Free to Do As We Tell You

sex_robots

The entitlement is astonishing.

What is the argument?

Men aren’t permitted to own property?
Men aren’t permitted to not give women attention?
Men aren’t permitted to not be legally extorted in court during divorce?
Men aren’t permitted to not be involuntary servants paying alimony?
Men aren’t permitted to not be involuntary servants paying child support?
Men aren’t permitted to not spend their money on women?
Men aren’t permitted to have alternatives to women?

It’s his money: if he would prefer a sex doll or a robot over a real woman, in order to avoid being murdered, mutilated, raped, legally extorted inside a court of law or become an involuntary servant paying forth alimony or paying child support for children which aren’t his; that’s his choice.

What is your argument against him?

70e

I heard the same protestations about sex dolls. Robots will eventually have human like AI, or a semblance of it. Sex dolls however are vacant and blank, they cannot move or say anything.

Let me put this past you and see if it sinks into your psyche.

If men find they are better treated by an object: as compared to a real woman – what does that say about how women commonly treat their male partners?

If the objective in life is not to reduce suffering but to increase happiness, and we take this as axiomatic truth: why are these men choosing sex dolls?

On a scale of positive 10 to negative 10: an inanimate object is 0. If an inanimate, neutral, zero is preferable to actual women on a scale of positive 10 to negative 10: where does that place women? they can’t subsist on the positive side of that scale according to that axiom.

What does that say about how women commonly treat their male partners?

On a scale of positive 10 to negative 10: an inanimate, neutral, 0 isn’t positive; but at least it isn’t negative.

they-actually-made-the-real-vibrator-emoji-into-a-for-23812104

By the way…. can’t help but notice you’re not making the same arguments against dildos, vibrators or sybians… That’s a bit interesting now isn’t it? It’s not a problem if women saddle up to something with PANASONIC scrolled across the side which consumes more power than an electric scooter driving at 55 mph down the interstate. No, that’s just fine.

Men however, oh they had better give endless attention to women regardless of how corrupted the marriage, divorce, alimony and custodial laws are. Men just have to suck it up devoting time and resources to women.

5175a77606d84s137561

V-card Pass Strikes Again

kayak_killer

From the same article.

kayak_killer2

Now… lets do the math on this shall we?

simple-008

1, She also admitted she knew that the ring for his paddle was missing, and that he was not wearing a life vest or a wet suit despite heading into dangerously cold and rough conditions. Forethought.

2, She admitted that she pulled the pl​​ug from husband-to-be Vincent Viafore’s boat before watching him drown as his kayak capsized during a boating trip in April 2015. Premeditation.

3, “I wanted him dead and now he’s gone,” she told cops during a lengthy 2015 interrogation. “And I’m OK with it,” she added. Malice.

The Free Legal Dictionary “first degree murder
n. although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.”

1, She also admitted she knew that the ring for his paddle was missing, and that he was not wearing a life vest or a wet suit despite heading into dangerously cold and rough conditions. Forethought.

2, She admitted that she pulled the pl​​ug from husband-to-be Vincent Viafore’s boat before watching him drown as his kayak capsized during a boating trip in April 2015. Premeditation.

3, “I wanted him dead and now he’s gone,” she told cops during a lengthy 2015 interrogation. “And I’m OK with it,” she added. Malice.

FindLaw.com “First Degree Murder: Definition
“In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or “lying in wait” for the victim. For example, Dan comes home to find his wife in bed with Victor. Three days later, Dan waits behind a tree near Victor’s front door. When Victor comes out of his house, Dan shoots and kills him.”

1, She also admitted she knew that the ring for his paddle was missing, and that he was not wearing a life vest or a wet suit despite heading into dangerously cold and rough conditions. Forethought.

2, She admitted that she pulled the pl​​ug from husband-to-be Vincent Viafore’s boat before watching him drown as his kayak capsized during a boating trip in April 2015. Premeditation.

