Before we get to Debbie and her orgy (yes, seriously, we will be looking at this as a perfect example of how brainwashing psyop works), we need a little framework based on (uncomfortable for many of you) reality, so…
As I have often stated, to the great offence of women far and wide, no doubt, because they don’t understand that generalisations are still facts, as a general rule:
- Women tend to be herd animals (it’s biological, and they can’t really help it, it’s what their main survival pressure was since cave times. See Caveman Theory for details)
- They tend to be solipsistic to a degree that would get the average man punched in the face daily
- They are in essence far less able to do logic and they process things far more from a right brain mode, and this duality of being has been best explained in this somewhat more technical post.
All that said, please remember that I also state the following about men in general:
- Feminism is due to weak men letting other weak and deceptive men (and especially the ones of a particularly noxious tribe that hates Caucasian Christians above all) impose various nonsensical “rules” that leverage the average NPC’s “good guy” intentions while bypassing his average 100 point IQ altogether for seeing how things play out down the line.
- MGTOW are just a bunch of cowardly, frustrated incels, pretending to be “done” with women, when the truth is that they are so desperately unfuckable, both physically, but even more so mentally, that we should all agree with them not to ever even attempting to breed. No one needs that DNA to perpetrate.
- The Red Pill and PUA nonsense is at least 50% bullshit, and the other 50% is misrepresented and misunderstood by the vast majority of men, perpetrating the myth that women are “the enemy”. [Pro-tip: You may want to familiarise yourself with my ongoing series on the JQ on this].
- The Protestant work ethic, the Protestant binary idea of women essentially being second-class citizens, the Protestant zeitgeist of the Anglo-speaking world, lends itself to a complete mechanisation, and reduction, of human beings; both male and female. But particularly on women, removing the value they have as nurturers, mothers, and wives, which degrades the entire fabric of human connection and society. Catholicism is more nuanced, varied, and focussed on reality and co-operation in the true, biological, natural way between men and women. And by Catholicism I mean strictly only actual Catholics, which are now limited to 1958 Totalist Sedevacantists [I don’t expect you to know what that is, but it’s on you to educate yourself if you care to.] And by and large, Protestantism has forever been pushed by weak, limited men of abysmal ahistorical knowledge and thoroughly flawed logic as well as lower powers of perception.
Now then, here is an example which I will comment in all its horrific “glory”.
Debbie decided to go to an orgy. Read the whole thing there at the link above, then you can come back here for a full vivisection of Debbie. However, I would like to point out that even though Debbie will be made to look an idiot, I don’t especially blame Debbie for anything much. She’s a woman, and reacts rather standardly, as far as female statistics on these things go. A little more context on her early life would no doubt confirm what I will write below, but I doubt she would agree with much of anything I write here. The brainwashing has taken hold deeply already and is intimately tied in with her own sense of identity and who she is.
Let’s start with getting an insight into the average female brain (if you were not aware of this, it will shock you, boys):
Is it worth it to tell the truth? I don’t know, but I feel compelled to try, because somewhere inside of me, there is a persistent and stubborn belief that the truth will set us free. Sounds corny and unrealistic, right?
People keep saying to me that I can’t change who I am, that if this is me, I should be able to express it, but I don’t buy that. People suppress parts of themselves all the time.
If it’s who you are to kill ants with magnifying glasses, no one says, “Well, that’s just who she is—she should be allowed to be herself.” Some things are unacceptable and many (most? all?) of us have dark intuitions that shouldn’t be allowed to surface.
Have you ever felt the urge to step out in front of an oncoming train? Or push someone else out? Or plunge a knife into the hand of someone sitting beside you? Or throw your whining child off the Westgate Bridge ?
Crazy bitch, right?
Except most women in the modern West have these kind of random thoughts throughout their day. While I can assure you I never ONCE had the thought of flinging one of my kids off a bridge or stabbing a random stranger for no reason. Women call these “intrusive thoughts”. Normal men, like me, call it “bitches be crazy”.
Just realising this is a general truth that applies to the majority of women (one can argue about the percentages, but go ahead and do your own research on that) will instantly give the average man an immediately better take on the female sex in general.
Once you know the level of crazy shit that goes on in their belfry, you will tend to not sweat the small stuff as much. And still, keep an eye on her whenever you are walking over a bridge with your kids!
Armed with this baseline starting point, let’s delve on.
It hadn’t occurred to me that monogamy and kink could be spectra like those of neurodiversity or sexuality, but when someone sent me Aella’s Polyamory Post , everything changed.
