Video: Brexit populism

It’s a Guardian thing to smear populism as a bad thing.
In a democracy, appealing to the public is a social good. The common man was said to have the best experience of what we’d now dub realpolitik.
They’re taking an anti-intellectual signalling stance that whatever the common man thinks must be inferior and wrong and yes, bigoted. That’s what they mean by bigoted = poor.

They keep conflating a University education with intelligence, an ironic mark of low intelligence.

This confirms the GE finding – the MSM is dead. People don’t listen to it anymore. We don’t trust it. We don’t trust our claimed betters, who are shills guarding their own wallets and selling their country down the river for thirty pieces of silver.


Yes, such a ‘crash’. Let’s ask English majors about the ForEx.

ah who knows mystery shrug eva green pfft haha

Lesson #1 for any lefties reading: the markets reflect risk profile, not the reality of whether something was a good idea or not. Uncertainty is a margin, and that error of profit can turn up too. If brokers knew exactly what would happen, there would be no trading. Crooked financiers bet on certainty because they rigged it. Uncertainty is good for literally everyone else. Think of it this way – the people you didn’t want to bail out just lost a fuckload of money.

Days later, they’re still trying to gaslight us.
They’re just stupid/They’re crazy/They can’t ignore us/They don’t know what’s good for them – terms an abuser would use.

The emotional blackmail was obvious after some rando killed a bitch of an MP but let’s be honest, nobody likes our MPs. Nobody. In any party. She failed in her duty to vote against punishing benefit cuts for the (real) disabled so I’d bet good British money that cunt is rotting in Hell.

We have rejected the Multicultural Project.

The Supranationalist Socialists are turning Stalin.

The Left always rediscovers its totalitarian roots eventually.

If they could, they’d line up every Leave voter against a wall and shoot us. Perhaps after a spot of gang rape a la Rotherham and The Red Army.

Another referendum would create a constitutional crisis because MPs are representatives, i.e. they gain authority on the basis of accepting the will of the People. In the Government leaflet, they agreed to enforce that decision.

I think Non-EU immigration will be raised to compensate cheap illegal labour.

Whatever happens, this country knows it did the right thing and the silent majority are sick of being bullied for existing.

We still have the non-Brits claiming to be more ‘real’ British than us. The anti-white sentiment is ticking up.

As for terrorism.

Threats to Brussels and Germany.

Well, we wanted our border control back. The fact they aren’t planning terrorism in London (cough Khan cough) is a victory for us. Those countries aren’t our business.

Pro: Racist officially means nothing.
Con: The people slinging it don’t yet comprehend their irrelevance.


What ‘tone policing’ is not


This is so offensive I don’t actually know where to start.

Three major points. Keep it brief.

  1. gaslighting is a serious form of psychological abuse and not a card to wave around to win an argument (i.e. you do not abuse someone by engaging in debate).
  2. gaslighting occurs over time with the mental unhinging of the victim, a chronic behaviour between a specific victim and predator. Harley Quinn is a good fictional example. It ruins lives, is no joking matter and the damage leaves a permanent mark. It is very serious and often counts as a crime when it can be proven.
  3. the people who say they want a polite conversation should be minding their manners the most, calling attention to someone’s shitty behaviour is not tone policing and certainly never gaslighting. However, SJWs are the biggest tone policers out there, say black not coloured, he in a dress is she, say POC not Paki, say gay not homo etc etc. If you use their words with sarcasm, they will literally try to play Tone Police and possibly threaten¬†to call the police (word use is not yet illegal, empty threats and wasting police time are).

I was tempted to put this on the wall of shame but it’s more productive to explain why it’s wrong.
Also, this ugly pig somehow manages to be uglier on the inside. Abuse victims are not rhetorical chips to play against people you dislike. I’ve seen the damage firsthand and I want to personally slap anyone who minimizes their trauma.

What was the argument, the topic?

A 15 year-old who thinks cutting its hair will make it a boy, responding to the correct claim it has a mental illness with ‘fuck you’.

done with this shit downton

Truly, it is the rhetoric of champions.

They’ve lost their minds, haven’t they?


Tone policing is when somebody with a higher social or other IQ insults you and all you can say in return is

“I don’t like your tone.”

