Maternity as pathology

Maternity is the most accurate “canary” in the coal mine as indicative of the health of society. The state of maternity is the best gauge we have as to the collective mental health of today’s culture. Any patterns or ongoing disruptions in the manifestation of maternity across all groups is an indicator of a fissure in our collective social health. Some might presume I’m placing disproportionate weight on motherhood.

Why yes, I am.

I believe maternity is the most crucial element in our social structure for the preservation of a healthy, just civilization. Women who are proud of this are traditionalists; women who disown it are feminists. As a man, I think women should take pride in such power. This is an awesome responsibility, but alas, the slow destruction of maternity is just another premonitory hint of bad times looming on the horizon. Over the long haul, I cannot believe society will survive the dissolution of motherhood.

I see many signs that motherhood is becoming “pathologized” and this can only spell the slow destruction of a vibrant and healthy society. Any such “progress” as measured in such a culture of diseased maternity is not progress so much as an inflation of dystopian ideals and visions; progress in the culturally diseased context is best described as a metastasis of unhealthy trends and values, and this is all clearly an offshoot of the diseased (pathologized) state of motherhood in the year 2012.

The natural inclination of the maternal instinct, at its core, is to nurture offspring to help them attain breeding-age maturity. This induces a selfless devotion that seeks to accelerate the well-being of a mother’s brood and see that its chances for survival are maximized. This is the elemental instruction guide that propels mothering.

We live in a world where this ideal has been distorted and polluted. Personal examples abound of the mothering instinct gone haywire. I won’t bother detailing any, but we’ve all witnessed such examples and we can recognize when mothering becomes a pathology.

I was reminded of this by a post that appeared on Reddit this weekend:

This is what I am talking about when I refer to “distortion” or metastasis of the maternal instinct. By nature, the maternal instinct seeks to keep the child out of harm’s way which includes dangerous physical situations. The incident portrayed here is a mentally ill exaggeration of the maternal instinct. It is a rampant paranoia that tends to presuppose all manner of horrible atrocities lying in wait. It also presents the maternal instinct as a fear-mongering sort of misandry that embodies much of the cultural distrust of men. Increasingly we see situations where men are presumed guilty until proven innocent when it comes to the suspicions of overprotective mothers. This is a parallel phenomena to the popular “helicopter” mentality we witness in so many mothers who allow their control issues to blanket and steer societal mores and values. This maternal preoccupation would not be given air or grievance in eras past. It should be ignored and humored for that’s what happened before maternity became diseased. Certainly, the maternal impetus should not apply to all people, but as it turns out, maternal values have seeped into the collective mindset and maternal worries become pervasive and exaggerated and are validated to the point where they dictate values of society at large. We now live in a din of nanny-state intrusiveness and worry-wartism. Many innocents are defiled and tried.

The next highly visible display of the modern corruption of the maternal instinct is the pathological addiction to bearing children seen in some female population groups, especially as witnessed in the ghetto societies of Black and Hispanic women. There is an inexplicable urge on the part of these women, and enabled by equally careless men, to procreate in spite of all logical reason to the contrary considering the scarcity of resources possessed by the mother, the absent father, and the families. The most public face of this phenomena was the Octomom, Nadya Suleman. Here is a woman who publicly announced she found babies disgusting, and apparently, who found self-responsibility just as disgusting. A mother of six who still found a medical male enabler who had no problem impregnating her with a litter of 8 babies despite the fact she had no job, no professional experience and a trashy support system with ethics to match. Which essentially sums up the mentality of most modern mothers who are addicted to pumping children out in the face of all reason. There is a depersonalization of children implicit in this behavior. The addiction to giving birth is a method by which these mothers adulate themselves as life-giving goddesses. It is an egotisitcal drive to spawn life without regard to its aftermath. Which is the definition of an addiction.

Nadya Suleman, from a trailer for her porn flick, “Octomom: Home Alone.

And then.

There is the curious case of Adalia Rose. If you don’t know who she is and you have a sensitive soul, beware where you go for Googled info. Some of the stuff out there is horrendously insensitive. Adalia is one of those internet sensations who quite frankly don’t need to be. Adalia Rose is a 5-year-old girl afflicted with the very rare genetic disorder, Progeria, also known as the “aging” disease in which young children manifest the symptoms of rapid aging before 2 and rarely live beyond 20 years of age. It is a tragic, debilitating disease and leaves its victims withered and hairless. Adalia’s appearance is typical of someone suffering from Progeria.

