Triggered degenerate Boomers

Not to be confused with salt of the earth Boomers I hardly ever need to discuss, who aren’t hypocrites and expected their kids to listen when they gave sound health advice.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/11/young-people-drunk-acohol-millenials

Normally when you see this line.

What’s wrong with young people today?

The next sentence better be fucking good.

The Groaniad today continues:

They don’t get drunk any more

WTF.
It’s a new low in moral decay that the elders are trying desperately to corrupt their children.
Alcohol is ridiculous (social media rep), expensive, a stupid (not glamorous) legal dark grey area and an addictive distraction from the important business of networking (which we wouldn’t have to do if you didn’t import competition and switch to offshore training).
We’re told to “protect ourselves”, cannot own a gun or knife or spray in public and given the most common date rape drug is alcohol, why bother?

[see end for that topic]

Nobody wants to be blamed for their own rape or other abuse, especially in this multicultural Hell of rape gangs expressly targeting the white (what hate crime?) and drunk (predators love legal nitpicking). Clubs are losing popularity because women hate hunting grounds. Clubs exist for men and the lowest kind. Pubs more popular than ever, for comparison. Low odds of rape, groping, grinding and (especially Third World) harassment there. Naturally, the club creeps use alcohol as their excuse too. Scientifically false, drunk people can behave impeccably, as you’ll notice the second the police turn up. Other sedatives are not a free pass on assault either.

https://psmag.com/social-justice/placebo-week-getting-drunk-beer-alcohol-expectations-92254

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2634499.stm
“We have made people’s memory worse by telling them that they were intoxicated even though they had nothing stronger than plain flat tonic water with limes,” said co-researcher Maryanne Garry.
So an intake of so-called moderate alcohol wouldn’t be wise either, before someone chimes in.

Think of it as a precautionary legal defense from rapists who take advantage of slow law changes (no major interventions since Queen Victoria’s reign, and on gin) and the crawling consideration of the latest neuroscience. Sugar isn’t cocaine and alcohol doesn’t turn a law-abiding citizen into a rabid rapist, men are not naturally rapists. Nor does it bring that out as an animal instinct, society conditions excuses. You can’t take from a bank drunk and say Muh It Doesn’t Count as robbery, neither can you “take” a human being in rape and victim-blame for the “hate crime” of being white and attractive (note: imagine the pedophiles and other dedicated rapists in response* to that). This is why we need studies, psychology is not common sense. They don’t dare mention where alcohol is consumed (privately, at home) and why (visibly valid concerns about public safety relating to the new low trust society).

It isn’t about women trusting strange men (and why the hell should they? when has that ever been intelligent historically?? and do they trust their fellow random men either?*) it’s that throughout society, there is no trust. Again, why should there be? Burden of Proof. So much rape and abuse isn’t recorded or reported due to political fears of revenge that there are active reasons to distrust, fuck your snowflake feelings on the subject. Why do these broflakes feel entitled to trust they didn’t earn? Normal people (i.e. not manwhores) have lower openness scores. It’s like the funniest red handed moment “how dare you notice I only want one thing and am willing to take it unwillingly, I wanted to rape you if I could get away with it but you hurt my narc feelings, I demand satisfaction”.

Unless you’d prefer women be armed? That would be better.

Predators believe only they are real – their urges, rights etc.
The prey isn’t allowed to plan, complain or have equal HUMAN rights.

*Rapists are as real and sneaky as serial killers, simply different types of predator.

**I bet they don’t let male salesmen into their house, the paranoid sexist pigs. Straight men in gay bars don’t dare get drunk, I rest my case.

Etiquette needs to return, no talking to strangers is basic.

Teen films are fiction, there’s a crime about every five minutes, it’s normalized. Forcing someone to consume alcohol, by coercion or “slipping” covertly, aside from being illegal (directly responsible) if they have any medical issues from it you didn’t know, is poisoning. Then there are the various chemicals in alcohol that are well-known as rape drugs specifically e.g. GHB in wine. Then there’s finally on this point how women are weakened more by alcohol than men so any arguments to “she was with it” ring false from simple sex differences and accurate biology (no woman can handle alcohol, none, it’s a Hollywood myth based on the 30s vamp who’d take one single shot of a hard liquor and stop there).