That’s it. The sole ‘criticism’.

Nothing more, nothing less.

That is literally it.

If they have anything else to say, the tone thing is a passing comment. Especially if they reference a specific etiquette rule which has been breached (rationality).
Another form, often improperly used for the same task is “You’re being very rude.”
Commonly used by men losing a row with a woman when the fact she is a woman makes them rampantly insecure.
It never works to silence women (they use it in a bitchy gay way) because a gentleman would never say that (if both parties are doing it, neither can play high horse) nor get into a row in the first place. Debates and other meetings are mannered, respectable affairs and if you flout the rules, you automatically lose. This isn’t a bar at closing. This improper decorum should be pointed out after a few like infractions and once pointed out. with evidence, the debate or other meeting is already over. Arguably, it ended when the rules were broken. If you have to breach the etiquette, you are the loser.

Sometimes, the topic calls for rudeness e.g. using the word vagina in a conversation about abortion. It doesn’t change the logos of the argument, the facts. If it devolves to a verbal barrage of personal insults, that person is declaring their own loss in trying to poison the well.
The speaker knows this, but things like ‘omg rude’ and other synonyms as an excuse to end the conversation are cheap tricks to get out of explaining oneself when your turn comes around once you already volunteered to do so (making the user, in fact, the rude one).

Essentially it’s

“I’m losing and/or I’m wrong so instead of admitting it and/or bowing out gracefully, I’ll blame you (possibly gaslighting, actually); I don’t want to talk to you anymore and I will control this situation because you’re a Big Meanie and should feel ashamed of yourself, you’re a bad person for making me feelbad.”

If you keep pressing their triggered amygdala, they’ll go onto a long projecting rant about how rude, ugly and stupid you are. Hitting the three main notes of manners, looks and intelligence that liars often seek to conceal re themselves.

Gaslighting comics and other funnies



They have a tell. “No you’re not“, whatever the topic and they’ll try to make you feel stupid.
They try to tell you what you’re (supposedly¬†really) feeling, or that what you’re feeling is wrong. Feelings can’t be wrong, facts causing feelings can be wrong but again, there is a clear demarcation. It comes down to a 100% logical truth:¬†Another person cannot know your mind better than you can. Anyone who claims otherwise is gaslighting you.¬†

(For this reason, you will never hear a psychologist¬†deny your experience, they will simply work with what you’ve got).
However gaslighting may be claimed by people who want to lie for attention and later claim other reasons. If you’ve got proof their ‘memory’ is wrong, they’re in the wrong. Sometimes manipulative people want you to take their version of events, with varying levels of awareness about how much they’re manipulating. That’s right, many gaslighters have little awareness about what they’re doing, and deny-deny-deny if they feel the slightest gain is to be had. Narcissists may use gaslighting without a conscious awareness of what they’re doing, like a deceptive fugue, better known as a ‘selective memory’. They’ll manipulate and even with dripping knife in hand, will always play victim, sometimes claiming to be gaslight victims themselves, or justifying themselves commonly with¬†“She deserved it.” As if anyone deserves any form of abuse. That they can treat someone they ‘loved’ with such cruelty, someone intimate and personal, that they took personal revenge? You’re dealing with an omega, lowest of the low.
The two types of narcissist act differently but both play Victim to control others: the covert kind often self-diagnoses (no, don’t do that) to control the narrative of their own life and use this ‘diagnosis’ as an excuse to control others. Frequently female.
The overt narcissist Plays the Psychologist (without qualifications, obviously), diagnosing everyone who disagrees with them as some form of ‘crazy’ (as if mental illness is an insult and sign of personal weakness). This type are more often male and almost always think of themselves a superior version of Freud (who, as we know had Mother Issues), so they often go for women they believe they can break, psychologically, and put back together in their model of Perfect Woman. First they minimise your experience before completely denying it. Naturally, this never works and she leaves him eventually. They become more bitter and sadistic as time goes on. They like Freud because they mistake it for an easy way to blame with a veneer of social acceptability.
Bear in mind the key question: If this person is so crazy, why do you want them?

