Girlboss action heroes like that chick from Atomic Blonde or Galadriel from Rings of Power are obviously metaphors for women's capability in white collar email work. The point is that women are getting top billing in male-dominated genres of fiction, not that women should compete with men at the Olympics. However, as much as people pretend otherwise when convenient, the action genre retains a certain utility to real life, and when it begins to stray too far from that anchor, audiences don't turn up. This is partly why current Marvel offerings attract a minuscule fraction of the attention given to a now-40+ year old show, Dragon Ball Z, despite both properties involving superhuman feats. Simply put, it's more credible on a subconscious level for an incredibly shredded dude to throw someone through a building than a 110 lb woman doing the same.

I just watched this review of Damsel, the latest fantasy action trash (Reaper's youtube channel is great though), in which Millie Bobby Brown slays dragons that 10 knights can't beat, and it made me think: if reality can be distorted to the point that a non-zero percentage of the population thinks that men can turn into women, what else can be programmed? Is it possible that women now believe to some extent that they can physically compete with men?

I would actually love if this were the case, but the likely answer is that the overwhelming majority of them do not. Physical strength, even in our tech-addled culture, is still so fundamental to human existence that it's inescapable. It's one thing to lie that your surgical wound is a vagina, because nobody wants to see it, but day 1 of high school gym class makes the male-female disparity extremely clear, and the more athletic the woman is, that disparity becomes even clearer to her.

To the extent the delusion exists, it goes something like this: unathletic women cite some extreme on the internet to "prove" they have just as much potential as men, even though they personally have no intention to lift a finger. For example, elite female powerlifters are stronger than a lot of men who lift. Elite BJJ girls can handle a lot of dudes off the street if they don't know how to wrestle. When you compare them against the prototypical soyboy, this is obviously the case.

The closest that women have come to believing they are equal with men, that I know of, is the debate over women being allowed in the infantry, and I think this is because the outlier argument is in full force. The thinking is that the most athletic, cream of the crop women could ruck march with the boys, and this is - actually somewhat true for about one in a million women. Of course it ignores practical concerns like the rate of injury, sexual interaction, the political lowering of standards, and many other things we have been over ad nauseum, but in that narrow band of details, it is true that a few women are capable of meeting a baseline male standard. Still, the pivot to white males in Army recruitment ads, or the fact that Selective Service has not been extended to women, show that most women do understand they cannot physically compete.

But maybe under the immense weight of our current propaganda, there are now some girls out there who think they can take their partner in a fight or wrestle a hog or something. That would make for some great entertainment in our dystopia.

There's always winners and losers. Which products and services will take the least damage from DEI hires? Fine dining will probably be OK. The elites have to eat somewhere, and they won't put up with overcooked broccoli rabe.

The comic book industry can only get better, if anything. I'm not sure if any straight white males are still working there.

I was thinking datacenter tech would probably be watched closely because the social media monopolies would fall over without it, but then again these are the people who paid 23-year old girls about $120k a year to take pictures of their lattes. So who knows.

Out of all the sentencing conventions in the US, I think the typical 5-10 years for pedophilia is the most obviously wrong. There's nothing to be gained from releasing pedos from jail, but everything to lose. The recidivism rate is so high that we need a special class of felon (the sexual offender registry) to try to provide at least some protection to children from further predation. In that light, is a life sentence cruel and unusual punishment as a consequence for child molestation? I don't think so.

The most enraging thing about child serial killers is that almost every one of them has a rap sheet for CSA and rape, but were set free by the legal system, sometimes multiple times, until their cravings got strong enough to kill their victims. The worst case I ever read was a guy that skipped bail for a pedo charge, then went on to kill an entire family, kidnap the youngest kids, and kill one of them before his last victim was rescued.

I don't know who decided that pedophiles should have the privilege of leaving prison, but let's say it wouldn't be surprising if there were a lot of conflicting interests involved.

I think a lot of huwhite libs have a misconception about how they're perceived, in that they think other races want to join them near the top of the cultural pantheon and do stuff like live in quiet leafy neighborhoods, exchange tasty ethnic cuisine, and enjoy gay Broadway musicals. Call it the suburban Kumbaya.