She described how she came to identify as poly, like one can identify as gay, and that resonated very strongly for me. I thought back to the discussion my partner Franc and I had had at the start of our relationship as to whether we could sleep with other people, and how I’d said that it would be fine, and he (and others) had said that it wouldn’t, so I’d agreed and settled into “normal”.
Reading that there were people for whom sleeping with others outside of their primary relationship was normal felt like coming home to me. I didn’t want to throw away what I had with Franc, but I found myself craving the same things I’d sought in my youth—the thrill of the chase, the feeling of being desired, the full-body rushes that only came when a new man had touched me, either virtually or physically.
After Aella’s polyamory post, I read Sex at Dawn , an eye-opening book that describes how early humans probably didn’t live in monogamous pairs, because:
1) If everyone sleeps with everyone, they avoid paternal certainty, which means greater chances of survival for offspring, who were less likely to be killed by rival males (i.e. if a dad doesn’t know which kids are his, he’ll let them all live), and;
2) They could provide group care, which is handy in a species devoid of claws, sharp teeth, speed, or basically any objectively useful defence mechanisms.
Indeed, many societies today still don’t practice systematic monogamy, and among our closest primate relatives (and the animal kingdom in general), true monogamy is vanishingly rare.
Humans, ourselves, aren’t the best examples of monogamy, if we’re honest. Watch this TED talk by Esther Perel if you don’t believe me.
Whew! Take a breath… quite a lot of self-deception, herd-animal behaviour, and pre-programmed psyops going on in this block-quote. Let’s start from the top and work our way down.
It hadn’t occurred to me that monogamy and kink could be spectra like those of neurodiversity or sexuality, but when someone sent me Aella’s Polyamory Post , everything changed.
Translation into normal language:
“I like dick and getting dicked down. I discovered my sexuality kind of early on and fooled around enough to discover: I like dick! But OMG it’s so rude and judgy to say I like dick. Kinda, all dick? Any dick? Weird dick? Yeah, that’s not normal, the herd would kick me out. BUT WAIT! Oh here are some new words: spectra … non-binary … ethical non-monogamy … Yay! I can be on a sliding scale of sluttiness, and…and….yeah! That’s socially acceptable by… well a bunch of freaks, degenerates and …oh who cares, point is I have a new herd here! And I can link it to other stuff, like autism! Or being “born” gay! Or…probably… racism! Yeah! You can’t argue against racism! Or being born gay, or…yeah, that will do! And now…oh here, see, here is another woman who says she too likes dick, any dick, all dick, and it’s all fine. It’s all great! I can like dick too! Yay!”
Now, in truth none of that is consciously going on for Debbie. Debbie just “feels” her way through all those “sensations” and pointing out their logical truth, origin, and reality is DEEPLY offensive to her. Makes her feel stupid and that can’t be right, because remember Debbie (like every other woman) is the centre of the universe and can’t possibly be fundamentally flawed. No, no, her feelings validate reality.
Nevertheless, that is, essentially, precisely what is going on for Debbie.
As an aside, who is Aella? Well, she is a profoundly unhappy creature that has been oversexed and possibly abused early on in life, and while her polyamory post is well-written and appears to argue the points she makes quite reasonably and logically, the reality is that Aella has never had a proper, stable, committed, child-included relationship. So her theorising, while possibly appealing, is just that, theory. Without the benefit of any real-life experience, or as we scientists (i.e. engineers) call it, actual physical proof that lasts in time and produces repeatable results over it across a wide variety of situations. Don’t take my word for it. See her own post on how she would pay you $100k if you introduce her to a guy who she ends up wanting to actually marry, or $300k if you can find her someone to impregnate her (and give her ten million to be a single mom [well, sort of, raising the kid in a hippie commune where child sexual abuse is rampant, actually]).
And for those of you too lazy to click and read her full on schizo-post, here is a snippet.
100k is not trivial for me, net-worth wise. But if I imagine I’m already happily married in the future, and you asked ‘would you have paid 100k to meet your husband?” I imagine I’d say yes without hesitation.
Or, you can find someone to pay me 10m (post tax) to impregnate me and have me raise his child, sole custody, single mother.
It wouldn’t be full single mother, I’d use a lot of the money to pay for assistance, and also to more intentionally build a community of other parents interested in more group-family type dynamics.
I am currently freezing many dozens of eggs (67 at the time of this post), through which we can do polygenic screening for the most robust offspring.
