Tips from the CIA for Detecting Lies

Source

 

There’s an episode of the old “Gilligan’s Island” television show where the castaways eat seeds that make mind reading possible. While it seems fun at first, the Gilligan gang soon finds out that sometimes it’s best not to know what everyone is thinking all the time.

But wouldn’t you like to know what your boss is thinking? Wouldn’t you like to know whether someone at work is telling you the truth or not?

There may be a way to do that without eating some seeds on a fictional island.

If you take the advice of some of the best lie detectors in the world – CIA officers – then you may be able to glean when the boss is fibbing about giving you a raise or a co-worker is lying about meeting a deadline. Such information can be helpful in making career decisions and avoiding missteps that can get you off the fast track.

In a new book, “Spy the Lie,” three former CIA officers share decades of experience in recognizing deceptive behavior and how you can apply their methods to everyday work situations.

One of the authors, Michael Floyd, has spent 35 years finding the truth for the CIA and the National Security Agency. While he says that you don’t want to use these methods to decide who is lying about a romantic weekend liaison while gossiping around the water cooler, it can come in handy in more critical work situations, such as a job interview or to discover who may be cheating on an expense report.

The authors stress that the average person often doesn’t detect untruths because he or she believes that others simply won’t lie or they are just uncomfortable judging someone else. In addition, sometimes we rely on beliefs by others that a person is honest, so we don’t look deeply enough and take everything at face value, they say.

“We’re not human lie detectors,” Floyd says of his fellow authors, Philip Houston and Susan Carnicero. “But we’ve developed a method to help spot deceptions based on our experiences, in real-world situations.”

One of the indicators that a person may be lying is a “cluster” of behavior. Exhibiting what’s considered one suspicious action isn’t enough to show someone is being deceitful, they say, but several clues should put up your radar.

Listening for lies

Some of the verbal cues that someone is not being truthful include:

• Failing to answer.  Dodging a direct answer to your question may indicate the person is trying to come up with a good answer because he or she doesn’t want to admit the truth.
• Denial.  If you ask someone, “Did you do it?” and he or she answers with “I didn’t do it,”  “It was not me,” or “I didn’t do anything,” instead of a simple “no,” consider that significant.  Giving such answers are a way for the person to psychologically avoid an out-and-out lie.
• Repeating the question. This helps buy the person time while he or she formulates a lie.
• Attacking. “Why are you wasting my time with this stuff?” can be a way to attack the person asking questions when the liar feels backed into a corner. He or she may try to impeach your character or abilities.
• Being too specific. Sometimes a liar may try to “technically” be correct while skirting the truth and provide too much information to create a “halo” effect as they try to manage your perception of them.
• Being too polite. Complimenting you on a great tie or saying “yes, sir” in response to only one question may indicate the person is trying to get you to like him so that you’re more likely to believe him.
• Bringing up religion. Psychologists call it “dressing up the lie” when someone being questioned starts talking about God. Look for phrases such as “I swear to God” or “As God is my witness,” which may indicate they’re “dressing up the lie.”

Looking for lies

There are also nonverbal cues that can indicate someone is being less that truthful. It’s important, the authors note, to consider only those cues that come in direct response to your questions. For example:

• Watch for disconnects. If the person nods affirmatively while responding “no” or shakes his head negatively while saying “yes” then that’s a disconnect, which can be an indication of deceptive behavior.
• Hiding. There’s a natural inclination to cover a lie, so someone telling an untruth may cover her mouth or eyes.  The same clue can be given when the person simply shuts her eyes while answering, indicating on a subconscious level that she doesn’t want to see the reaction to her lie.
• Touching the face. Licking lips and pulling on lips or ears can be an indication of a lie. Why? A person’s flight-or-fight response can kick in while lying, prompting blood to rush to certain areas and trigger a sensation of cold or itching.
• Moving anchor points.  Anchor points are those areas that keep someone in a particular spot or position. A person standing uses feet as anchor points, while a person in a chair is using the buttocks as an anchor point. Once those anchor points start shifting, it can be a sign of deceptive behavior. The authors note they often place interviewees in a swivel chair because it can become a “behavioral amplifier” and make anchor point movements easier to spot.
• Grooming. A man might adjust his tie or a woman straighten her skirt or move her hair when responding to a question. They may even begin to tidy the area. Such gestures in response to a particular question can indicate deception.

Finally, Floyd says one of the best ways to make sure you’re getting all the information you need is to ask a catch-all question, such as “Is there anything else I need to know about this incident?”

“You can’t think of every question to ask, and they may not tell you if you don’t ask directly,” he says. “They often give you some very good information.”

Read More

What makes something go viral on the internet?

Making people angry.

Via Trust Me, I’m Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator:

In 2010, two researchers at the Wharton School looked at seven thousand articles that made it onto the New York Times Most E-mailed List. (A story from the Times is shared on Twitter once every four seconds, making the list one of the biggest media platforms on the web.) The researchers’ results confirm almost everything we see when content like the sensational ruin porn of Detroit goes viral. For me it confirmed every intuition behind my manipulations.

