure” himself eight or so times, I start to wonder when this Twilight Zone marathon is going to be over. We’ve just left a porn shop near Times Square, where he’s planning to open another store, and I’m thinking it’s time to go home. I briefly hesitate as he hails a cab heading downtown, knowing the inevitable rituals of his night are still to, uh, come. Then, as I step into the depths of the backseat, I realize I don’t want this trip to end just yet.

Posted in Jews, Sex | Comments Off on ‘Meet Your New Boss’

Sexual Harassment At Work

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Luke Ford

In my experience, about one woman in 50 at work is hot. But when you see the same woman every day, your attraction to her grows even if you wouldn’t give her a second glance if she were a stranger walking down the street. Only about one woman in 30 over age 20 is hot.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* While a few young workplace women are passable most aren’t that hot. Most of the men being caged up and having sparse outside interests tend to over-estimate the beauty of their female colleagues. And of course the women spend a huge effort getting dolled up for work precisely to pique male interest and to inflict consternation among their female rivals.

Friend of mine at Encorpera went to the company picnic at the local water park. Later he mused “the women all look hot at work but when you see them in a bikini they don’t look so good.”

This latest public outrage over male-on-female harassment needs to include a discussion on female beauty privilege and women’s complicity in instigating bumbling sexual entreaties from their befuddled male co-workers.

* Women dress to excite the envy of other women and attract the attention of alphas. If they attract the attention of betas and below, their unwelcome attention has to be swatted down. What is interesting in what is going on now is that by many measures the male “harassers” meet the alpha test – they are rich, powerful entertainment figures. But physically they are betas and below – fat, balding, etc. Would they be getting ratted out in this way if they were not just rich and powerful but also handsome and attractive (or even just handsome and attractive)? Does their physical repulsiveness outweigh their bank balance in the lizard brains of the women that they hit on?

* The business at my part time weekend job now has cameras covering every nook and cranny of the building interior, at considerable expense. For the simple reason that we once had a female employee who went out of her way to sleep with every married man at that place of business, or shine on every married man she wasn’t attracted to, and then in your face their wives about it while filing sexual harassment charges. I was at work twice when wives came up to confront her.

The reality is that if your business has as many as (as few as?) ten female employees, at least one of them is going to be a grade A sexual predator looking to create as much chaos and harm as possible, to as many people as possible. But of course, we only hold men accountable for their behavior, and that is 100% of why our civilization is collapsing.

* The Jews in the psychotherapy hustle want us to believe that they know more about “mental health” than the rest of us. So what do they tell us to do? Let go of the past, abandon the illusion of the ego and live in the moment, like you see recommended in those one-off magazines for sale in supermarkets about “mindfulness,” “holistic living” and “spirituality.”

But then look at what Jews do when it comes to the things they really care about: They obsess over their history of persecution, they show bruised egos, and they worry constantly about white men organizing into the next Nazi movement and led by a new Hitler.

* Stand up comedians are notorious for swapping “ChuckleF#cker” stories revolving around just what they are able to get away with with both the groupies and possibly struggling female comics.

https://jezebel.com/5989971/the-word-chucklefucker-can-chuckle-fuck-itself

NSFW but quite revealing.

https://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/i_was_a_comedy_groupie/

Porn addiction is just another substance also commonly abused by comedians. There have been numerous documentaries on stand up comedians in addition countless on stage confessions to this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Comic

Combine sexual/erectile dysfunction caused by porn addiction with the access to often willing & troubled groupies and its not hard to imagine the rabbit hole comedians Louis C.K. fall into.

* I remember reading an account by an Elvis groupie of her encounter with Elvis as a teenager. When she was escorted into his hotel room, it was understood that it was for the purpose of sexual relations – this is something he did every night in every city or at least very often. She wasn’t there to discuss her algebra homework with Elvis. So after doing this for a while, you just assume that any female that is alone in hotel room with you is there for sexual purposes like all of the others. We are reading about the 1% of females that objected (retroactively) to what was going on and not the countless others who were fine with it.

* Ground is being broken here. Masturbation is to become “performance art”. Who wouldn’t want to pay to watch Louis CK jerkoff at Avery Fischer Hall? Complementary umbrellas and ponchas provided at the door. Bring the kids and Aunt Gertrude. All proceeds will be donated to Friends of Jewish Jerkoffs. FJJ is the worlds preeminent organizing leading the fight against chronic masturbation in the Jewish community.

