Survey says skincare is now androgynous

http://www.byrdie.co.uk/men-and-women-beauty-habits

Yes, that matches all the men I’ve had to help with concealer swatches to hide their nights out.

snort lol laugh haha hmph derision yeah duh really uhuh mhmm princess bride

There’s nothing vain about taking care of your skin. It’s like going to the optician or getting a blood pressure check. Cancer is real. You don’t want to miss out on a promotion because you didn’t spring for the dark circle caffeine roll-on.

Goes to show men aren’t as confident about ‘aging like wine’ as they say.
Although anyone who knows about wine will tell you the cheap ones get worse over time.

~sip~

They never get better.

So when men use that phrase, do not correct them. It’s funnier that way.

‘PC’ doesn’t exist, everyone go home

They are insane.
I mean, to deny the words and ideas you are literally in the process of using exist?
But certain words are so real they count as physical battery.

This entire delusion is insane. The blatant denial is reaching a psychotic pitch.
It isn’t stupidity, they’re arguing from bad faith. They think it’s like a quiz show and you can ‘pass’ on points that prove you wrong. If they say “This is so evil I can use it as an excuse to ignore you*” it’s the adult equivalent of hiding under the duvet. Except they expect it will be taken seriously.
* That’s literally never an excuse in a debate. You entered a debate, not an argument, it has formal rules. You can’t suddenly change the rules and stop playing – it’s childish, as if you flipped a Monopoly board. You automatically lose.

Political correctness: covering the terrible truth with a polite lie for political gain.

e.g. those little white girls in Rotherham weren’t raped, they had non-consensual boyfriends who promised to set them on fire. According to these people, this exact type of person, the gang-rapists were the Real Victims Here. Because Muslim > white minor on the Progressive Stack. They hate it when we point out their tactics** and if they get to have their terms, we get to have ours. Otherwise politics and wider morality will be a monopoly, and liberal theory (true classic liberal) says this is wrong. They are literally trying to censor the enemy, in a vaguely fascist sense. It’s a sign we’re winning because they cannot retort, they have no proof or logic to their claims.*** We don’t say “You can’t say that”, we’re like “You can say that, and I can laugh at you for saying that because it’s the dumbest shit I ever heard.” Freedom of speech, not control of thought/speech and control of response. They’re literally trying to turn the term PC from a thoughtcrime (You’re a bad person for saying this) and a crimestop (If you say this, you lose your rights) into a thought-terminating cliche (judged by effect, whereby all discussion by ALL parties is henceforth terminated). They want to silence everyday conversation because platform-denial in public places hasn’t secured their totalitarian grasp of control, and eventually the new Left always becomes tyrannical and refuses to allow dissent, at which point post-entryism they slide into irrelevance and incompetence, as signalling takes the position of skill. Privilege games are negative-scored points where the biggest loser wins. They cannot win positively scored status signalling games in real society. It’s like that one person who makes it a competition when someone else is ill. There’s something deeply psychologically wrong with them to brag about it.

As Carlin said “I’m expecting to hear a rape victim referred to as an “unwilling sperm recipient”.

That’s PC. He was a classic liberal. And it hasn’t gone mad, it has always been mad, as the innately contradictory, linguistic control of the opponent’s rhetoric****. Their own rhetoric is baseless, as critical theory cannot create anything from itself but only parasite off of other ideologies, it’s the academese equivalent of shouting Oh No It Isn’t! at everything. Forever. For Victim Ranking guidance, they use the ever-shifting goalposts of Cultural Marxism. A term they dare not use, because if you don’t acknowledge it, it isn’t real. Except for privilege of course. /s 

Political witch hunts, history will mark this time as the digital Dark Age.

SJWs = NEETs + covert narcissism

Where NEET means a person useless to their economy and community, by laziness and stupidity. Not the temporarily unfortunate. SJWs are empowered by the rise of the attention whore internet (in PC, ‘social media’, however much studies prove it antisocial). Do you really think these people would hang out on usersubs with real nerds?