For couple there is a simple way to smoke the rats out.
If they are actually ‘crazy’, why don’t you want to see a psychologist together?
You see, they don’t want the psychologist to see their interactions, what they’re doing, because the psychologist has legally and socially valid opinions on what is crazy, although I have seen men try to gaslight female psychologists. Yep, scumbags. Exactly the same type to complain about how they never find the Right Woman (defined in real terms as a sex slave happy when emotionally abused, if you ask for details) and how it’s an injustice because they’re so ‘sweet’, when in the same bloody sentence they casually refer to us all as ‘whores’ (regardless of behavior). Does that sound oddly specific? Yes, yes it does. It’s a tell with 100% reliability. Berating the entire sex because you can’t get 1 (ONE) is desperate countersignalling (‘I didn’t want one anyway’… sure you didn’t).


“You’re (personal insult).” or “You’re not offended (as an order).” = dismissive, judgemental, definitive, gaslighting
I think (self-ownership) your¬†reasons¬†(distinction) for being offended (valid emotion) might (room for error) be mistaken (outcome).” = not gaslighting

gaslighting gaslight2

Translation: She doesn’t trust my version of events above her own direct experience of events. I’ve seen them deny text messages, honestly.
Of the man with ‘crazy exes’ ask yourself: what are the odds they were ALL crazy, if so, why did he pick them? Or did he make them crazy?


They tend to select introverted victims because those people naturally question themselves. If they’re too busy looking within for the problem, how can they look at the person next to them?
If you’re in this situation, you have my sympathy, ask yourself: Did these problems start when he showed up?
Gaslighters despise self-confidence, self-respect, any form of dignity (differentiates you from them) and happiness (when you’re happy, they’ll tear you down, test it by pretending to be happy for no reason and watch their reaction).
You need to establish clear personal boundaries and be willing to walk if you don’t get your needs met.


Somewhat connected to mansplaining before the concept was taken too far (dismissing a man’s opinion on a non-female-exclusive topic on the basis of being a man), really it’s where a man assumes he knows more on a topic, any topic – because he is a man, and attempts to browbeat you under the guise of teaching. This is like a subtle form of gaslighting but is light enough to be done naively, it can become true abuse with time and constitutes a red flag for this reason. The concept is amusing if only for all the mansplainers who deny it vociferously, then¬†make it personal when it wasn’t even aimed at them, which actually proves its validity as a concept. By definition, they hate it when you point out what they’re doing (like gaslighters).
Mansplaining: because a Y chromosome is not a qualification. 

Gaslighters do the opposite, it’s more advanced, they make everything about you because it’s personal.¬†Most egregious are the ones where he pretends you’re too dumb to understand his argument (why socialize at all then?) when you reject it because you happen to be an expert (gaslighters deny any form of expertise not connected with them), and/or use¬†their feelings¬†(bless) as the barometer for what yours should be (solipsism).

…The actual crazies deserve one another. Leave them be.

Sorry this turned into an advice post but I thought What If someone in that scenario found this page by accident and couldn’t help myself.

Another final test for a gaslighter is to joke they’re gaslighting you, while they’re doing it. If they fly into a rage (and know exactly what that is), that’s a positive. “How could you?” they’ll turn. If they look confused, “Why?” they may be in denial or Mr Expert may be playing dumb, something along the lines of “I think I know my own mind better than you” is appropriate, delivered cheekily. If they logically explain why they aren’t, with proof, they’re either fine or a sociopath (good at rationalization, most people can’t tell the difference between that and logic).

Link: Gaslighting Techniques

The standard misconceptions about gaslighting are twofold;

  1. it’s lying, especially compulsive, intense and frequent
  2. it’s playing Doctor and telling them they’re mentally ill because it’s harder to disprove

There is a teeny grain of truth to these but often the opposite is more truthful.

For the first, it’s far more often subtle but sustained over time e.g. “You know how you forget things sometimes? We talked about this, yes, we did.”

Compulsive lies are comparatively easy to spot, especially when you have proof of what they said (video, text). A compulsive liar will then call the recording wrong.

Gaslighters tend to escalate over time, but drip-drop over years e.g. “You forgot what drink I wanted. Why didn’t you cook dinner tonight? The appointment was yesterday. You sold the car, that was your idea. If you hate it, maybe there’s a good reason.” See how it builds up, from fairly innocuous to insidious.