Posted in Sex | Comments Off on Sexual Harassment At Work

Are All Men Pedophiles?

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Luke Ford

Starting at the age you first become attracted to the opposite sex, men are always attracted to that age female but as men age, the range of women they find attractive expands upward.

Doco: Are All Men Pedophiles examines the ‘pedophilia hysteria’, arguing that in an attempt to protect children, society has begun to isolate men by viewing them all as potential pedophiles. It delves into the history of age-old customs and human development in an attempt to acquire a fresh perspective on this troubling phenomenon.
Directed by Dutch filmmaker Jan-Willem Breure, the film shows that while the modern society strongly condemns pedophiles, biological instinct and the history of various world cultures indicate that human attraction to adolescents is inevitable. Even today, the multi-billion fashion industry continues to sexualise young female models, yet those who act on these instincts are vilified.
The documentary highlights the differences between hebophilia and pedophilia. Hebophilia refers to attraction to children who are undergoing puberty, i.e. from twelve to seventeen years old. Since many people are not aware of the distinction, they talk of pedophilia when in reality they mean hebophilia. Several experts are interviewed, including a psychologist, a neurologist, and even modelling scouts, in order to expound on the meaning of pedophilia and their views concerning age and sexual attraction to teenage girls.
The film features a testimony of a childhood pedophilia victim in order to depict the anguish of sexual abuse by adults on young people. There are also interviews with a non-offending male and an offending female pedophile.
Are All Men Pedophiles is a thought-provoking overview of a divisive and emotive topic. It also exposes the many dangers faced by children and the systematic violation of their rights by societies.

Posted in Sex | Comments Off on Are All Men Pedophiles?

A Politician’s Sex Life

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Luke Ford

I think the allegations against Roy Moore are true. I don’t think they reflect well on him. I don’t think they’re an abomination either. If I were in Alabama, I would still vote for Roy Moore.

I want politicians who will do the best for the country. How they conduct themselves in private is a secondary concern for me. On the other hand, a man will be loyal to the woman he’s having regular sex with, and so that will shed light on his priorities. Bill Clinton, caught out for cheating, gave Hillary Clinton free reign to develop a healthcare plan in his first term as a way of placating her.

I’m sure Roy Moore has a screw loose. I’m sure Trump does too. Those anti-social instincts could bring them down and bring us down. They also could allow Trump and company to do great things.

All of the women in the Washington Post article claim they were repulsed by what happened. That may well be true. I know that when I remember things from my past, how I feel about them largely depends upon the company I keep. To people who think that what I did was cool, I tend to feel it was cool. To people who think that what happened was horrible, I tend to think it was horrible.

As far as the age of consent is concerned, looking at the issue through a moral lens rather than an American legal lens, I remember that Judaism places the age of consent at age 13 for boys and 12.5 for girls.

Roy Moore’s actions are not remotely pedophilia. I don’t want laws changed to lower the age of consent to 12 or 13, but I see a dramatic moral difference between sex with the pre-pubescent and post-pubescent. Sexual behavior with the pre-pubescent is pedophilia and far more reprehensible than sex with the post-pubescent.

Joe* says:

It was common in European and American history for girls to marry at age 12-15…

Loretta Lynn the famous coal miner’s daughter country singer was a mother at 15, a grandmother at 30 and a great grandmother at 45. For all I know she is a great great grandmother at 60.

I don’t know how old any of the husbands (I am assuming they are not unwed mothers) were.

The most likely explanation for Judge Moore hanging out at malls and high school football games is that he did so out of insecurity and sexual inexperience. Most men won’t admit it and most women (Amy Alkon being a notable exception) won’t concede it, but woman (and girls) hold much of the power in the relationship when a man asks a woman out (or when a boy asks a girl out), when a boy initiates sexual foreplay (kissing, petting frottage etc). My suspicion is that Moore was afraid of rejection, afraid of appearing sexually incompetent (and what he did with the fourteen year old sort of confirms my suspicion on this point) and so it eased his concerns when he asked a younger and sexually inexperience girl out. He was less likely to be rejected. But Moore can’t say this, its politically incorrect to even suggest that even a fourteen year old girl hold sexual power over a 30 something district attorney, and so he denies it.

If Moore survives this and is actually elected it is because the voters of Alabama either (1) accept from Moore that it didn’t happen, (2) accept that it happened but it is no big deal or (3) accept that it happened but subscribe to my interpretation of what was motivating Moore to go after a teenager below the age of consent.

