|Animals don't have any restrictions
Animals do not have the ability to set rules for behavior.
Every animal has the freedom to do whatever they please. They can eat any
food they please, and as much of it as they want, and whenever they feel
like eating. They can get into fights with any animal at any time, and
they can go to sleep anywhere they please at any time of the day or night.
Male animals can chase after any female they please, and at any time they
are in the mood to do so.
We restrict the disposal
By the time the first cities were developing, about 4000 years
ago, people had a few restrictions on their behavior. For example, the
city of Mohenjo-Daro
had a simple sewage system, which implies that the people had put restrictions
on the disposal of human waste.
If dogs had enough intelligence to create a city for themselves, would
they be interested in providing themselves with bathrooms or sewers? Not
necessarily. The interest in bathrooms is an emotional issue, not
an intellectual issue. Therefore, intelligent dogs wouldn't necessarily
impose restrictions on their disposal of waste products. In fact, the dogs
might enjoy rolling around in their poop. They might also enjoy spraying
their buildings and trees with pee in order to mark their territory.
Our distant ancestors did not have any restrictions on where they disposed
of waste products. However, at some point in time, some people began to
encourage the others to dispose of waste in certain areas. Through the
centuries these suggestions became more detailed, and eventually they became
laws rather than suggestions. During the past few decades, some cities
have started creating laws to put pressure on dog owners to clean up after
A few thousand years ago people discovered that there waste products
were valuable as fertilizer and chemicals. Today a lot of cities are processing
their sewage in order to keep the environment clean and salvage some of
the chemicals. However, even in our era there are areas of the world where
people are dumping waste products in the streets, rivers, parks, and vacant
lots, just as we would expect from intelligent animals.
One reason I mention this issue of waste products is to show you how
human culture has been changing. It was originally very similar to that
of a monkey, but as our ancestors became more educated and technically
advanced, some of them developed an interest in controlling the disposal
of waste in order to keep their cities clean and attractive. Furthermore,
we can see that these laws are still being created today, which implies
that we are not finished with this process of creating restrictions on
the disposal of waste products and trash. Therefore, we can assume that
future generations are going to have even more restrictions, and that they
will be even more detailed. What type of restrictions will future generations
create? Perhaps they will have more control over animals, such as prohibiting
dogs from certain areas, and employing robots to kill pigeons and other
It is important to notice that each of us has a different interest in
these issues, and it has nothing to do with "intelligence". These are emotional
issues, not intellectual issues. Some people are not bothered by dog poop,
for example. Some people are not even bothered by dogs that lick their
face, and some people enjoy opening their mouth and letting their dog lick
their tongue. Some people go even further and engage in sex acts with their
There is no right or wrong to these issues. If a person wants to have
sex with his dog, that is his decision. You could consider such a person
to be disgusting, or you could consider him as lucky to have
the ability to enjoy sex with another species. We cannot argue over right
or wrong; rather, we have to make decisions on what we want our society
to be, and what we want the human race to evolve into. Do we want humans
to be emotionally attracted to animals? Do we want humans to also be sexually
attracted to animals? Do we want animals living in our cities with us?
Do you want pigeons in our cities? Are you willing to share in the work
of cleaning up after animals?
We restrict the eating
Animals will eat food whenever they are in the mood, regardless
of where they are, or what the consequences will be. If animals were to
create a society, they would allow the eating of food everywhere.
Our prehistoric ancestors didn't put restrictions on the eating of food.
Their food consumption was limited by the availability of food. They would
eat food whenever they found it, and whenever they were in the mood. They
would also eat in whatever manner they pleased, and they would eat as much
food as they wanted to eat. They didn't follow any rules of etiquette.
Today there are a lot of organizations that have restrictions on eating
and drinking. For example, many museums, businesses, and retail stores
prohibit us from bringing food or drinks inside. Most parents also have
restrictions on where their children can eat and drink within the house.
These restrictions are intended to prevent the mess caused by eating
Theaters and sports stadiums currently sell food and drinks to their
customers, but not because they think the food is improving life for the
people. Rather, they want more money. If we switch to a society
that doesn't care about profit, then there is no financial incentive for
any theater, social club, sports event, or other event to provide food
or drinks. Therefore, I would recommend that we increase the restrictions
on food and drinks to only the restaurants and picnic areas.
In such a case, we wouldn't have to clean up food anywhere except in those
designated areas. This would reduce the amount of cleaning that we have
to share, and it would eliminate the need to deliver food and drinks to
theaters and other locations. Is this a sacrifice you are willing to make?