According to the story, “the most powerful predictor of virality is how much anger an article evokes” [emphasis mine]. I will say it again: The most powerful predictor of what spreads online is anger. No wonder the outrage I created for Tucker’s movie worked so well. Anger has such a profound effect that one standard deviation increase in the anger rating of an article is the equivalent of spending an additional three hours as the lead story on the front page of NYTimes.com. 

And if you can’t do anger, just make sure to take people to an emotional extreme, one way or the other:

A powerful predictor of whether content will spread online is valence, or the degree of positive or negative emotion a person is made to feel. Both extremes are more desirable than anything in the middle. Regardless of the topic, the more an article makes someone feel good or bad, the more likely it is to make the Most E-mailed list. No marketer is ever going to push something with the stink of reasonableness, complexity, or mixed emotions. …in studies where subjects are shown negative video footage (war, an airplane crash, an execution, a natural disaster), they become more aroused, can better recall what happened, pay more attention, and engage more cognitive resources to consume the media than nonnegative footage. That’s the kind of stuff that will make you hit “share this.” They push your buttons so you’ll press theirs.

Sadly, we just don’t respond as strongly to reality:

As Chris Hedges, the philosopher and journalist, wrote, “In an age of images and entertainment, in an age of instant emotional gratification, we neither seek nor want honesty or reality. Reality is complicated. Reality is boring. We are incapable or unwilling to handle its confusion.”

Source

Read More

Swimming with the White Shark

Source

 

Read More

What happens when you stay awake for 11 days straight?

Source

Via Dreamland: Adventures in the Strange Science of Sleep:

The only thing stranger than the need to sleep is what happens when it is ignored. In 1965, a San Diego high school student named Randy Gardner stayed awake continuously for 264 hours, an eleven-day feat documented by a team of researchers from Stanford University who happened to read about his attempt beforehand in the local newspaper. 

For the first day or so, Gardner was able to remain awake without any prompting. But things went south quickly. He soon lost the ability to add simple numbers in his head. He then became increasingly paranoid, asking those who had promised to help him stay up why they were treating him so badly. When he finally went to bed, he slept for nearly fifteen hours straight. And yet a few weeks later, he was as good as new. To this day, he continues to be a minor celebrity in Japan.

So what’s going on under the hood when you stay awake this long?

Within the first twenty-four hours of sleep deprivation, the blood pressure starts to increase. Not long afterward, the metabolism levels go haywire, giving a person an uncontrollable craving for carbohydrates. 

The body temperature drops and the immune system gets weaker. If this goes on for too long, there is a good chance that the mind will turn against itself, making a person experience visions and hear phantom sounds akin to a bad acid trip. 

At the same time, the ability to make simple decisions or recall obvious facts drops off severely. It is a bizarre downward spiral that is all the more peculiar because it can be stopped completely, and all of its effects will vanish, simply by sleeping for a couple of hours.

Read More

What is Cultural Marxism?

William S. Lind

http://www.marylandthursdaymeeting.com/Archives/SpecialWebDocuments/Cultural.Marxism.htm

In his columns on the next conservatism, Paul Weyrich has several times referred to “cultural Marxism.” He asked me, as Free Congress Foundation’s resident historian, to write this column explaining what cultural Marxism is and where it came from. In order to understand what something is, you have to know its history.

Cultural Marxism is a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or, less formally, Political Correctness. From its beginning, the promoters of cultural Marxism have known they could be more effective if they concealed the Marxist nature of their work, hence the use of terms such as “multiculturalism.”

Cultural Marxism began not in the 1960s but in 1919, immediately after World War I. Marxist theory had predicted that in the event of a big European war, the working class all over Europe would rise up to overthrow capitalism and create communism. But when war came in 1914, that did not happen. When it finally did happen in Russia in 1917, workers in other European countries did not support it. What had gone wrong?

Independently, two Marxist theorists, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary, came to the same answer: Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interest that Communism was impossible in the West until both could be destroyed. In 1919, Lukacs asked, “Who will save us from Western civilization?” That same year, when he became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun government in Hungary, one of Lukacs’s first acts was to introduce sex education into Hungary’s public schools. He knew that if he could destroy the West’s traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying Western culture itself.

In 1923, inspired in part by Lukacs, a group of German Marxists established a think tank at Frankfurt University in Germany called the Institute for Social Research. This institute, soon known simply as the Frankfurt School, would become the creator of cultural Marxism.

To translate Marxism from economic into cultural terms, the members of the Frankfurt School - - Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Eric Fromm and Herbert Marcuse, to name the most important - - had to contradict Marx on several points. They argued that culture was not just part of what Marx had called society’s “superstructure,” but an independent and very important variable. They also said that the working class would not lead a Marxist revolution, because it was becoming part of the middle class, the hated bourgeoisie.

Who would? In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question: a coalition of blacks, students, feminist women and homosexuals.

Fatefully for America, when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, the Frankfurt School fled - - and reestablished itself in New York City. There, it shifted its focus from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to destroying it in the United States. To do so, it invented “Critical Theory.” What is the theory? To criticize every traditional institution, starting with the family, brutally and unremittingly, in order to bring them down. It wrote a series of “studies in prejudice,” which said that anyone who believes in traditional Western culture is prejudiced, a “racist” or “sexist” of “fascist” - - and is also mentally ill.