I remember a case before the Beit Din of America which Rabbi Michael Broyde lectured about (one Shabbos afternoon in 2008). Two best friends were 55yo. One stayed with the other for a Shabbat. During that Shabbat, the 55yo visitor had consensual sex with his friend’s 14yo daughter. The girl had no problem with what happened. She wanted everyone to ignore it. The father was furious when he found out and consulted his local Orthodox rabbi who advised him to gather his friends and to beat up his buddy, paying particular attention to the organ that sinned. That happened and the guy was left with serious injuries and sued the rabbi. The rabbi was visited by the police and the rabbi said he would be happy to go to court on the matter and no jury would convict him. I think the Beit Din ruled that the beaters should pay the injured party’s medical expenses.

The philosopher Will Durant was 28 when he met his future wife Ariel, who was 14 and his pupil. When she turned 15, they married.

John Derbyshire wrote May 15, 2006:

Some of the most vituperative emails I have ever got came in after I made an offhand remark, in one of my monthly NRO diaries, to the effect that very few of us are physically appealing after our salad days, which in the case of women I pegged at ages 15-20. While the storm was raging, biologist Razib Khan over at Gene Expression (forget philosophers, theologians, and even novelists: the only people with interesting things to say about human nature nowadays are the scientists) decided to look up some actual numbers. Reasoning that a rapist is inspired to his passion mainly by the physical attractiveness of his victim, Razib went for rape statistics.

He found a 1992 report (Rape in America: A Report to the Nation) from the National Victim Center showing the age distribution of female rape victims. Sixty percent of the women who reported having been raped were aged 17 or less, divided about equally between women aged 11 to 17 (32 percent) and those under eleven (29 percent). Only six percent were older than
29. When a woman gets past her mid twenties, in fact, her probability of being raped drops off like a continental
shelf. If you histogram the figures, you get a peak around ages 12-14 … which is precisely the age Lolita was at the time of her affair with Humbert Humbert. As Razib noted, my own "15-20" estimate was slightly off. An upper limit of 24 would be more reasonable. The lower limit really doesn’t bear thinking about. (I have a 13-year-old daughter.)

Behind such sad numbers, and in the works of literary geniuses like Vladimir Nabokov, does the reality of human nature lie. It is all too much for our prim, sissified, feminized, swooning, emoting, mealy-mouthed, litigation-whipped, "diversity"-terrorized, race-and-"gender"-panicked society. We shudder and turn away, or write an angry email. The America of 1958, with all its shortcomings, was saltier, wiser, closer to the flesh and the bone and the wet earth, less fearful of itself. (It was also, according to at least one scholarly study, happier.)

One of the first media sensations ever to impinge upon my consciousness was the visit to Britain by rock star Jerry Lee Lewis in May 1958, four months before
Lolita’s American debut. This was supposed to be a concert tour, but 22-year-old Jerry had brought his wife Myra along, and the British press got wind of the fact that Myra was only 13. This wasn’t an unusual thing in the South of that time; Jerry himself had first been wed at 15 (when he already had a drinking problem). Myra was
his third wife, and also his second cousin once removed. Back then country people grew up fast and close to their kin. Neither Jerry nor Myra could understand what the fuss was about. He: "I plumb married the girl, didn’t I?" She: "Back home you can marry at 10, if you can find a husband." (This was not true, even in the South, though Myra likely believed it. She also, according to the British press, believed in Santa Claus.) It didn’t help that Jerry’s new record was titled High School Confidential.

How long ago it seems! Nowadays our kids are financially dependent on us into their mid-twenties, and can’t
afford to leave home till they are 35. Marriage at 13? Good grief! And so, while Lolita met with a fair share of disapproval in 1958, and was denounced from many pulpits, I believe its reception would have been much more hostile if it appeared now. It would also have been differently politicized. Back then the complaints
came mostly from social conservatives, who I imagine would disapprove of Lolita just as strongly today. The Left, however, almost unanimously championed the book. Would they still do so? A woman! Who was also a child! Exploited by a man! And both of them from stifled, self-denying bourgeois backgrounds! Oh, that evil Patriarchy! It’s amazing how far this stuff has spread: There is a strong whiff of it in Azar Nafisi’s memoir Reading Lolita in Tehran (whose author went to college in the U.S.A.)