Does that sound like anyone you would take life advice from? That you’d want your daughter to take life advice from?
I mean, I’m just saying… but back to Debbie and her brainwashing, however.
Notice that Debbie is self-justifying her going to an orgy to be a slut based on the ramblings of someone that is CLEARLY far from happy, fulfilled, or reasonable by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn’t matter, because now Debbie feels “less alone” in wanting to be a wanton slut that like dick, any dick, all dick. And that’s all that matters. If she was alone in it then she would be a dirty, dirty, dirty whore and deserving of judgement and scorn. But as long as she is in a coven of wanton whores, then she is just another member of a perfectly sane, just, and equitable society.
Again, she doesn’t ACTUALLY think these things consciously, it’s all just “feels” but that is precisely what is actually going on.
Moving on to the next part of that dense quote:
Reading that there were people for whom sleeping with others outside of their primary relationship was normal felt like coming home to me. I didn’t want to throw away what I had with Franc, but I found myself craving the same things I’d sought in my youth—the thrill of the chase, the feeling of being desired, the full-body rushes that only came when a new man had touched me, either virtually or physically.
Notice how it is SOMEONE ELSE slutting around that gives her, her own “permission” to feel ok about liking dick. All dick. Any dick. Now, any marginally self-aware
person
MAN that is not functionally retarded, already knows sex feels good and we all like it. How’s that saying? Even bad sex is good sex? Yeah, water is wet and sex feels great. What a powerful journey of self-discovery you did there Debbie! Climbing Mount Everest in a bikini next?
The next bit is interesting:
After Aella’s polyamory post, I read Sex at Dawn , an eye-opening book that describes how early humans probably didn’t live in monogamous pairs, because:
1) If everyone sleeps with everyone, they avoid paternal certainty, which means greater chances of survival for offspring, who were less likely to be killed by rival males (i.e. if a dad doesn’t know which kids are his, he’ll let them all live), and;
2) They could provide group care, which is handy in a species devoid of claws, sharp teeth, speed, or basically any objectively useful defence mechanisms.
Now, I have NOT looked this up before typing this sentence, but I’d bet even odds that I could tell you something about the “early life” portion of the wikipedia page of the author of that nonsense. Shall we google it together people? Let’s. And let’s see if I was right in my suspicion.
Oh it’s a rabbit hole for sure:
The authors are one Christopher Ryan and his “wife”. We are not told what ethnicity he is…but…from his wikipedia page, we can see who he was influenced by (much like Debbie really):
His doctoral dissertation analyzed the prehistoric roots of human sexuality. It was guided by the psychologist Stanley Krippner , [2] a humanistic psychologist , Sabrina Zirkel, and Jürgen W. Kremer. [3]
Now, who might Stanley Kripper be?
Krippner has written extensively on altered states of consciousness , dream telepathy , hypnosis , shamanism , dissociation , and parapsychological subjects . [3] [4] [8] Krippner was an early leader in Division 32 of the American Psychological Association (APA), the division concerned with humanistic psychology, serving as President of the division from 1980–1981. [9] He also served as president of division 30, the Society for Psychological Hypnosis, and is a Fellow of five APA divisions. [10] Krippner has conducted experiments with Montague Ullman into dream telepathy at the Maimonides Medical Center. [3] In 2002, Krippner won the APA Award for Distinguished Contributions to the International Advancement of Psychology . [4] [11]
So… well versed in hypnosis and therefore the entire psyops set of skills and… he certainly had some —stein collaborators, in case the APA was not enough of a red flag .
The dream laboratory at the Maimonides Medical Centre was established in 1962, and Krippner joined the staff in 1964 as the first dream telepathy studies were commencing. [12] The design of the first experiment had already been established at this point, by Montague Ullman and Sol Feldstein. [12] In total Krippner, Ullman and Alan Vaughan list ten dream telepathy experiments in their 1973 book Dream Telepathy , beginning with the first screening study in the summer of 1964 [13] and ending with “The Second Bessant Study”. [14]
But, aside the roots of the idiotic book, let’s look at the two premises she quotes as being “valid”.
1) If everyone sleeps with everyone, they avoid paternal certainty, which means greater chances of survival for offspring, who were less likely to be killed by rival males (i.e. if a dad doesn’t know which kids are his, he’ll let them all live), and;
Actually no. This has never worked in any society, and the very few primitives in which SOME aspect of this existed essentially never got out of the Stone Age. And they kill each other regularly. With clubs. See Amazonic tribes and primitive Papua New Guineans.