Most importantly, the Frankfurt School crossed Marx with Freud, taking from psychology the technique of psychological conditioning. Today, when the cultural Marxists want to do something like “normalize” homosexuality, they do not argue the point philosophically. They just beam television show after television show into every American home where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual (the Frankfurt School’s key people spent the war years in Hollywood).

After World War II ended, most members of the Frankfurt School went back to Germany. But Herbert Marcuse stayed in America. He took the highly abstract works of other Frankfurt School members and repackaged them in ways college students could read and understand. In his book “Eros and Civilization,” he argued that by freeing sex from any restraints, we could elevate the pleasure principle over the reality principle and create a society with no work, only play (Marcuse coined the phrase, “Make love, not war”). Marcuse also argued for what he called “liberating tolerance,” which he defined as tolerance for all ideas coming from the Left and intolerance for any ideas coming from the Right. In the 1960s, Marcuse became the chief “guru” of the New Left, and he injected the cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School into the baby boom generation, to the point where it is now America’s state ideology.

The next conservatism should unmask multiculturalism and Political Correctness and tell the American people what they really are: cultural Marxism. Its goal remains what Lukacs and Gramsci set in 1919: destroying Western culture and the Christian religion. It has already made vast strides toward that goal. But if the average American found out that Political Correctness is a form of Marxism, different from the Marxism of the Soviet Union but Marxism nonetheless, it would be in trouble. The next conservatism needs to reveal the man behind the curtain - - old Karl Marx himself.

(The Free Congress Foundation’s website, www.freecongress.org, includes a short book on the history and nature of cultural Marxism, edited by William S. Lind. It is formatted so you can print it out as a book and share it with your family and friends.)

Read More

The non-existent debate

Read More

What are the 5 keys to a good apology?

´

Source

Apologies do make a difference. People often prefer them over money, even if they’re just cheap talk.

What does the research say about the best way to apologize?

One

Don’t apologize for what you think you did wrong. Apologize for what they think you did wrong:

…victims reacted most positively to apologies that were congruent with their self-construals.

Two

The most effective apologies have four parts:

Via Wait: The Art and Science of Delay:

Aaron Lazare devotes two full chapters of On Apology and much of his subsequent research to questions of timing and delay. He finds that effective apologies typically contain four parts:

1. Acknowledge that you did it.

2. Explain what happened.

3. Express remorse.

4. Repair the damage, as much as you can.

This aligns with previous research on effective apologies:

Results indicated that relationships recovered significantly when offending partners used behaviors labeled as explicit acknowledgment, nonverbal assurance, and compensation.

Three

Timing is crucial — and faster is not better. People need to feel they are heard and understood so a delayed apology is actually more satisfying.

Via Wait: The Art and Science of Delay:

The results were stark: “Apology timing was positively correlated with outcome satisfaction; when the apology came later in the conflict, participants reported greater satisfaction.” Statistical tests showed that, the greater the delay, the more a victim felt heard and understood. With more time, there was more opportunity for voice and understanding.

Four

If it’s clear you intentionally did something wrong, you’re probably better off not apologizing. After intentional acts, apologies tend to backfire and make things worse:

An apology does not help at all after clearly intentionally committed offenses. On the contrary, after such offenses harmdoers do better not to apologize since sending an apology in this situation strongly increases punishment compared to remaining silent.

Five

Are they not accepting your apology? A little guilting can be effective. Being reminded of times when they did something wrong makes people more likely to accept apologies and forgive:

…participants in the recall-self-as-wrongdoer condition were significantly more likely to accept the apology from the classmate and forgive the transgression.

A Final Tip

Hopefully you won’t need this list too often. However, you may want to keep the principles in mind for next time you get pulled over. Studies have shown that apologizing to the police is one of the few effective ways to get out of a speeding ticket.

Read More

Lioness adopts calf

Source

 

Read More

What does the most comprehensive study of geniuses tell us about creativity?

Original

For his book Creativity, noted professor Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi did interviews with 91 groundbreaking individuals across a number of disciplines, including 14 Nobel Prize winners.

In 50 Psychology Classics Tom Butler-Bowdon sums up many of Csikszentmihalyi’s findings. Here are some highlights:

• The idea of the tortured creative person is largely a myth. Most of his respondents were very happy with their lives and their creative output.

• Successful creative people tend to have two things in abundance, curiosity and drive. They are absolutely fascinated by their subject, and while others may be more brilliant, their sheer desire for accomplishment is the decisive factor.

• Creative people take their intuition seriously, looking for patterns where others see confusion, and are able to make connections between discrete areas of knowledge.

• Creative people are often seen as arrogant, but this is usually because they want to devote most of their attention to their exciting work.

• Though creative people can be creative anywhere, they gravitate to centers where their interests can be satisfied more easily, where they can meet like-minded people, and where their work can be appreciated.

• Beautiful or inspiring environments are better at helping people to be more creative thinkers than giving them a seminar on “creativity.”

