Dangers of the Blue Pill

This clip arrived in my Twitter stream a couple of days ago and I was going to dismiss it until I read through some of the comments about this guy on the ensuing Twitter thread. I’m going to give you my take on what I think is really going on here and then I’ll contrast this with how other viewers interpreted this incident. I was about to pass on this until the conversation really made this an interesting social experiment.

I have seen things like this before. Remember, for the better part of my ‘real job’ career I’ve been around a lot of people who are socializing and drinking. I watch guys pick up women, I watch women pick up guys, and I’ve seen a lot of couples argue in public. One thing that these couples all have in common (or at least 90% of them) is the guy trying his damnedest to get his girlfriend/wife to ‘come around to him’. As you may guess, the majority of these men were Betas who ‘just didn’t get it‘ and were appealing to their woman’s reason in order to resolve whatever it is that was making her turn off to him.

Again, most of these guys were oblivious to the fact that their trying to reason with her was only emphasizing the fact that he just didn’t get it, and that she was paired off with a guy who needed to be told how to get it.

The guy with the capacity to call a woman’s bluff with a confidence that implies she is to be worthy of him rather than the other way around is the Man to be competed for. Essentially the ‘chick speak’, ‘chick advice’ phenomenon is a shit test writ large on a social scale. And even your own mother and sisters are in on it, expecting you to ‘get it’; to get the message and see the challenge for what it really is, without overtly telling you.

She want’s you to ‘get it’ on your own, without having to be told how. That initiative and the experience needed to have had developed it makes you a Man worth competing for. Women despise a man who needs to be told to be dominant. Overtly relating this to a guy entirely defeats his credibility as a genuinely dominant male. The guy she wants to fuck is dominant because that’s ‘the way he is’ instead of who she had to tell him to be.

Observing the process will change it. This is the root function of every shit test ever devised by a woman. If masculinity has to be explained to a man, he’s not the man for her.

I have been this guy before. I’m not happy to admit that, but in my 20s, during the time I was with the BPD girl she made a habit of airing out her insane jealousy, insecurities and general relationship disorders as publicly as possible. When this becomes a way of life for a guy it changes you and particularly when it’s part of a woman’s personal neurosis. At that point in my life I had fallen very Beta (almost Omega by Vox’s standards) and I made all of the same mistakes I see guys in this predicament make when I’m working. I also know better than to try to correct these guys, because, like myself, they can get really hostile towards you or themselves when you point out the obvious to them.

So, a couple of caveats here; I don’t know for sure what’s transpired before or after this incident, and I have no idea if the guy is imbalanced (I’m being polite). It could be him, it could be her, likely it’s both, but I do know the patterns and I can see that the guy will resort to self-injury to make a point. This is a classic expression of Blue Pill Beta frustration with a girl.

The girl could be blameless and he’s just a nerdy Blue Pill Beta reacting to his frustration in not understanding how to resolve whatever it is that set him off with her. I’ve watched a lot of guys in the ‘Gamer’ social set who fall into this type. They buy into the “open communication is the key to everything” ideal that the Blue Pill told them women want, so when that ‘open communication’ is actually the reason for his problems he gets frustrated. Women are supposed to be reasonable, co-equal egalitarian agents in a relationship and when his appeals to that reason are ineffective, what’s left for the kid?

Again, this is me speculating. What we do know is his reaction. Imagine if this guy had actually broken the window and cut himself (and maybe a few bystanders) to ribbons. I mention this because it’s the reaction I’d expect from the Blue Pill mind that makes a guy believe that killing or hurting himself will in someway emphasize the seriousness with which he wants to resolve the issue he believes is crucial to his happiness with a woman. This is one of the main reasons I’ve always said kill the Beta before it kills you. There’s a very real danger that a Beta mindset will lead to you or someone else’s injury or death.

I’m actually inclined to think that the incident was his own doing though. She seems indifferent to him even after the head bang, but likely that might be due to embarrassment. She’s certainly frustrated with his attempts to get her to “listen to him”.

I’ve mentioned this before, but as women have become more self-assured about their own personal safety they feel more secure in provoking physical altercations. I understand that women love to say that they feel threatened by men all the time, or they have to always think about their personal safety no matter where they are, but I really don’t see this in real life – certainly not at my own promos. In fact it’s quite the opposite. I have seen women on many occasions (both drunk and sober) deliberately instigate confrontations that never needed to be started. All of them did so from a feeling of invulnerability because they know that no man would dare to actually assault her while she could wail on him with impunity. I think this is a new social trend with women today. They understand that if the guy she was hitting actually hit back there would be half a dozen men in the room who would beat his ass for raising a fist, much less his voice, to her. Women know the power that an opportunity to defend a woman has over men; it’s a confirmation of the old social contract that women still expect men to adhere to.

I’ve also seen women start altercations with other women in the same confidence that her man will fight the other woman’s man if the two of them get into a fight. They do so by appealing to their man’s Alphaness (or lack thereof) and having her back no matter what – even when she’s being stupid, catty or drunk. It’s kind of a new play on the ‘Lets you and him fight’ social convention, but if cooler heads prevail and one or both men pull their women away from the other they just look like pussies or less than men. Again, this is one more way women can socially reserve their bestowing or confirming manhood on a man.

Is any of this happening here? Likely no, but it’s important to remember these things in context with incidents like this. That’s important, because a few of the female readers of this Twitter thread seemed to think that, rather than his kid being a potentially terminal Beta, he had the potential to be an abuser. In fact this was their first impression. I guess I can sort of see this from a woman’s perspective, but I really think the Sisterhood Über Alles kicks in when women see something like this. Always take the woman’s side first.

I think women see this through the girl’s eyes. They understand what she’s going through in having the guy try to ‘logic’ her into understanding. They understand the girl’s frustration at just having to deal with this Beta.


I’ve probably done a really bad job at this, but my intent here is not to beat this guy up over this whole thing. When I first watched this clip I thought, “Yep, been there, done that”, and like this guy I was in my 20s when I did. It seems like this is something men must learn for themselves as part of their unplugging. I think one thing that makes unplugging more difficult today is that the stakes are so much higher when a guy just ‘doesn’t get it’. There are guys who never get past any of these Blue Pill trials because they make bad decisions that seemed logical or profound at the time and they have to live with the consequences for failing that Blue Pill trial.

I would bet that this guy is still with this girl today. Even with this going slightly viral I doubt he’s learned anything from the experience and I’m sure he’s still trying to figure out how to make this pudgy little HB 3 happy. His head bang against a window (which he had no idea was plexiglass) is really a manifestation of his own self-loathing. He wont hit her, he’ll hurt himself to make his point. This is what guys like this have been taught, to express his emotions, but in this instance that emotion is angst and frustration.

