You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

“I am a modern day Nero / So hand me a fiddle and bow / ’Cause dancing on ashes and graves / Is the only joy I know.”-This Is Hell, “Procession Commence”

“And we danced like a wave on the ocean, romanced / We were liars in love and we danced.”-Hooters, “And We Danced”

It doesn’t get any more tiresome than the same re-hashed social justice causes that are essentially no longer causes. Physics Today bemoaned the fact that there’s still a gender pay gap between men and women (5.7% after factoring in age and experience), which the magazine then goes on to unintentionally explain away as women being less aggressive in salary negotiations and in asking for raises. It’s a small gap to begin with, and we now have the solution right there in front of us. Case closed. Right? Wrong.

Maria Klawe, president of Harvey Mudd College, states that in negotiations, men are more likely than women to request higher salaries: “Women say ‘Thank you very much.’ I’ve done that myself, several times—it’s embarrassing.” I thought women could do anything a man can, so simply speaking up shouldn’t be an issue, now that the root cause has been identified, right? Again, wrong. Nancy Hopkins of MIT believes that women should be on hiring committees proportional to their numbers in the field of physics, but I don’t see how that solves the issue of gender disparity or the pay gap in the field. Claude Canizares, also of MIT, states that;

“Men need to be more proactive about equity for women and underrepresented minorities”

Equity, as you should know by now is a clear SJW red flag; but quite beyond the fact that the bizarre comparison between men and minorities (are there not male minorities?) has been made at all is that this is an empty platitude uttered exclusively for virtue-signaling brownie points. Most of the physicists interviewed attributed the stubborn pay gap to the ever-elusive “unconscious bias.” Mind you, we’re talking about a very small percentage which, as I mentioned, the article already attributes to a pair of correctable factors. Nancy Hopkins observes, “It seems like women have been talking about gender discrimination forever.” Yes, yes it does.

Education Researcher recently released an article that revealed the “disturbing” fact that there is a gender gap in PhD article submissions and publications. On average, men submitted an average of 5.9 manuscripts for publication and women submitted 3.7 publications; the number of submissions published were 4.9 for men and 2.9 for women. So men submitted more often and were accepted more often…but women, statistically speaking, were more likely to be published. The article goes on to explain that more women teach and more men serve as research assistants, so logically, would the fact that men are involved in more research and hence more potential papers not explain the disparity in submissions? Also, could these causes get any more niche?

Once again, I see no one’s talking about the gender gaps in mining, logging, and garbage collection. I wonder why? Less lucrative? Less visible? More physically demanding? More likely to be killed on the job? If we want true equity, we had better goddamn well start seeing equal numbers of men and women slinging trash. For your consideration, a few of the most dangerous occupations in the United States, accompanied by the male percentage of the profession and their fatality rate per 100,000 workers (courtesy of the Bureau of Labor Statistics):

Logging: 97.2% / 132.7
Fishing: 99.9% / 54.8
Garbage Collection: 89.6% / 38.8
Truck Drivers: 94.9% / 25.2
Construction: 97.3% / 15.6
Police Officer: 86.4% / 11.7
Mining: 99.9% / 11.8

It can’t have anything to do with wanting to have your cake and eat it too, can it? Can it?

Consider the following news item from last June, where the “accidental gay parents” Biff Chaplow and Trystan Reese announced their “trans pregnancy”; Reese is a biological woman who “identifies as a gay man” and Chaplow is a gay man who identifies as the “mom.” Reese told NBC that, “We know a lot of transgender men who have babies. We have several in our close friend circle.” (S)he explained to CNN, “I’m OK with my body being a trans body. I’m OK being a man who has a uterus and has the capacity and capability of carrying a baby. I don’t feel like it makes me any less of a man. I just happen to be a man who is able to carry a baby.” As Stuart often repeats in Hello Ladies, “I don’t know what the rules are!” We are through the looking glass, people.

Gender and sexuality are, as we “know,” fluid, n’est-ce pas? I don’t know about you, but I wasn’t “taught” who and how to fuck, nor cajoled into rendering myself sterile when I was a child because I was a child, and thankfully my parents aren’t evil, like lesbian couple Pauline Moreno and Debra Lobel who have their eleven-year-old on hormone blockers (direct quote from The Daily Mail: “The mothers say that one of the first things Thomas told them when he learned sign language aged three - because of a speech impediment - was, ‘I am a girl’”) nor did they send me to a “transgender day camp” like the one in San Francisco that caters to children as young as four, though according to UC San Francisco professor Diane Ehrensaft, children understand their gender by age two. What could possibly go wrong?

Brad/Ria Cooper, who had his first sex change at fifteen, has decided he will now undergo his third sex change to make himself more like a woman again, as at age eighteen Cooper “transitioned” back to his biological sex to live life as a “gay man.” Cooper originally took hormone blockers to stop puberty and, per The Sun, “had female hormone injections to help [him] form breasts and cut down [his] body hair, but [he] didn’t have full gender reassignment surgery.”

Let me say this, and I’m appalled I even have to: children are off limits. We do not have sex with them, we do not sexualize them, and we do not project our feelings, desires, or inadequacies on to them or make executive decisions on irreversible hormonal treatments while they’re still developing, but the Social Justice Warriors do this all the time. As for the rationale, well, it is the current year, so simply because we mark this year on the Gregorian Calendar as 2018, training yourself to be bi-sexual or something should be a given with no further explanation. Try this one on for size: “I mean, why isn’t there a white ethno-state? It’s 2018!” What do you make of that? Or as Ricky Slade says in Made, “Can I color me that?”

