Friday, March 30, 2018

Quisling therapy for hyperpolitical disorder

To be an MRA of the male sexualist persuasion is to be extremely isolated. We don't share society's values in the profoundly important area of sexuality, so we are not one of them. Our open hostility to laws that most people around us have internalized (whether they obey them or not, funnily enough) makes us quislings, and I mean that literally. But lacking either an effective male sexualist insurgency or an external enemy with whom to collaborate, and also assuming we don't want to stage an unsuccessful coup and get killed or imprisoned, we are faced with the need to manage our hatred. This post is concerned with strategies for such hate management, the most promising of which I call quisling therapy.

The fact that I am a quisling is already determined. A country with all these hateful sex laws and which on top of that has abolished the jury of your peers in criminal trials is not my country. Indeed, just the abolition of the jury is more than enough justification for civil war. Now, what do I do with this conviction? How do I live my life with such an all-consuming hatred against the government?

We don't strive for a "cure," because the only cure is war, which currently can only lead to death or imprisonment because resistance to feminism is so ridiculously scarce that MRAs can't even muster a small peaceful protest. Furthermore, we don't have an "anger management" issue, since we don't act impulsively. (If we were to get violent, the level of premeditation would be just as intense as our views.) Our issue is separate from and runs far, far deeper than anything to do with impulse control; it consumes our very souls. This is more a rhetorical figure than a proposed psychopathology, but it helps to have a name for it:

Diagnosis: hyperpolitical disorder

Diagnostic criteria: Over a period of at least six months, a person has experienced daily intense hatred against laws and their enforcement, hatred which is distressing and interferes markedly with quality of life.

I have met these diagnostic criteria since at least 1998, when Norwegian legislators began working in earnest on sex law corruption, with the first huge feminist victory being the rape law reform of the year 2000. Since then, the misandry has only accelerated, culminating in the abolition of the jury in 2018 (which alone should be enough to make any decent person hyperpolitical, obviously, but bizarrely isn't having that effect on most of the population) and still getting worse.

The aim of quisling therapy is to correct the quality of life part, but not the hatred, because the hatred is righteous. I am, without question, the person who hates the government the most out of everyone I have met or ever heard of aside from actual terrorists. The only reason I did not become a violent activist myself is due to circumstances and nothing else, as I am cut from the same ideological and moral cloth as those who do take that path. It is important to emphasize that a pragmatic decision to obey the law such as I have made does not equal a peaceful disposition. I would be the first to take up arms against my government if such resistance were realistic (and if I had access to arms, which I don't). Integral to quisling therapy, then, is to still feel like a warrior. That is the first step, which assures that we retain our pride and integrity. And of course we can incite within the limits of the law, like I have done with great success at avoiding a criminal record.

But I am still thinking about the other steps. Quisling therapy is a work in progress, and I welcome input. There are basically three ways to deal with hyperpolitical disorder, or three endpoints: become a terrorist, let the hatred destroy you, or get quisling therapy (I guess a fourth would be to change your political views, but I am not interested in that one). Thus if we develop a helpful quisling therapy, we may prevent some tragic fates, so this is important.

Most people are only noticeably bothered by odious laws when they are accused of breaking them or at least at strong risk of being so. I can't fathom how they do it because I am very, very different -- I am truly hyperpolitical, or oversensitive to laws. My soul seethes with hatred almost to the point of self-destruction. I am talking about the negative health effects of stress hormones associated with a constant state of intense raw hatred. This is a problem, because we have to admit that hate is toxic to the hater as well as the hated object. The childish safe spaces employed by liberals serve a similar purpose, but they only help naive people who are bothered by ideas and not the monopoly violence of the state. There are no safe spaces against laws; that would be like trying to hide from gravity. So we have to come up with a different strategy.

The number one, and most obvious strategy is (non-violent) activism and political activity, and I do that, but it isn't enough. So I started thinking of myself as a quisling -- honestly the worst quisling since Quisling himself -- which helps more, but can be refined. I have also thought of converting to Islam as a step in my quisling therapy, but haven't committed to that yet.

PS: After I wrote the above, I googled "hyperpolitical disorder" to see if someone had thought of it before. I got two hits, neither of which describe what I am talking about. One of them referred to Ben Carson, but his views are just hyper-dumb, not bordering on insanely hostile.