We restrict sexual activity
Animals do not put any restrictions on their sexual activities,
and as a result, they will have sex with whatever they please, wherever
they please, and at any time of the day or night. During the past few thousand
years, humans have been putting restrictions on sexual activity, such as
prohibiting sexual acts in public, and prohibiting sex acts with children.
Of course, just as some people cannot follow the rules for trash disposal
and the eating of food, many people have trouble following the rules for
sex acts. There are some people who rape children, for example, and others
have sex in public areas, such as airline bathrooms.
In society today, we have restrictions on sex acts, and we restrict
pornography to adults. However, there is no society yet that prohibits
the sexual titillation of children by businesses, television programs,
or movies. Also, there is no restriction on the sexual titillation of adults.
I think that we should increase the restrictions to completely prohibit
the sexual titillation of children, and put more restrictions on the titillation
Men might consider such restrictions to be unnecessary or even cruel,
but I think life will be more comfortable and relaxing for all of us when
we can go to work, parks, social clubs, and festivals without being sexually
titillated by advertisements or saleswomen who dress and behave like prostitutes.
What you want in life is not necessarily what is best
for you. Men are attracted to sexually titillating material, for example,
but I think that being titillated all day every day is annoying.
When was about 14 years old, I enjoyed the titillation, but did it help
me to find a wife or have a better life? No!
Furthermore, after a few decades it became irritating. Am I unusual?
Or do other men get tired of it, also?
When contemplating an issue, remember to ask the question, "Who
benefits?" Who benefits by sexually titillating men and teenage
boys all day, every day? How has it improved your
life? How is it helping your children?
Do people today have better sex, or more stable marriages, or happier lives
than our ancestors who didn't have access to pornography, television, movies,
and other sources of sexual material? Did our ancestors suffer as a result
of their lack of sexual material? I don't think so. I think humans evolved
for a less sexual environment. I think this constant titillation is causing
The ideal way to determine the effect of sexual titillation would be
to set up two societies that are identical in all respects, except that
in one society we allow constant sexual titillation in advertisements,
movies, and television shows, and in the other we restrict sexual activity
to the bedroom. We would then be able to pass judgment on which society
was providing a better life for its people.
If we were to create different, semi-independent cities, as I've described
in other files, then each city would be free to experiment with their culture,
and we would get a much better understanding of which society has the most
beneficial culture. Unfortunately, at the moment all we can do is make
guesses. My guess is that sexual titillation is detrimental. I think it
interferes with human relationships, and it is causing men to be more frustrated
than they would otherwise be. The men assume they enjoy it, but children
believe that they enjoy eating candy all day, every day. We cannot follow
our emotions like a dumb animal in this modern world. We have to think
What do we do with people
who cannot follow the rules?
We have restrictions right now on disposal of trash, but there
are lots of people who simply don't care, and they are dumping trash
along the streets and in vacant areas. A lot of people with pet dogs are
refusing to clean up after the dog because they don't want to pick up dog
poop. They want the dog to be their friend or sexual partner, but they
don't want to clean up its poop. There are also lots of people ignoring
the rules about where they can eat and drink.
What do we do with people who don't want to follow the rules? The only
sensible solution is to restrict reproduction to the people who
are better suited to this modern world. This will eventually result in
a higher quality group of people who don't need threats of jail to prevent
them from dumping garbage in the city streets, and who are willing to eat
only in the designated eating areas.
We should also consider evicting
the people who cannot to follow the rules. We should not assume that we
can fix their problems with punishments or Bible lessons. Consider the
men who grab at women at crowded trains. Those men are not grabbing at
the women because of ignorance or because of a lack of punishment. Rather,
they are having trouble controlling their emotional cravings. They are
more like an animal than a modern human. Punishing them will not help them
develop better mental qualities. As of today, there is nothing we
can do to help those people.
The same is true for the people who cannot follow the rules for eating,
or who cannot follow the rules for the disposal of trash, or who cannot
resist raping children. We cannot fix the people who don't have the mental
ability to fit properly in this modern era. There are a few medical problems
that we can fix by changing a person's diet or providing them with insulin,
but we cannot improve a primitive mind. All we can do is evict
Imagine living in a society in which we evicted the
people who could not follow the rules for the eating of food. This would
create a society in which we don't have to post signs about where and when
it is appropriate to eat. The people would eat at the restaurants and picnic
areas, and they wouldn't need other people to watch over them. And imagine
that we also evicted the people who couldn't follow the other rules. Imagine
living in a society in which the people are behaving in a respectable manner
they want to, not because we are threatening them with jail.