Color indeed: the demography of the future is downright harrowing. Fear of a black planet? Not exactly, but there are very serious consequences coming our way regarding the shifting demographics of the post-modern era. While Westerners are busy dressing their one adopted nine-year-old in drag or out “dogging” in the woods (or is that no longer a thing “because current year”?), the demographic time-bomb between the Tropics is set to explode. In the past, due to high infant mortality rates, diseases, and other causes, it was often necessary to have a good number of children, but today, with our modern advancements in medical care and vaccines, in order to sustain the population, reproductive levels do not need to be what they were in previous eras.

What concerns me, however, is that in Africa particularly and to a lesser extent most of the rest of the Third World, these people are not adjusting accordingly, which bodes very ominously for the future, especially when you consider Westerners have simply given up on reproducing altogether, unless they are mixed-species gender-queer vegans. The people of the Third World are not showing a willingness or, more terrifyingly, ability to adapt to their changing circumstances. I know many people get into a tizzy when I mention biological realities, but this really does have a lot to do with differing levels of time preference or the ability to plan and manage resources. It’s not at all unreasonable to use race as a civilizational proxy. The Japanese build Japan, the Swedish build Sweden, and the Somalis build Somalia. The issue is when you import Somalia and expect to get Sweden. Just ask Maine or Minnesota.


The real questions, to my mind, are, however, how many of the people in charge, and/or to what degree, do they actually expect identical outcomes? How much of this is egalitarian window-dressing masquerading as “tolerance,” “equality,” and “diversity”? For some, perhaps many, the fiction is too tantalizing to resist, or maybe they simply don’t know any better, but for others, there can be no question that the large-scale importation of the Third World is designed explicitly to at minimum atomize whites and in their isolation make them easier to control, but more likely in the face of mounting evidence, the Final Solution is not to move them all to Madagascar, but to erase their very existence.

The literature strongly suggests that the host (white) population in Western countries is being adversely affected by the sustained commitment to the diversity agenda, and it’s directly responsible for the squandering of what Robert Putnam terms our “social capital.” In his 2006 study, Harvard professor Robert Putnam found that, based on analysis of the responses of almost 30,000 Americans, the greater the diversity in a community, the less people trusted each other, the less they donated to charity or worked on community projects, and the less they voted and were civically-engaged. In the communities “enriched” by diversity, neighbors trusted one another half as much as they did in homogeneously white communities. From the very beginning, there was a concerted effort to ensure that the citizens of the West would have no say in the mass importation of alien peoples who, it has clearly become evident, do not share our values and don’t particularly care for our delicate, liberty-oriented political systems that’ve evolved in fits and starts since classical antiquity. Though immigration started after World War II in certain parts of Europe in the form of “temporary workers,” it wasn’t until the mid-1960s in the United States and a while later for most of the other non-Eastern Bloc Western countries that the numbers started to trickle in, but by the turn of the century, that trickle became a (relative) flood—though that flood is going to get Biblical when the population in Africa hits four-and-a-half billion! And there’s only a relatively small strip of water separating Africa from a Europe that’s largely proven unwilling to defend itself.

As Jared Taylor says, “The purpose of immigration is not to set a moral test for natives.” Ah, but it appears that it is. Louis Farrakhan recently used his bully pulpit to call for an end to the White Man, “because his nature is not in harmony with the nature of God.” He continued:

The white man was only given 6,000 years (6 days) to rule. You cannot deny he has ruled but on what principle did he rule? Righteousness? Truth? Justice? Fairness? I don’t think so.

How interesting that the most open and tolerant societies the world has ever known have somehow become the bad guy. In this inversion of reality where not only Farrakhan but a majority of the world now lives, the people who abolished slavery, the people who established the doctrines of self-government, who enshrined women’s rights, and civil rights, and gay and transgender rights, the people who built the modern world, these are the wicked and the cursed, these are the ones denied a heritage, these are the ones told to debase themselves. As Jim Goad catalogued:

The more that white people apologize, the more they get mocked. The more they concede, the more that is demanded of them. The more frequently they make gestures of goodwill, the more they get emotionally sandblasted with malicious rhetoric about how “whiteness” is a poison that needs to be uprooted and eradicated…Whites are publicly reprimanded if they dare to notice anything in white history beyond slavery, colonialism, and the Holocaust. Look with disgust upon these squirming white worms with their endlessly tacky public displays of self-flagellation, exulting in the idea of their own wickedness, trying to drown their historical sins in a cleansing wave of softly genocidal immigration. Afflicted with a perverse sort of racial body dysmorphia, they would crawl out of their white skin if they could only find a way. This is the sort of thing that happens in the late stages of a crumbling empire, when the fat, lazy, and pampered have grown so soft they’ve blinded themselves to the wolf pack waiting at the door that’s eager to tear them to pieces. Believe this—if white people actually held such iron-fisted power and were remotely as ruthless as they are portrayed, there would be no such mocking.

And so the wicked shall fall. Between Goad’s “cleansing wave of softly genocidal immigration,” and whites’ self-abnegation, learned helplessness, and their genderless, barren-wombed, de-fanged Eloi-like existence, Farrakhan won’t have long to wait before we’re nothing but a memory. Then the world will know true peace, harmony, and prosperity. In the meantime, it’s much better to focus on niche issues like “dead-naming” and “transphobia” than the fact that the entire fabric of Western civilization is coming unraveled.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

  • W.B. Yeats, “The Second Coming”

That blood-dimmed tide sounds an awful lot like Enoch Powell-by-way-of-Virgil’s “River Tiber foaming with much blood.”

John Q. Publius

by John Q. Publius

John Q. Publius writes for Republic Standard and runs the blog The Anatomically Correct Banana.