3, “I wanted him dead and now he’s gone,” she told cops during a lengthy 2015 interrogation. “And I’m OK with it,” she added. Malice.

Dictionary.com Definition “First Degree Murder
“Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder) and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder)

1, She also admitted she knew that the ring for his paddle was missing, and that he was not wearing a life vest or a wet suit despite heading into dangerously cold and rough conditions. Forethought.

2, She admitted that she pulled the pl​​ug from husband-to-be Vincent Viafore’s boat before watching him drown as his kayak capsized during a boating trip in April 2015. Premeditation.

3, “I wanted him dead and now he’s gone,” she told cops during a lengthy 2015 interrogation. “And I’m OK with it,” she added. Malice.

Cornell University definition “First Degree Murder
The intentional killing of another person by someone who has acted willfully, deliberately, or with planning. All murder that is committed with poison or by lying in wait is first degree murder.

1, She also admitted she knew that the ring for his paddle was missing, and that he was not wearing a life vest or a wet suit despite heading into dangerously cold and rough conditions. Forethought.

2, She admitted that she pulled the pl​​ug from husband-to-be Vincent Viafore’s boat before watching him drown as his kayak capsized during a boating trip in April 2015. Premeditation.

3, “I wanted him dead and now he’s gone,” she told cops during a lengthy 2015 interrogation. “And I’m OK with it,” she added. Malice.

USLegal.com “First Degree Murder Law and Legal Definition
First degree murder is defined by federal and state laws, which vary by state, but generally define it as a killing which is deliberate and premeditated. Many states define first degree murder as a killing committed in connection with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, or involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child or a police officer), or certain weapons, particularly a gun. It is distinguished from second degree murder, which usually does not require premeditation, and from manslaughter, which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.”

2-24

According to multiple sources on the definition of what constitutes First degree murder: and the killer’s own admissions; she committed first degree murder. Her own admissions, under the statutes of the law and what constitutes first degree murder: undeniable quantify the case as a clear cut case of first degree murder complete with admission of guilt / confession.

Her own admissions prove beyond the shadow of a doubt she acted with premeditation, out of malice and intentionally murdered him. This is unabashedly first degree murder yet she will get 4 years or less and deportation back to Latvia.

This is why men are going MGTOW, as stated in my article “No, Not All Women Are Like That“:

“We know very well Not All Women Are Like That (NAWALT): but all women are given the opportunity to be like that and what’s more their actions will be given a legal sanction. All due to how the law has been rewritten in the past 50 years.”

55566f980423bdb8568b4569

Psychopathic Misinformation

For future references: a lot of what Verstappen has written for this video: is wrong.

Time 1:59. Empathy is not the reason we are inspired by works of art or music. Art and music activate the pleasure centers in the brain releasing endorphins. Empathy is a result of the mirror neurons: unrelated phenomena. Sad art, music or poetry can activate the mirror neurons if the stimuli is personified in some way. However, mirror neurons are unnecessary for aesthetic enjoyment.

Minute 2:20. lacking empathy makes psychopaths neither truly human nor truly alive. This is woo woo. A person doesn’t need to be assaulted by psychic pain of others in order to feel alive. Quit projecting your suffering martyr god syndrome onto scientific research.

Minute 2:32 List of joyous interactions and psychopaths cannot understand what all the fuss is about. Understand, yes, necessarily care, no. Psychopaths themselves often engage in a multitude of exactly the same activities mentioned for their own pleasure. they just don’t feel what you feel and they probably don’t care what you feel when you engage in those same interactions. Verstappen is confusing psychopathy for autism. An autistic would not understand what all the fuss is about because of their hypo-mentalism.

Head in Hands

Minute 2:51. yes psychopaths understand why: the reason -why- they should act this way, is to fit in. They understand, conceptually, why people act in various ways. they don’t -feel- the emotional urges which cause people to act in those ways.

