Pride and Prejudice and Promiscuity

Gay men are not like the rest of us

Yes of course, the men attending a gay pride parade are perhaps overachievers in the field of sexual conquest.  But the stereotype of the promiscuous gay man is long established and accurate.  Do not pretend otherwise.

They want to be treated like everyone else; get married like everyone else; these days, have children like everyone else.  But don't kid yourselves, they are not like everyone else.

I'm pretty liberal about gay people and the gay lifestyle; they can do whatever they like, both in and out of the bedroom.  But this level of promiscuity does not lend itself to marriage and children, not to mention public health.

Yes, these debates are over.  But maybe they need a second, more realistic, look.

The public has largely accepted what gay men do.  Even if most of us do not really want to think about it.  But if a heterosexual man has this many sexual partners, most people would consider that licentious and degenerate.  Here, even the term partner is out of place.  These are not partners in any sense of the imagination.  But I do not know a better term to describe the person on the other side of a daily, one-off, anonymous, sexual encounter.  Of any type.

Well there is slut, right?  But call a gay man a gay slut and his response is likely to be:  Oh honey, you are so right.  You don't know the half of it.  Look at the men in the above video; they are proud of it.

Regarding a heterosexual man with that amount of sexual activity, some will surely envy his sexual prowess.  But they will also call him a womanizer or a player; and no one is going to consider him marriage material.  But is the heterosexual male slut also proud?  Yeah maybe.  But how many of these guys are there versus what is really normalization on the gay side.

I recently watched the Netflix remake of Alan Alda's The Four Seasons.  And today of course, it includes a married gay couple.  Okay fine.  But in the series, the gay couple pick up an anonymous stranger and take him back to their hotel room to have sex.  Like this is normal.

That is not normal.  I mean it may be normal gay behavior and I do not care if that is what you want to get up to; have at it.  But it is not normal marriage behavior.  And this is not the first time I have seen this in a television series.  I saw one production a couple of years ago where the required gay couple had multiple outside partners.  Hollywood has decided that this is, in fact, normal and the rest of us should get on board with it.

Now, I am perfectly well aware of the fact that some small number of heterosexual married couples also have so-called open relationships.  But here too, let us not pretend this is normal marriage behavior.  I will add what I always think about when someone cheats on their spouse:  If you do not want to be married, just do not be married.  It is not as complicated as people sometimes want it to be.

Like I said, I do not care what anyone does.  But let us not pretend that gay men are like us.  And if this is normal behavior for you, straight or gay, maybe marriage is not your thing.

𓐵

Citizen Vigilante

The film is sort of Death Wish meets contemporary European immigration.  With Armie Hammer stepping in for Charles Bronson.

I cannot say that Death Wish was ever my cup of tea.  Too much gratuitous violence, and in this case gratuitous sex, for my taste.  But if the powers that be in Europe, particularly the increasingly authoritarian German regime, feel the need to censor it, then I must do my small part to fight the censorship.

So is the movie any good?  Again, it's not really to my taste.  But if you like the John Wick series, you will like this.  And because the targets are immigrants rather than the mere thugs and criminals in Death Wish, there is definitely a political dimension to this film.  In the end, whether or not you appreciate this film probably depends on your own political convictions.

I will add that both Armie Hammer and Costas Mandylor are excellent in their roles.  Same for the supporting cast.  I suppose the film is classified as low budget, but it is well made and the reduced budget did not interfere with the story.

In summary I would say that the movie is worth watching for its message.  And here I mean, whether you agree with the message or not.  You need to hear it.  This problem is not going away.  And I do not believe that European leaders will sincerely address it.  European elites do not suffer the consequences of their policies and actions, so they do not care.  Ultimately that is the message of this film.

I hope it is the most widely seen film this year.

𓐵

Neil Oliver on Losing Trust

This line really got my attention:  I'm skeptical about any possibility of anybody voting themselves out of this trouble (14:18).