Naturally, there are also other issues mentally with these people but they rarely ascend beyond mid-tier. Other SJWs find them insufferable too. Every generation has a characteristic mental complaint, Millennials happen to be narcs. Gen X tend to be borderline (no identity, hyperemotional) and Boomers… well, ruthless sociopathy of the 80s. IMHO, I’d call it that Gen Z appear histrionic, complete with stimming over Twitter (calling it PTSD or anxiety or panic) with a few tuning out into depersonalization.

Speaking of superiority games, isolation and ostracisation. Bullying when anyone else does it, non-Platforming and virtuous banishment for ideological purity when SJWs do it. Like how Whites must help the whole world at personal expense because innately, we CAN, but remember, we’re not superior……

Simply defined, a bigot is someone who refuses to hear other opinions. If you shut down because you hear a term or idea you dislike, there is no debate anymore and you are a bigot. By definition. Why enter into a debate with a person you don’t somewhat respect? Well, they don’t want a debate, they want to preach. Signalling moral superiority without having to do anything to threaten their own, often middle-class white bitch position, that will parasite off their parents until long after those parents are dead (trust fundees, inheritance).
It’s like how they use the gender studies definitions of biological terms as if that is acceptable. Nope, the harder science always wins. One of the first things you do in a debate is define your terms and that is the rule.

** remember SJWs Always Lie
*** 
because they’re always lying.

There is an upside: they cannot stand non-Far Left signalling and identification, which means we should do what, exactly?

****It’s a red herring to react to their terms instead of what those terms seek to gain, there are sociopaths at the top of this moving the narcissists with the promise of prestige, it all keeps us busy on their words, which they know are BS, while they act to push through policies we’d otherwise have time and numbers to question them on (e.g. TTIP), because they are outnumbered by rational people (see GE and Brexit).

It also means we are winning for the first time in decades because their amygdala is shot to shit by the mere memory of us.

Youtube short on edgy shekels

youtubeshekels

The whores of Patreon must be concerned.

Wow… Youtube is dead.
That’s the only reason anyone went there.
They’re worse than the Puritans. CROMWELL APPROVES.

You want mainstream money, you’d better follow mainstream narrative.

Ironically, these people were also (rightfully) complaining that popular entertainers make too much money.

evil grin lol smile happy

Not limited to Jennifer Lawrence.

They’re correct – if it’s art and these people would do it anyway, it’s just a hobby, and those excessive fees are not justifiable.

No platform monopoly, no monopoly money.

Comic: Living wage is a contradiction

livingwage

Equal pay for equal work actually comes from Marxist theory, and was applied by socialist factory workers so whoever covered a ‘shift’ wouldn’t get preferential treatment or paid less based on who was expected (a man, when they got a woman or child because the expected party was sick and someone else was ‘covering’ for them). Read North and South you ignorant, backward illiterates. Where did you think these terms came from?

Employers are not responsible for the personal lives of their employees, otherwise they’d get them all sterilized so they can spend more time on the job. Whatever happened to stay out of my bedroom?

They assume that someone flipping burgers for $5 an hour is a hard worker.
Really? Do they have the SAT transcript to support that statement?

Those jobs are supposed to suck on PURPOSE. It’s motivational so you move up from the bottom rung of the ladder. You aren’t supposed to stay there five years let alone your whole life. This opens up the ‘spot’ to newer people to the economy, usually younger or less skilled (you’re supposed to get more skilled on the job, with experience).

Wage is calculated precisely, it’s based on contribution: primarily to the company and widely, to the economy.

If you’re replaceable, that’s your fault.

If you have the same skills after 10 years as you had on the first day, frankly, you’d hardly qualify as a monkey by IQ. Monkeys are smarter than that. The tiny ones. You must take responsibility for your career, ask what can I do to move into a better role? What does the industry need? How can I stay competitive? If they won’t help, find another company. Do online courses. Do something. Treading quicksand means you drown. You’re probably competing with everyone in India and China. Wake up. You must use them as much as they’re already using you.

Company loyalty died with globalism. You made your choice. Now? If letting an employee go makes the company one more CENT in profit, they will do it. Hey, you wanted cheap phones.

The Boomers running HR currently have lied. Your whole life they’ve acted like you must XYZ to be an asset to the company. Without employees, all companies fold. With subpar employees, they are outcompeted. They are screwing over the young to justify their current high positions, when most of them can barely keep up with the technology required for entry-level. They also refuse to retire, which a non-Boomer board would insist on.