It’s easy to think that guys like this are too far gone. It’s easy for guys who’ve been Red Pill aware for a long time to dismiss Beta behaviors that they were also subject to, but have been so far removed from now that they think shit like this doesn’t happen.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

788 comments on “Dangers of the Blue Pill

  1. @Sentient

    “Unless some are prettier than the others.”

    That’s a glorious hypergamy feature for PUA and gamers and DHV men of all stripes. Use the hardwiring of intra female competition to your benefit, those most beautiful you sleep with, those less beautiful are offered a carrot to chase and can fx in other capacities.

    IMO hypergamy anabolized legalized feminism grants the sexual losers consolation prizes…but the fact remains the losers would prefer to be back in the sisterhood more than anything else.

    This isn’t a battle against the sisterhood, it’s a expectation that she should get a retirement package for her contribution to the sorority.

    Notice she’s not attacking the sorority nor her sisters. She’s giving her sisters a golden parachute if they care to take it.

    To all: This is a how-to documentary so take notes and leave the shock for others. He did it on a grander scale than everyone else, minus the FLDS perhaps, but the theory is the same.

    Make some popcorn.

  2. @Sentient

    great example of not owning the room

    no emotion, no push/pull, no build, he sounds like a fucking newbie, the bitch challenges his frame because he has none…

    this is why we know his name. because he failed

    i guarantee the “sex” with empty old used up sluts was not worth it

    “watch out for your cornhole, buddy”

  3. Fleez

    “great example of not owning the room”

    Disagree… He was challenged but kept frame. Using verbal techniques familiar to anyone who has argued with a female… Lack of logic, shifting focus, emotion etc…

  4. @Sentient

    The more I watch those videos and mock the silly women who worshipped this guy a thought suddenly struck me…

    He’s not that far off from some of the Pua’s peddling their crap videos and theories.

  5. “He’s not that far off from some of the Pua’s peddling their crap videos and theories.”

    Exactly… the structure is the same, the game is the same, the lessons. Tyler has some catching up to do…

  6. “Disagree… He was challenged but kept frame.”

    they just tossed his company president’s house

    he was never protected. stupid.

    a guy who has to threaten people to get them to comply is no cult leader and his frame is shit

    “Exactly… the structure is the same, the game is the same, the lessons. Tyler has some catching up to do…”

    even tyler isn’t stupid enough to threaten people like this idiot

    and arent’ theose bronfman bitches billionaires from the liquor?

  7. “he was never protected”

    Well the jury hasn’t been impaneled yet much less come back. Time will tell.

    Alpha does not mean bad things won’t happen to you…

    And yes Bronfman from Seagram’s

  8. “Alpha does not mean bad things won’t happen to you…”

    cash in a safe?

    conducting medical studies without oversight?

    this particular alpha should learn how to fill out paperwork better, and get a better lawyer

    good lawyers have you traveling internationally in modified shipping containers into ports where you can’t be searched or touched

    keith doesn’t have that kind of lawyer. if he did, we wouldn’t be hearing about any of this

    waiting for that nicelodeon guy’s info to drop. that will be nasty if it goes

  9. “Pua’s peddling their crap videos and theories.”

    Difference is this: PUA videos target clueless dudes’ wallets and betas find validation, self worth through sexual conquest, this Kieth guru guy targeted clueless women’s wallets and the sex was validation too, a benefit to the women who contributed to his empire.

  10. keith violated law 47: do not go past the mark you aimed for; in victory, learn when to stop

    “there is no substitute for strategy and careful planning”

    keith’s cash in a safe + hiding in mexican villa using an old dead gfs credit card = not fucking careful planning

    how many old sex slaves would have been enough? lol.

    if you’re planning on commiting multiple felonies where there are lots of witnesses and a huge paper trail…

    you might want to rethink your plan

  11. It takes time to put together a Federal case. Sometimes the preparation takes a year or even a couple of years. Could be this whole Keith Raniere thing was supposed to happen with Hillary! in charge. Part of the whole “future is female” circus.

  12. “You assume it’s a plan, not organic…”

    maybe that’s why game “gurus” fizzled out… no long term plan, just plodding along as things happened, thinking it was amazing brah and that the golden age would never end

    i didn’t take into account that mid 20s gamma guys might not have ever partied with party girls before they hit the club pickup party scene. if you aren’t at parties where girls are kissing and flashing and maybe one or two are sucking cock in bedrooms and maybe even getting naked and masturbating for the crowd in late junior high and at least high school, you might be the kind of guy that thinks that very normal behavior is amazing when he gets to over 21 life. you might also set your fucking goals really low as a result

    by all accounts keith was a well known douche in albany

    no fucking thulsa doom, that’s for sure

    from what i remember that script is pretty red pill. can’t remember if milius was good with skirt or not

  13. “Claiming one of the world’s highest IQs and holding three degrees from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Raniere has evolved over the past two decades from the fresh-faced founder of Consumers’ Buyline Inc., a buying club business investigated for being a pyramid scheme, into the 51-year-old intellectual commander of NXIVM”

    lol. the “vanguard” yells, “I’m the smartest motherfucker alive”…

    as he drops the soap in a federal pound me in the ass prison

    isn’t there a guy around here who also has the highest iq in the world and who also yells a lot of crazy shit?

    women are so fucking dumb. if guys haven’t figured that out yet then it’s like, who’s dumber, the dumb one who joins nxivm slave club, or the one who can’t understand that the dumb one is dumb enough to join the nxivm slave club?

  14. “Raniere has told his inner circle he wants to create his own country with its own currency, according to sworn testimony.”


    literally any man can be a cult leader. and while it’s good to aim high, you might want to be realisitic about the odds of creating your own soverign and monetary system

  15. @M Simon

    While women play with expressing sexiness for a variety of reasons, most men respond to sexual women the same way: they assume (wrongly) that any woman displaying sexuality is available for sex.

    While women play with expressing sexiness for a variety of reasons, most beta men respond to sexual women the same way: they assume (wrongly) that any woman displaying sexuality is available for sex with a beta male.

  16. “by all accounts keith was a well known douche in albany”

    And Troy (I first crossed his path when he was an undergrad at RPI), and Schenectady and Saratoga, and . . . but it’s not like there’s any shortage in the area. Mike Tyson held the title in those days, but I guess Keith stuck around and tried harder. They both shoulda gone back to Brooklyn where they came from.

    “I’m the smartest motherfucker alive”

    Ummmmmmm, no. He’s certainly not an idiot, but he can’t keep up with me.

  17. The same jewish Bronfman clan that managed to avoid paying around $700 million in Canadian capital gains tax, because ….. ‘connections’, and now using a small pittance (which in reality is a small fortune) of all that ill-gotten doe, to shove this goof down people’s throats. Fucking sick. The same story as always – ‘as old as the hills’ as they say. Heartiste goes overboard on alot of stuff – but this jewish shell game thing – no – CH got that right. Of course jewish psychopaths aren’t the only ones at the top playing this game, but …… highly over-represented in that respect. Why? The jewish tribe-proper closing ranks around their own psychopaths (much more so than any other group ) certainly has a lot to do with it in my estimation.