• School does not seem to have had a great effect on many famous creative people, and even in college they were often not stars. Many people later considered geniuses were not particularly remarkable as children, what they always had more than others was curiosity.

• Most fell into one of two family categories: They were poor or disadvantaged, but their parents nevertheless pushed them to educational or career attainment, or they grew up in families of intellectuals, researchers, professionals, writers, musicians, and so on. Only 10 percent were middle class. The lesson: To be a powerfully creative adult, it is best to be brought up in a family that values intellectual endeavor, not one that celebrates middle-class comfort.

• It is a myth that there is one “creative personality.” Something all creative people seem to share is complexity — they “tend to bring the entire range of human possibilities within themselves.”

Read More

How much happiness does it take to make up for the sadness in life?

Original

3 to 1.

Via Rainy Brain, Sunny Brain: How to Retrain Your Brain to Overcome Pessimism and Achieve a More Positive Outlook:

Psychologist Barbara Frederickson is an expert on flourishing and has been an advocate of finding ways to bring more positive emotions into our lives. In her research she discovered a critical 3 to 1 ratio, indicating that we need to have three positive emotions for every negative one in order to thrive.

And:

Frederickson has found out that if we really want to prosper, we shouldn’t try to eliminate negative emotions, rather, we should work on keeping the ratio at three positive for every one negative. Most of us, she has found, have two positive experiences for every negative. This gets us by, but it is effectively languishing.

How many people are at 3 to 1? Around 20%.

Frederickson and Losada pinpointed such “flourishing” mental health in 45 people from a survey of 188 university students. Forty-five out of 188 (23 percent) may seem very few, but several surveys have shown that only about 20 percent of Americans are flourishing in this sense.

Is you spider-sense tingling? If you’re a regular reader it should be: we’ve seen similar patterns with ratios and happiness before. While 3 to 1 keeps you happy, 5 to 1 keeps relationships smooth.

Via The Ape in the Corner Office: How to Make Friends, Win Fights and Work Smarter by Understanding Human Nature:

It turned out that the fifteen high-performance teams averaged 5.6 positive interactions for every negative one. The nineteen low-performance teams racked up a positive/negative ratio of just .363. That is, they had about three negative interactions for every positive one…

And:

What’s even scarier is that Losada’s five-to-one ratio also appears to be essential when you get home and try to muster the energy for a successful marriage. John Gottmann at the University of Washington has found that couples with a ratio of fewer than five positive interactions for every negative one are destined for divorce.

This may be hard-wired. It’s seen in other primates:

Curiously, the magic number also seems to have a close parallel in the ratio of positive behaviors…and negative behaviors…among monkeys and apes. Thus the five-to-one ratio begins to look suspiciously like a basic primate need.

The specific ratio for different relationships varies, with the overall pattern indicating the more distant the relationship, the more good you need for every bad.  A full chart is here.

Just as well we’ve also seen in the past that it usually benefits us more to focus on increasing the good vs trying to eliminate the bad.

With friends:

The best way to maximize happiness when having meals with friends is for one person to take a turn each time paying for everyone’s dinner. It’s a big hit but it results in many more “free” meals for everyone, boosting happiness.

In relationships:

Divorce may have less to do with an increase in conflict and more to do with a decrease in positive feelings. It’s a better strategy for couples  to increase fun moments together rather than trying to eliminate the bad times.

Improving yourself:

As Pete Drucker said: “In identifying opportunities for improvement, don’t waste time cultivating skill areas where you have little competence. Instead, concentrate on—and build on—your strengths.”

When it comes to happiness, frequency beats intensity.

Read More

What would happen to Obama if only men voted?

Thanks to Weasel ZIppers for the pics.

Read More

10 ways science can make *anyone* sexier:

http://www.bakadesuyo.com/10-ways-science-can-make-anyone-sexier

http://www.bakadesuyo.com/10-ways-science-can-make-men-sexier

http://www.bakadesuyo.com/10-ways-science-can-make-women-sexier

Read More

Baby crying at Obama's mask.

Read More

The Danger of Militant Atheism

Read More

Dinesh D'Souza destroys Piers Morgan

Read More

Image from AoS

Read More

Pussy Riot

Read More

The Art of Whore: Why Betas Marry Leftovers

Source

Bottom-feeding scum sucking Cory Catfish, thy name is beta. Thank you for cleaning the algae and fecal remains of bigger, stronger, faster fish from the pond of society. You are the homeless guy I give my leftovers to, packaged in a glossy takeout box from a restaurant you could never afford. You, beta, are the malleable putty that fills the karmic gap between what she wants and what she deserves. If ever there was an exultant scavenger, a happy beggar, or a willful fool foraging through the rotting leftovers of discarded femdom like a soon-to-be-roadkill raccoon, it’s you.

Thank you for your service.