Also, as someone that has fathered five children, and seen countless other couples and their babies, I can assure you that nature sees to it that a father recognises his own children. And so does everyone else. So much so that when someone we knew obviously had his wife get pregnant by her boss, it was obvious the boy was not his child, even if everyone politely pretended it was. And this sort of thing was not glossed over in cave times. There would be dead bodies over it.
2) They could provide group care, which is handy in a species devoid of claws, sharp teeth, speed, or basically any objectively useful defence mechanisms.
More absolute bullshit. Primitive people band together to fight off danger, other tribes, etc. but they do so as a matter of survival, not because no one is sure whose kid belongs to whom.
The premise is nonsense and Ryan and his “wife” are just trying to justify their kink.
Now, please understand, it’s not even their kink I have an issue with. It’s their trying to normalise it as though it was a good thing that is the issue. And once again, this sort of libertine “freedom” is always pushed on traditionally Caucasian Christian(ish) populations, but is NEVER accepted as valid in a small violent, genocidal country in the Middle East. I wonder why that is.
The point, in relation to Debbie though, is that first she gets validation for her liking dick from a schizophrenic on sub stack, then from a BOOK! OMG a PUBLISHED BOOK! So it’s GOT to be true now, right? She’s just part of a giant herd of like-minded sluts now, no one can point a finger at her only, so it’s all cool!
But is that enough, well, let’s see:
Indeed, many societies today still don’t practice systematic monogamy, and among our closest primate relatives (and the animal kingdom in general), true monogamy is vanishingly rare.
It’s always good to bolster our own self-deception with absolutely unfounded little aphorisms like that. Go on Debbie, name three (functioning? hahahah) societies that don’t practice monogamy (because if you mean the Mormons and the Muslims, I have news for you, it’s the MEN that can fuck around, not the women). We’ll wait.
And then of course… apes and monkeys! Yay! If we can just rope them in with the (absurd, mathematically nonsensical, untenable, and flat out wrong, and outdated) 1 “theory of evolution” then we are on sound footing, right!? Right!
And, and… if all else fails… TED talk! Because THAT means it’s absolutely true and justified and GOOD! Okay, bigot?
Now, can you appreciate how many ways Debbie had to self-validate her “choice” to get gang-banged (for science) by first making sure she was part of a large enough herd?
THAT dear reader, is how female minds are pushed into this or that direction. The illusion (or reality, regardless of how toxic it might actually be) of social acceptance and “going with (a large enough) flow”.
And in her own way, she too, finally admits it (after once more referencing Aella as if she was the oracle of all things good in the sexual milieu of the world):
It was like giving myself permission not to see myself as broken, but as a natural product of evolution, with interests that could be explored rather than hidden away.
And I genuinely did not read her whole post when I wrote there was some childhood trauma there. I mean, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist.
My history of seeking out dominant males who would choke me and slap me and tie me up made a bit more sense. I had always assumed it was down to some internalised guilt from my childhood that meant I felt I was deserving of punishment. Either that or it was my need to hold onto a man—if he was holding me down, he wasn’t walking away.
Now… here is an important point, which is why I have a bolded heading that is a bit catchy, here:
Why the Church Forbids Blowjobs
Let’s see what Debbie gets up to though, with her boyfriend:
Except that I was in a relationship with someone who saw sex as something both sacred and secret. To be practiced in the dark, between two loving partners with no external input, no learning necessary, and certainly no sharing.
He noticed my burgeoning interest in polyamory, and being the loving and thoughtful human being he is, he bought me a voucher for an erotic massage for Christmas.
I went along and loved it, although the experience didn’t give me rushes in the aftermath.
And if you’ve read about My First Orgy , you’ll know that things didn’t stop there.
Now, see, Franc (her boyfriend) is trying to indulge her sexual desires and steps out of line a little bit and lo and behold, it quickly descends into her going to an orgy. Now, if you actually read the Bible, in the songs of Solomon, it’s fairly clear that even in the house of David (lineage of Christ) we have lascivious men and women. Actual whores and men with plenty of wives and concubines. The point is not that such practices did not happen, but rather that such practices lead to nowhere good.
Now, imagine you are a happily married peasant that has only ever known marital sex in the missionary position in a loving manner and has fathered a bunch of children with his wife. And that is the norm. They are in love, know nothing else and are happy, and their children loved.