PPS: Gally was found guilty and sentenced to two years and three months in prison (which he is appealing, so this is not final). I plan a separate blog post on that hateful verdict, which is a very good example of why I am hyperpolitical.

241 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 241 of 241
Gally said...

As a minor update, the appeal has been submitted well within the time limit.

I will post the verdict tomorrow, after having anonymized it sufficiently.

Then, in respect of the fact that people have a fundamental right to make up their own minds, I will postphone posting the appeal concurrently.

The appeal will be posted on sunday, so that if you wish, you can comment freely and exchange thoughts.

Which I just so happen to think is a very important ethical aspect of an information society: Allowing people to think for themselves and making up their own minds through an independent exchange of ideas.

I identify as a data ethicist, amongst other things. :)

Eivind Berge said...

Good luck with the appeal, Gally. What you wrote now doesn't have to be perfect or complete. The important thing is to get a retrial so you can argue the case properly. Though there may be technical reasons as well, I strongly urge you to plead not guilty by reason of the law being unethical and go for jury nullification. I know there is no proper jury and it is an extreme long shot, but in theory the lay judges could still refuse to convict, and at least you will maximize the ideological statement for men's rights by employing this strategy.

Gally said...

@EivindBerge
I have taken your views into sincere consideration, and I must confess that I am positively surprised by thinking your arguments through, and realizing that you have some very interesting points.

I must, however, balance.

One cannot hope to achieve everything and all things at first; one must do "battle", in the sense that discourse is basically violence by peacefull and reasonable means.

A can assure y'all though, that this - this little thing - this will in no way stop me.

I shall speak reason, and do so in a peacefull and "digestible" manner.

So please bear with me, as I cannot divulge all of the details, but I think your impression of me as a person, means that you can trust me when I ask for your understanding of this: I do have a plan.

(obligatory youtube vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Yhyp-_hX2s )

Chinzork said...

I am starting to realize that rape, defined as the use of violence or extortion by a male to "steal" sex from a female, is an extremely rare phenomenon. In the first place, nearly all men would not receive much sexual pleasure in such a scenario. In fact, I doubt that they would be able to get and maintain erections.

Now, a lot of males (and females) like rough sex, but that is something very different from actual rape.

Anonymous said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUUavtvWrTo

Eivind Berge said...

That video started out well but became unbearable when she called sexual relationships between female teachers and male students "inappropriate" and probably even supports punishing these women. So it's just another feminist.

Eivind Berge said...

You do not support men's rights by foisting fake outrage over victimless sex crimes on us. This bitch needs to learn that. And how is it possible to be so dimwitted as to think the solution to out-of-control sex laws is more sex-hysteria, anyway? Even if student-teacher sex merited outrage, this would not be the solution.

Eivind Berge said...

This is a very common problem outside of male sexualism. Every once in a while someone realizes that the sex laws have gone too far in some respect. But it seems impossible to speak out against it without virtue-signaling how much one supports a level of sex-hysteria only slightly less extreme. Hence any criticism against sex laws and their enforcement is always accompanied by a call for more punishment for other sex offenders, usually women. Never mind that female sex offenders are already insanely overreacted against; these activists always call for more.

Female sexuality is harmless and should never have been legislated against in the first place, of course. Feminists have made gender-neutral sex laws, but the system is still not so corrupted that the laws are enforced equally. This is a good thing, a shred of sanity left in a world gone insane with sex-hostility. Male sexualists do not participate in increasing the sex-hostility against women or men. We do not strive for equal treatment of unequals like the retards who otherwise speak out on these issues. We want reasonable sex laws, and that means none for women and only very minimal ones for men.

Chinzork said...

"Female sexuality is harmless"

I would say that both male and female sexuality are harmless from an objective standpoint. As I said before, actual rape that involves violence or extortion is almost nonexistent. Also, the idea of someone (male or female) having sex because he/she is truly afraid for his/her well-being or life is preposterous when you really think deeply about it. It would be impossible for sexual pleasure to actually occur in such a scenario.

Chinzork said...

For example, say you are facing a mortal threat against someone who seriously want to maim or kill you. Sex and sexual pleasure do not even come into the equation in such a situation.

Gally said...

Sorry guys, but I have to postphone posting the verdict by one day.
It has been a very sunny day and I have made lots of plans and discussed stuff, so I am exhausted and that's when you make opsec mistakes.