A man with options would never put a ring on a finger that’s been wrapped around a dozen cocks. A man with options would never pay the ultimate price of commit for a born again virgin fucktoy. A man with options would never let his son’s first home be a womb that has seen more traffic than I-35 during rush hour. A man with options would never allow the first kiss his newborn son receives to come from lips that have hosted lotsa cocka. A man with options would never let his son’s first nourishment come from breasts that can be viewed on any number of cell phone cameras. A man with options would never let his son’s first throne be the lap of a woman who has been passed around like a blunt at a frat party. A man with options would never be a dickstand for a woman who squandered her youth and beauty on the men who respected her the least. A man with options would never consider being the last man standing at the end of the long line of conquests she racked up while being the Grand Marshal of a rather impressive cock parade.

Do men with options pass up on whores because of Christian ethics? Sometimes. Do men with options pass up on whores because a promiscuous lifestyle stunts a woman's ability to bond with her husband and children? I reckon. Do men with options avoid committing to whores because of social pride? I certainly hope so. But there’s one gloriously simple, easy to define and even easier to defend reason why men with options do not marry whores:

They don’t have to.

Beta males have four primary deficits when it comes to making sound relationship decisions, which leads them to permanently settle down with Gangbang Barbie after the rest of us are done with her.

1) Their inability to identify a whore/slut due to lack of experience.

Thanks to a lack of experience with women, betas believe that a whore is a filthy girl who will sleep with anybody. When their pea-sized brains conjure up the idea of a whore, they imagine a woman who stops a red light, sees a man waiting at a bus stop, and has an unbelievable urge to put the car in park and go bang him. Betas think a whore is a girl who goes out to the bar four nights per week and bangs four different men.

Dead wrong.

With this definition of whore, it’s no wonder betas defend women – they never see a whore. But in reality, whores are selective. In fact, they’re probably the most selective women in the mating market. The Art of Whore is displayed by women who harness their sexual power and unleash it with stunning accuracy on the men at the top of the social hierarchy – often in a serially monogamous fashion (with a few “mistakes” along the way for good measure). Wake up, beta. That nice girl in your social group who has a different boyfriend every three or four months on average, has casual hookups on vacation, and has that “special friend” who keeps her warm at night between boyfriends is a two-bit worthless whore.

“But wait, Mentu! Most girls do that these days!”

Now you’re getting it. Walk with me.

Whore is not about a number; it’s about her decision-making abilities and the value she assigns to sexual congress. Women are the gatekeepers of sex, so the men she lets through the gates – regardless of how many or how few – tells you everything you need to know about her relationship value. I don’t care if she’s slept with 5 men or 50 men; her sexual past reveals her relationship worth and ability to make sound decisions.

Take for instance a healthy 28 year old woman. In my experience, your average American woman has had anywhere between 12 and 23 sexual partners by this time. Let’s call it an average of 17. A reasonable man would not assume that all 17 men dumped her, or that she dumped all 17; a myriad of reasons, situations, emotions and circumstances led her to this place. So what does this tell us? It tells us that a number of men just had fun with her (promiscuity), she had to bounce a number of men after she opened her womb to them (bad decision making), and a number of men sampled a mini relationship with her for a while and decided not to keep her around (low value).

So, beta, which of those three traits – promiscuity, bad decision making, and low value – would you like to have instilled in your children? Which of those traits do you believe will make her an excellent wife? Which of these traits do you believe will not increase your likelihood of being cheated on or landing in divorce court? Can you see yourself waking up in the morning, rolling over, looking at her and thinking “Thank God I’ve committed to a worthless whore who has a 15 year long track record of making bad decisions?”

Of course not. But this leads us to the 2nd primary deficit of the beta:

2) Their susceptibility to shaming language.

Betas cower in fear and quickly acquiesce when confronted with shaming language. “I’m not like that anymore”, “You can’t judge me”, and “A woman’s worth is not decided by her sexual past” seem to be the go-to responses for women who find themselves in the awkward situation of justifying why they've banged more men than can be comfortably seated in a small Family Diner.

For the record, the correct responses are “yes you are”, “yes I can”, and when it comes to marriage, “yes it is.”

Does promiscuity make her a bad employee? Nope. Does it make her a bad friend? Nah. Does it make her an evil person who is likely to knock over a liquor store and steal a getaway car? Not at all. Does a promiscuous past mean she can’t do good in the community and make profound societal contributions? Of course not. Does it make her a high-risk marriage partner and a shitty role model for your children in a society built around the family unit instead of the "it takes a village" approach? According to the church, the Centers for Disease Control, your buddy who laughs at you behind your back, biological evidence, gender anthropologists, a growing number of psychologists, your own gut instincts, and yours truly, yes it most certainly does.

It always amazes me how betas will agree with a woman that her past education reveals her dedication to scholarly pursuits, her past work experience reveals her quest to improve her business acumen, her past payment history reveals her credit worthiness, her past workout routine reveals her desire for a healthy lifestyle, and her past volunteer efforts reveal her heart of gold, but her past sexual habits reveal absolutely nothing.

That, my beta friend, is The Art of Whore. If you buy in to that shit, you deserve whatever ill may befall you.

3) Their unnatural dedication to the female definition of “fairness.”