Here it is in context:

All over Europe, you see the rise of alternative political movements.  Said before and I'll say again, I'm skeptical about any possibility of anybody voting themselves out of this trouble.  But the instinct is there.  People want political alternative.  So you see it all over.  You know the Alternative for Germany for example, the AFD, where the response of the regime is to try and make the AFD illegal.  You know surveilling its would be candidates and arresting people just for posing, being a threat to the incumbents.

So the the trust in the in the political system, not just for me, but for millions, billions of people, is gone.  What do people do then if the mechanisms that they've been told to trust are demonstrably useless?  What do you get?  Well, apart from anything else, you get loss of trust.

I am not sure that Oliver, who I quite like and appreciate, really believes this.  He's skeptical.  Fair enough.  But I for one have absolutely come to believe it.  The problems of the United Kingdom and continental Europe will not be solved at the ballot box.

Absolutely not.

And sadly, I will take it a step further with this question:  In the United States, can we solve the political differences between left and right at the ballot box?

I am skeptical.

𓐵

Have You Ever Actually Watched Any Of His Debates?

The left is an intolerant religion and proud of it

I do not know if this is real or not; I hope it is.  But even if it is not, I think it makes a fair point.  Popular culture, media, and the education establishment endlessly foist left-of-center views on people from the right.  And those on the left need not ever entertain any views from the right.  They are actually proud of this.

Since Charlie Kirk's death, the organization he founded has gone off the rails.  I think he was naive about the people he surrounded himself with; including his own wife.  But that should not diminish his own contributions.  The question asked here is paramount.
𓐵

The Lowe-Down on Britain

Rupert Lowe asks:  Is the British government a criminal enterprise?

Lowe says that change can be driven through the ballot box.  Well as a politician, he would have to say that, right?  But as in California and Minnesota, I'm not at all sure that will work any more.

Lowe thinks that people will vote for things to get worse before they get better.  That is wishful thinking; I do not believe that people will do that.  Collapse is inevitable.

I mean in Britain you have an elite class and a government class who absolutely refuse to hold rapists accountable.  Mind you, over decades.  They minimize it, they dismiss it, they hide it.  And it doing so, they prove themselves worse than the actual rapists.  It is, in fact, criminal.

Can the government at large be guilty of accessory and/or obstruction?  Or aiding and abetting?  Because that is exactly what happened.  And Keir Starmer was the head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

And this is before we get to the vast crimes of the Covid "pandemic" response.  Weinstein wonders aloud if the mRNA "vaccines" were not designed to create immunity (which so clearly, they were not), but rather purposefully designed to create some future venerability.  To what, we cannot yet know.  But given the players involved, this clearly is a possibility.  This would certainly explain the unhinged enthusiasm for the jab from the powers that be.

Whether designed for immunity or future venerability, my question is, what other alternatives are there?

Well there is pure profit.  But to me, that does not adequately explain the multi-government fervor, both domestically and internationally.  And the punishments for noncompliance.  The governmental actions and supposed reactions were unexplained, dark, and sinister.  We may not know the tree, but we sure saw the fruit.  It was not merely profit-driven; just my opinion.

In any case, these same people are in charge of the election processes.  So my question is:  Have we reached the end of functional democracy?

I think we have.  These people must be dislodged and prosecuted.  Keir Starmer must be jailed.  Along with many thousands of his ilk.  And now, I hear that Andy Burnham will be even worse.

But how will this happen?

The answer is obvious.

𓐵

The United Kingdom Today

Do not lay the blame at the feet of the immigrants.  Of course, they should be removed, but they are who and what they are.  No, the blame lies with the elites and their government minions.  They must pay dearly for what they have done to the country.

𓐵

On Digital Pricing in Retail Environments

Yet another Walmart technology fail

This is not a consumer oriented website.  But I think this issue rises to the level of importance that it warrants inclusion here.  I featured Lindey Glenn in a post on McDonald's earlier this year.  Here she returns with a video on digital pricing in a Walmart retail store.

I have become a Glenn fan and she does excellent work in a usually entertaining fashion.