Don't be fooled into thinking that we are "cruel" by evicting the people
who don't fit in. Life is cruel no matter what we do. If we let the misfits
live with us, then we suffer. Why should we
suffer? It's not our fault that they don't fit in. This is simply
a characteristic of life.
We should put restrictions
Human societies have been adding restrictions to the consumption
of food, sexual activities, and the disposal of waste, but we have not
yet put any restrictions on courtship.
In one of my earlier files I made a remark that we should prohibit men
from pursuing women in the social activities that are not designed for
courtship, and now I will explain this concept in more detail.
If we did not provide ourselves with bathrooms or trash cans, then we
could not expect people to dispose of their waste in a sensible manner.
Likewise, if we did not provide restaurants, picnic areas, kitchens, and
other areas for the preparation and eating of food, it would be impossible
for us to control when and where people were eating. By comparison, when
we provide facilities for the disposal of waste and for the eating of food,
then we can tell people to use those facilities for those particular activities.
Why not apply this concept to courtship?
No society has any special activities for courtship, and as a result,
no society can restrict courtship to those activities. Men and women are
pursuing each other at all hours of the day and night, and in every location
and activity. This courtship is occurring while people are working at their
job, while shopping for food, while swimming at a lake, and while waiting
at an airport to get on an airplane. Why not provide a variety of activities
specifically for courtship? That would allow us to tell people to look
for a partner only at those specific
functions and not during other activities.
Create special activities
I think the mixing of courtship with everything else is causing
trouble, and it's also wasteful. It would be more efficient for society,
and more pleasant for all of us, if we created special activities for courtship,
and if we forbid people from mixing courtship into other activities.
Providing special activities for courtship makes it much easier
for us to meet more people, and we will get to know them more
thoroughly. Finding somebody compatible requires that you have the
opportunity to spend some time with them and interact with them. By providing
activities specifically for this purpose, such as the "Singles Pageants"
that I mentioned here, we
will be able to more rapidly meet and get to know a lot of people.
If we create special activities for courtship, then we could demand
that single people look for a spouse only at those courtship activities.
This would allow both men and women to go to work, museums, restaurants,
and swimming areas without being concerned that single people will pester
them. Of course, some people will not want to follow the rules, but if
we evict the people who cannot follow the rules, then we would create
a society that is much more comfortable for both men and women. We would
be able to go to a restaurant, lounge, social club, or public park without
any concern about being pestered by people looking for a spouse, and when
we were in the mood to look for a spouse, we would go to the activities
that were specifically designed to help us meet one another.
It might help you understand this issue if you consider the problem
of men who grab at women on crowded trains. If we could read the thoughts
that pass through our mind, we would find that idiotic and crude thoughts
are passing through all of our minds all the time, but most of us
can control or ignore the inappropriate thoughts. The men who grab at women
are not the men who think of such thoughts; rather, they
are the men who
cannot control themselves.
The men who are incapable of controlling themselves should be evicted
from society. We should not try to fix their mental problems. This
would create a society in which women can safely walk onto a train that
is full of men without any fear of being touched. Likewise, by setting
rules for courtship and removing the people who cannot follow the rules,
we create a society that is much more comfortable for both men and
Although evicting people is one way of improving society, we should
also look for ways to reduce the likelihood of the problem occurring.
For example, in regards to the problem of men touching women on crowded
trains, we could reduce the problem by letting women have different or
shorter working hours so that most of them can ride the trains when the
men are already at work.
|Why don't the feminists try to stop the use of women
as sexual props?
Unfortunately, instead of trying to reduce the problem of men
being titillated by women, all societies today are aggravating the
situation by allowing businesses to sexually titillate both young boys
and adult men in their advertisements, television programs, and movies.
To add to this problem, the women who have jobs that put them into contact
with customers, government officials, or other people are under pressure
from their employers to dress in attractive or sexually titillating manners.
Men enjoy the sexually attractive women at trade shows, meetings, and
press conferences, and we enjoy the sexually titillating advertisements,
but that doesn't justify this behavior. Just because we like something
doesn't mean we should do it. Children are titillated by sugar, but that
doesn't justify letting them eat candy all day, every day. We can't follow
our emotions like a stupid animal in this modern world. We would create
a more pleasant society for both men and women if we restricted sexual
activity to our homes. When we go out in public, we shouldn't be exposed
to sexual material.