Here’s where the rubber meets the road for bottom-feeding beta males. We’ve all heard the statement “It’s not fair that a woman who sleeps around is a whore, but men who sleep around are studs.” There’s been more than enough digital ink spilled on this topic in the manosphere, so I won't go in to it. Everybody knows it’s easy to be a whore, but hard to be a player – and society doesn't award trophies for doing easy shit. It’s not a double standard; it’s two different standards for two different genders with two different barriers to sexual entry and two different sets of risk factors.

But forget that for a moment. For the sake of this article, let’s assume that the woman’s statement is true. That’s right, let’s assume for a moment that there is an unfair evil double standard afoot.

What the fuck do you care? If you’re a beta male looking for marriage, it’s not your job to be fair - this is your life, not a general assembly at the UN. Your job is to find the best mother for your children that you possibly can. It doesn’t matter if you banged 5,000 women on camera last night; you need to find the most competent, capable, qualified, trustworthy, physically and emotionally stable woman you possibly can to help raise your children. Let her worry about your past and whether or not she thinks you’re qualified to be their father, and you focus on her qualifications.

Come to think of it, that's actually quite fair, wouldn't you say?

4) Their lack of options.

When it comes to liaising with whores, Alphas are volunteers, and betas are voluntolds. The Art of Whore is not lost on the Alpha male – they volunteer to use them for what they’re good for, then pass them off to betas who are voluntold to put a ring on their finger.

Beta, your lack of options is making you weak, distorting your judgment, and may eventually land your pansy ass in divorce court. The Art of Whore is real, and women work to better their craft every day. What have you done lately besides make excuses for her?

Women proficient in The Art of Whore get what they want: A decade-long ride on the cock carousel with no consequences, then a willing hapless beta with open arms, an open mind, and an open wallet to cushion their landing and finance their recovery.

As long as you're standing there ready, willing and able, I honestly can't say that I blame them for taking you up on your generous offer.

Read More

Feminist Quotes

"The nuclear family must be destroyed... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process." -- Linda Gordon

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor.

"I haven't the faintest notion what possible revolutionary role white hetero- sexual men could fulfill, since they are the very embodiment of reactionary- vested-interest-power. But then, I have great difficulty examining what men in general could possibly do about all this. In addition to doing the shitwork that women have been doing for generations, possibly not exist? No, I really don't mean that. Yes, I really do." -- Robin Morgan

"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." -- Robin Morgan

"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire."
-- Robin Morgan

From her "The Demon Lover" (NY: Norton & Co., 1989 Morgan doesn't hide her bigotry):

* p. 138-9: The phallic malady is epidemic and systemic... each individual male in the patriarchy is aware of his relative power in the scheme of things.... He knows that his actions are supported by the twin pillars of the State of man - the brotherhood ritual of political exigency and the brotherhood ritual of a sexual thrill in dominance. As a devotee of Thanatos, he is one with the practitioner of sado-masochistic "play" between "consenting adults," as he is one with the rapist.
* p. 224: My white skin disgusts me. My passport disgusts me. They are the marks of an insufferable privilege bought at the price of others' agony.
* p. 229: Sex to this point in my life has been trivial, at best a gesture of tenderness, at worst a chore. I couldn't understand the furor about it.
* p. 316: Did she die of the disease called "family" or the disease called "rehabilitation", of poverty or drugs or pornography, of economics or sexual slavery or a broken body?

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism--the lie that there can be such a thing as 'men's liberation groups.' Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group, specifically because of a 'threatening' characteristic shared by the latter group--skin, color, sex or age, etc. The oppressors are indeed ****ED UP by being masters, but those masters are not OPPRESSED. Any master has the alternative of divesting himself of sexism or racism--the oppressed have no alternative--for they have no power but to fight. In the long run, Women's Liberation will of course free men--but in the short run it's going to cost men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily. Sexism is NOT the fault of women--kill your fathers, not your mothers".
-- Robin Morgan

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo."
-- Valerie Solanas, Authoress of the SCUM Manifesto

"Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and destroy the male sex."
-- Valerie Solana, SCUM founder (Society for Cutting Up Men.)

"The male is a domestic animal which, if treated with firmness...can be trained to do most things."
-- Jilly Cooper, SCUM (Society For Cutting Up Men, started by Valerie Solanas)

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." -- Sheila Cronin, the leader of the feminist organization NOW

"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin

"In my own life, I don't have intercourse. That is my choice." -- Andrea Dworkin

Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." -- Andrea Dworkin

"To be rapeable, a position that is social, not biological, defines what a woman is." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Q: People think you are very hostile to men.
A: I am." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Men use the night to erase us." -- Andrea Dworkin

"The annihilation of a woman's personality, individuality, will, character, is prerequisite to male sexuality." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Men love death. In everything they make, they hollow out a central place for death, let its rancid smell contaminate every dimension of whatever still survives. Men especially love murder. In art they celebrate it, and in life they commit it. They embrace murder as if life without it would be devoid of passion, meaning, and action, as if murder were solace, stilling their sobs as they mourn the emptiness and alienation of their lives."
-- Andrea Dworkin

"Men are rapists, batterers, plunderers, killers; these same men are religious prophets, poets, heroes, figures of romance, adventure, accomplishment, figures ennobled by tragedy and defeat. Men have claimed the earth, called it 'Her'. Men ruin Her. Men have airplanes, guns, bombs, poisonous gases, weapons so perverse and deadly that they defy any authentically human imagination."
-- Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women

"On the Left, on the Right, in the Middle; Authors, statesmen, thieves; so-called humanists and self-declared fascists; the adventurous and the contemplative, in every realm of male expression and action, violence is experienced and articulated as love and freedom."
-- Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women.