Minute 4:18 Psychopaths can and do understand how and why the things they do can and or will be hurtful to others. They don’t *care* that it’s hurtful. For a feeling person it’s easier to rationalize that someone wouldn’t understand what they’re doing would hurt others: because the idea that psychopaths would full well understand and do it anyway – is nearly unthinkable for an emotional person. It’s still wrong, they know – and they don’t care. Unless the other party’s response harms or impedes the psychopath in some way: they do not care. If it doesn’t negatively effect the psychopath in some way: the psychopath does not give a damn.

Minute 4:31. Again – he trips over his emotionalism. “Psychopaths are not easily disturbed by feelings of guilt.” It’s a simple concept: you cannot be disturbed – by emotions – you do not have. Psychopaths lack empathy, they do not *feel* remorse, they do not *feel* guilt. They are not simply resistant to feeling guilty: they don’t feel guilt. It’s an emotion they do not have.

Minute 5: the whole speech about passion is utterly wrong. Psychopaths can in fact have the drive necessary to reach the top tier echelon of fields of human endeavor. Be that music, theater, medicine or the sciences. Josef Mengele is believed to have been a psychopath: his gruesome and horrendous human experimentation was not only on the cutting edge of medical science but his research on twins in particular advanced the study of genetics 30 years or more. The hallmark traits of psychopathy are lack of empathy and lack of remorse: the day and in fact the hour, in fact WHILE the first atomic weapon was used to destroy millions of lives, Julius Robert Oppenheimer is reported to have been completely aware that his creation – the device he was the lead physicist and architect of, was about to destroy an unfathomable number of lives in the blink of an eye, was sitting in his office, waiting for news of the air mission’s success while playing cats cradle with some string to pass the time as he waited for the report. Biding time to hear that the bomb was a success, completely aware his creation was about to vaporize hundreds of thousands of lives and lethally irradiate hundreds of thousands more – and waiting to hear that it worked was such a blase experience that he was playing with some string, bored. Oppenheimer was among the top 5 physicists of his generation. I reiterate, The whole speech about passion is utterly wrong.

flat,1000x1000,075,f

Minute 7:07 “Rape is good and the date is bad” – No, no, no. You’re horribly off the mark. The thought process is not that “rape is good and the date is bad” or theft is good and you are bad. It’s “I’m going to take what I want – because I want it.” There’s not reflection upon the other person as being bad for denying or having what the psychopath wants. Other people are just things, small, easily destroyed toys. They’re inconsequential. There’s no reflection upon them, they don’t matter. the psychopath takes what he or she wants – simply because he or she wants it. That’s all. Other factors are inconsequential. As far as the psychopath is concerned: you the victim – don’t matter. The psychopath can step on you without even noticing, you’re a bug underfoot. You don’t matter, you may as well not even be real.

Minute 7:25 “If this strikes the reader as insane, it’s because it is.” – No, it isn’t. Insanity is not a medical diagnosis, it’s a legal term. Insanity is the inability to determine fantasy from reality. Psychopaths are perfectly sane: they’re just not governed by the same inherent or innate restraints which are developed over time naturally due to mirror neuron induced empathy. Successful psychopaths curb their impulses by means of mental processes, forcing themselves to consider consequences of actions. As where normal people don’t do bad things because it makes them feel bad. Successful psychopaths don’t do bad things, or avoid being caught, because the consequences of said action are undesirable.

Minute 7:49 “Living at the expense of the rest of humanity would be impossible in a rational society” – Apparently you’ve never heard of welfare, socialism or communism. Welfare literally is a person living at the expense of the rest of humanity. It’s an uncharitable way to define it: but it is 100% accurate. It’s a person who’s existence is being paid for by the work and earnings of everyone else. Didn’t really think that statement through did ya, Verstappen?

