Book: How the Jews invented Hollywood

I’m guessing they don’t mention that it was and remains one giant brothel, like modelling.
Yeah, that was worse, OpDeathEaters didn’t go far enough.

Why do you think Kylie Jenner needed the plastique before breaking into ‘modelling’?

Speaking of massive slags. So it isn’t as if Jews themselves are exempt.

However ‘model scouts’ tour poverty-stricken areas of Eastern Europe and force the girls into prostitution because there’s no one around to look after them.

Today, when we think of mainstream Hollywood, we think of big companies making big films for big profits and nothing more. It may come as a surprise to many that the entire reason that films are made in Hollywood comes from a few independent filmmakers who were brave enough to go against the then-established industry. In the early days of silent films, Thomas Edison’s film company, along with the other biggest companies, formed the Motion Picture Patent Company, or “the Trust,” in 1908. The Trust controlled all distribution and production of films and film equipment, so anyone who wanted to make films or enter the industry had to have the express permission of the Trust and had to buy their equipment from them.

During this time, the vast majority of films being produced were short films or serial films, but when feature-length films were being imported from Europe to great success, many wannabe filmmakers wanted to cash in on the craze. However, the Trust was always against feature-length films, so only independent filmmakers could make them.

Porn isn’t usually feature length.

Since most films were made on the East Coast by the Trust, independent filmmakers Jesse Laske and Samuel Goldfish (he later changed his name to the more famous Goldwyn) went first to Flagstaff, Arizona, and then to the end of the line—a community in Los Angeles called Hollywood where they made popular feature films against the permission of the “Trust” in a studio converted from a barn.

The first film that Laske and Goldwyn made, along with first-time director Cecil B. DeMille, was The Squaw Man. Even though the film was shot far away from the Trust, it was almost destroyed when several rolls of footage were sabotaged. While many blame the Trust for this act, the real perpetrators remain a mystery. When the film was released, it was vastly different from what most audiences saw and changed the industry forever. Eventually, Laske and Goldwyn’s company became Paramount, and the movie companies that went to Hollywood to escape the tyranny of the Trust became the mainstream studio system that still exists in one form or another today.

Another reason to hate Edison, kinda.

Link: Asperger’s or Psychopathy?

It’s like extreme arrogance in both cases leading to mindblindness.

Asperger’s can be sadists too, though. They aren’t exempt because of reduced empathy, which is also called callous in psychopaths.

There’s an eerie number of similarities between the two conditions.

Maybe that’s why it was revoked from the DSM as its own category.

Link: Mirror syndrome or Cassandra Phenomenon

Mirror Syndrome made more sense, the original term.

Stunning example of lack of empathy

Autism activists vehemently deny that people close to them suffer significant trauma from their lack of empathy, just as they deny that they lack empathy. The truth is that spouses, partners, children and siblings of individuals who have social disorders such as Asperger’s Syndrome (AS) and high functioning autism (Hfa) suffer significantly. They are subject to chronic, repetitive psychological trauma within the context of their relationships with persons with AS. This is a normal stress reaction to the ongoing abnormal interactions within these relationships.

This stress reaction has been named Ongoing Traumatic Relationship Syndrome (OTRS), AKA Cassandra Phenomenon (CP). It is a metaphor for the emotional and physical suffering of spouses and children of adult individuals with AS and high functioning autism, because they are typically disbelieved as they attempt to share the cause of their sufferings with others (Cassandra, the Greek mythological character, suffered because her capacity to predict the future was accompanied by the curse that no one believed her. She could foresee disasters, but could not convince anyone to forestall them. By analogy, family members of adults with AS experience great moral distress because they can predict calamities caused by the individual with AS, but they are not believed or validated by the very individuals to whom they turn for professional help).


Asperger’s isn’t genius.