Adalia has become a franchise of inflated praise, courtesy of her mother, Natalia Amozurrutia . This is a grave disease that should be dealt with privately and not mutated into a publicity vehicle by which to extract a level of praise that is an outright parody of itself. The maternal instincts being distorted here are pride and defense. Mothers will naturally defend the honor and reputation of their children. A mother will valiantly battle for her progeny’s future and social status. This plays out many times as that “maternal peer pressure” tension that occurs when mothers tend to manipulate their children’s schooling and activities in the most impersonal manner, as if their children were possessions rather than living beings. I feel very bad for Adalia’s condition and her future, and I applaud her strength and courage. This little girl has bigger balls than most men I know.

Still, I view Natalia Amozurrutia’s treatment of her daughter’s condition as an exploitative manifestation of this inclination in which she malevolently seeking to elicit praise for something that is obviously abhorrent to most reasonable people. She seeks to elicit lies in order to boost the ego of her daughter in a world that is not quick to part with praise for someone who looks like this. It is an utterly cynical move on the mother’s part for it seeks to blatantly manipulate people when all evidence clearly indicates they are doing so against their instinct. It’s a similar mechanism to the fabled “Emperor’s New Clothes.” Ultimately, we are left with a very sick, dying girl whose mother has usurped her identity into a shameless public vehicle of self-aggrandizement. It’s the degree that bothers me. If Natalia had kept this “low-key,” perhaps I’d have more consideration for her. This solicitation on her Tumblr page tells me otherwise.

Maternal pride, uncontrolled.

**On edit: Let us not forget these travesties of maternal pride.**

A question to the moral Right (seeking insight into ways of slicing tough ethical rape questions)

OK, you crazy Social Conservatives.

Why do your Right-Winging moral crusader public officials implode every stinking time you guys look like you might have a chance? Who are you going to blame now? The MSM for directly reporting the stupid shit your proselytizers spew on national television when someone sticks a mike in front of them? Are you going to blame the heathens who control the information channels and control everything? Or worse yet, will you gather scientists who will help you deconstruct the stupid stuff you “spokesperson” said in order to spray some perfume on the pile of shit he left for you to clean up?

I predict, in my Nostradamian fashion, that the conversation which ensues from this soundbite over the next few weeks, or months, regarding the Missouri Republican Senate hopeful’s astounding and articulate scientific allusions to the physiological state of women under the influence of sexual orgasm, will deal exclusively with the science of the situation. Both sides will dig up data to support their argument. Liberals will point out how many births-by-rape occur each year; conservatives will be profuse with medical proof that women’s cervix’s do in fact clam up under stressful sex (and Sunday worship).

This bickering doesn’t matter! People will argue incessantly about scientific shit that has absolutely no bearing on the argument. Who cares what women’s reproductive apparatus undergoes during rape? Does it matter? Even if only one woman each year is impregnated by a rapist, what more is there to argue? People love discussing shit to a tiresome end and they do not care if any conclusions are met. Because they just love hearing themselves speak. But I guarantee where this community argument is going. “Does the female cervix allow impregnation under stress?” Probably not as much, but the fact is that women can become pregnant in any situation and when you consider that in the United States alone, there were about 84,000 reported rapes in 2010, only a fool would postulate that none of those resulted in pregnancy because of this awesome physiological refutation of impregnation women experience under force. We are conflating rape and abortion. Rape sucks, and you know what? Abortion sucks too. No one in their right mind loves abortions. But they are a distasteful necessity. Still, please inform your Christian demagogues to shut up with the science and quit quoting Dr. Seuss.

Rape is a very sensitive subject in the MRA-sphere because it is wielded as an aggressive tool by aggrieved women, however, we should not ever discount that genuine, evil, physical rapes take place. And some pregnancies result. Is this so wrong to recognize?

Once the right-wing moral crusading mouthpieces start veering into science land, they sound like complete, ignorant suntanned dorks. (BTW, what’s up with Akins’ tan!??).