Another way to look at this issue is that the attraction men
have to sexual material is similar to the attraction a rat with an electrode
in its brain has to an electric switch. The rat assumes that he
loves the stimulation, but I don't think it improves the life of a rat.
Likewise, men are attracted to sexual material, but I think we would have
a more pleasant life if we were not titillated all day.
Furthermore, I suspect that men and women would have a more comfortable
life if we spent most of our time with our own sex, and if we got together
in our leisure time. Even riding a train to and from work would be more
comfortable for men if we were not bothered by children or titillated by
women. I think that when men and women are together a lot, or when men
and children are together a lot, we get on each other's nerves. I think
we would have more pleasant lives if men spent most of their time with
men, and if women spent most of their time with women and children.
When single men and women want to find a spouse, they should go to the
social affairs that are specifically designed for such activities. When
men and women want to get together to socialize at dinner, festivals, or
holidays, then we should be able to do so without worrying about being
pestered by single people.
Provide courtship activities
I think we should apply these concepts to teenagers, also.
The boys and girls, when they're in school, should be learning something
of value, not flirting with one another. I think it would be better if
the teenage boys and girls were in separate classrooms so that they
didn't waste their time flirting with each other. The boys should be learning
something of value in the classroom, not being titillated by the girls.
We should have special activities for the teenagers to help the boys and
girls meet and get to know one another. We should also encourage them to
get to know a lot of other people before they make decisions about
who they want to marry.
Our primitive ancestors didn't have to do anything to help teenagers
meet one another because they grew up together in incredible intimacy,
but today we need help. By providing special activities for teenagers to
meet one another, they will get to know dozens or hundreds of different
people. Compare that to the situation today in which teenagers have to
meet one another wherever they have the opportunity, such as at school
or at shopping centers. Most teenagers "meet" a lot of people, but they
don't get to "know" very many of them.
Another advantage to providing courtship activities for teenagers is
that it gives the more "normal" boys a better chance to meet girls. In
the world today, the boys who have the advantage are those who spend a
lot of time chatting with the girls and giving them lots of attention and
gifts. The more "normal" boys are busy doing something useful with their
life, not spending hours every day at shopping malls or having hours of
silly conversations with girls.
Why are coffee
shops so popular in America?
Coffee shops are popular businesses in America, but I don't
think it's because Americans have a fascination with high-priced coffee.
Shopping malls are popular with some teenagers, but I don't think it's
because they have a fascination with shopping malls. I think the coffee
shops, shopping malls, bookstores, and other businesses are being used
by lonely people as places to meet
friends and find a spouse.
I think most people have trouble admitting that they want a spouse.
We sometimes see this problem with Hollywood celebrities; after they get
divorced they sometimes announce that they have no desire to get
married. They cannot admit what should be obvious to everybody; namely,
that nobody wants to be alone. Men are better able to deal with loneliness
than women, but how many men truly want to spend their lives alone? We
prefer to spend our lives alone only when we don't know somebody
that we want to live with.
There is a significant difference between wanting to be alone
because you don't have a desire for a spouse, and choosing
to be alone because you don't like any of your choices. For example, I
am not married, but it's not because I like being single. Now that I realize
that I have been low on thyroid hormones, I can see that one of the reasons
I never got to know many women was because of my lack of energy, especially
during the evening. However, a lot of people would say I am too
finicky. This brings up an interesting issue because it also
applies to voting.
Voters must be finicky, but not too finicky
Most people have the attitude that they will take the "lesser of
the evils". They do this when they vote, and they do this when selecting
spouses, also. I can understand why animals and people do this. If you
are too finicky, you get nothing. However, people can hurt themselves
when they are not finicky enough.
Voting is a serious responsibility. It should not be treated as a "right"
that everybody should have. Selecting leaders for society requires a lot
of thought and effort. If voters are too finicky, then it will take them
too long to find a candidate that they will accept, but if they are not
finicky enough, they create an incompetent or corrupt government, and that
will have a detrimental effect on the entire world and the future
generations. Voting should not be treated as entertainment.