"The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist" -- Ti-Grace Atkinson

"Feminism is the theory, lesbianism is the practice." -- Ti-Grace Atkinson

"Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear" -- Susan Brownmiller; Authoress of Against Our Will p.6

"When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression." -- Sheila Jeffrys

"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated." -- Catherine MacKinnon

"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." -- Catherine MacKinnon

"You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs."
-- Catherine MacKinnon (Prominent legal feminist scholar; University of Michigan, & Yale.)

"In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent."
-- Catharine MacKinnon, quoted in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies.

"The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men." -- Sharon Stone; Actress

"Ninety-five percent of women's experiences are about being a victim. Or about being an underdog, or having to survive... women didn't go to Vietnam and blow things up. They are not Rambo."
-- Jodie Foster; Actress - as quoted in The New York Times Magazine.

"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." -- Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future - If There Is One - Is Female.

"And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual (male), it may be mainly a quantitative difference."
-- Susan Griffin, Rape: The All-American Crime.

"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.

"If anyone is prosecuted for filing a false report, then victims of real attacks will be less likely to report them." - David Angier

"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." - Catherine Comins

"As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love; he can rape women...he can sexually molest his daughters... THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN IN THE WORLD DO ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE."
-- Marilyn French (her emphasis)

My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don't even need to shrug. I simply don't care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don't matter."
-- Marilyn French; The Woman's Room.

"All patriarchists exalt the home and family as sacred, demanding it remain inviolate from prying eyes. Men want privacy for their violations of women... All women learn in childhood that women as a sex are men's prey."
-- Marilyn French

"All men are rapists and that's all they are"
-- Marilyn French, Authoress; (later, advisoress to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign.)

"The media treat male assaults on women like rape, beating, and murder of wives and female lovers, or male incest with children, as individual aberrations...obscuring the fact that all male violence toward women is part of a concerted campaign."
-- Marilyn French

"I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it."
-- Barbara Jordan; Former Congresswoman.

"Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release."
-- Germaine Greer.

"Man-hating is everywhere, but everywhere it is twisted and transformed, disguised, tranquilized, and qualified. It coexists, never peacefully, with the love, desire, respect, and need women also feel for men. Always man-hating is shadowed by its milder, more diplomatic and doubtful twin, ambivalence."
-- Judith Levine; Authoress

"Men's sexuality is mean and violent, and men so powerful that they can 'reach WITHIN women to ****/construct us from the inside out.' Satan-like, men possess women, making their wicked fantasies and desires women's own. A woman who has sex with a man, therefore, does so against her will, 'even if she does not feel forced.'
-- Judith Levine, (explicating comment profiling prevailing misandry.)

"I feel what they feel: man-hating, that volatile admixture of pity, contempt, disgust, envy, alienation, fear, and rage at men. It is hatred not only for the anonymous man who makes sucking noises on the street, not only for the rapist or the judge who acquits him, but for what the Greeks called philo-aphilos, 'hate in love,' for the men women share their lives with--husbands, lovers, friends, fathers, brothers, sons, coworkers."
-- Judith Levine, Authoress of My Enemy, My love

"There are no boundaries between affectionate sex and slavery in (the male) world. Distinctions between pleasure and danger are academic; the dirty-laundrylist of 'sex acts'...includes rape, foot binding, fellatio, intercourse, auto eroticism, incest, anal intercourse, use and production of pornography, cunnilingus, sexual harassment, and murder."
-- Judith Levine; summarizing comment on the WAS document, (A southern Women's Writing Collective: Women Against Sex.)

"All men are good for is ****ing, and running over with a truck".
Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator, quoted by Richard Dinsmore, who brought a successful civil suit against the University in the amount of $600,000. Richard had protested the quote; was dismissed thereafter on the grounds of harassment; and responded by bringing suit against the University. 1995 settlement.

((Delaney Nickerson, of the American Coalition for ABUSE AWARENESS, refers to the False Memory Syndrome Foundation as "The ****ing Molesters Society". (Miami Herald, April 3, 1995) The ACAA is a lobbying group, which includes Ellen Bass (co-author of THE COURAGE TO HEAL), and Rene Frederickson, leading feminist psychotherapist and strong proponent of repressed memory theory.))

((At the STONE ANGELS satanic ritual abuse conference in Thunder Bay in February, 1995, the following was contained in the handouts at a conference supported financially by the Ontario Government: FMS stands for: FULL OF MOSTLY SHIT; FOR MORE SADISM; FELONS, MURDERERS, SCUMBALLS; FREQUENT MOLESTERS SOCIETY.))