The battle between Left and Right on the national front is ultimately a secular journey, indeed. Like it or not. There are many, many urban Republicans who love one-night-stands and partying. I don’t believe they feel emboldened by the quaint theoretical bullshit of your garden-variety anti-abortion scientifically illiterate fanatics, who incidentally, don’t seem to have the sharpest familiarity with female physiology.

Ass Cams and the somewhat gradual decline of civilization

Too many guys (yours truly, included) tend to fixate on the Ugly and the Lesbian. We have this freaky habit of treating them as harbingers of a modern female dystopia.

Read Chateau or any other MRA site and you will see. Ugly, fat women are painted as the scourge of modern civilization. If the downfall of our society could be pinpointed to any one “type,” it would be the fat, ugly woman. Chateau, et al, make a franchise of harboring groups of allies around the rejection of such women en masse. They don’t stop with the fat chicks. It’s all self-congratulatory bullshit because by “downvoting” the plain, normal woman in such an excruciating display of high-school level cruelty, men act as if they are asserting some fleeting sense of power. The problem is, it is at the expense of everyday women who are the least inclined to truly wield any gender-revolutionizing or boardroom power. Hot women are much more likely to advance in the supposed “male” world than a plain Jane who never showcases any of her physical attributes.

In fact, the women I work with who ascend to “upper” levels of management, regardless of whether they are hot or not, have one conspicuous thing in common: they know how to behave and dress in a manner which differentiates themselves in a femininely aggressive manner from their male counterparts. This includes, first and foremost, super high heels. This seems to be the common differentiation modern corporate women use to separate themselves from suits while simultaneously finding a common ground by which she can assert exclusive feminine power and control. Women by and large do not attain executive class without flaunting whatever they got, even if it isn’t very much. For instance, I work with a skinny big-nosed Jewish broad who would be nothing to look at normally but who has learned to accentuate the feminine “fuck-me” uniqueness of her body and as such, generates an Alpha image that works in the corporasphere to offset the male influence.

Ultimately, women mimic what men like, regardless of how ambitious or liberated they might claim to be. Their entire persona is structured around male attention. Women ultimately play to carnal male malice. Women instinctively know what works. Those who are especially ambitious have overcome the shamelessness and boldness which normally impede such displays. Most genetically hot women have integrated this mindset and have no problem flaunting their physique in a conspicuous gesture of attention seeking. They learned this behavior from day 1 when daddy went out of his blubbering way to remind her that she was a snowflake, and she never looked back.

Chateau can go on, and his readers/commenters can belabor the point until they soil their tighty whities, but the truth is we have nothing to fear from fat and homely women. They wield little power in the evolutionary dance and ultimately are at man’s mercy. The dystopian nature of society does little to reinfoce the lack of credibility they bring to the mating ring. The truly dangerous are the one’s Roissy and his ignorant minions proclaim as the standard by which all “real Alpha men” should prove their manhood: hot chicks.

These are who men should fear because they mirror and echo the dystopian vision of gender reality in 2012. These are the women who will truly fuck civilization up (and are capable of it).

For instance, there are these British attention whores who thought it would be amusing to hook up a couple of “ass cams” to their guess what’s?

Yes, in a feat of scientifically controlled field study, they walked around town with cameras sitting on their ass while daring to act indignant that their asses were concomitantly attracting attention.

They are hot. I will admit this.

Here is the video of their “GTA” walk through in Los Angeles.

Yeah. The camera was sufficiently inconspicuous that most of the reactions, out of visual range, were assuredly the responses of mesmerized men who can’t help their instinctual reactions to such a hot, curvy ass.

Is this so bad?

Of course not. The lucid remnants of humanity know this. But Gawker is not lucid, nor is it humanity. It represents all that is wrong with pussymunching pop-culture. They chose to air this video under this banner and showcased it as an abhorrent display of the male tendency to “leer.”

In fact, Gawker’s opener was this: A model in Los Angeles used a hidden camera to prove a point we’ve known all along — straight guys look at women’s asses way more often than they should.

“…they should?”

How is this?

Gawker, populated by attention whores, stupid women, and their meek male enablers, has established with no amount of certainty, that men are “wrong” to glance at women’s asses, and thus finding they like what they see, staring for a period of more than 3 seconds.