  18. The jewish tribe-proper closing ranks around their own psychopaths

    Who was the jewish con man who bilked old jewish ladies with his Ponzi scheme and ended up going to prison about the time of the Great Recession?

  19. The lolz will never end…


    Former members have depicted him as a man who manipulated his adherents, had sex with them and urged women to follow near-starvation diets to achieve the type of physique he found appealing.

    To become effective, members had to overcome weaknesses that Mr. Raniere taught were common to women — an overemotional nature, a failure to keep promises and an embrace of the role of victim, according to Ms. Edmondson and other members.

    This guy!

    Submission and obedience would be used as tools to achieve those goals, several women said. The sisterhood would comprise circles, each led by a “master” who would recruit six “slaves,” according to two women. In time, they would recruit slaves of their own.

    She made it sound like a bad-ass bitch boot camp,” Ms. Edmondson said.

    Oh the psychology… Can you hear the betas cry?

    In May, Sarah Edmondson began to recoil from her embrace of the secret society.

    Her husband, Anthony Ames, who was also a Nxivm member, learned about her branding and the couple both wanted out.

    I didn’t dooooo anything! I swear! I wonder just how long it took for hubbie to find that brand? A month? A year?


    She rubs her clit every time she shows it off… Guarantee it’s on her Insta.

  20. https://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Secrets-of-NXIVM-2880885.php

    Keith Raniere, a multilevel-marketing businessman turned self-improvement guru, has peddled himself as a spiritual being to followers, most of them women. A close-knit group of these women has tended to him, paid his bills and shuttled him around. Several have satisfied his sexual needs. And a few have left their families behind to wrap him in their affections.

    “He’s the Vanguard,” one of his key supporters testified in court, with the insistence and reverence of a child describing Santa Claus. Dozens of followers assemble annually near Lake George for Vanguard Week, a celebration of Raniere’s birthday also considered a corporate retreat.

    Raniere has convinced some followers he doesn’t drive because his intellectual energy sets off radar detectors

    Any similar issues kfg? Great line…

    She described her relationship with Raniere in a series of Times Union interviews. The first time she met Raniere, she said, he had noticed she’d gone outside for a cigarette and asked if she wanted to quit smoking. When she told him she did, Raniere took her into his office for what she thought was only 15 minutes. Her husband at the time told her afterward that she had been in the room with Raniere for 2 1/2 hours. She doesn’t remember anything that happened during the session, but she didn’t smoke again.

    Liminal space.

  21. “Any similar issues kfg?”

    Only once, but when I offered to repeat at trial they found something non-moving for me to plead to.

  22. “She rubs her clit every time she shows it off… Guarantee it’s on her Insta.”

    Hahaha – that be mucho funny because it’s surely true! She in the quandary she now be in partly because of either an absence of masculine guidance at critical junctures, or her refusal to accept that, a refusal dynamic as supported by all this FI crap that abounds in the culture (which abounds, in part, once again, because of a pervasive absence of masculine guidance). Now what the root cause of this pervasive absence of masculine guidance is, is an open question – I agree (but I got me some ideas around that).

    Look – the bitches (which is the right word given the current dynamic displayed by the likes of this ‘branded’ woman), they all got self-agency, …. it works just fine, ….. but they tend to be lazy cunts that way, and tend to avoidance around that. The masculine guidance in part, is about enforcing any attempts towards said self-agency avoidance. In my estimation, it’s the western way (i.e – promotion of, and support of, self-agency), and we are stalling right now in the west because the changing cultural conditions stemming for a whole host of reasons, has eroded past masculine enforcement strategies, which were too codified in any event. New more direct strategies are now needed. Don’t take no self-agency avoidance shit whatsoever from no bitches.- yes?

  23. Wild Man

    Self agency? Heaven’s no. What this incident puts squarely in the spotlight is that women really don’t have self agency… Just listen to ’em – it’s “not her fault” she spent 10 years in a cult, neglected her husband and kids… because “blame man”.

    It’s not coming off as heroic as she intends… Truly are shown to be children. Need adult supervision at all times.

  24. “Sarah Edmondson Actor, voice artist, unstoppable multitasking wife & mama, yogi, smoothie junkie.”

    This is why I have to say that I studied with Indian men who came by their white hair naturally, and not the 19 year old, bleached blonde chippie down at the mall.

  25. Wild Man
    March 28, 2018 at 11:52 am

    Pay attention to the bigger picture. Jews excel at everything. (excepting sports – in this era).

    Milton Friedman
    Albert Einstein
    Meyer Lansky

    They are over represented in everything that requires intellect and/or business sense.

    It is a function of distributions and their tails.

    CH is an idiot on the subject.

    But I will tell you a secret – every country that has expelled its Jews has gone on decline. Europe – has decided on that course in favor of Islamics. It will take a while – but watch the decline. It has already started.

    “Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as ‘bad luck.’” Robert Heinlein

  26. Is that married dude with the “travelling solo” wife still around?

    Dude, read this:
    if you have kids read this too

    I searched RM and surprised these have not been linked before. It looks like the Michelle Langley book is out of print (suppressed?) since it’s massively overpriced and not in any library

  27. M Simon

    Weren’t countries and nations expelling not just Jews? they were expelling or imprisoning others along the way as well, especially much of the culture creators, middle men, merchants, intellectuals of all ilk.

    Peterson talks about the Kulaks. Classic case. Your point is fine, but just like everything else, it’s not all about the Jews, the Blacks, colonialism, the wimminz, our absent fathers or the fuxking Dow.

  28. “It is a function of distributions and their tails.”

    the tails are one thing, it’s the cloven hooves that put me off .

  29. Just Beers
    March 28, 2018 at 2:38 pm

    You expel the smart people – it is going to have a greater effect (long term) than expelling the other groups.

    Take Spain – 1492. It has never recovered. And that despite treasure unimagined. They bought a lot of things with the money. What they didn’t invest in was production.

    And in the age of brains the results will be worse faster.

    Look up ” Smart Fraction Theory “

  30. And speaking of hard to find books relating to “women’s issues,” poking about I have discovered that the classic noir Laura, is back in print, published by — The Feminist Press at the City University of New York.

    Because femme fatales are feminist now. Go figure.

    And if I buy it I’ll only finance and encourage them.

  31. Speaking of distributions and tails, Nassim Taleb’s book Skin in The Game has something to say about the Keith Raniere cult of NXIVM.

    How to Legally Own Another Person, Chapter 3 of Skin in the game–Nassim Nicholas Taleb


    In its early phase, as the church was starting to get established in Europe, there was a group of itinerant people called the gyrovagues. They were gyrating and roaming monks without any affiliation to any institution. Theirs was a freelance (and ambulatory) variety of monasticism, and their order was sustainable, as the members lived off begging and from the good graces of townsmen who took interest in them. It was a weak form of sustainability, as one can hardly call sustainable a group of a people with vows of celibacy: they cannot grow organically, and would need continuous enrollment. But they managed to survive thanks to help from the population, who provided them with food and temporary shelter.