The second point is grating. There are people qualified to diagnose and they are not in the wrong, you’re free to get second, third, hundredth opinions. If you are a patient or client, you are the passive party in that power dynamic, either accept it so we can work together¬†or get out of my office. You’re paying for that expertise, hence The Wall (of qualifications). It seems funny and vain to outsiders but sometimes very disturbed people need reminding who is boss. Clients having a particularly troublesome time (very high defenses, need a lot of help) can try to play the shrink, actually emotionally abuse them, at which point body language says it all (looks to Wall, looks at client).

However, if a person has no formal qualifications whatsoever, yes, that is gaslighting. Totally fair claim there. Personally, I am revolted to see laymen go around spouting off like they think they’re Freud (always men, never seen otherwise, often attacking women, often saying they were raped and/or are whores, baseless defamation attacks, it’s sick).

You wouldn’t go around telling people they have diabetes cos they’re being moody, don’t go round telling them they have depression, okay? (see footnote) No, reading wikipedia like a checklist doesn’t count, and the formal bullet lists aren’t supposed to be read as a checklist anyway, or everybody would self-diagnose and we’d never need any type of doctor ever again, just WebMD.
Assuming you have a personal relationship with that person (to notice this stuff in the wild, outside the safety of The Room), there is a system both subtle and ethical: gently verbally test how bad the possible symptoms are. Bring these to their attention, in a non-judgemental way. Encourage them to see an¬†independent¬†third party. Like a regular check-up.¬†This is not an insult, because merely having a mental illness is not insulting, and you’re already suffering, it can’t get much worse but deliberately making your social circle suffer because you feel ashamed about getting treatment is wrong and requires the client take responsibility – by seeing somebody they’ve never met (try to claim bias there).

If the professional says they’re fine, the person calling it out should shut up on the topic. A gaslighter would not.

There is a fatal flaw to the logic of the intimate gaslighter.

If they’re so crazy and awful, why do you want to be with them?

A handy way to spot if someone has qualifications (which include training on how to handle these incidents) is to see if they immediately jump to an answer when the person is currently not diagnosed with anything. That’s projection and it tends to follow trends in pop psychology e.g. anxiety and PTSD are having a moment. If, however, they tentatively venture that you might have some symptoms (which they point out and explain their reasoning) and you should get it ruled out¬†by somebody else? You’re looking at a professional.

While we’re here, someone can act crazy without being mentally ill (which is 100% their fault for being an adult brat) and be mentally ill but not act crazy (usually because their treatment plan is the real deal). Somebody calling you crazy might not be gaslighting you, unless they’re trying to change your behaviour in a negative direction (less autonomy, more stress) to their personal benefit¬†and gaslighters have a long line of victims, so note if that’s their Go-To ‘insult’ based on your demo (sex, race, whatever), which again, betrays an ignorance of whatever the fuck they claim to be talking about, cos it is certainly not¬†psychology.

Footnote: there is word of a blood test for depression on the medical horizon.

Are you new to the Manosphere?

Allow me to instruct you. See that link you came from? Run. Run back as fast as you can. It’s dead. It’s over. The cancer is malignant.

It’s become a scam.

It’s like the anti-lifestyle blog for hipster depressives. My pain isn’t like your pain!

We’re special because we see the truth!

The world is awful and hates us, we haven’t made any stupid decisions!

It’s like the sad male answer to Oprah. It tells you everything you wanna hear. There are many feminist analogues, and that’s why they hate them so much, the similarity smarts their fragile ego e.g. ROK is the male Jezebel. Prove me wrong.

You know the name is ironic?

I have never met a man in the manosphere.

Plenty of entitled shrill nags bitter about other’s happiness. Their dream is to make other people as hopeless as they are. They’ll dissemble and twist to do it. They want you to stop trying. They tell you it’s impossible. Whatever plans you had, the Big Bad is keeping you down. Be miserable and give them money. It’s such a con. Few provide value. It’s the internet equivalent of subprime – they don’t believe in what they’re selling and they don’t believe in anything. They wear their apathy and nihilism with pride. They’re full of pride and hollow of accomplishment. Hedonism is the only thing that can touch them, past the Mommy Issues and blunted affect. Their vision for the future is bleak, their fallacies predictable and notably, success is a joke to them. They mock you for believing in it. They tell you it will never happen, whatever you wanted.