This is so European of Gawker.

It is also anti-evolutionary of Gawker, but this is a normal stance of the site who prides itself in predating Western social trends.

Who in the world would give a camera to a bimbo with a nice ass (and an ego to match) and unleash her upon the social plains in order to debunk the propriety of primal male behavior?

I like asses. In fact, I’m an ass man.

When a really nice one walks by, I tend to to divert my stare. I’m more subdued than most guys, but still, I don’t resist.

We are men!

Gawker and other female avenues of self-absorbed existence will see to it that the male imperative is all but squashed. It’s a female reaction but in typical female fashion, it is short-sighted and moronic and excruciatingly self-serving.

A chick once boasted to me that women are long-term thinkers because they worry about retirement. What utter bullshit. They are only long-term thinkers insofar as their present preoccupations are concerned. I have often sensed that women are not overly concerned about the “tomorrow” in and of itself. Long-term thinking involving the broadest scheme of civilization. Women only care about their direct spawn.

Men are the only capable of contemplating the fate of civilization.

Chateau and company, by concentrating on the creme de la crop of females, are also perpetuating the strength and self-reflective wonderfulness of hot women that they know is true. These weak men, by their conspicuous actions, merely serve to adulate the ideal feminine form without demanding more. In essence, perpetuating the vacuousness of female nature they criticize. And we are left with women who tie cameras to their asses.

Good job, PUA/MRA guys. Raising the bar!

Black Dawn


Frightening stuff. I suspect Whiskey rushed straight to his Word Press composition screen just moments after awaking from one of those scurrilous WASPy paranoid fever dreams. Titled “Will Obama Stage a Self-Coup?” he embarks on a legitimate litany of the many Barackian downfalls, weaknesses and sinister backstories. If the article was confined to simply pointing out the garish legacy Obama has begun cementing in time for his ultimate departure from the Oval Office (I don’t believe this will happen until 2016, no thanks to Mitt Romney), I would tend to nod completely in concurrence with Whiskey’s sordid laundry list of Shit To Loath About Obama’s Presidency. Unfortunately, Whiskey fast forwards a few hasty chapters and makes an outrageous postulation that, due to its sheer unlikelihood and insanity, tends to diminish the excellent facts he brought up previous to his bombshell. Namely, that Obama, if soundly defeated in November, will not calmly accept defeat. And in fact, his actions during the first term have laid the groundwork for a coup of the United States government, because, among other things, Michelle Obama won’t tolerate a loss of Presidential power. This is the problem with anti-Obama conservatives. They go so far out on their strange little limbs making farcical claims, that they end up repudiating the true dirt on Obama because of distracting conspiratorial paranoia.


Essentially, Whiskey details the many suspect associations and practices of #44 in a thorough and linked manner, but then wanders into right-wing racist fantasyland. For instance, he begins confidently and Tolstoy-like with the grand statement: “Barack Obama is unlike any other President.”


Uh yeah, the first thing I thought is…he’s Black! However Whiskey proceeds to detail all the supposedly unique things about Obama which are just a template and combined personality sketch of every damn President to lay in the Presidential Bedroom. Furthermore, he brings up all the typical Presidential historic distastefulness and proceeds to accuse of Obama of being “unique” in this regard, and hence, possessed of ulterior, anti-American motives. The template reads like a who’s who of Presidential arcana.


-The psychopathic obsession to power and its maintenance.

-The externally imposed sequestered nature of Presidents.

-The sinister machinations, associations, and inauspicious power plays that make observers wonder what they are “really up to.”

-The overbearing [fill in the blank] who uses their position in the Presidential inner circle to influence the President in evil directions.

-The destructive vanity of the President and his enablers which is easily construed as dictatorial and endgame-focused with utter disregard for the Constitution.

-And last, but not least, the questionable and evil associations they maintain with minion holdovers from younger political days of Presidential aspiration.


Whiskey’s Obama allegations describe the archetypal nature of any man who would choose to run for President of the United States of America. And infers that in Obama’s special case (because he’s Black) that he will turn ghetto on the highest American office and that he and his Chicago cronies will pull a flash mob on our Bill of Rights.