    Until sometime around the fifth century, when they started disappearing—they are now extinct. The gyrovagues were unpopular with the church, banned by the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century, then banned again by the second Council of Nicaea about three hundred years later. In the West, Saint Benedict of Nursia, their greatest detractor, favored a more institutional brand of monasticism, and ended up prevailing with his rules that codified the activity, with a hierarchy and strong supervision by an abbot. For instance, Benedict’s rules, put together in a sort of instruction manual, stipulate that a monk’s possessions should be in the hands of the abbot (Rule 33), and Rule 70 bans angry monks from hitting other monks.

    Why were they banned? They were, simply, totally free. They were financially free, and secure, not because of their means but because of their lack of wants. Ironically, by being beggars, they had the equivalent of f*** you money, which we can more easily get by being at the lowest rung than by joining the income-dependent classes.

    Complete freedom is the last thing you want if you have an organized religion to run. Total freedom for your employees is also a very, very bad thing if you have a firm to run, so this chapter is about the question of employees and the nature of the firm and other institutions.
    Benedict’s instruction manual aims explicitly at removing any hint of freedom from the monks under the principles of stabilitate sua et conversatione morum suorum et oboedientia—“stability, conversion of manners, and obedience.” And of course monks are put through a probation period of one year to see if they are sufficiently obedient.

    In short, every organization wants a certain number of people associated with it to be deprived of a certain share of their freedom. How do you own these people? First, by conditioning and psychological manipulation; second, by tweaking them to have some skin in the game, forcing them to have something significant to lose if they disobey authority—something hard to do with gyrovague beggars who flout their scorn for material possessions. In the orders of the mafia, things are simple: made men (that is, ordained) can be whacked if the capo suspects a lack of allegiance, with a transitory stay in the trunk of a car—and a guaranteed presence of the boss at their funerals. For other professions, skin in the game comes in more subtle forms.


    Let us say that you own a small airline company. You are a very modern person; having attended many conferences and spoken to consultants, you believe that the traditional company is a thing of the past: everything can be organized through a web of contractors. It is more efficient to do so, you are certain.

    Bob is a pilot with whom you have entered into a specific contract, in a well-defined drawn-out legal agreement, for precise flights, commitments made a long time in advance, which includes a penalty for nonperformance. Bob supplies the co-pilot and an alternative pilot in case someone is sick. Tomorrow evening you will be operating a scheduled flight to Munich as part of an Oktoberfest special. The flight is full with motivated budget passengers, some of whom went on a preparatory diet; they have been waiting a whole year for this Gargantuan episode of beer, pretzels, and sausage in laughter-filled hangars.

    Bob calls you at five P.M. to let you know that he and the copilot, well, they love you…but, you know, they will not fly the plane tomorrow. You know, they had an offer from a Saudi Arabian Sheikh, a devout man who wants to take a special party to Las Vegas, and needs Bob and his team to run the flight. The Sheikh and his retinue were impressed with Bob’s manners, the fact that Bob had never had a drop of alcohol in his life, his expertise in fermented yoghurt drinks, and told him that money was no object. The offer is so generous that it covers whatever penalty there is for a breach of a competing contract by Bob.

    You kick yourself. There are plenty of lawyers on these Oktoberfest flights, and, worse, retired lawyers without hobbies who love to sue as a way to kill time, regardless of outcome. Consider the chain reaction: if your plane doesn’t take off, you will not have the equipment to bring the beer-fattened passengers back from Munich—and you will most certainly miss many round trips. Rerouting passengers is costly and not guaranteed.

    You make a few phone calls and it turns out that it is easier to find an academic economist with common sense than find another pilot—that is, an event of probability zero. You have all this equity in a firm that is now under severe financial threat. You are certain that you will go bust.
    You start thinking: well, you know, if Bob were a slave, someone you own, you know, these kind of things would not be possible. Slave? But wait…what Bob just did isn’t something that employees who are in the business of being employees do! People who are employees for a living don’t behave so opportunistically. Contractors are exceedingly free; as risk-takers, they fear mostly the law. But employees have a reputation to protect. And they can be fired.

    People you find in employment love the regularity of the payroll, with that special envelope on their desk the last day of the month, and without which they would act as a baby deprived of mother’s milk. You realize that had Bob been an employee rather than something that appeared to be cheaper, that contractor thing, then you wouldn’t be having so much trouble.
    But employees are expensive. You have to pay them even when you’ve got nothing for them to do. You lose your flexibility. Talent for talent, they cost a lot more. Lovers of paychecks are lazy…but they would never let you down at times like these.

    So employees exist because they have significant skin in the game—and the risk is shared with them, enough risk for it to be a deterrent and a penalty for acts of undependability, such as failing to show up on time. You are buying dependability.

    And dependability is a driver behind many transactions. People of some means have a country house—which is inefficient compared to hotels or rentals—because they want to make sure it is available if they decide they want to use it on a whim. There is a trader’s expression: “Never buy when you can rent the three Fs: what you Float, what you Fly, and what you…(that something else).” Yet many people own boats and planes, and end up stuck with that something else.
    True, a contractor has downside, a financial penalty that can be built into the contract, in addition to reputational costs. But consider that an employee will always have more risk. And conditional on someone being an employee, such a person will be risk averse. By being employees they signal a certain type of domestication.

    Someone who has been employed for a while is giving you strong evidence of submission.

    Evidence of submission is displayed by the employee’s going through years depriving himself of his personal freedom for nine hours every day, his ritualistic and punctual arrival at an office, his denying himself his own schedule, and his not having beaten up anyone on the way back home after a bad day. He is an obedient, housebroken dog. –Nassim Taleb, Skin in the Game

  33. @Sentient
    Self agency? Heaven’s no.

    Women want options and freedom of choice. What they don’t want is the responsibility and accountability that follows. Neural pathways for hypergamy. Only the upside with no downside. This is the pinnacle of any argument they have with you at the individual and societal level. Exactly like children. Just listen carefully.

    Sometimes my wife tries to shit test me for doing something my way without consulting her. When it happens, and I decide not to shrug it off, I give her enough space to take ownership of that bit and let her know what decisions she may need to make in the process. Often it’s enough for the hamster to squeal in pain and she steps back. Every now and then, however, she wants to prove her point and thinks she can handle it. Clockwork… lol. She comes back more stressed and asks for help. It’s done my way by then.

    Let them experience consequences of their hamster dreams. A dosage of the real world = hamster vaccination technique… lol

    Nb. things she can deal with I don’t even touch. Little does she know I’ve given her space for that little bit of self agency she can cope with. Not more. Violate this and their happiness plummets. That’s why “my way or the highway” works too and they come back. The fuck up is when you try to make it work for them and they start to believe they can handle it… and want more.