Tell them about a happy marriage. They’ll laugh.

Tell them about true love. They’ll deride you.

Tell them about a stable family life. They’ll probably try and gaslight you into thinking your wife has been cheating with the milkman.

Oh, they don’t believe it. They hope they’re¬†right or you destroy their precious worldview. The one where they’re unhappy because they fucked up, repeatedly. You can’t improve your life until you admit you did something wrong with it. They’re insecure and cannot be saved from themselves. They need a shrink. They don’t laugh at other people, not really, they’re so self-loathing they project out to other people what they hate and laugh at themselves, twisting it into proof of their own superiority. You’re married? Lol they’re single and loving it. You’re single? Lol they’re covered in women, so alpha. You’re seeing someone? Lol they know she’s gonna ruin you.

You cannot win.

You know what they say about women? Anytime a woman is happy, they complain. It hurts them to see a woman happy, whatever the cause. That’s how you know they’re misogynists and have issues with their mother. Btw, they often resort to childish psychodynamic explanations of people they dislike, often involving rape, despite holding no qualifications on the subject, clearly. Mental illness isn’t an insult but they disgustingly use it like one. They will twist anything good into something evil.

A woman has no job? Parasite. A woman is a mother? Shrew. A woman is part-time? Bad mother. A woman is in a low wage job helping to pay the bills? Emasculating her husband. A woman gets welfare? Thief. A woman has a high wage job? She’s ‘stolen’ it from men. A woman contributes to society with her intelligence? That doesn’t prove anything, but she probably slept her way to the top.

We cannot win.

Note: they will play the slut! accusation card regardless of overwhelming evidence against this. That’s why they’re cunts. Women don’t need a second, thanks.

These people are toxic. Some are sociopaths controlling the others, but mainly they’re spergs looking for a system to explain away their self-created pain. If you act stupid, bad things happen. If you insult women, you’ll repel them. They’re collectively too dumb to ever realize this, let alone acknowledge it openly and self-correct.

Know why?

All the real ones have left, long ago. We’re left with the broken rejects. You see, the manosphere should be a stop along the road. Like a convenience store, you get in, you get exactly what you need and you get out. You aren’t supposed to hang around at the bar pontificating on your failure as an adult in the easiest century ever (and using your sex as an excuse, how cheap). Past a certain age (20, the age is 20) you have to stop blaming other people. They’re full of contradictions ruining their lives e.g.

Men are the best and naturally good at everything.
Women somehow have the power and intelligence to keep us down.


We need more traditional women to improve society and boost fertility.
Women are useless inferior bothers who ruin your life and intelligence/creativity are sex-exclusive because fuck neurological proof to the contrary.

Women are crazy.
Men keep killing themselves and practically everyone else and this is evil and women’s fault.

Women are the sex without sexual self control. A man needs to cheat – in his marriage. Ignore the Ashley Madison data on male cheats. Also, women are prudes with broken libido. A woman who won’t have sex with us is a whore.¬†

and the increasingly shrill refrain recently

hur derp Women never invented anything and having babies¬†[note: pro-creation, the ultimate creation]¬†is all they’re good for.
We should reinforce the ban on letting women go to University again, they aren’t dumb as we lied about, they’re actually making us look bad.

Don’t bother pointing this out, I already explained the IQ thing for voting if they bothered to pick up a bloody book. The average female IQ is actually higher than the average male,as tested and admitted by a male researcher but don’t bother trying to show them real data. They’re in a sex supremacy movement, just like the feminists. That is why they fail. They don’t get, it isn’t a competition. If a woman contributes to society in STEM then everybody wins! (There are many women in STEM actually, if they bothered to go to a convention instead of whining about muh Tesla online like IFLSers they could meet us, see footnote).

Can you read this? It means if we went back to a merit based system, one based on IQ, then women would control elections, as more men would be disqualified. As for one based on property, women live longer aka we inherit, bitches!

They’re dumb enough to look up to psychopaths. The same guys often dead or in jail before 40.