Why don’t the would-be (totally not definitely never) rapists want people to defend themselves in their company by remaining of lucid consciousness? If they’re so concerned with “false” allegations? Makes you think.

Surely you’d want all women in the club not drinking so when they consent to you, it’s legally kosher. Unless of course, you’re “taking advantage”, and want them insensible, the politest term for rape we have.

And if you only sleep with brain-impaired strangers, don’t you expect allegations?
Why can’t you get your “fun” from sober people?

They try to blame the victim a sneakier way (planning legal defense months before the act itself isn’t odd?) by asking a false dichotomy and presenting a cliche anecdote that acts like the sexes are biologically the same, namely, what if they’re both drunk? The one who physically initiates is the rapist, obviously. Actus reus, look it up, idiots.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/actus_reus

They think they’ve got an AHA! moment on the “both drunk” condition but it’s the simpleton logic of pointing to a car pileup after an accident and claiming all of the cars in question caused it. Non sequitur much?

And define drunk? Given sex differences, you’re still stupid.

Back to booze

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-01-alcohol-dna-cancer.html
Alcohol causes permanent DNA damage and while older people may not care, we’re clued-up enough on science to care an awful lot. It may even pass down the germline (epigenetics).
https://newatlas.com/alcohol-cancer-dna-damage-stem-cell/52813/
Why?
Well, since we’ll be working our entire lives (retirement is a temporary fad) then staying working fit is imperative.
comment
“It concerns me how much people over a certain age brag about their alcohol intake like they don’t have a problem.”
Yes, agree, let’s all aspire to be like the alcoholic divorcees!
Definitely not addictive, is it? They can give up any time they like.
They wanted clean living kids, they got them. If they’re so triggered by the fact their children are literally better than them, their narcissism is not our problem.
Opposing the degeneracy when we see the Bacchanalian wages of it, how absolutely awful of us.
https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2017/09/28/millennials-oppose-carousing/

You’re not James Bond, we can now get those martini ingredients in the average Tesco…. Express.
We don’t want to be a burden on the State if we can possibly help it (we know about elder abuse) and neither should they?

https://drugfree.org/learn/drug-and-alcohol-news/alcohol-most-common-date-rape-drug-law-enforcement-officials-say/
https://efficientgov.com/blog/2018/04/04/what-is-the-most-common-date-rape-drug/
https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/sep/22/alcohol-date-rape-drug-facilitated-sexual-assault-dfsa
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071020113144.htm

It does count, and anyone who says otherwise is a willing mark in a game of Spot the Rapist. It’s a chemical that impairs the brain from threat recognition and literally weakens the physical ability to resist (fend off). It’s also most common in male rape, regardless of victim age. The law requires adjustments.

The limits of tolerance

Wings don’t really exist anymore. Mostly, nobody cares about capitalism/socialism.

It’s all about the moral issues, the personal issues and what affects society. Social harm.

So it’s social harm against too much freedom (at what point can society curtail your damaging, antisocial expression, adult?)… the cult of individualism is dying and we could never afford it as a society/nation/race in the first place.

The libertarian who wants good roads and doesn’t want to pay for them.

“You don’t own me, but you owe me!” entitlement.

No.

And the cognitive dissonance applies elsewhere.

Plus the left wing says it’s beyond question. That is illiberal. They’re dogmatic because their foundational principles are being shown, empirically, to be entirely false and actually damaging the societies they’re in.

They refuse to admit.

Brexit 2nd vote?

Not our President?

Closed to reality.

IQ isn’t real but GPA is!

We need funding to teach IQ!

NURTURE IS ALWAYS TRUE. NATURE IS A LIE.

People can change but if they don’t want to it’s your fault. Don’t expect criminals to stop being criminals! Don’t apply our logic unless we say it’s okay! We love freedom of thought! We’re intellectuals!

Echo chambers of lies. Nice lies, killing you softly.

You don’t need to suffer, we’ll bail you out with free money if you sell us your soul.

The fake angel pouring poison in your ear. You didn’t sin, it was an accident, wasn’t it?

Learned helplessness, enabling destructiveness, pathological altruism – all abuse.