So, my apologies for breaking my promise (I do not enjoy having to go back on my word), but just one day's delay should be acceptable, I hope.

Eivind Berge said...

@Chinzork

Real rape is much rarer than feminists claim, but it exists. It is certainly true that most men much prefer willing women, but don't underestimate the power of sexual frustration. Rape is better than being incel, and opportunistic rape also exists, as in war.

The best argument for considering rape a crime of its own is the likely existence of rape-avoidance adaptations in women. These instincts are believed to trigger more traumatization than the violence involved would otherwise cause, and if this is true, I am inclined to agree that rape can be considered a more serious crime than a comparable nonsexual assault.

However, women don't get to use this excuse to inflate the importance of all kinds of sexual offenses. It should be limited to forced intercourse only, and they do need to resist to the best of their ability unless threatened with death or serious injury. If they can't be bothered to resist, then it wasn't as bad as they claimed and your theory of sex crimes would be the right one.

If you look at the typical "rape" trial in feminist countries, it is easy to get the impression that rape doesn't exist, since the allegations typically boil down to women getting drunk and regretting their actions, but don't let this confuse you. Real rape also exists. I can't actually think of a good example from Norway, but am pretty sure this is an example of an honest-to-God rapist:

https://www.iol.co.za/news/africa/zim-rapist-asks-to-be-hanged-receives-72-year-sentence-13645911

Considering the tremendous value of sex to men, it would be strange if rape never occurred as a mating strategy. Men may also have evolved rape adaptations, that get expressed under certain circumstances, and this is yet another argument for considering rape a category of its own. But the strongest argument is the unique ability of rape to traumatize women. Ironically, feminists deny that these adaptations exist, so if you followed feminist logic, sex crimes should not exist apart from other violent crime. Male sexualists should rise above such nonsense and be realistic, even when it doesn't necessarily produce the most lenient laws.

Chinzork said...

Well I just question if the women really are unwilling because in nearly all cases it does not seem so. I think the whole "trauma" thing is mostly just women trying to make excuses for willing sexual encounters that they end up regretting later on.

Of course, I am not denying that genuine objective (i.e. physical) trauma can exist in a few cases, but they seem extremely rare in any part of the world. Rape may have been a sexual strategy created by men, but it seems that women have adapted to it, thus giving rise to "rape."

Chinzork said...

Basically, I am trying to distinguish between rape and "rape," the latter having evolved from the former. "Rape" is common not just among humans but also among other animals as well. I would even say that it is a natural and expected form of sexuality.

Considering that fact that in many animal species the female kills the male after mating, the idea of "rape" as a natural and expected mode of sexuality is not farfetched.

Eivind Berge said...

When we separate all the feminist bullshit from real rape, I still think we are left with a real phenomenon, that does involve the utmost resistance and considerable mental anguish. The reason I find this plausible, apart from evidence of actual rape, is that it makes evolutionary sense for women to be selective, and experience tells me they are extremely reluctant to have sex in all sorts of situations, so why should they give up sex without a fight to men they REALLY don't want to have sex with? It makes sense that they are liable to resist most men to the best of their ability and then if that fails, get traumatized as a mechanism to help them avoid such situations in the future, because selectivity is almost as valuable to women as promiscuity is to men.

Yes, it can be natural, just like murder is natural but still deserves to be a crime.

Chinzork said...

Well I don't think females really had a choice in the matter for most of human history. Male prowess would make any female resistance futile, so they learned to like being assaulted by men. Rookh Kshatriya wrote a good post which relates to this matter.

http://kshatriya-anglobitch.blogspot.com/2010/08/new-year-game-special-ii-does-rape.html

The below paragraph is particularly insightful.

"Males continually project masculine logic onto female sexual preference since male sexuality is eminently logical - men like youth, large breasts, small features and long legs because those are reproductive advantages. Unfortunately, females never had to evolve such clear-cut, logical preferences since intra-male sexual competition obviated such developments. In sum, female sexual choices are illogical because they lack any coherent sexual instinct - which explains the reproductive success of thugs, bums, retards and other male misfits and the relative sexual failure of the intelligent, articulate and successful. It also explains why most 'alpha' theories of Game are unsuccessful in practice, and often confuse sheer physical prowess for complex psycho-sexual traits like confidence and 'social-dominance'."

Eivind Berge said...