The ‘naturals’ as they call them, in spite of self-improvement work common to everyone, those guys don’t sit around angrily typing on keyboards about what a man really is like a conspiracy nut or what a woman should be if only XYZ. No. They’re out there being it. They’re out there living it. They’re doing things to improve the world. Blogging is navel-gazing narcissism, no better morally than women talking at a coffee shop, we all know that. They aren’t pushing a product and they certainly aren’t pushing themselves, these manboys are like makeup bloggers who believe in personal branding to excuse their narcissism. It’s such a gamma thing to go around correcting everyone when your moral authority is zero and strutting around with your cognitive distortions carefully crafted to make you feel better while calling everybody else deluded.

The frequent voices of the manosphere are the archetype of modern Peter Pan. The r-type’s ideal. They will say and do anything to avoid responsibility. Hence, manboys. They dispute male duties even exist (laughably trying to dub that sexist, well yeah…, but also they say they believe in gender roles, I know) because that’s dressed in overalls and looks like work. But oh, they’ll make some bitchy comment about better men who worked in the mines or died in a war so they can denigrate the grand-daughters of those men or have some legally questionable¬†bad¬†sex with them. They look like men but they don’t think, feel or act like one. There isn’t a moral compass.¬†Utterly useless to any real society and their social lives match, they’re often the dregs that enjoy going to clubs, ffs. Who primarily socializes in a place too dark to see, too loud to hear and with such terrible music?

Test: You know will know an r-type by his positive, victimless attitude to promiscuity. 

Bonus: And they’re bizarrely quiet on the subject of cheats.¬†Cliff notes: If a man cheats, good, because I am man and free after holy vows. If a woman cheats, evil, because woman is my property as it says in the vows.¬†

If you want to know whether to trust a man look at his personal history. Look at what he made out of his life. If he’s what, 30+ and still a loser? You want to take advice from this person, seriously? Don’t listen to what he says until you like what he’s done. It’s all theory to him and he’ll chuck it out as soon as it makes him feel bad about himself. He’s in a little bubble like a weeaboo. You don’t take marriage advice from the guy who thinks it’s a prison, the gamophobe. You don’t take advice on women from a man who has never kept one beyond the honeymoon period. If a man says all women are trash, what does it say that they were attracted to him? You don’t take career advice from a blogger. This should all be common sense.

It’s a stream of outrage porn and a long string of self-pitying weak-willed excuses to remain a loser. My, so many girls must be begging to lock down that bundle of issues! I bet he wants you to fold his underpants and cut his crusts too, just like Mommy did. Because marrying your Mother to look after you and being sexually attracted to that image isn’t creepy whatsoever.

I cannot think of a single man in the usual swirl of the manosphere and it’s drama that would make a drag queen diva blush, who is qualified to give traditional advice. None of them have lived it. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude it is generally a scam. Think about it this way: if it’s so obvious or they’re so kind-hearted, why must you keep opening your wallet? Lovebombing.

It’s a personality cult. There, I said it.


Footnote: STEM is fine!

‚ÄúNone of those things are observable,‚ÄĚ Hira says. ‚ÄúIn fact, they‚Äôre operating in the opposite way.‚ÄĚ
Read it and weep.

You have been replaced. You were inferior to the new team, that’s capitalism. You let yourself be replaced. That’s a personal failure and rather humiliating.

Name ONE decent male inventor of the past century and I’ll let you play the Tesla card. He’s your version of Jezebel’s Lovelace card but at least her code worked.

10 Gaslighting Signs


  1. The Meaning of ‚ÄúNormal‚ÄĚ Changes

This is one of the most obvious signs of gaslighting. If someone tries to tell you something is normal when you think it is wrong, you need to get out of that relationship.

This is like if a person does not want to take the next step in a relationship and is called a prude rather than accepting their comfort levels. Keep in mind abusers are not only in romantic relationships but even professional relationships.

p.s.¬†It isn’t gaslighting if you request they get independently checked out by someone with your formal qualifications. I have encountered people dipshit enough to call “gaslight!”and clutch their pearls when I’ve recommended this. …It’s good mental hygiene. These are the same people who think self-diagnosis counts btw.