For those who may not know, Walmart has started using digital price displays on its shelves.  The prices shown on these displays can be changed at will by the company.  This lowers the labor cost involved and gives the company greater pricing flexibility.  But if you think this may not be as advantageous as Walmart does, you really should watch this video.

My question is:  Is Walmart acting out of malice for its customers or sheer incompetence.  I mean, hey, it's Walmart.  And Walmart's deployment of technology.  So almost assuredly, it is incompetence.

But this is what I walked alway from this video with:  In regard to digital pricing in any retail environment, whether the motivation is malice, purposeful deceit, or incompetence, the point is, shoppers should not trust it.

Even if the store does everything above board, say for example, they only change prices once a day, at midnight, the potential for abuse is high.  And further, we all know that retail businesses lust for the dynamic pricing precedent set by airlines and Uber.

Let's just imagine a future:  You push your cart past a display of Walmart toothpaste, on sale for $2.69.  But you just bought toothpaste last week, so you move along.  But somewhere around the auto parts section, you remember that you paid $3.19 for the same toothpaste last week.  So you return to the toothpaste display only to discover that now, ten minutes later, the price has changed to $2.99.

But that is not the worst of it; yes, the price changed, but only for you.  The system reads the MAC or IMEI identification number on your smartphone and says, hey, that guy was just here, let's charge him more.  Meanwhile, the next customer still gets the original $2.69 price.  And a third customer, who has never purchased this particular toothpaste before, gets a price of $2.49.

You do not have to be very creative to come up with any number of similar scenarios.  One day, the tags will only include QR codes and you have to use your phone to see the price.  So every customer will get their own unique price based on shopping history, demographics, credit score, education level, time of day, etc.

Take a date and time stamped photo of the digital price display tag (ESL, Electronic Shelf Label) of any important purchase.  Or even of any possible purchase.  And as in this video, do not put up with any bullshit.
𓐵

What Should Be Done?

Under what circumstances is it okay to publicly call for civil war?

Is that ever allowed in polite society?

In the United Kingdom, it is not any one event or situation, but the cumulative actions and attitude of those in charge.  Over, say, the last decade or so.  The government, the courts, the police, all of them.  It should be noted that this situation has evolved under both of the two major political parties, first under the Conservatives and now under Labour.  Is it not time to remove them?

The problem stretches beyond government.  It is really the elites, who are immune to the consequences of unchecked immigration, versus the working and middle classes, who are forced to suffer the actual consequences.  Because the immigrants do not live and work among the elites; rather they burrow down with the working classes.

The elites and their government henchmen are responsible for the rape and murder of the lower classes.  It may be the immigrants doing the actual raping and killing, but clearly it is the elites who are responsible.  And they are completely cavalier about it.  The only question I really have is:  How long are the people of Great Britain going to put up with this?  How many daughters have to be raped and how many sons have to die?

Believe me, if it was the sons and daughters of the elites, this problem would have been solved years ago.  But they could not care less about the sons and daughters of their inferiors.  They look down their noses, call them racists, and put Tommy Robinson in jail.  When will it be enough?

Of course, I am not British and it is not for me to say.  But if any government acts this way, regardless of how it is installed, should something not be done about it?

I'm asking.

I hope the British will as well.
𓐵

The Cartesian Crisis in Gaza

Is this physician telling the truth?

What is going on in Gaza?  How do we know?  For many months, I viewed this question as, well, you can accept reporting from Israel or you can accept reporting from Hamas.  Take your pick.

I can tell you, I will never accept anything coming out of Hamas.  Anyone who uses civilians as human shields is not honorable and not credible.  But after Trump's appalling behavior since his second election, and after Thomas Massie's failed  re-election, I have to question everything coming out of Israel as well.  And while I am generally supportive of the war against Iran, it seems completely obvious to me that Benjamin Netanyahu is also not credible.  And that he has some kind hold over Donald Trump.  That also seems obvious.