"Women have their faults / men have only two: / everything they say / everything they do."
-- Popular Feminist Graffiti

"I was, in reality, bred by my parents as my father's concubine... What we take for granted as the stability of family life may well depend on the sexual slavery of our children. What's more, this is a cynical arrangement our institutions have colluded to conceal.".
-- Sylvia Fraser; Journalist

"We are taught, encouraged, moulded by and lulled into accepting a range of false notions about the family. As a source of some of our most profound experiences, it continues to be such an integral part of our emotional lives that it appears beyond criticism. Yet hiding from the truth of family life leaves women and children vulnerable."
-- Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women.

Catharine MacKinnon ( ) maintains that "the private is a sphere of battery, marital rape and women's exploited labor." In this way, privacy and family are reduced to nothing more than aspects of the master plan, which is male domination. Democratic freedoms and the need to keep the state's nose out of our personal affairs are rendered meaningless. The real reason our society cherishes privacy is because men have invented it as an excuse to conceal their criminality. If people still insist that the traditional family is about love and mutual aid--ideals which, admittedly, are sometimes betrayed--they're "hiding from the truth." The family isn't a place where battery and marital rape sometimes happen but where little else apparently does. Sick men don't simply molest their daughters, they operate in league with their wives to "breed" them for that purpose.
-- Donna Laframboise; The Princess at the Window; (in a critical explication of the Catharine MacKinnon, Gloria Steinhem et al tenets of misandric belief.)

"If the classroom situation is very heteropatriarchal--a large beginning class of 50 to 60 students, say, with few feminist students--I am likely to define my task as largely one of recruitment...of persuading students that women are oppressed"
-- Professor Joyce Trebilcot of Washington University, as quoted in Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed Women.

"Men, as a group, tend to be abusive, either verbally, sexually or emotionally. There are always the exceptions, but they are few and far between (I am married to one of them). There are different levels of violence and abuse and individual men buy into this system by varying degrees. But the male power structure always remains intact."
Message on FEMISA, responding to a request for arguments that men are unnecessary for a child to grow into mature adulthood.

Another posting on FEMISA: "Considering the nature and pervasiveness of men's violence, I would say that without question, children are better off being raised without the presence of men. Assaults on women and children are mostly perpetrated by men whom they are supposed to love and trust: fathers, brothers, uncles, grandfathers, step-fathers."
Both quotes taken from Daphne Patai's excellent critical work, Heterophobia

"At Brandies I discovered Feminism. And I instantly became a convert... writing brilliant papers in my Myths of Patriarchy class, in which I likened my fate as a woman to other victims throughout the ages."
-- Heather Hart 7

Here are 10 reasons why we are concerned about feminism and the National Organization for Women.

1. "The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist" (National NOW Times, January, 1988).

2. "Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage" (feminist leader Sheila Cronan).

3. In response to a question concerning China's policy of compulsory abortion after the first child, Molly Yard responded, "I consider the Chinese government's policy among the most intelligent in the world" (Gary Bauer, "Abetting Coercion in China," The Washington Times, Oct. 10, 1989).

4. "Overthrowing capitalism is too small for us. We must overthrow the whole...patriarch!" (Gloria Steinem, radical feminist leader, editor of MS magazine).

5. "Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women.... We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men.... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" (from "The Declaration of Feminism," November, 1971).

6. "By the year 2000 we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God." (Gloria Steinem, editor of MS magazine).

7. "Let's forget about the mythical Jesus and look for encouragement, solace, and inspiration from real women.... Two thousand years of patriarchal rule under the shadow of the cross ought to be enough to turn women toward the feminist 'salvation' of this world." (Annie Laurie Gaylor, "Feminist Salvation," The Humanist, p. 37, July/August 1988.

8. "In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them" (Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College, and associate director of the school's Center for Research on Woman).

9. "Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family- maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that." (Vivian Gornick, feminist author, University of Illinois, The Daily Illini, April 25, 1981.

10. "The most merciful thing a large family can to do one of its infant members is to kill it." (Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in "Women and the New Race," p. 67).

"We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men." -- Elizabeth Cady Stanton

From 'A feminist Dictionary; ed. Kramarae and Triechler, Pandora Press, 1985:

MALE:...represents a variant of or deviation from the category of female. The first males were mutants...the male sex represents a degeneration and deformity of the female.

MAN:...an obsolete life form... an ordinary creature who needs to be watched...a contradictory baby-man...

TESTOSTERONE POISONING: ... 'Until now it has been though that the level of testosterone in men is normal simply because they have it. But if you consider how abnormal their behavior is, then you are led to the hypothesis that almost all men are suffering from "testosterone poisoning."

Letter to editor: "Women's Turn to Dominate". "......Clearly you are not yet a free-thinking feminist but rather one of those women who bounce off the male-dominated, male-controlled social structures. Who cares how men feel or what they do or whether they suffer? They have had over 2000 years to dominate and made a complete hash of it. Now it is our turn. My only comment to men is: if you don't like it, bad luck--and if you get in my way I'll run you down."
Signed: Liberated Women, Boronia Herald-Sun, Melbourne, Australia. 9 Feb., 1996.

antimisandry.com http://antimisandry.com/feminist-misandry/feminist-quotes-20106.html#ixzz22fYpT6zT

Read More