I don’t see that Obama is so special. He is just another Presidential representative/installation of the oligarchs. He never would have reached office without the Old American elite traditional Anglo power guard. The “corporatization” of our lifestyle and civic landscape in this country has dulled politics terribly. Politics are no longer unique or vibrant, and the characters, reagardless of the “R” or the “D” in front of their names, are the same regurgitated capitalist puppets whose ultimate voter is dollars and ego.


I find it difficult to believe that Obama’s post-Presidential life will suffer or be less than monetarily and personally lucrative. So many Presidents leave office with a trail of legally questionable detritus behind but they are given a pass because our society is hesitant to treat a man who wore the title “Commander-In-Chief” as anything vaguely resembling a criminal. Obama will be fine. The impending loss of the Oval Office occupancy simply means he will be able to get on with his spectacuarly ill-deserved acclaim a little sooner. This is when President’s make their real money. This is the payback period for the ones who played it well. Barack has greased big business palms quite well during his first 4 years in office. He’s in good shape. He’s got the unofficial Presidential “pension” to look forward to.


I can’t imagine Whiskey’s ostensibly fictional, plot-outline-ish treatise was meant as anything less than satire…or preparation for a Hollywood script. All good right-wingers wet themselves over Red Dawn back in the 80’s and would love another tale of patriotic American uprisings against evildoers.


Who would be the new Patrick Swayze?


Perhaps the Obama-coup script can be called “Black Dawn.”



Take this phone and shove it


There was a day last week I was in one of those countless meetings I get invited to but whose agenda are far beyond my pay grade and for which I usually have nothing to contribute. Frequently, I’ll sit (linger) in such meetings while listening to the participants speak freely and comfortably for they appear to have a preexisting vibe that I was excluded from wearing. I feel uncomfortable and foreign in such situations. I listen, sometimes I laugh in unison with important (dictated by the person uttering) comic statements just to fake some kinship, but it’s all phony. Holden Caulfield would shit his pants. I’m an excellent faker. People like me learn to fake it early. We are experts with practice. We act one way while totally thinking and living another. We are good at poker faces and make the best moles. So there I was, faking it again during another insufferable meeting. Every one was talking and pretending to be productive when in fact most meetings are just lame attempts at institutionalized and pardoned socializing. The object of the game is to make it appear you are working while disguising the fact you are taking a 1/2 hour or 1 hour break and chewing the fat with other overpaid members of the employee rolls.


I was one of the first to the meeting in question. I sat at one end of the table. At the other end sat the “conductors” with their company-issued laptops which were synced in to the network IP address in order to display their output on the room’s large screen (for meeting purposes). I took my cell phone out of my pocket and laid it on the table. I carry it around on vibrate because we just need to be in touch 24/7. This is how it is now! We can’t leave the world behind, ever, can we? Gradually, the rest of the meeting’s participants filtered in and the show got underway. A few minutes in, I noticed most of the folks on my end of the table were fiddling around with their Blackberry’s/smart phones, shuffling objects around on their fancy touch screens. I looked down at my forlorn phone that sat on the tabletop. I was the only person in the room without a fancy phone.



It looked so overpowered and I didn’t notice if anyone saw it. It looked very comically inappropriate there in light of the high-tech shenanigans going on in the room. People reading their emails, sending emails, being important. Blackberry’s are lame. I can never understand why anyone needs to be tethered to their job to such an excruciating degree. Forget that crap. I’ve somehow carved out a small niche whereby I can exist amid this so-called professional clusterfuck without caving in to a stupid Blackberry. No job will follow me, ever. People walk around at work, typing away seriously on their little touchpads, responding, replying, reading, accepting, while on the go! They sit in silence while they study the inner life of their phone screens. My phone is just a simple relic that is the “gift” byproduct of my obscure wireless carrier’s plan marketed to no-frills old people who still remember when phones were only for talking and listening. I’m an old person before my time. If I had my way, I would have no cellphone. I rather admire those oldsters who don’t have one. My father is one of those people. He has no cellphone even though my mom bought him one which he graciously never carries.



This is my phone. Admire her dim beauty, her archaic functionality.
I can’t check in to buzzing locations on Facebook and I can’t Yelp shit on it.


C’mon, it doesn’t get any better than this! Living the life, baby.