Voters should be finicky, and we should design our election system to
enable us to pass judgment on whether the candidates should even qualify,
and if not, replace them. We should not have to pick the "lesser of the
We need to be finicky with selecting a spouse,
The same concepts apply to finding a spouse. When you get married,
you are altering the future of somebody else's life, and if you have children,
you are affecting the future generations. People who want to reproduce
should take the issue of finding a spouse very seriously. If we are too
finicky, we will not get married, but if we are not finicky enough, we
may reproduce with a person who has undesirable genetic characteristics.
During prehistoric times, nature used to keep this problem under control.
If the people in a primitive tribe were too finicky when selecting a spouse,
they would go extinct. At the other extreme, if the people of a tribe had
too little concern about the quality of their spouse, then more of their
children would be low-quality, and more of their relationships would be
unstable. The unstable relationships would result in mothers alone with
their children, which would have been difficult in prehistoric times. Furthermore,
in prehistoric times, there were no restrictions on murder, and so stepfathers
could kill their stepchildren, thereby reducing the number of children
from people who cannot form stable relationships.
Today, however, we prevent nature from doing its job. For example, we
provide assistance to the people with unstable marriages, such as alimony,
child support, and laws that prevent a stepfather from killing his stepchildren.
If we continue on this path, the human race will degrade into freaks who
have no concern about the quality of their political candidates
or spouses. They will become creatures who will vote for anybody, even
a retard, and who will marry anybody, including a retard.
We should encourage people to be very finicky when finding a spouse,
but that requires that we provide lots of social activities to help people
meet and get to know hundreds of people. We are behaving like stupid
animals or primitive savages when we expect men and women to spontaneously
find each other.
We should be concerned about the quality of
These concepts also apply to the issue of raising children.
If a couple has no concern about the quality of their children,
then they will raise anything, even a child without a brain. Unfortunately,
in all societies today, parents cannot be finicky about their children
because we have laws to prevent the killing of defective children.
I wonder if the concern about being burdened with a defective child
is causing some people to remain childless, and others to have only one
or two children. If this law were removed so that parents could kill their
children, would the higher-quality people be willing to have more children?
Having a law against killing your own children is like having a law
to prohibit you from cutting off your own hand. Who among us needs a law
to stop us from cutting off our hand? The only time you would consider
cutting off your hand is if something terrible happened to it, such as
severe frostbite, or if it got caught in a piece of machinery and was hopelessly
destroyed. In such a case you would want it amputated. A law that forbid
you from cutting off your hand would prevent you from amputating your damaged
hand. Who would benefit from that?
Likewise, nobody needs a law to stop them from killing their own children,
and nobody benefits from it, either. No parent would ever kill a
nice child. Instead, allowing parents to kill their children would allow
parents to eliminate a lot of defective children. This in turn would benefit
everybody in the world, including the future generations.
If the higher-quality people are having less children because of the
concern of having a defective child, then the people who have less concern
about the quality of their children will have more children. This in turn
would cause the human race to evolve into freaks who have increasingly
less concern about the quality of their children.
Actually, we can already find a lot of parents with serious genetic
defects having children that they know are defective. They don't care about
the quality of their children, or whether their children have happy lives.
They simply want to reproduce. Children are just toys to these parents.
We must create a pleasant
environment for raising children
Americans are raising a lot of defective children, and
this is giving a bad image to families. All women have a strong attraction
to babies, but some women refuse to have children because they don't want
to deal with the problems. Their craving for babies is overpowered by the
bad image they have of raising children. This is actually a very significant
and important issue. It is related to the issue of "morale", which I will
discuss a bit more at the end of this article.
I had a good view of children and marriage when I was at child, but
during my adult years I started developing a bad image of both as a result
of observing marriages and families. Only a few marriages seemed pleasant
and stable, and watching parents trying to control their children gave
me a bad impression of raising children.
I visited Europe when I was about 30 years old, and I saw some families
that made me realize that raising children can actually be pleasant. Some
European children are just as horrible as American children, but a lot
of them are much better behaved, and I saw married couples who seemed to
have nice relationships, also. It made me realize that the reason I had
such a bad image of families was because so many American children are
Some of the bad behavior is due to mental disorders
of the children, and some of it is because the children are being raised
in a terrible environment. For example, I have seen children with
irrational demands for certain cereals, candy bars, and namebrand clothing,
and they picked this up from advertisements and other children. I have
also seen children imitating disgusting characters that they saw on Beavis
& Butthead or some other television show or movie. America is not providing
a good environment for raising children. America is allowing businesses,
religious fanatics, and other people to manipulate children.
Why do I criticize America so often?