However, nobody ever discusses the real problem: foreign competition.

You can’t get cheaper than free (because it’s illegal).

Minimum wage laws do not work if immigration laws are not enforced. Pick one.

That’s the real reason Trump is killing it with black voters. They have common sense.
The jobs they used to do under the table to claim welfare simultaneously, are now going to Mexicans who can be blackmailed with deportation. Bigger threat, better worker.

There is no such thing as a living wage because everyone lives differently. We all have differing lifestyles. These are bailouts of people who didn’t work as hard at the free schooling they attended. You choose to accept an employment contract, if the terms are not agreeable, you do not take the job. All parties have a choice.

An adult pretending to have no choice is a rotten liar.

Living wage will quickly devolve into welfare. It’s the rule of Communism when you’re getting paid anyway, it’s like a pet cat, why hunt? Why try? They’ll slowly reduce their hours to minimum, which is practically zero.

Considering the contributions to the economy then, what do you think will happen to the scheme?

The only thing that can happen mathematically –  it will fail.

I rarely give out advice because this isn’t that type of blog. BUT.

They’ll blame the people who gave them a job, and then wonder why nobody wants to hire them.
You’re hired, not based on your job title, or your CV, or even what you do, but based on HOW you do it. That’s how you win. Read The Rules of Work. It isn’t cheating to be charming at work, it’s how they work. It isn’t cheating to be timely and efficient, that’s how you work. It isn’t unfair if the kiss-ass gets a promotion – that’s how he works.

You cannot expect superior results from mediocre efforts.

Comic: College tables

blackactivismsegregation

Sorry, no source. DFP posted it.

Based on http://americanmilitarynews.com/2016/09/cal-state-la-sets-up-segregated-black-housing-safe-space-founder-of-group-salih-muhammad-is-nation-of-islam-devotee/

This cultural segregation eventually leads to the literal kind.
I’m fine with whites being barred from colleges, as long as their taxes don’t fund those institutions.

Notice how the Muslims are trying to recruit foreign blacks too? Used to be just MENA.

It’s like they’ve never heard of cannon fodder. Muslims think as little of blacks as they do whites.
Someone tell them about the white privilege of chess pieces, it’s the only real kind.

At least nobody is buying the “They just want respect” line anymore. It’s pretty clear they want special treatment, even trampling the human rights of others. If they’d looked it up, black kids need whites in their class to help them study, so they’re really spiting themselves here. Black teachers also get worse results, even with additional resources.

White people + danger + Adam and Eve

An example of how criticizing white people can be funny (because it’s true), fine (because it’s put in a polite way) and not anti-white.

I’d argue that adventuring spirit is the reason we had Empires.

And for That’s Not Sexist Because It’s In the Bible.

I already know this but it’s well put. I find it funny when fake manosphere Christians bring up Eve like that’s a real point. Are you missing a rib too? And Lilith is Jewish. There’s no such thing as Judeo-Christian because Nietzsche came up with that to trash-talk two religions at once et cetera et cetera…

It’s good to explain to these people what really happened – according to the Bible they do not read except in snippets on wikipedia.

A man did something he knew would make God mad – and the woman got blamed for it. I’ll take World History for $100.

Based on a literal reading of this fact, women can educate themselves with as much knowledge as they want with God’s blessing aka only men are forbidden from knowledge. Probably because you know, what they do with it.

~nukes going off in the distance~

So, if we’re being pedantic like many male theology students, Christian only universities should be women’s only universities, right?

Or do we only apply the one-sided stuff when women get the short end of the passage (like explicitly mentioning female virginity because it was written by horny men)?

Double standards are fine if there is a sound reason given at the same time (so in this case, in the Bible, preferably same gospel). In that case, I think it’s presumed men would be virgins upon marriage based on the rarity and expense of prostitutes. Nowadays all you need to do is buy them a drink.

Yet it never mentions whether it was OK if she lost her virginity to the man she was marrying….

hmm did not know nice surprised hot

It kinda reminds me of the hypocrisy (always wrong) of the hijab/niqab/burka – if it’s really about modesty, the men would wear them too.

Like old nun clothing, matched up to priest clothing. Fair standard. No free rides here, sinner.