People with AS do not exhibit reciprocity; do not show empathy or compassion;

no, that’s psychopaths

cannot put themselves in the place of others; have difficulty with mutual communication; do not recognize the NT partner’s reality and attitudes; cannot read others’ intentions and emotions; find it difficult to learn from experience;

no, that’s PURE psychopath

cannot assess complex situations; cannot nurture a relationship;


cannot see their responsibility for their own actions;


cannot negotiate, seek compromises or resolve conflicts;


is extremely busy solely for their own needs; and has inadequate capacity for adult impulse control. 

There are brain scans.

It does not take an advanced degree in mental health to understand the emotional deprivation and extreme psychological stress that would result from ongoing interaction with such a person.

A lot of people claiming autism, especially online, are really psychopaths looking for an excuse.

A diagnosis doesn’t exempt you from criminal behaviour.

You can’t claim to be smarter than everyone then, magically, hypoagency!

A stress breakdown is a normal reaction to a period of prolonged negative stress from enduring repeated violation of boundaries, betrayal, rejection, bewilderment, confusion, lack of control and disempowerment, with seemingly no means of escape and no support.


Just say abuse.

So how have people with AS reacted to the recognition of the detrimental effects of their disorder on those closest to them, and to calling these effects OTRS or CP?


With a stunning lack of empathy. 


Link: Men explain things to me

I did have a post explaining the real features of mansplaining but I need to find it to post it. At least I doubt I posted it. It’s hard to keep track. This will be blunt for the spergs.

You’re not holding court if the other party hates you and wants to leave.

I have never seen a woman do it. We keep out. It seems a male feature, especially a bitchy gamma male type. Internet bitch fights between guys. Think the atheist talking about sky fairies when nobody asked.

When men do it to other men, which is uncommon, they’re just called jerks.
There should really be a term for this behaviour though.

It’s toxic, it’s antisocial and it’s ignorant to think a conversation is an excuse to chop the other party down.
You can say someone’s wrong if you think, but there’s a respectful adult, mature way, and then the way where you make them never want to speak to you again and act like it’s their fault you’re an ass.

Also a favourite with the guys who complain of being friendzoned. They’re normally not friends but acquaintances.
I insult her! I demean her! I disrespect her! Why won’t she date me? I’m such a Nice Guy!

Really they’re passive aggressive and blow hot and cold while thinking they’re being smouldering and mysterious.

One of the assumptions is that a woman, despite credentials, has no idea what she’s talking about (even as she’s teaching you the thing, thereby proving it) or randomly invalidating their opinion purely because they’re a woman (that’s just sexist, like when SJWs dismiss men on that basis).

Opinions don’t need to be right.


So the bloviating moron just rattles off his opinion like a fact glibly and expects the presumably ditzy girl to be sexually impressed. And that’s the worst part, they think cocky is sexy.

No woman fancies House.


Have you noticed that?

…Why do you do this?

It’s the shittiest flirting tactic known to man.

Look how smart I am! they think they’re signalling.

Look how obnoxious I can be! women see.

You are not at work and you’re not the boss there either, so you couldn’t bully people like that at work. If you did bully work inferiors, they’d leave. If you’re mean when you’re trying to be ‘nice’ on first meeting, imagine what an asshole they think you are once they get to know you, who wants to? Really it’s the bottom rungs of men who do this because negative attention is better than none, they’re already unattractive but this makes it hard to look past because there isn’t even inner beauty or some sympathy.

Woman thinks:

Why should I be nice and carry you in this conversation? Next!

It’s this alpha posturing BS going round. The old term for this? False bravado.

It’s fake as those thots’ nails. Pretending it’s about the intellect doesn’t make you less superficial than a guy in a tight tank top, you’re still being vain. It’s a false image of leadership. Who is inspired by catty comments?

There’s a sexual element where it’s like negging but instead of appearance or something superficial like a laugh or posture, they’re dehumanizing you. It’s the dehumanization part that rings true to regular, non-SJW women and made this such a Thing, thanks to EQ. I’ve had men on here try to deny women’s EQ when there are plenty of studies, since the idea of women being good/better at anything triggers them to their tiny fragile peanut balls, but then go on to say women are too sensitive. ….like -how? How does your brain keep you alive when it’s so dumb?