Some people complain that my criticism of America is due to a bad attitude,
but I grew up in America, so I know it better than the other nations. If
I grew up in India, I would be complaining about India. America has a lot
of good features, and a lot of nice people, but I'm not writing these articles
to make the American people feel good about themselves. I want to make
America better, and that requires identifying its problems. You
don't help a person or a nation by giving them compliments.
Incidentally, it's not just me who thinks that American children are
badly behaved. I have heard other people mention that their visit to Europe
or Asia made them realize that raising children can be fun. I have also
heard American teachers make remarks that the Asian students, as a group,
are better behaved than the American students, as a group.
Many American parents have a "loser's attitude"
Another reason American children are so badly behaved is because millions
of American parents have a "loser's attitude" towards life. I suppose a
lot of Canadians and Australians have the same attitude. These three nations
are full of losers from Europe. A large percentage of our population are
people who do not want to work, learn, or be responsible. They want to
play. They do not tolerate criticism very well, no matter how constructive
it is. They have trouble controlling their cravings for food, alcohol,
sex, or gambling.
These parents assume, probably correctly, that their children are the
same as they are and want the same type of life. Therefore, they do not
want to force their children to work, learn, or be responsible, and they
do not want to criticize their children. I have even met parents who resist
toilet training their children. They justify this by saying that they want
their children to learn at their own pace. These parents seemed to have
trouble in school, and as a result, they have a bad attitude towards teaching,
learning, criticism, and thinking.
By comparison, people who enjoy learning, being responsible, working,
and learning a skill do not consider themselves to be cruel when they expect
their children to learn, be responsible, and work. And people with the
emotional strength to handle constructive criticism do not consider themselves
cruel when they provide their children with constructive criticism. Actually,
they consider themselves to be helping their children.
I think the manner in which parents raise their children is an indication
of the mind and attitude of the parents. For example, many Americans give
their children almost anything they want. I think this is because most
Americans believe that the key to happiness is avoiding work and being
pampered. They fantasize about becoming rich, retiring, and doing whenever
they find entertaining while teams of servants pamper them.
I think this is one of the reasons that gambling and religion are so
popular. Americans pray to God on a routine basis for material items, money,
sex, and the death of people that they don't like. They are selfish, spoiled
brats who are looking for gods, gambling, investments, inheritances, or
other people to give them whatever they want. They don't want to earn
what they want. They want handouts. And when they behave in a destructive
manner, they ask for forgiveness from God, and they beg society to give
them a second chance, and a third chance, and a fourth chance.
Why are large jackpots so appealing?
In March 2012, the jackpot for the Mega Millions lottery was $656 million.
That enormous amount of money caused people to spend 1.5
billion dollars on tickets. Why do large jackpots cause more people
to gamble, and with larger amounts of money?
I would expect more people to gamble when the odds were better.
However, the people who gamble don't seem to care about the odds. Furthermore,
they don't seem to suspect that the gambling operations are dishonest.
With all of the corruption in the media, the government, the Nobel prizes,
Academy Awards, and the history books, how can anybody believe that these
gambling operations are one of the few honest operations in the world?
There is probably something significant in the fact that when the jackpot
becomes larger, more people gamble, and they gamble with larger amounts
of money. My guess is that the large jackpots are causing people to have
visions of enormous amounts of material items, gigantic mansions, yachts,
pampering by thousands of servants, and lots of diamond jewelry. These
extreme images might be overstimulating the people. By comparison, when
the jackpot is small, people have visions of paying their rent check for
one month, or purchasing groceries for a few weeks. Those images are not
very exciting. Perhaps the lesson to learn is that if you want to manipulate
people, give them a fantasy that stimulates them to such an extreme that
they have trouble controlling themselves.
Judge a society by its behavior
Many Americans boast that we are "the greatest people in the world",
but only some Americans are actually wonderful people. An enormous percentage
of the American population are - as the Statue of Liberty says - the "wretched
We have to judge people by what they actually do during their
lives, not by what they claim to be. Many Americans cannot form
stable friendships, marriages, or business partnerships. An enormous percentage
is also very religious, and many have alcohol and drug problems. These
are not the characteristics of the greatest people in the world. These
are characteristics of people with mental disorders. Not surprisingly,
when these people have babies, their children tend to have mental disorders.
Their psychotic children are difficult for the parents to raise, and they
are a nuisance to their neighbors, school teachers, school bus drivers,
policemen, and retail store clerks. To make the situation worse, businesses
and religious fanatics are manipulating those psychotic children!