Here you see one of the paradoxes of our strange times. Our women dress like sluts; our kids are taught about buggery in elementary school; "wardrobe malfunctions" expose to prime-time TV viewers body parts customarily covered in public since "the lamented end of the Ancient World B.C." (Humbert); our colleges have coed bathrooms; songs about pimps rise to the top of the pop music charts; yet so far as anything to do with the actual reality of actual human nature is concerned, we are as prim and shockable as a bunch of Quaker schoolmarms. After forty years of lying to ourselves, we are now terrified of the truth. Which is an unhappy thing, because the truth is bearing down on us fast.

What would Vladimir Nabokov say if he could view our present scene? I think he would weep. Political Correctness was only embryonic in the mid-1950s, and Nabokov poked some gentle fun at it in Lolita:

 …according to the rules of those American ads where schoolchildren are pictured in a
subtle ratio of races, with one — only one, but as cute as they make them — chocolate-colored round-eyed little lad, almost in the very middle of the front row.

He would have been horrified to see how these silly but harmless and well-intentioned courtesies have swollen into a monstrous dreary tyranny, shutting off whole territories of speech and thought, acting as a sheet anchor to hold back our commercial and intellectual progress, corrupting our constitutional jurisprudence, turning unscrupulous mountebank attorneys into billionaires, and making art like Nabokov’s incomprehensible to millions who, had they been born a few decades earlier, would have gotten from it such unexpected, unimagined delight as I got among the birdsong and bowlines in the Sea Cadets’ hut at Northampton School for Boys 44 years ago.

That we are stupider, coarser, duller, lazier, narrower of mind, more fearful of strangeness, more abject, and more craven than the Americans of 1958 is bad enough. What really shows that our civilization is, and richly deserves to be, on its way out, is that we are less able to savor and love a surpassingly beautiful work of art like Lolita.

Posted in Politics, Sex | Comments Off on A Politician’s Sex Life

I Was Never A Louis CK Fan

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Luke Ford

Yes, he was funny at times, but I always felt diminished after watching him. I always felt icky. So I stopped after a couple of hours of trying his show and never went back.

The New York Times reports:

Now, after years of unsubstantiated rumors about Louis C.K. masturbating in front of associates, women are coming forward to describe what they experienced. Even amid the current burst of sexual misconduct accusations against powerful men, the stories about Louis C.K. stand out because he has so few equals in comedy. In the years since the incidents the women describe, he has sold out Madison Square Garden eight times, created an Emmy-winning TV series, and accumulated the clout of a tastemaker and auteur, with the help of a manager who represents some of the biggest names in comedy. And Louis C.K. built a reputation as the unlikely conscience of the comedy scene, by making audiences laugh about hypocrisy — especially male hypocrisy.

Any man who is a feminist is off.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Masturbating in front of unwilling others would seem to fall under the rubric of what used to be called the fetish of exhibitionism. It’s a known kink.

One of the odd things today is how little one hears anymore about sexual fetishes — with the exception, I guess, of S/M.

Of course among the fetishes one used to hear about of course was transvestism. Now one never hears about it, I suppose because it violates the New Rule of Transgenderism.

But it used to be well understood that there were very distinct categories of fetish, which would often lead to criminal behavior, exhibitionists being one among them. The classic case was of a man who would dress up only in a trenchcoat, and expose himself. I can’t say I hear of such cases today.

Yet are there really no more exhibitionists, or ordinary transvestites, for example?

* Winston Mosely, the killer/raper/killer again of Kitty Genovese

Kitty Genovese Killer Winston Moseley Dies in Prison

“Searching the area, Moseley found Genovese bleeding and crying for help in a vestibule at the back of the building, out of view, and proceeded to stab her several more times, raped her, stole what cash she had on her, and left her in the hallway. Wounds to her hands showed that she tried to defend herself.”

In the memoir of Al Seedman, former NYC police chief, he recounts how Mosely described raping Genovese as she lay bleeding to death in the foyer. He (Mosely) describes having an orgasm, but not an erection. Granted, his taste in perversion is a little more hands-on than what seems to be the standard Hollywood Jewish approach, but I’d stack him up against the likes of Louis CK any day. He’s like the Babe Ruth of molestation, sweeping away the elaborate one run groping strategies of Weinstein et al with sheer brute force.

Posted in Comedy | Comments Off on I Was Never A Louis CK Fan