All of the people who liked this video and I’m not even 8 minutes in, it’s 37 and a half minutes long. This guy Stefan Verstappen is a complete hack shilling horse manure based on a veritable smorgasbord of broken premises. This is fucking awful. I could make a video about how this video is wrong – but it would either be a 3-4 hour video or I’d have to splice it into multiple videos an hour long to show all of the falsehoods.

a0c

Hippie Unicornists

hippie_commies

Who’s going to build the cottages?
Who’s going to harvest the materials for the cottages?
Who’s going to manufacture the tools necessary to harvest those materials?
Who’s going to harvest the materials necessary to make the tools necessary to harvest the materials for the cottages?
Who’s going to transport the materials for the cottages from where those materials are harvested?
Who’s going to manufacture the form of transportation needed to ship the materials for the cottages?
Who’s going to manufacture the parts necessary to manufacture the transportation necessary to ship the materials for the cottages?
Who’s going to harvest the materials necessary to manufacture the parts necessary to manufacture the transportation necessary to ship the materials necessary to build the cottages?

On and on and on…. Just the cottages alone could require a whole book to asking “Who’s going to do X” over and over and over again.

Then a second book to ask how you are going to create this music….

Then I have to point out: you’re either using slavery or all of these people involved: have to be paid in exchange for them agreeing to do work for you.

Know what happens then? You haven’t re-done society: it’s exactly the way it is. With a vast array of lower classes performing menial, often dangerous, physical labor, followed by a middle class doing production supporting an elite class at the very top who benefit from everyone else’s work. Which is precisely what this image is complaining about.

We do not star trek replicators yet: nothing is free. everything requires work: and someone is going to have to do that work in order to produce anything.

unicornists

Nails. Just nails – for nailing wood planks together to create a cottage. Just the nails, nothing else – just the nails.

To create that one category of item. just that. A group of people far away mined iron ore. A group of people loaded that ore, eventually, onto a fleet of trucks. People drove those trucks to ports. A group of people unloaded those trucks on tanker ships. A group of people manned and operated those ships somewhere else.

A group of people unloaded those ships onto trucks. A group of people drove those fleets of trucks to steel mills. Where a group of people melded down that iron ore and some of it was used to make nails. A group of people then packaged up those nails for shipping. A group of people loaded those nails onto a fleet of trucks. A group of people drove those trucks, likely to warehouses.

A group of people unloaded those trucks and stored the nails in large shipment lots inside warehouses. A group of people receiving orders and keeping track of inventory got the order for those nails. A group of people then took that shipment of nails out of it’s place in the warehouse and loaded it onto a truck, headed for a specific destination. A person drove that truck to that specific destination, an outlet store such as lowes or menards or home depot.

A group of people unloaded that truck into their back room. A group of people then broke down that load and re-stocked their inventory on the sales floor. Where it can be picked up by a consumer: and the nails will be scanned for purchase by another person at the check out line.

That’s – just – nails. Not any of that other technology; which was largely manufactured and brought into existence in the exact same way. Just the nails.

People who have absolutely 0 idea about how the world functions or how goods arrive on the shelves from which they purchase: have no business making proposals about re-designing society.

Unicornists 2.o: The Law

anarchy23

“Laws are arbitrary dictates to control a population”

Here we go again, Unicornists hard at work shilling propagandist Utopian horse manure.

Consider: the representative chosen for theFREETHOUGHTPROJECT banner there is female. Now if Laws are simply arbitrary to control a population, which is their claim: then I should be able to rape and murder that young lady, at will, simply because I feel like it.

Oh, wait: maybe “laws” aren’t simply arbitrary; but were in fact established as a means with which to protect the rights of the individual against the possible violation of same by others.

Whoopsy, there goes the narrative.

Let’s take it one step further. thefreethoughtproject.com is registered through godaddy.com. Now suppose I offer to pay godaddy MORE money than thefreethoughtproject.com for that address. Effectively shutting down thefreethoughtproject – just because I feel like it. If “Laws are arbitrary dictates to control a population” – than the thefreethoughtproject has no right to complain do they?