I think women always exercised some degree of sexual choice and usually lots of it, with some rare exceptions like very restrictive harems maybe. Even when they couldn't choose their husbands, they could still have other lovers and exert selection pressure that way. They might even kill the husband or run away. I disagree that women "lack any coherent sexual instinct." Their most coherent instinct is to prefer some kind of alpha male. There are other ways to be alpha than to dominate the official hierarchies. Some alphas are also sneaky bastards (often criminals) and it certainly makes sense to have children with them since the sons will inherit those beneficial traits. If a man has reproductive success, then he is by definition a winner and whoever calls him a misfit is wrong.

Gally said...

@EivindBerge:
Right now, I'm kind of thinking maybe I should send you the verdict + the appeal, and maybe you could read through that and perhaps it could be a separate thread?

Because this thread is getting kind of longish (on a mobile it is not so apparent that you can click for "more comments"), and it really is a separate theme that can be discussed on its own.

What do you think?

PS! I would love to host it on my own, it's just that right now I am so busy I am working around the clock, rising at before 4-O'clock some days.

Anonymous said...

https://yourdailymisandrist.wordpress.com/2018/04/06/all-male-sexualists-are-sockpuppets-of-one-dudebro-eivind-berge-norwegian-intelligence-operative/

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, just send the verdict to me the way you want it published and I will put it in my Google docs and link to it in a new blog post.

Anonymous said...

Watch the comments on this video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FLsAb4xdPEg

Anonymous said...

@Gally

Where's the verdict?!

Anonymous said...

There’s no argument to win, Eivind. You’re a self-professed underage-fucker, the lowest form of trash. Absolutely everyone in society looks down on you. I don’t need to describe my life to you because you’re not a peer to me, and its hilarious that you and your audience think that “having a family” and “having sex, with a girl!” are herculean feats that make the scorn all worth it. You fantasize that everyone else is living a sad and pathetic life when the reality is that you’re bragging about absolutely pedestrian life events that most people have no trouble accomplishing without selling their soul and/or rendering themselves anathema to most of society.

Eivind Berge said...

About those comments... all they can think of is "is she 18?" The age of consent (or the imaginary universal limit of 18) has put a ridiculous damper on male sexuality. Do they think like that when they see girls in the street as well? Can't be attracted until she is past some meaningless limit? The funny thing is some of them have internalized it and think it is supposed to be that way. That's a real-life benefit of male sexualism right there, even if we can't change the law, as you avoid the toxic thoughts in your head. We make it unequivocally clear that there is nothing wrong with attracting to underage girls.

Eivind Berge said...

To the comment above my last, it is people like you who have sold your souls to hateful laws like I just described, instead of living. You are already in hell, and you participate in your own oppression. You are damn right that we male sexualists are no peers to you because you are sick in the head. We are quislings precisely because most people think like you.

Eivind Berge said...

I should also point out that the toxic thoughts extend far beyond underage girls to encompass all of sexuality. Men in the workplace have similar toxic thoughts about sexual attraction lest it be "sexual harassment." And if you manage to get a girl home with you after running to one of the few places where it's still not taboo to pick up women, if you follow the feminist program there are toxic thoughts about all the excuses she has to accuse rape, like being drunk or not enthusiastic enough. And obviously you are a criminal if you pay for sex. So there isn't much left but hell, and I don't go there willingly, that's why I am a male sexualist.

Anonymous said...

There's a comment on the video that says that even "if it's legal in your country at 16 or 17 it doesn't make it okay". (really men why 18 and not 17?) He ends by saying that we are all a "bunch of pedophiles" because we like teenagers (more and more laughts) and its all because we have a small penis (a pathetic, castrating and discriminating insult typical of misandric women).

All this from a "man". We complain about RoK and other MRA guys because they ignore the under-18 attraction but at least try to look like men the most of the time. But this guy is a literal mangina 24 hours at day, I think he'll get his period every month. It's unrealistic this level of stupidity.

Gally said...

@Anonymous:
"Where's the verdict?!"

It's comming, dude.
FYI I was put in the cell in Norway that has the national record in illegal police custody - FOUR FUCKING YEARS - and as a result, I have developed skin-diseases under my feet that I now have to go to the hospital to have treated because not even a skin-expert can help make it go away, and I wake up several times a week at 2 O'clock and have to apply pain-killing skin-cream just to be able to get through the night.

So cut me some slack as I want to be focused enough to anonymize it to my satisfaction, pretty please.