  34. Sentient
    March 28, 2018 at 3:00 pm

    it’s the cloven hooves that put me off .

    Milton Friedman?
    Richard Feynman?
    Albert Einstein?
    Hans Bethe?
    John von Neumann?
    Leo Szilard?
    James Franck?
    Edward Teller?


    But OK. Hitler was a white man. What about the cloven hoof white men?

    We have half a nation practicing this kind of stupidity. The question is why you – a supposedly intelligent person – would want to add to it?

    BTW this kind of hate is typical for the bottom of a Kondratieff Cycle. The cycles last about 80 years. So 1930 + 80 = 2010. We will not be out of the woods for another 10 or so years.

    And giving in to the group identity shite aligns you with the Frankfort School. Which is in fact hilarious.

  35. Only the upside with no downside. This is the pinnacle of any argument they have with you at the individual and societal level. Exactly like children. Just listen carefully.

    Dread = Fear of Loss

    Skin in the Game excerpt:



    Take for now the following:

    What matters isn’t what a person has or doesn’t have; it is what he or she is afraid of losing.

    The more you have to lose, the more fragile you are. Ironically, in my debates, I’ve seen numerous winners of the so-called Nobel in Economics (the Riksbank Prize in Honor of Alfred Nobel) concerned about losing an argument. I noticed years ago that four of them were actually concerned that I, a nonperson and trader, publicly called them frauds. Why did they care? Well, the higher you go in that business, the more insecure you get, as losing an argument to a lesser person exposes you more than if you lose to some hotshot.

    Being higher up in life only works under some conditions. You would think that the head of the CIA would be the most powerful person in America, but it turned out that the venerated David Petraeus was more vulnerable than a truck driver. The fellow couldn’t even have an extramarital relationship. You can risk people’s lives, but you remain a slave. The entire structure of the civil service is organized that way.


    Perhaps, by definition, an employable person is the one you will never find in a history book, because these people are designed to never leave their mark on the course of events. They are, by design, uninteresting to historians. But let us now see how this fits the theory of the firm and the ideas of Ronald Coase.

    An employee is—by design—more valuable inside a firm than outside of it; that is, more valuable to the employer than the marketplace.

    Coase was a remarkable modern economist in that he was independent thinking, rigorous, and creative, with ideas that are applicable and explain the world around us—in other words, the real thing. His style is so rigorous that he is known for the Coase Theorem (about how markets are very smart about allocating resources and nuisances such as pollution), an idea that he posited without a single word of mathematics, but which is as fundamental as many things written in mathematics.

    Aside from his theorem, Coase was the first to shed light on why firms exist. For him, contracts can be too costly to negotiate due to transaction costs; the solution is to incorporate your business and hire employees with clear job descriptions because you can’t afford legal and organizational bills for every transaction. A free market is a place where forces act to determine specialization, and information travels via price point; but within a firm these market forces are lifted because they cost more to run than the benefits they bring. So market forces will cause the firm to aim for the optimal ratio of employees and outside contractors.

    As we can see, Coase stopped one or two inches short of the notion of skin in the game. He never thought in risk terms to realize that an employee is also a risk-management strategy.
    Had economists, Coase or Shmoase, had any interest in the ancients, they would have discovered the risk-management strategy relied upon by Roman families who customarily had a slave for treasurer, the person responsible for the finances of the household and the estate. Why? Because you can inflict a much higher punishment on a slave than a free person or a freedman—and you do not need to rely on the mechanism of the law for that. You can be bankrupted by an irresponsible or dishonest steward who can divert your estate’s funds to Bithynia. A slave has more downside.

    End Quote.

    Via Red Pill and game there was a tipping point in MRP for me three years ago. When my wife (who is a keeper) realized that her exit strategy was failing because I pulled a thread on her sweater as she was trying to walk away and IT unraveled. We were having an argument and I wasn’t getting emotional to her dismay. She volunteered: “And now I’m stuck with You!” And So It Goes. I’m happy in my own way and so is the family. And I’m mostly able to go my own way with my vision, purpose and mission on the proper tracks that I designed.

  36. We have quite a progression going on here.

    Kill the Witches.
    Kill the Jews.
    Kill the White men (maybe all men – but we aren’t quite that far – yet)

    What do they all have in common? “The answer to your problems is kill the….”

  37. Quote from Skin In The Game:


    The exact obverse of the public-hotshot as slave is the autocrat.

    As I am writing these lines, we are witnessing a nascent confrontation between several parties, which includes the current “heads” of state of members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (modern states don’t quite have heads, just people who talk big) and the Russian Vladimir Putin. Clearly, except for Putin, all the others need to be elected, can come under fire by their party, and have to calibrate every single statement with how it could be misinterpreted the least by the press. On the other hand, Putin has the equivalent of f***you money, projecting a visible “I don’t care,” which in turn brings him more followers and more support. In such a confrontation Putin looks and acts as a free citizen confronting slaves who need committees, approval, and who of course feel like they have to fit their decisions to an immediate rating.

    Putin’s attitude mesmerizes his followers, particularly the Christians in the Levant—especially those Orthodox Christians who remember when Catherine the Great’s fleet came to allow the tolling of the bells of the Saint George Cathedral in Beirut. Catherine the Great was “the last czar with balls,” and she is the one who took the Crimea from the Ottomans. Before that, the Sunni Ottomans had banned Christians in the coastal cities under their control from ringing church bells—only inaccessible mountain villages allowed themselves such freedom. These Christians lost the active protection of the Russian czar in 1917 and now are hoping that Byzantium is coming back about a hundred years later. It is much easier to do business with the owner of the business than some employee who is likely to lose his job next year; likewise it is easier to trust the word of an autocrat than a fragile elected official.

    Watching Putin made me realize that domesticated (and sterilized) animals don’t stand a chance against a wild predator. Not a single one. Fughedabout military capabilities: it is the trigger that counts.*6

    Historically, the autocrat was both freer and—as in the special case of traditional monarchs in small principalities—in some cases had skin in the game in improving the place, more so than an elected official whose objective function is to show paper gains. This is not the case in modern times, as dictators, aware that their time might be limited, indulge in pillaging the place and transferring assets to their Swiss bank accounts—as in the case of the Saudi Royal family.

    *6 Universal suffrage did not change the story by much: until recently, the pool of elected people in so-called democracies was limited to a club of upper class people who cared much, much less about the press. But with more social mobility, ironically, more people could access the pool of politicians—and lose their jobs. And progressively, as with corporations, you start gathering people with minimal courage—and selected because they don’t have courage, as with a regular corporation.