Have you ever visited a high school or college? If so, do American children
inspire you to be a teacher? I thought the situation was bad when
I was in high school, but I think it's worse today. Furthermore, I think
the awful behavior of American children is causing a lot of Americans to
either remain childless, or have only one or two children.
There is no concern in any society yet about "morale". Nobody cares
whether married couples are inspiring other people to get married, or whether
they are giving marriage a bad image. Nobody cares whether children are
inspiring us to raise children, or if they are giving children such a bad
image that we want to remain childless. As of today, human societies are
not much more advanced than packs of animals. Most people merely
exist from one day to the next with no concern about what other people
are doing, or what effect other people have on society. People like Josef
and Philip Garrido can live
in our neighborhoods for decades without anybody noticing or caring.
This modern world needs people who can face reality and understand
our animal qualities. We should not pretend that we enjoy being alone,
for example, or that we don't need any help in finding friends or a spouse.
We should not pretend that we enjoy sitting in a coffee shop and drinking
expensive coffee from a Styrofoam cup. Women should not pretend that they
do not want babies.
We should understand our mental characteristics and design society to
be more appropriate to what we really are. We should not have to look for
a spouse or a friend at a coffee shop, or at a shopping mall, or while
riding a train to our job. Instead, we should design a city with lots of
different social activities to help us meet one another to find both friends
and a spouse. We should design our city with lots of free lounges, patio
areas, recreational areas, restaurants, and snack bars so that we have
lots of areas for socializing. Furthermore, we should separate our
activities. We should socialize in the areas that are designed for socializing,
and we should look for a spouse at the activities that are designed to
help men and women meet one another. We should not look for a spouse
while riding a train or while working at our job.
Why are young girls having
Until recently, fathers and brothers would watch over their
daughters and sisters and provide some guidance to them in regards to boys,
but today parents pamper their children; let them do almost anything they
please; and keep them ignorant about sex, relationships, and marriage.
Boys and girls need to be prepared for life, not entertained and
Many young girls are having what they refer to as "boyfriends", but
what type of relationships are these? These girls are not getting married
to these boys, so what are they doing with these boys? What do they want
I get the impression that young girls want boyfriends only because they
enjoy the attention that the boys give them, and many of the boys also
provide them with gifts and various types of entertainment. These girls
could be described as exploiting the boys because the girls are
a lot from the boys, but what do they give the boys in return? The
boys get nothing but the fantasy that eventually they will be able
to have sex. I would describe these relationships as crude, disgusting,
and abusive because the girls are using the boys for entertainment
and gifts, and the boys are only looking for sex. They are not "human relationships".
Rather, they are the type of selfish, crude attractions that we see with
If I had managed to get a girlfriend when I was a young teenager, it
would have been for sex, not for marriage or a family. I would have formed
the same crude relationship that other boys my age were forming. This brings
up a point that I've mentioned before. Children are not miniature adults.
They are more like animals. The relationships that children form
are crude and selfish. We are foolish to let young girls form relationships
with boys. They do not have the mind of an adult woman. They are more like
animals, and their relationships are disgusting. Listen to the conversations
of young girls if you think I'm exaggerating about their crude mental qualities.
Young girls should meet boys and get
to know them, but they should not be forming relationships with them.
From my own casual observations, most of the relationships that develop
among young teenagers turn out to be failures, and some of them
are very unpleasant. Young girls make terrible decisions about boys,
and young boys are only fascinated with sex; they're not seriously interested
Our society is not doing a good job of preparing boys and girls for
marriage, families, jobs, or society. Actually, we are allowing children
to be contaminated with propaganda from religious fanatics, feminists,
sociologists, and other anti-scientific nitwits. Children are also being
kept ignorant about sex and the animal qualities of the human mind. Furthermore,
no society cares that businesses are titillating the boys with sexually
stimulating television shows, movies, and advertisements, and they are
titillating the girls with cosmetic products and books of romantic fantasies.
Also, no society is doing much of anything to stop the pedophiles.
I think that children are being raised in a terrible environment, and
this in turn is making it more difficult for them to make good decisions
about relationships, jobs, marriage, and life itself. I was full of feminist
nonsense when I was a teenager, for example, and I don't think the situation
has improved for teenagers today, and it might even be worse.