They can’t rule people unless they’re broken. Male and female. Poor and rich.

It intentionally reduces healthy independence and produces conflict by appealing to sin. Eat the apple, you deserve it. For every group. Everyone is weakened. Decadent rich, stupid poor, angry women, apathetic men.

By appealing to every group’s unique weakness, the chaos seems natural.

It isn’t.

Men are encouraged to sleep around and women are encouraged to hate their libido.

Insecurity in everybody.

The Left is even eating itself in a purity spiral, purity of delusion.

Virtue signalling insanity. Whoever can pretend the most insane bullshit will become utopia magically (magical thinking) wins. Spot it.

The blind optimists win.

trans. I can afford to ignore reality. Countersignal.

They create nothing so have no new solutions to their own problems, nobody to blame but don’t say they’re useless! The first time it went wrong didn’t count, try try again! Socialism has never been tried, guys!

You can’t argue with a moral relativist.

Literally.

There’s no evil to attack, they don’t see it.

They don’t really believe in laws because what enforcement? All feelings.

What about the victim’s feelings?

Where are the principles? Lowest immoral common denominator. Celebrated inferiority (below norm). Look how well we’re doing, we can afford this!

Like atheists arguing in bad faith about what God isn’t. You can’t prove a negative and they don’t believe in the positive concept they discuss – it’s all theory, wishy washy useless pontificating. It’s trolling, debate is impossible. They don’t care. They pretend to care.

Special plea: dehumanizing and ruining people’s lives is virtuous when we do it. Delusional hand of God, Angel of Death type reasoning. That is what all evil people believe.

They are deliberately blind to their own evil. They think they’re flawless based on what they eat.

>love everyone, positive thoughts! hate is bad!
>spends most weeks outrage posting on twitter

Age of Hypocrisy. Send in the pretentious clowns.

Send every stray African to rich California and London areas, only the liberal ones.
See how fast they complain. Holier than thou poor-haters.

I won’t rest until I see gypsies cover Hampstead Heath.

Political correctness is social shaming

And it’s rude.

As an addendum to a little thing I wrote previously.

http://www.xojane.com/issues/5-gaslighting-phrases-donald-trump-used-that-remind-me-a-lot-of-my-abusive-ex

“In reality, “political correctness” is just being considerate.”

Haha, no. This is a technique of manipulation called minimization (it’s just this, what’s your problem deflection) common to gaslighters, similar to You would if you loved me, it’s only… They also catastrophize trivialities regularly and screech when their lack of perspective (concern and awful priorities) is pointed out. They can’t lobby for normal things, they need special things! Special victim groups and special causes for special people!
It’s heavily politically skewed far-Left. Those things called standards are mutually agreed, as rules of etiquette and enforced politely, otherwise you’re a controlling bitch trying to manipulate a person into behaving how you consider ‘acceptable’ and calling them deficient as a human (you’re a terrible person, you’re worse than X, please kill yourself dehumanization) when they dare exert agency. Control+lies+guilt-tripping = gaslighting.

Who let you make all the rules? I didn’t vote for you.

SJWs love discusssing gaslighting only to twist the definitions at the very end.
To make you feel bad about yourself for opposing disagreeing with them. Even when you don’t know them. That’s how toxic they are.
#SJWsAlwaysLie

“And telling people not to be hateful isn’t limiting their free speech. They can still legally say what they want.”

What a contradiction. Underline: there’s your problem, slut.

Why not ban other unpleasant emotions? Anger, guilt, shame, remorse!

I guess we can take speech law crimes off the books, if social shaming is the means of enforcement!

No?

And what about accusing people of various hate crimes when you aren’t a judge? Isn’t that slander? Libel? I wonder if the new surveillance powers will be applied to SJ monster mobs. Somehow doubt it.

You know, the longer you stay with bad people, the less people sympathize. I bet she was with that terrible person for months/years, yet expects sympathy? Why not leave, really? She knew damn well what she was doing and I’d bet money he dumped her and she pines for him. I mean, she wrote a whole article on someone she claims to be over. ….O.K.

Isn’t denial a human right?

Isn’t a slur a social construct? Shouldn’t it be taken as a compliment?

If she comes here looking for attention a definition of ‘slut’, here’s one.
Slut: You slept with someone you hated. There is something wrong with you.