  38. Jean of LA FONTAINE (1621-1695)

    The Wolf and the Dog

    A wolf had only the bones and the skin, so
    much the dogs were good guard.
    This Wolf meets a Dogue as powerful as it is beautiful,
    Bold, polite, who had accidentally misguided himself.
    To attack him, to put him in quarters,
    Sire Wolf would have done it willingly;
    But it was necessary to give battle,
    and the Mastiff was able
    to defend himself boldly.
    The Wolf, therefore, humbly approaches him, enters
    into his words, and compliments him
    on his plumpness, which he admires.
    “It will only hold you handsome sire,
    To be as fat as me,” said the Dog to him, ”
    Leave the woods, you will do well:
    your kind are miserable,
    Cancers, heroes, and poor devils,
    Whose condition is to starve.
    Because what? nothing assured: no loose point:
    Everything at the tip of the sword.
    Follow me: you will have a better destiny. ”
    The Wolf continued:” Let me he will do?
    “Almost nothing,” said the Dog, “hunt people
    carrying sticks and beggars;
    Flatter those of the house, to his Master compliment:
    For what your salary
    will be force reliefs in all ways:
    bones of chickens, bones of pigeons,
    not to mention many caress. ”
    The Wolf is already forging a happiness
    that makes him cry of tenderness.” In the process
    , he saw the collar of the dog peeled.
    “What there he said -. Nothing. – What nothing? -? Not much.
    – But encor – The necklace which I am attached
    What you see may be the cause.
    – “Do you not run
    Where you want?” “Not always, but what
    does it matter? ” “It matters so much, that of all your meals
    I do not want of any kind,
    And would not even like at this price a treasure. ”
    That said, Master Wolf runs away, and runs again.

  39. Might is Right gentlemen, we can argue whatver we want about intergender dynamics, but is the mighty men who gets all the rewards. Do what you want, that’s the supreme law. Employees are the voluntary slaves, owners of debt are the owners of earth, the natural state of the earth is war, every rationalisation, is just noise.

  40. M Simon

    It’s not just one group. You don’t think Jews are the only smart people do you?

    Case in point, Spanish Inquisition.

    Stop fomenting.

  41. One last one. And I swear this has relevance to a bottoms up approach of a man with vision in The Red Pill and With Game.

    To abdicate to the FI or to complain about the women you deal with is to abdicate your own personal skin in the game. To be a slave. To be an employee. To go along. Instead of blaze your own path.

    To not know your blind spots, to not know what is holding you back, to continue without you controlling your reality. Because you have skin in the game. (Yeah, sorry for the abstract, non-concrete steps for the peanut gallery. But such is life.)

    Quote from Skin in the Game:


    More generally:

    People whose survival depends on qualitative “job assessments” by someone of higher rank in an organization cannot be trusted for critical decisions.

    Although employees are reliable by design, it remains the case that they cannot be trusted in making decisions, hard decisions, anything that entails serious tradeoffs. Nor can they face emergencies unless they are in the emergency business, say, firefighters. The employee has a very simple objective function: fulfill the tasks that his or her supervisor deems necessary, or satisfy some gameable metric. If the employee when coming to work in the morning discovers the potential for huge opportunities, say selling anti-diabetes products to prediabetic Saudi Arabian visitors, he cannot stop and start exploiting it if he is officially in the light fixtures business, selling chandeliers to old-fashioned Park Avenue widows.

    So although an employee is here to prevent an emergency, should there be a change of plan, the employee is stuck. While this paralysis can arise because the distribution of responsibilities causes a serious dilution, there is another problem of scale.

    We saw the effect with the Vietnam War. Most people (sort of) believed that certain courses of action were absurd, but it was easier to continue than to stop—particularly since one can always spin a story explaining why continuing is better than stopping (the backfitting story of sour grapes now known as cognitive dissonance). We have been witnessing the same problem in the U.S. attitude toward Saudi Arabia. It is clear since the attack on the World Trade Center (in which most of the attackers were Saudi citizens) that someone in that nonpartying kingdom had a hand—somehow—in the matter. But no bureaucrat, fearful of oil disruptions, made the right decision—instead, the absurd invasion of Iraq was endorsed because it appeared to be simpler.

    Since 2001 the policy for fighting Islamic terrorists has been, to put it politely, missing the elephant in the room, sort of like treating symptoms and completely missing the disease. Policymakers and slow-thinking bureaucrats stupidly let terrorism grow by ignoring its roots—because that was not a course that was optimal for their jobs, even if optimal for the country. So we lost a generation: someone who went to grammar school in Saudi Arabia (our “ally”) after September 11 is now an adult, indoctrinated into believing and supporting Salafi violence, hence encouraged to finance it. Even worse, the Wahhabis have accelerated their brainwashing of East and West Asians with their madrassas, thanks to high oil revenues. Instead of invading Iraq or blowing up “Jihadi John” and other individual terrorists, thus causing a multiplication of these agents, it would have been better to focus on the source of the problems: Wahhabi/Salafi education and the promotion of intolerant beliefs according to which a Shiite or an Ezidi or a Christian are deviant people. But, to repeat, this is not a decision that can be made by a collection of bureaucrats with a job description.

    The same thing happened in 2009 with the banks. I said in Prologue 1 that the Obama administration was complicit with the Bob Rubin trade. We have plenty of evidence that they were afraid of rocking the boat and contradicting the cronies.

    Now compare these policies to ones in which decision makers have skin in the game as a substitute for their annual “job assessment,” and you will picture a different world.

  42. They are over represented in everything that requires intellect and/or business sense.

    Entertainment and similar mind-control enterprises, I concur. Manufacturing CEOs not so much. Transportation, not so much. Energy, not so much. Lots of smart jews own jewelry and clothing shops. And jews tend to be liberal, which indicates that they live in a bubble. And they have disdain for blue collar workers. Guess why blue collar workers tend to be anti-jewish….

    When jews start to assimilate into a gentile culture, other jews work against assimilation…(being a CEO requires some assimilation, unless you can surround yourself with your own ethnic group–like in Hollywood or the broadcast networks)…if you want to prevent assimilation, you have to work at keeping fear of outsiders and a fear of past incidents reoccurring…which, of course, breeds hostility among people who weren’t involved in those incidents…which further helps prevent assimilation…the anti-assimilators foster ill-will…pretty much the same as the KKK which fosters ill-will based on past events…

    most jews are motivated by fear…and are controlled by the patriarchs who feed that fear…

    Unpleasant truths…


    I went to school with a lot of jews…on the east coast…I even had a couple of jewish roomates…we had lots of interesting conversations where they taught me a lot of these things…

  43. You expel the smart people – it is going to have a greater effect (long term) than expelling the other groups.
    Take Spain – 1492. It has never recovered. And that despite treasure unimagined.

    The intelligence of Jews was irrelevant. What mattered is that the Jews ran the banks and it was against Catholic doctrine for a Catholic to charge interest. No money for investment means no manufacturing.

    Spain has recovered just fine. For example, at one point it ranked third in shipbuilding.