Gally said...

@Anonymous:
"You’re a self-professed underage-fucker, the lowest form of trash. Absolutely everyone in society looks down on you."

No. Eivind is a highly reasonable and intelligent person, with a shitload of integrity and honesty.
The fact that YOU don't like his opinions, does not mean that his entire character is flawed and disreputable.

Now, over to you.
Just the other day, I met a girl in a "Russ-uniform", who looked 14. Here in Norway we celebrate the end of college by dressing up in red or blue overalls (depending on which education you take), and get shit-faced drunk and fuck around like rabbits in heat.

She was over 18 and looked 14, in fact had she put on a young girl's clothes she could have given people the impression she was 12.

And here's the problem, which I recommend you put in your pipe and puff a little on: Her voice gave away that she had massive self-esteem issues and complete lack of confidence.
Why?
Because she can't get a boyfriend because everybody would be afraid of being called pedophiles if they fucked her.

Tell us that you think that is okay. I dare you, I double-dare you motherfucker.

Anonymous said...

Gee, I wonder who could be behind this comment...

Anonymous said...

Gally, I am a Vampire high school girl and I can spot a chimo like you before he gets the chance to do harm to one of my high school friends.

Gally said...

@Anonymous:
"Gally, I am a Vampire high school girl and I can spot a chimo like you before he gets the chance to do harm to one of my high school friends."

Yeah I fuckin' know dude, that's why I can't work with children b/c I am too honest and I can be read like an open book at page 1013.

I tried working with kids but everybody looked straight through me and one girl fell in love with me and I just had to run.

My lawyer suggested I should have brought that up in court as an example of strength of character, but I don't want the police to cause trouble to anybody else - which is all they are good for, the inbreed bastards - so I kept my mouth shut.

Oh and for the little piggies reading this, nothing happened so don't fucking bother.

Ask the NSA for help cracking my VPN straight to Switzerland instead.

Gally said...

Oh and just one more thing, if I may just put the fine point on it pretty please with sugar on top: There's a difference between idi0ts who simply don't get it, and "normal" people who just so happens to, yeah.

That's why the people in jail who have messed around, have been measured to have an average lower IQ of 10 points (about 10%) than the general population.

I am not stupid and I don't have "other problems of concern", and that makes me *not dangerous*.

Except, of course, to adults crossing my doorstep. They is gonna die unless they are invited and speak softly, softly.

Gally said...

Oh, and just for funsies: "G A T E, episode nine, 'She detected me for sure, from 450 meters' @ 9:20

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSlWzpdoXP8

I am not one with whom to fuck.

Anonymous said...

@Gally
You post links to some weird shit, but no link to the verdict. I really want to see what evidence they used against you and what exactly you were convicted of.
Do you have any news articles too that you can link us to? I read Norwegian so the language isnt a problem. Come on now, it's about time.

Gally said...

@Anonymous:

Yeah I know and I am not usually this slow, but.

Give me two hours (and a half) and I'll have it sent to Eivind at which point he can decide how to publish it.

There are some outdated metadata-removing programs so I have to check everything manually, so that is one reason for the delay.

Anonymous said...

I honestly dont see how some people are completely fine with his obvious sexual interest to young girls, whom behaves like a little girl. If he Gally had a young age and behaved young than ok, but since he Gally is a clearly a grown up I find it creepy, dunno.

Gally said...

Yeah and I find it absurd to support laws that cater to your "feelings" of "creepiness".

Want me to cite you the Little Lupe-case?

Eivind Berge said...

I have written a new blog post that is just waiting for Gally's verdict before I can publish it, so I am ready. But it can always use some more proofreading, so take the time you need.

Eivind Berge said...

I went ahead and published it since it is a blog post that stands on its own anyway.

http://eivindberge.blogspot.no/2018/04/gallys-verdict.html

Will fill in the verdict when Gally wants to publish it.

Gally said...

Not a problem.
Sorry for being a slow-poke, man.
I have just had to apply Xylocain-cream three times to my feet these last couple of days, and mat (Metadata-Anonymisation Toolkit) doesn't want to compile (or else I am stupid which is always a possibility), and I like building stuff on my own so.

Doesn't really matter though, if my name should be somehow buried in there somewhere I still can make some tools day a really, really bad day if they should try some stupid shit.

A Salam Aleikum.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 241 of 241   Newer› Newest»