We would create a more pleasant society if businesses were prohibited
from exploiting children; pedophiles were removed from society rather than
elected to Congress; schools were providing children with serious information
about sex, relationships, pregnancy, venereal disease, divorce, abortions,
and the animal qualities of our mind; and if the city provided special
activities for young boys and girls to meet one another.
What are fathers to do with
When girls become teenagers, they start developing a desire
to look pretty and put themselves on display. They are behaving like a
flower that is opening up and waiting for a bee to pollinate them.
When girls are kept ignorant about sex, relationships, and the animal
qualities of the human mind, then they will not understand what they are
doing. They will assume that they spend hours every morning trying to look
pretty simply because they enjoy looking pretty, and they will assume that
they like to go out in public simply because it is fun to do so.
Teenage girls need to be taught that they are at the age at which their
emotions want them to start looking for a man, and they need to take this
activity seriously, not treat it as fun or entertainment. They need to
understand that the reason they want to look pretty is that they are like
a flower that is competing for the bees.
Most people in the world today cannot handle reality. They live in a
fantasy world, usually full of religious nonsense. In this modern world,
humans need to be able to enjoy reality and understand the animal qualities
within us. Teenage girls need to understand their emotions, not
their emotions like a stupid animal.
The boys and girls in prehistoric times knew one another better than
brothers and sisters do today because there were absolutely no secrets
in that era. Since they intimately new one another to a much greater extent
than people know each other today, they didn't have to "meet" one another.
They only had to flirt with one another and pick somebody that they
They didn't have to make any intellectual decisions. Furthermore,
everybody in a prehistoric tribe was compatible with everybody else. The
tribe didn't consist of a mixture of religions, races, and illegal aliens.
They didn't have to worry about gypsies, homeless people, pedophiles, or
crime networks. It was safe for a girl in that era to follow her emotions.
The situation today is significantly different. Millions of us do not
even know much about our own neighbors. The secrecy and privacy
that we have today is preventing us from knowing the people we live with,
and so we must get to know people before we can make decisions on
who we want as a friend or spouse. But how can we get to know people? We
need to create activities specifically for this purpose. After we
get to know a lot of people, then we can make decisions on who we want
to form a friendship or marriage with.
Society should provide a lot of activities for boys and girls to meet
and get to know one another, and they should be told to first get to know
lots of people of the opposite sex before thinking about forming a marriage.
Another difference about life with our prehistoric ancestors is that
fathers and brothers would help their daughters and sisters find a spouse.
If a father thought that his daughter was being taken advantage of by a
man, he would try to stop the relationship. Today the situation has reversed
itself. The men are becoming submissive to the women. The feminists are
trying to stop fathers from interfering with their daughter's selection
of boyfriends and husbands. Women are being told to liberate themselves
from the abusive men; to follow their emotions rather than their father's
A lot of men and women have wanted to meet me, have sex with me, and
marry me during the past 10 years, but they have turned out to be wolves
in sheep's clothing, such as Peggy Borger
and Daryl Smith. Furthermore,
a Jewish boy is pursuing my niece, as I mentioned
here, but I doubt that he is really interested in her. I suspect that
his family is hoping that they will somehow get some information to allow
their criminal friends to manipulate, kill, blackmail, or kidnap me.
The reason I bring this issue up is that the manner in which Jews have
been pursuing me and my niece make me wonder, how many other
people are being pursued by Jewish criminals? And how many people are
being pursued by non-Jewish criminals? How many people care that
our society is full of criminals, psychos, and freaks who are pursuing
us for friendship and marriage? Is anybody looking after your daughter,
sister, or niece? How many fathers are trying to protect their children
from bad relationships? How many parents are willing to do something
to help their children? And how many parents are rasing children simply
How many adults are bitter
I suspect that one of the reasons that some adults do not want
to help teenagers meet one another and form stable relationships is because
they are bitter that their own childhood was miserable, awkward, frustrating
and lonely. They had a miserable childhood, and they want everybody else
to have a miserable childhood, also.
Animals are selfish creatures who do not get any pleasure out of helping
strangers or future generations. The humans who react to problems with
bitterness or anger are behaving like animals. They are not suitable for
this modern world. We all experience problems with life, and if each of
us were to react with anger or bitterness, we would have a miserable world.
I could be angry and envious at all of the men who have healthier bodies,
and I could be bitter that other men are getting women. However, I quietly
accept my problems. Life is like a smorgasbord. There are lots of pleasures,
so if you miss out on some of them, just deal with it and enjoy the others.