    What hurt Spain for a couple of centuries was its gold acquisition economic policies. And a civil war where it lost a quarter of its population in the 20th century.

    I guess it doesn’t take great intelligence to write great literature. Shakespeare, Wilde, and Cervantes were morons. Otherwise we’d see great Jewish writers of their caliber.

  44. Let’s hope this bullshit ends quickly.

    …. at least it wasn’t me this time though.

    ” Might is Right gentlemen, we can argue whatver we want about intergender dynamics, but is the mighty men who gets all the rewards. Do what you want, that’s the supreme law. Employees are the voluntary slaves, owners of debt are the owners of earth, the natural state of the earth is war, every rationalisation, is just noise. “

    I have heard this kind of shit all of my life. This is the 2nd time today. Boy oh boy.

    If men are smart enough to know that Might and debt and widgets are the measure of man, then by God, be smart enough to know what has happened historically to all authoritarian/bully assed societies.

    Every. Single. One. Period.

    There are bursts where bonehead asswipes get the run of large patches of earth, by brute and unjustified force. Then those bursts are usually followed by extinction bursts for that society.

    Thousand Year Reich? Yeah, that worked out wonderfully. The sun never sets on the British Empire? Lmfao. Truth, Justice and Liberty for All? Whateva.

    Guess who’s up next?


  45. Anyone care to list out what is considered ” against catholic doctrine? “.

    Bullet points not necessary.

  46. Lately I’m also interested in rehabbing old bullshit too.

    Like one guy calling out a religion by stating a tenant of hisreligion that he gingerly accepts and violates at will.

    tsk, tsk, tsk.

    So, as a ” Christian “, are you more partial to the teachings of Jesus, or more partial to following the old testament?

    Ever read a quran?

    C’mon old chap, tell me more.

  47. theasdgamer
    March 28, 2018 at 5:50 pm

    “Blax, stick to your competencies, like rehabbing old cars”


    Now it’s verrry serious, folks 🤣

  48. “I guess it doesn’t take great intelligence to write great literature. Shakespeare, Wilde, and Cervantes were morons. Otherwise we’d see great Jewish writers of their caliber.”

    Arguably the most successful playwright of all time is … Neil Simon
    (I’d go with Mel Brooks in a pinch, however — for most successful movie dates)

  49. M Simon

    “To clarify === “The effect of THC is with you forever even if you don’t use it.”

    It is built into your system. You can’t escape it.”

    This ^ is common knowledge in the year of our lord 2018.

    Back in the day I noticed that those that hadn’t yet imbibed in the reefer were more apt to act stoned then those that had and weren’t. Have I lost you yet? This would seem to be the result of cannabinoid receptors shutting down their sensitivity.


    Mutation and chimera studies are excellent ways to gather information on ligand binding sites. Although the CB1 binding sites for SR141716A [169–177], WIN55212-2 [169, 172, 176, 178–180] and CP55940 [176, 177, 179, 180]/HU-210 [172, 174, 175, 178, 180] and the CB2 binding site for WIN55212-2 [63, 181–183], CP55940 [182, 183], HU-210 [182] and SR144528 [184, 185] have been explored (many quite extensively) via mutation studies, very few mutations have shed light on the endocannabinoid binding sites at CB1 or CB2. Song and Bonner reported that a K3.28A mutation in CB1 leads to severe loss of binding for anan-damide, HU-210 and CP-55940 [178]. Mutations of aromatic residues on TMH3,4,5,6 of CB1 revealed that the binding of anandamide was affected by the mutation of one aromatic on TMH3, F3.25 [169, 176]. Recently, the Kendall lab has reported that mutations of F268W, P269A and 1271A in the EC-2 loop of CB1 have a profound effect on the binding of R-methanandamide (13, Chart 3) at CB1. These results are suggestive of a steric effect on R-methanandamide binding and imply that anandamide binds high enough in the CB1 binding pocket to be impacted by changes in the EC-2 loop [175]. Surprisingly, there have been no mutation studies that explored the 2-AG binding pocket at CB1 or CB2.

  50. JT

    Nah, I’m not gonna belabor the point. asd gets what I’m sayin’.

    Folks claim ” Christian ” but speak like the damn devil. Lol. It’s common. I just like to remind them of what they ( supposedly ) already know if they were taught the teachings of Christ.

    But, if they read the New Testament ( and of course they would…right? ), Revelations speaks clearly of the Synagogue/Church ( no ” churches during Jesus time ) of Satan. Then there’s false prophets and so on. And men not knowing right from wrong, etc.

    People claiming Jesus while speaking Old Testament just rub me wrong – especially when they hate Muslims and Jewish practitioners.

    More reading is required, and maybe less blind acceptance of what a bunch of guys in a building preached.

    That is all.

  51. I never was one to get wrapped around the axle about Jews and bankers, lawyers maybe , mostly legislators. Never have gone in debt not for a car or house or any of that a few hospital bills is all.

    A couple of things,if you can’t afford it you don’t need it and set yourself up in a position where you are free to work harder and longer for more reward,no 9-5n. You can’t squeeze blood from a turnip or a rock. If you get a credit card pay it off in full every billing,it works if you use their money one month at a time,if you try to use it longer they will end up using yours.

    Revelations is full of good advice not the least of which is to carry on in faith and let the dervishes whirl.

  52. Arguably the most successful playwright of all time is … Neil Simon
    (I’d go with Mel Brooks in a pinch, however — for most successful movie dates)

    I’m sure Simon’s plays have been read and performed more than the Bard’s. XD

    Blax, I wasn’t arguing against Catholicism. The point was banking. Catholicism is WHY gentiles didn’t get into it back in the Middle Ages. Fifteenth century Catholic doctrine is moot now. Catholics are big into banking.

    Haven’t you read “The Merchant of Venice?” Remember ol’ Shylock? The Jewish banker? That play gives us a picture of economic/religious issues back in the Middle Ages.

  53. People claiming Jesus while speaking Old Testament just rub me wrong – especially when they hate Muslims and Jewish practitioners.

    Didn’t your mother teach you not to tell stories? Mine did.

  54. Let’s see, in 1972 I was . . . . oh, yeah, spending an awful lot of time sitting in that very Queens University hall that Jordan Peterson spoke in. Too much nostalgia overload in that video for me.

    So that was the year Bucky Fuller crashed my birthday party.

    And I’ve had a ’72 FIAT 124 Spider and Alfa Romeo GTV. Managed to really like them both even if the 124 ate head gaskets and the Alfa had a fuel injector that didn’t inject fuel.

    So the first thing we’re going to have to do to go shopping at the corner of 19 and 72 is buy a DeLorean with the flux capacitor option.

  55. @Blaximus

    Let’s hope this bullshit ends quickly.

    “…. at least it wasn’t me this time though.