Social justice – anti-social revenge against the happy.

Behavioural genetics continues to rustle SJW jimmies

http://uk.businessinsider.com/genes-play-role-in-antisocial-personality-disorder-2016-9

role?

A role?

Yes, like water has a role in osmosis.

“And a new study has begun the task of identifying which genes are most likely involved in ASPD, with significant success.”

Please start on borderlines and histrionics and narcissists. We can clear Parliament. We can do it.
Suck on your socialization hypothesis.

“This seems to be the first time researchers have made this leap with a personality disorder.

But just as interesting are the concerns the researchers express about how their research might be misused. “

Here we go. The guilt-trip.
The findings stand by themselves, it is a choice how we use them.

…In the past, claims about specific genes and violence have been — in the researchers’ words — “misused” by prosecutors as evidence that defendants are violent. And as more studies like this one link specific genes to the potential for violence, that danger only grows.

It revokes neither legal agency (you chose to act on it) nor commits crime (the act) on its own grounds (that would be like arresting redheads). Being born isn’t a crime, they’re being misleading.
This is about racial profiling, among others. Prediction is the trigger word. They can’t say it shouldn’t be studied but they want to.

Some people have the brain structure of psychopaths – they are not psychopaths.
Some people have a blue-eye allele – they do not have blue eyes.

This is simply a filter for early on in the process that might save lives, like estimating their height from a footprint.

Also, the amused expression on this woman typifies the K-type reaction to violence.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/walmart-customer-posts-footage-of-fatal-shooting-2016-9

She wants the party to start already. I don’t post about Ks enough but they rarely make the news.

Diversity makes a community more antisocial

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/32/1/54.full.pdf+html

That’s the basic finding.

Antisocial needn’t be clinical, that’s the polite term for criminal aggressions; its milder form is very common, it has all the features of our modern multicultural low-trust society.

teadrinking sipping pretentious sarcastic bitch mmhmm not my problem lol

Obviously, as a side effect, happiness goes down, along with the number of school places, hospital beds, expendable council funds, available housing, number of people with a common language, general class of the area etc.

For some strange reason, liberals, who love their happiness studies, refuse to report/record that data…

Aspergers (and other autism) is NOT genius

http://iqpersonalitygenius.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/the-relationship-between-aspergers.html

Clinically, Asperger’s doesn’t even exist anymore. It was removed from the DSM-V and subsumed under the Other category. Most autistics are not geniuses (pop culture myth) and further, savants (what most people mean) don’t need to have a mental illness. Some are genetic, some are accidental. The autistic savants are easier to spot.

Universities filter for the precocious, and I believe this is a core reason we don’t see geniuses in academia anymore (plus the excessively long training times, stifling environment, low wages like a slave and the expectation of hoop jumping like a prize dog).

A lot of reddit morons go around bragging about their Asperger’s because they believe it equates to genius. Don’t bother uttering the words ‘false equivalence’.

Academic genius (Binet IQ) doesn’t necessarily mean jack either. It’s about what you do with it. If you sit on your arse doing nothing and playing video games, you might as well be retarded. Creative genius is what people praise, not a G score on a piece of paper. They see it as a license to be lazy. More fool them.

On the other hand, most people with Asperger’s syndrome are not geniuses (not even partial or potential geniuses), even when they have exceptionally high intelligence – because they lack the intuitive style of thinking which is vital for real creativity.

In my experience, real genius has a drive, a grit and resilience toward their subject/s.
Motivation is not a problem for them. Ever. As one told me: I have found my life’s calling, why would I want to do anything else? 

Einstein wrote widely on intuition in science but don’t expect the supposed rationalists to listen from pride. They see it as a girly thing.

They are not anti-social either. The party-hard model of modernity is unnatural. They don’t buy into it. At most, they are asocial, they can do without, unless they’re selective. It’s a choice.

A genius is one whose main focus and motivation is not social, nor sexual; but instead abstract, asocial – whether artistic, scientific, technical, or whatever it may be.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/the-genius-famine-book-online-excerpts.html

Always happy to plug great work.

Whosoever is delighted in solitude is either a wild beast or a god. ~ Aristotle