Then he travels one day to another town, maybe gets drunk a bit, is accosted by a slutty woman that gives him the first and only mind-blowing blowjob he has ever had. Well now he’s hooked. Aside the guilt and badness he will feel in the morning, he will not be able to forget that slutty, awesome, sensation of a well executed blowjob. And he will begin to be unsatisfied at home. And before you know it his family is torn apart by his whoring (in secret at first) then ever more rampantly disrespecting of his wife and family to satisfy his lusts.
And THAT, in essence, is why the Church forbids blowjobs. Because once you move away from the sensation that making love produces a child and you WANT that, you begin to delve into the perverse.
Now, for some of us, who have been through pretty much all the perversions first and somehow find themselves back to the origin and the intimacy of an actual marriage, the perversions no longer hold such a strong hold over us. But we are very few and far between. I have personally known men that after bedding literally hundreds of women were STILL in the thrall of the seduction, sex and having affairs. For decades and really throughout their lives.
For most people, the attractions of the flesh, lust, in short, is quite irresistible.
And while it plays out differently for men and women, both are extremely susceptible to being dragged into lust instead of love. And lust never ends well.
There are no real, lasting, “polyamory” throuples or quintuplets, or whatever they call them. It’s always just a temporary chaos of degeneracy, and inevitably hell for any children unfortunate enough to spawn from such things.
But see how all this sensible stuff is swept away by a schizo-post by a broken and unhappy slut on the internet, a book by some swingers, and the “psychology” and “progressiveness” pushed relentlessly upon us by the same tribe that invented feminism, Marxism, and the Frankfurt school of economics as well as how to rule by pederastry-blackmail, and creating fiat money.
But back to Debbie:
Franc is the kind of person who will balk at something in the first instance, but with enough time, will generally come round, especially if he thinks it’s important to me.
Despite being perfectly comfortable in our nuclear familial bliss, he agreed to come and check out a sex bar on an MFM night. He put his unwavering faith in me, his loyal partner of 15 years, fellow traveller, and mother of his children, to remain by his side throughout.
When, instead, I called him awkward and jumped onto a bed with a bunch of strangers, he felt more betrayed than if I had had an affair.
In all the years we’d been together, I had never seen him cry. He didn’t hide his tears; he just never shed any. Had never felt any need to.
That night, he wept as he walked home.
Think about the type of person that acts this way.
Her own emotions more important than the relationship she apparently has built with a man for the last 15 years, and the children she has had with him too.
Remember when I started out explaining that women are solipsistic? That they feel their own emotions validate reality? That they are, in a word, rampant egomaniacs as a rule? Well… see above dear reader. And if you are female, go on and try and backward rationalise all your solipsism as much as you like. It’s still true. And me, most men that are able to think, and God, know it too.
And so do you, in those flashes of lucidity you get at three am you admit to no one.
Besides, the poor dear needs her beauty sleep, yo!
I was still full of adrenaline from the orgy and my apologies probably sounded weak and without heart. I couldn’t simultaneously take in his criticism and enjoy the rushing waves of euphoria that the night of unbridled passion had unleashed.
My eyes started to droop. I asked if we could talk about it later.
Every time I roused from my shallow sleep that night, my guilt grew along with the painful sound of his sniffles and stifled sobs.
The next few days were colder than the deepest Siberian winter.
And the solution?
Well, clearly… let’s go to the very source of the malaise to begin with to ask for answers:
Was my behaviour an inevitable expression of who I was? Did this all mean I needed to pursue sex in unusual ways with new people in order to be happy? And did it mean, as he continually insisted, that he wasn’t “enough” for me?
And does his natural character mean that he can never be happy in a non-monogamous situation?
Are we incompatible, despite all outward appearances, because of this one fundamental difference in our outlooks?
These were the questions I wanted a professional to answer for me.
I organised our first therapy session.
Her post is “to be continued” and I think we can all see how it is very likely to end with a book perhaps, called Eat, Pray, do Orgies .
I’m sure it will do well and maybe a film about her “glorious” experience will be made in her “honour” by the parasites in Hollywood.
Seriously. This is not a religious argument. It’s a factual mathematical one. And irrefutable, as was always obvious to anyone who could do math. I figured this out in my 20s and never bothered to argue it too much though I mentioned it in my book the Face on Mars at age 26, but people are stupid and don’t listen, so I never saw much point to argue with them other than for my own entertainment. Vox Day has been most pre-eminent in pointing out why, “evolution” is nonsense. You may want to search his blog for his MITTENS posts.
This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here