They’re patronizing but in doing so, demonstrating their stupidity. If the woman defends herself, let alone fighting fire with fire? He gets really offended and maybe calls her a sexist bitch.


You don’t take the time (SQ) to explain something for free only for the ingrate to turn around and begin implying that, because they don’t like what you say, you have no right to say it.. also because you have tits. Ironically they talk about freedom of speech constantly…. yeah, they just mean their speech. So you can’t punch them for being jerks….

That was April 2008 and it struck a chord.  It still seems to get reposted more than just about anything I’ve written at, and prompted some very funny letters to this site. None was more astonishing than the one from the Indianapolis man who wrote in to tell me that he had “never personally or professionally shortchanged a woman” and went on to berate me for not hanging out with “more regular guys or at least do a little homework first,” gave me some advice about how to run my life, and then commented on my “feelings of inferiority.”

Don’t be this guy.

If it’s something a nosy old woman might say, don’t.
Hearing something you don’t like isn’t a personal insult.

Don’t make it personal.

He thought that being patronized was an experience a woman chooses to, or could choose not to have–and so the fault was all mine. Life is short; I didn’t write back.

the way someone else speaks to you is THEIR fault

they are the responsible one for their tongue

even being wrong isn’t a provocation

it’s a learning opportunity

a bonding opportunity

or maybe that’s my EQ talking

not a bitchy high horse shade-throwing competition


straight men are acting gay

to attract women

it puts off women

homosexual men do this

that’s why they do it

they always did this

look at Oscar Wilde!

Young women subsequently added the word “mansplaining” to the lexicon. Though I hasten to add that the essay makes it clear mansplaining is not a universal flaw of the gender, just the intersection between overconfidence and cluelessness where some portion of that gender gets stuck.


empty arrogance

nothing between the ears

literally no self-awareness, like, autistic levels but no autism

It’s like being nagged but about something you don’t need to do, by someone who acts like they know you and has no idea what they’re talking about. They seek you out and maybe corner you and trap you with a question to make it look less like bullying.

to the sincere fools:

you can’t banter until there’s a bond

Busybodies is too archaic a term. The worst were crotchety old men. At least the women would feed you and it wasn’t about sex.

The funniest are when any woman who uses this word gets mansplained by a broflake guy who says he’s never seen or done it.

It’s a thing you do, that’s why the word is used.
It just isn’t always directed at women, but when it is, there’s a significantly patronizing power dynamic imbalancing tone, regardless of the actual status of individuals involved.

The other cause? Smartphones.

They can’t hold a conversation anymore, we blame the internet.

Then there’s the sociopathic nutjobs-

On two occasions around that time, I objected to the behavior of a man, only to be told that the incidents hadn’t happened at all as I said, that I was subjective, delusional, overwrought, dishonest–in a nutshell, female.

That’s misogyny and gaslighting.

You are woman, therefore must be <character insult>, it’s defamation.
Men used to hold their tongue in days of dueling.

The craziest ones you’ll ever see think they’re playing Freud and can sit judging all women as inferior because they imagine a fetish of theirs, daddy issues (plot twist: because they have the daddy issues) and begin seeing insanity or dishonesty everywhere… because they need a shrink themselves. Put down the schoolgirl/teacher porn!

Men explain things to me, still. And no man has ever apologized for explaining, wrongly, things that I know and they don’t.

that’s the virtue of humility

let me end with

Surely one of these men has died of embarrassment, but not nearly publicly enough.

Cool or pseudomature?

It’s hard to find studies on this.

They’d rather make money selling them things.

The wide spread in young people’s rates of social and psychological maturation has led some researchers to propose that we think about adolescents not just in terms of their chronological age, but also their subjective age: how old they feel and act.

The concept of subjective age seems like an excuse to drop age of consent.

We already have legal age and mental age.

Agency is similar in root to age.