Oh…. but they have a contract which guarantees them the use of that domain for X amount of time: and if godaddy violated that contract they’d be violating thefreethoughtproject’s rights….

Whoopsy, there goes the narrative.

Let’s go even further… thefreethoughtproject posts a great deal about police brutality and other such crimes: suppose law enforcement simply decides to shut down thefreethoughtproject. That would be a serious violation of thefreethoughtproject’s first amendment rights.

Now If “Laws are arbitrary dictates to control a population” – why don’t the police simply shut them down?

4518621+_9f938165b0b5a9799fefdae77e3f8da1

Oh, poor little anarchist narrative – laws were in fact established as a means with which to protect the rights of the individual against the possible violation of same by others. It is the existence of the first amendment of the constitution which projects thefreethoughtproject FROM being simply shut down by the government or one of it’s institutions.

“The Free Thought Project’s” own continued existence in spite of the fact that they have so much to say about the state, rather than it being arbitrarily shut down: proves the efficacy of the first amendment and constitutional law; also proving, in and of itself and it’s continued existence: an unabashed example that law in and of itself is not simply arbitrary. Laws were in fact established as a means with which to protect the rights of the individual against the possible violation of same by others.

“The Free Thought Project” claims the law is arbitrary and only a means for controlling the population: while SIMULTANEOUSLY taking advantage of the fact that it is only the law which permits them produce such blatant propaganda in the first place. Without the law protecting their freedom of speech: they would be UNABLE to produce this exact propaganda.

The first amendment of the constitution is the LAW which protects the free thought project from being shut down: *WHILE CLAIMING* that laws exist only as a mean with which to control the population.

Somehow…. they don’t see the irony…..

unicornists

Evasion of Reality on Taxes

Trumptax2.png

Leftist liars are horribly easy to expose: I could do this all day.

Leftists are the most innumerate group of people I know to exist. There are brain dead hillbillies who contemplate Austrian economics better than leftists because they routinely calculate mixtures of fuel ratios in engine blocks or cost analyses when dealing backwoods moonshine illegally.

Yes: I just quantified an apparent absurdity as being objectively provable.

Trumptax3

I picked the low hanging fruit in the above image by pointing out the most blatant lie, but not the more inherent deception. Specifically to make the image small, if I’d added more text it would have been longer than the original image, making it more difficult to meme.

The leftist image conflates corporate money with personal income. Trump’s tax plan only drops the highest tax bracket from 39.60% (currently) to 35%. By comparison, and in stark contrast to what the leftist’s are claiming: trump’s tax plan provides a BIGGER tax cut to working class 99%’er Americans than it does for the rich. The “99%’ers” get a 5% tax cut, the “1%’ers” get a 4.60% tax cut.

The biggest tax cut is upon business tax (all businesses, corporations of sidewalk hot dog vendor): dropping the tax rate from 35% (currently) to 15%.

Which is causing leftists to shit in their hands and throw it like monkeys in a zoo: because god forbid business owners be able to increase profit margins with which to invest in expansion (creating jobs), pay their workers better (increasing median income), compete with foreign goods (increasing GDP) or lower prices (reducing consumer price index and increasing standard of living for everyone).

sarcasm-mode-on-long-sleeve-shirts-men-s-premium-longsleeve-shirt

That’s all just further evidence that he’s the spawn of Satan who once spent a billion dollars on building a time machine so he could shoot Kennedy. You can actually see him in the Zapruder film, there’s 3 frames of a blonde comb over poking over the fence of the grassy knoll.

However in the above image: the leftists are *COMBINING* the money saved from corporate tax with the personal income of the people depicted. Instead of each person being paid a salary and that salary (along with other forms of employment or gigs) being their personal income. By combining money which is not actually theirs with money which is theirs: they’re falsely presenting those astronomical numbers.

The Walton’s for example: are all three collectively only worth $8.7 billion: total, as of LAST YEAR. The number quoted above is how money money will be saved by all the corporations (walmart, sams club, etc.) which will be saved: of which the Walton’s, between the 3, only own 50% of.