We can speculate:  It seems that Netanyahu wants to milk his hold over Trump for all it is worth, while he has the opportunity.  Maybe he views this as now, while he has Trump in his pocket, or never.  I have no idea what is really going on, but it is strange that the American president seems to be acting on behalf of another nation.  While we may not know exactly what is going on, we can see the results.  And we can know the tree by its fruit.

For many years, I have given Israel the benefit of the doubt.  But I am just not sure this can continue.  I am no longer convinced that they are deserving of our trust.  On the other hand, the people who are convinced that there is a genocide happening in Gaza mostly seem to accept Hamas reporting, either directly or indirectly.

Anyway, this physician, Nick Maynard, does seem credible to me.  Is he linked to Hamas, or Islam, or some Arab money, etc.?  Maybe he holds some Arab-funded chair at Oxford?  I do not know.  He just seems believable.  That alone does not make him honest, but judge his reporting for yourself.

I have been fooled before.  Of course; we all have.  And Gaza offers the most recent, and perhaps best, example of the Cartesian Crisis.

Broadly speaking, today we are witnessing the complete absence of honest journalism.

So in 2026, how can we know what is true?
𓐵

Walking Alone with My Thoughts

How to pass the time in 2026

I like to walk for around sixty to ninety minutes a day.  I try to do it early, before the sun gets too high, but it is never as early as I would prefer.  First things first, we start with coffee and the news, and only after that, can I make it out.  Yes, I miss some days, but I try not to miss two days in a row.

If you are walking a new path, even the most mundane route will keep you occupied and entertained.  But after a while walking the same path, one does seek something to occupy the mind.

Now I pretty much live in my head.  And I can easily spend an hour, or a morning, just thinking about life, family, business, and the latest variety of Dairy Queen Blizzard.  And there are mornings when I do exactly that.  Particularly on weekends.

There are those who prefer to walk and otherwise exercise with music.  I get that, and the devices today are small enough to be carried along unnoticed.  But I was never one of these walkers, as I was more likely to listen to talk radio.

But there was another way that I used to occupy myself walking.  Phone calls.  I could and often did make phone calls for the entire walk.  Friends, co-workers, clients, no one seemed to mind.  I found it amazingly productive.  And the time flew by; before I knew it, my walk was done.

More recently, I have interrupted my walks with stops for photos, almost always landscapes or cloudscapes.  Above is a photo I took today.  While this may interrupt the monotony, you still have the distance to cover.  Photos just slow you down.  Not complaining, that's just the way it is.

Enter podcasts.  All of this changed three years ago, when I purchased a set of Apple AirPods.  Up until this point, I suppose I did watch some podcasts, but only on Youtube and only on my computer.  What's the difference between a podcast and any other Youtube video?  Until that point, I don't think I knew.  And I never downloaded Youtube videos to watch or listen while walking.  That seemed more trouble than it was worth.

But at some point I did become aware of how podcasts worked, and importantly, I realized that several Youtube channels that I subscribed to, were also podcasts.  Which came first seems unimportant to me.

I think it is worth pointing out that far and away the Youtube videos I watch the most simply contain one or two people talking into a camera.  They are not girls in bikinis or some dude pranking strangers for clicks.  In other words, it is the sound that is important, not so much the video.  Your mileage may vary.

So anyway, today I walk with podcasts.  There are about five that I listen to regularly, though I am actually subscribed to quite a few more.  That's more than enough to fill my weekday walks with usually enough spillover to fill my weekend walks.  And if not, that's okay too.  At least once a week I walk alone with my thoughts.

Podcasts may not be my own thoughts, but I often stop the podcast and think about what I just heard.  It is not radio.  It is not phone calls.  It is not music.  But they are thoughtful.  I would argue that the DarkHorse Podcast is one of the most thoughtful broadcasts in all of media, old or new.

My podcasts have also replaced radio in the car, and fill most of my downtime.  I would love to tell you they are mostly about poetry, highbrow literature, and stoic philosophy, but no, sadly, they are mostly news and commentary about current affairs.

My walks may not go by as fast as when I was making phone calls.  But today, I find more value in the solitude, listening to a quiet podcast interspersed with a few photos.

𓐵