On the other hand a lot of people on the hardcore right think that minorities are on a mission to destroy white people specifically. Actually this is a misconception (except about rich Jews).

Outside of deracinated whites, the overriding psychology is ethnic narcissism. Minorities agitate to climb to the top, but if you've ever known them at "the top" then you realize they actually don't care much about whites, or other races, either for good or bad. It's all about self-love, associating with people who mirror your own traits. They enjoy twerking to rappers you can't understand and if you don't get it, you're invisible. Or they'll serve up a 10-course curry meal for a house party in pure blissful ignorance of whether a single white person (or Mexican, or Korean) attended. This is the climate at the Eric Adams administration. The important thing to him isn't pushing out Irish and Italians, it's being able to hang out with the brothas and sistas all day while they run the city into the ground. Notice the distinct absence of Chinese at a time when Queens is basically an Asian borough.

I'm a hapa, so I've seen more than a few settings. An image that's become familiar to me is a white guy or girl on the periphery of a bunch of ethnic friends. They could be a nervous smiling lib who's flattered to be the white guinea pig plied with Kenyan donuts and spicy radishes or a savvy operator interested in having "experiences" and deliberately unconcerned with his own ethnic identity. Either way, they spend time meditating on being the white friend in a non-white group, while the group only cares about the group and couldn't care less if a ringer is attached.

I was at a wedding recently where the bride and groom were both halfies. Technically this should have made it some kind of 21st century post-ethnic celebration of enlightenment, but in practice, the bride made a heartfelt declaration of "I AM INDIAN" to a sea of saris and kurtas before the white grandfather was driven out of the reception by Bollywood music at 100 decibels. The other family was OK, much more culturally American, but it was clear which side won out. I just felt sad.

Most elites and journalists who trot out this line are fully aware it is false. Their motives vary: will to power, protecting their status or their demographic group, etc. I don't believe the average lib is lying when they express their fear of Trump, though. To truly lie they would have to understand the system enough to know the part or the whole of their claim is false, and most of them do not.

I believe the mind of a lib is relatively comfortable with their place in the status quo - on a level akin to subsistence. They like to bitch about the problems in their life, especially if they can tie them to the right wing, but overall they can effectively satiate their day-to-day needs with drugs, social media, hookups, porn, consumerism, food, or whatever. This is true all the way from living in a safe middle-class neighborhood to living tranny life on the street. Maybe they're Antifa living out of a van, but at least they got their drugs and their furry porn. Maybe their kid's necromorph phase isn't working out and he's suicidal, but the family gets a lot of love on social media. Maybe inflation is blowing up the food bill - but there's always Netflix and credit card debt. They're vaguely conscious things aren't heading in a good direction, but they're always able to get to their crutches.

The lib, on some level, is OK living with hardship, self-injury, and filth, as long as he has his vices. Harvey Milk was fine with STDs as long as he could help himself to twinks. MLK Jr. could live with threats to his life as long as he had his orgy and rape parties. The average Dem voter recapitulates this pathology on a less dramatic level.

This is bread and circuses, but not textbook. Most Americans and Westerners are hurting, but some people are more or less fine with their current level of pain.

These people never needed or wanted to learn about our system. They never investigated whether Trump is Hitler, not because they lack the intelligence but because it's simply not important to them. They have gone along to get along and found their own personal lines of dopamine supply within the cultural forces imposed on us. If the tides rise in that direction, then so much the better. What is that going to change? The real problem is the reversal of the tides, which would leave them stranded. If the media says that someone is threatening to upset the status quo, then that person is rejected. It's the instinctive choice - it's mentally easy.

Right wing people are affected in the same way by the same forces, but they have something that libs don't: the sense or the impression or the memory of something in the past greater than what we have now, whether that goes back to the 1990s or ultimately to the Garden of Eden. This urge compels a person to stand against the tide, or at least ask where it is going. If libs look ahead, they look sightlessly to a utopia that never existed, while right wingers look to monuments far taller than themselves.

If Hellary had won I was looking into sending my son to Israel even though we aren't Jewish. If I'm going to lose him to war, and she was building up to war with Russia that would almost certainly have required a draft, I'd rather it be in defense of Israel than being used as a mercenary by some muslim dictator (as O liked to make US troops do).