However: they money taken in by those corporations are not the soul property of the Walton family. The Walton family only get’s paid -by- those corporations in dividends for their stock ownership and Salaries for the two sons who still work in the company. Their personal wealth only just reached $8.7 billion, combined, total.

That’s the level of deception involved. Complete lies combined with false conflations: and it works on leftists because they are the most mathematically challenged form of sentient life to walk the face of the Earth since the invention of the abacus.

10534154_824923267548143_7113036006521428770_n

Actual common core math problem, answered by child,
corrected by teacher: then photographed by the child’s mother.

Day, Vox. SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police (Kindle Locations 1709-1714). Castalia House. Kindle Edition.

“There is nothing SJWs fear more than a patient enemy who methodically documents their words and actions because they know that their lies will inevitably be exposed and used against them.

Don’t forget the First Law. SJWs always lie! Don’t take anything they say for granted, not even if it appears to be correctly sourced and cited. I cannot tell you how many times I have gone to verify something an SJW has confidently asserted to be true and discovered that he either lied, exaggerated, or completely mischaracterized the evidence upon which he was supposedly relying. Go through everything an SJW says with a fine-tooth comb, and document all the various “errors” and misrepresentations you will find. They will be there. I guarantee it.”

Meme’d here for your convenience, share at will and enjoy.

sjws_document

Weaponized Logical Fallacy

The article relies on a logical fallacy which is often exploited by people who do not comprehend the correct use of it.

Logical Fallacy: “Correlation does not equal Causation”.

This is true, but very misleading to people who don’t actually study any topic in which the scientific method is utilized. More aptly stated “Correlation does not necessarily equal Causation.” The fallacy itself only stipulates an uncertainty principle in that datum provided does not prove a causal effect: until experimentation proves or disproves that the correlation is causal.

That’s why experimentation to determine causal effects is necessary.

People who do not understand this tend to throw out the Correlation/Causation fallacy in order to simply ignore any evidence supporting a possibility which they do not wish to capitulate to. It’s a way to simply ignore and suppress something inconvenient.

6217869031_dd6e3b3605_b

What they are essentially attempting to do is observe the apple falling on Newton’s head and exclaim “That means nothing, just because the apple dislodged from the tree and then hit you on the head doesn’t mean anything. Correlation does not equal causation.”

The so called “butterfly effect”, is a thought experiment in correlation verses causation: or so the anti-reason front would suggest. It’s actually false on it’s face because we know how much atmosphere can be displaced by a butterfly’s wings and we know what exterior pressure and gravity are, therefore we know how far that force moves. The butterfly pushes itself through the atmosphere: it doesn’t push space-time in the direction it wishes to go.

Leftists feminist academics and advocates have been pushing against reason, against knowledge, against the enlightenment, against logic and against the very concept of objective truth for a very long time. This article is just an example there of. They resorted to the “correlation does not equal causation” fallacy as a weapon to deny that which is objectively provable.

doublethinking

Since long term studies of booze-babes verse teetotaler-tots cannot actually be performed, ethically, you cannot gather long term datum absolutely proving beyond the slightest doubt that the booze-babes are getting hammered in the womb and coming out hung over and malformed far more often than the granola crunching vitamin sufficient teetotaler-tots – you cannot produce an absolute proof. You can show a probability: but not a proof.

It does not matter how great that probability is: you do not have an absolute proof because you cannot conduct the necessary studies required to generate it. So based upon that: the anti-reason corp of ideologues attempt to exclaim “correlation does not equal causation” as a means with which to attempt to discredit, invalidate and therefore ignore anything which they do not like.

Thank you Immanuel Kant for teaching imbeciles how to use the dialectics of reason, but not reason or logic itself, to undermine reason by means of dissembling and evasion: your death was not nearly painful enough.

15699615-b833-4859-99f5-8f3e1a26ddba_560_420