    ” Might is Right gentlemen, we can argue whatver we want about intergender dynamics, but is the mighty men who gets all the rewards. Do what you want, that’s the supreme law. Employees are the voluntary slaves, owners of debt are the owners of earth, the natural state of the earth is war, every rationalisation, is just noise. “

    I have heard this kind of shit all of my life. This is the 2nd time today. Boy oh boy.”

    I don’t know how to interpret your comment, if you either agree or disagree, anyway that’s not important. Of course every great men eventually have lost ground to someone more powerful than him, that’s nature, and it always will be, it doesn’t matter what you do or do not think. So, might is right might be very regurgitated already but it is the truth, he who can excert violence is king, whatever you, me or the fucking queen of the australian aborigenes says.

  56. “Self agency? Heaven’s no. What this incident puts squarely in the spotlight is that women really don’t have self agency… Just listen to ’em – it’s “not her fault” she spent 10 years in a cult, neglected her husband and kids… because “blame man”. It’s not coming off as heroic as she intends… Truly are shown to be children. Need adult supervision at all times.”

    Sentient – surely you jest. As always watch what the subject in question does, not so much just what the subject in question says. But you know all this already. Ergo – what I said above, with respect to ‘Don’t take no self-agency avoidance shit whatsoever from the bitches’ is the prescription you abide by – yes?

    For reference sake, and definition-sticklermatics-sake – (oops a neologism – maybe better to say – ‘and for precision-sake’, …. you know …. for kfg’s sake):

    Self-agency = the belief in the personal power to make meaningful non-deterministic decisions which therefore implies personal responsibility for the consequences of said decisions.

  57. M Simon – are you of jewish heritage? If so, to point – do you think the Bronfman clan were out of line with respect to their $700 million tax avoidance scheme?

  58. SJF – the fella you are quoting re ‘Skin In The Game’ – his ideas around Saudi Arabia 9-11 complicity – yes. All true (and obvious). Yet still no reopening and re-investigation of the 9-11 debacle despite 9-11 victim’s wherewithal to now seek Saudi compensation, via judicial due process. Mmmmm?

    So … what gives? The author you quote says it’s because the elected officials and bureaucrats don’t really have skin in the game. Now which game would that be exactly? See? What is it now – $5 trillion and counting borrowed from America’s future to pay for the middle eastern wars? And the author claims it’s primarily about not upsetting the oil markets? Hogwash. Because $5 trillion. So what applecart is the applecart that the elected officials and the bureaucrats seek not to upset? Huh?

  59. Folks claim ” Christian ” but speak like the damn devil. Lol. It’s common. I just like to remind them of what they ( supposedly ) already know if they were taught the teachings of Christ. ~Blaximus

    Hear it from me,

    someone’s that’s been dead,
    experienced it
    and it affects everything I do,

    someone that’s been told for decades


    because of your work in Hollywood”

    (I let time limits pass on ALL on camera deals
    and I never used my real name in the high paying voice work
    my voice was known for)

    someone that’s spent nearly two decades

    being a man that decision makers trust

    asking specific ones to test one big-budget wide release

    (2,000+ screens in the U S) feature film

    based on a true story that shows


    the kind “Christians” are supposed to have

    which changes everything.

    LIONSGATE was the LEAST LIKELY to DO a REAL TRANSFORMATION project on this level of budget, quality, wideness of release (and they didn’t water down the message)

    I’m asking those same “Christians” that enjoyed blaming me for the “evil” content

    filled with profanity even though I don’t generally use profanity.

    Instead of living around Los Angeles, CA DOING THE WORK changing “Hollywood” instead of consuming its content (a major feature film requires virtually every position you can think of)

    “Christians” think their “news” channel is immune to scripted fantasy. Sad, sad people

    I still don’t have time to consume the content that “Christians”
    that they are the most important people to affect, and they consume
    more of it than other groups.

    Thank LIONSGATE directly
    No lecture about the past
    Thank them individually
    Hand-Written letter
    Gratitude for funding it,
    no resentment about past content


    Commit yourself to mastery.

    Begin with books by Rollo Tomassi and Ivan Throne.

    Also, learn what the decision makers in Hollywood know:
    They know the Bible better than you do.

    Study the old KJV Bible.
    Learn what the texts mean in Greek and Hebrew.
    It’s free to learn.

    I acted like I’d never heard of the new LIONSGATE wide-release, big budget feature film
    “I Can Only Imagine”

    I acted like I didn’t know Bart Millard all of this time.


    That “Christian” would’ve been skeptical
    because it’s LIONSGATE,
    because I’m friends with unusually influential NON-Christians
    in the industry that “your evil friends”

    People that
    “aren’t loyal to you”
    “would let you die”


    I’ve died. I Believe.

    A lot of those (NON-Christians) showed up
    and immediately took the most effective actions
    (when “Christians” did not)
    and made sure I lived
    and they wouldn’t settle for my simply walking and talking
    as mastery is the way
    and they’re still making sure
    the rebuilding thrives.

    I’ve an excellent PPO health insurance plan,
    but coming back from extreme means most of it
    is not covered.

    Who has been there for me when
    the rebuilding exceeded
    $1 million?
    $2 million?


    What Did “Christians” Do?

    Too many “Christians” complained
    and still complain about “your evil friends”
    regardless of clear evidence that they have never stopped their
    power, influence, resources to open doors that’ve repeatedly saved my life
    through professionals, advanced techniques and medicines that have no negative side effects…
    and they’ve protected me all of this time.
    They’re real, but they’re not impressed with how “Christians” settle rather than live the concrete process to mastery, then do it again, and again and again…


    Stop complaining. Do.

  60. Well, I for one am grateful that Israel bombed those nuclear plants in the Middle East.
    And if our stupid asses hadn’t been occupying Iraq, Iran wouldn’t have full-up nuclear capability either.

  61. I don’t often quote PBS, but …

    “Neil Simon is the world’s most successful playwright. He has had dozens of plays and nearly as many major motion pictures produced. He has been showered with more Academy and Tony nominations than any other writer, and is the only playwright to have four Broadway productions running simultaneously. His plays have been produced in dozens of languages, and have been blockbuster hits from Beijing to Moscow.”

    So don’t XD quite so loudly

    Of course I’ll give Shakespeare the top spot, but never tire of reminding my Bard-crazed LTR that Simon (Neil, not M!) is Number Two with a bullet

  62. IMO these cult women, and all ladies to some extent, have agency, though assume none of the responsibility. Nothing new there.

    Feminine women see no contradictions in that, feel no guilt in their poor decisions. It’s the same capricious, attractive, freewheeling love of life that I want in the women in my sphere. Consider them kittens.

    Female solipsism can work in men’s benefit too and up to us to promote that as much as possible. I hope you experience it too.

    Feminity is best served hot and spiked with booze. Guten Appetit.

  63. Arthur Miller was no slouch…
    People don’t really make fun of the kids stumbling off the short bus. They just feel sorry for them.
    Take it as a compliment.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: