I’ve completely fucked with the layout here and might change blogging provider

This will remain archived, both here and as a singular-post file-dump on my new blog (the latter will be without commentary).

I didn’t realise how many of WordPress’ 10,000 layouts they did away with during the transition to their new code-base. As it stands, there’s about <2% of that left for free-plan users, and I think the layout I got rid of was once free, but now on a pay-plan (or may not even exist at all anymore!). Meaning I can’t revert to what was a perfectly good layout.

I’d experimented with 2 layout changes in all. In one, the logo wasn’t a stand-alone entity but integrated into the text-header, so they melded strangely as to make the latter illegible. In the currently used layout (which shall remain during this blog’s abandonment and move to a new platform), the logo won’t show at all, and I don’t feel like demonstrating such unappreciation towards my reader’s work.

Blogger? Probably, unless you can suggest an alternative.

Cuntster: unceasing in impetuousness, unceasing in daringness

Recently, I had to delete a comment from the section of a recent post detailing my non-mischaracterised position in what can only be described as a vitriolic piece of sententiously misrepresented alternative historical events to his liking, solely geared as an invective shibboleth, not per the intention of a remark as being enhtusiastic to discuss it remotely civilly, which Amber Haselgrove has now proven himself incapable of doing, undesiring of, and uninterested in:

I didn’t really bother reading too much of this garbage after I realized it was the same old, tired tacticry you’ve used for so many years now; distort and confuse simple facts with over-analysis and until no shred of the truth is left unscathed or recognizable. But hey, I’m sure you managed to convince *yourself* that you’re legitimately trans yet again. Gotta keep repeating that mantra to maintain the act, right?

It’s odd (but not surprising) when we look back at your recent history. There was a point where you vocally and vehemently loathed trannies followed by your admittance to jerking off over and fetishing them which led into you getting caught up in David Chac’s non-binary gender shtick. And now? You’re magically female all of a sudden. What a journey! I think it’s safe to say you’re so confused by your unsatisted perversions you have no idea what the fuck is real anymore. Perhaps if you actually went out and got laid it might release some of the pressure building up inside your head but sadly no one wants to get anywhere near an awkward, delusional quasi-transsexual, let alone engage them in intercourse of any kind.

You’re a snake, constantly wriggling and writhing around the truth, using big ‘impressive’ language to prove to yourself (and only yourself) that reality is flat out wrong but you always, always go about it in the same way; like a spoiled child throwing their toys against the wall in a fit of rage. No one, and I honestly mean *no one* is buying this new story. For anyone with a even half-functional brain it’s crystal clear that is yet *another* attempt by you to desperately feign some kind of personality you can bear to stomach.

Your track record shows that you’re a liar, a fantasist and totally bereft of any kind of substantial genuine identity. You have no concept of kinship or comradery because that would require you to take a step down from your self appointed throne and act human for once which you’re just not capable of doing. You simply can’t tolerate being part of the crowd, or having peers, or just assimilating into the group. You have to be ringmaster, the top dog or supreme leader even when you pale in comparison to the accomplishments or abilities of the peers around you. You just can’t help yourself.

Even the bottom-feeding scum of Kim’s Brethren saw through your facade because that flimsy veneer you hide behind is paper thin. It was so obvious and clumsy even the socially disabled exceptional individuals who made up the ranks of alumni during the birth of the Aspergian ‘ideology’ saw through it with ease. You’re a one trick pony who’s gift is using big words to convey no meaning yet you completely overestimate your ability to connive and mislead. You did it with Haselgrove, you’ve done it with nearly everyone who regarded you as a friend at some point and you’ll do it again to the next poor unwitting soul who befriends you out of sheer pity.

— Cuntster, 28th April ’17, KiwiFarms

I’ve already, in part, responded partially to the claims of the second paragraph over that medium:

This paragraph is particularly illuminating, as an example of Cuntster’s sole talent: to massage incongruous discrepancies in the timeline of events so as to create new versions of them entirely. And again it can be summed up to substituting looking at a YouTube trail for analysis, as I’ll exposit:
Firstly, none of this is recent history. He has drenched from the recesses of historical obscurity now going back more than half a decade, the remnants of which are still available from obscure enough resources and channels. In particular, the admission he refers to was an object of ridicule by RiktheYid89 in a disgrace/attrocity-video published by him about my disgrace from the fabled Kim’s Brethren. We’re going back 5 years at a minimum; if Cuntster wants to count the initial founding of Kim’s Brethren, he’s going back at least 7, the analytical relevance of which is shaky and pins itself underlyingly on the idea that everyone follows a negroid developental cycle in which only realizations you’ve consciously made during your conniving, socially precocious infancy are valid.

He tries to throw back the ball at me in the theme of some of these remarks, depicting me as far more motivated to do cunning than I actually am. This is categorically not the case.

Skipping over the history of Kim’s Brethren (which in itself is nowhere nearly as nuanced as Amber portrays it), there’s one individual with whom can be credited for threatening to disclose my gender dysphoric tendencies at that time, one Robert Campbell. I retroactively changed it to fetishism in my discussions with RiktheYid89 and others, solely to discredit myself and save myself the embarrassment of such an admission, expecting myself to stealth-disappear at some point in the future. It was, in other words, a deliberate misdirection; it’s strange, but unsurprising, to see Cuntster choicefully misapprehend misdirections for literal truths and vice-versa, in a knowing and active architectual forging of a propagandic agenda.

— My response, same date, same place

It’s rare for me to actually delete comments, so I think it’s important to discuss a rationale behind this before continuing with anything else. In the last line of the post on which this comments was originally written, I said I was happy to debate on queries. This wasn’t a query, but an incendiary invective designed to gaslight, enrage, upset, hurt, instill doubt in, and also partially boast about contacts accrued from the formative influences of my work.

It wouldn’t surprise me if Amber did approach David Chac or Emma Quigley in a mood of theirs which would dispose them towards their demonization of me, but even those accounts are wildly inaccurate and riddled with sententuity.

Amber has a habit of being contradictory in a way where his own intellect is analogous in description to the way he represents the characteristics of my personality: it’s a patched-blanket of disparate facts he hasn’t put in context (that’s basically all negro learning), and has smatterings of what I do believe, on closer inspection of this, to be mixtures of Emma’s and David’s respective opinions. Emma would be in the habit of underestimating the complexity of the material presented since she would literally overlearn material far beyond her station and consider herself some sort of epigone for it; as for David, this is where the “big and confusing language” claim comes from. David, for however verbose and eloquent he was, disliked and discredited as “dictionary” and “thesaurus” words what ever was slightly beyond his own regurgitation of a failed SAT vocabulary list.

Neither are clean or absolved of the sorts of accusations Amber puts forth, but in different ways: Emma’s mental gymnastic style was extremely childish and stereotypically hyperfeminine in that “rote regurgitation without context” way, whilst David’s, was abstrusion, taking principles in basic biology and other elementary levels of different disciplines he thought were impressive that would be obvious to the rest of us, and then, through extrapolation, distorting them. In each of their different ways, they have spoon-fed their projections into Amber, who has apprehended them in the most literal way possible as ammunition, which he subsequently fired and made woefully missed hits with.

It is also from whence the mistaken recount of the historical events covered probably stem.

A characterisation of the journey of this sort comes from the mouths of people who had only ever associated with me mercenarily. David’s own, hypocritical, abandonment of an ideology he had held steadfast conviction to, capitulating in the easiest way to a least-resistance pathway of a life, is in no discrediting of the ideology itself, but as a treasonous traitor whose own capacity for camaraderie and ideological conviction are in question, per the Pongian maxim, “those who abandon the road of faith in history shall have the heaviest dues extracted from the by it.”

Defaulting the development of history’s course to Amber’s whims must be the worst offense of this basic principle, and if it was on his participation upon which Amber’s recent revelations are responsible, the accusations of snake, liar, mercenary, petulant toy-thrower, temper tantrumer, self-appointed king and supreme commander contempting his own group, and identity-less traitor with a streak for connivance and manipulation whose overestimation of their abilities in doing so lead them to these impetuosities, lay squarely with Chac.

I’d received a PM from Amber today, in which the lexicography seems Chacean in its extent of dyslexia enough that I had wondered:

“Except Chris, or course”… WHAT?!? That guy is the PINNICAL of an abuser if I ever saw one! He is a total ego-maniac and everything, and you better not debate him or your his enemy.. WHAT! Are you HIS co-dependent or something?”

— Cuntster’s PMs are rarely complete unless speaking to me directly, almost cryptically phrased; the time-travel one was an example of that, but this recent one, sent 28th April ’17 at 12:58 GMT, is of particular curiosity

The lines upon which Emma’s recall of the events of Kim’s Brethren can be delineated from Chac’s own are so heavily converged in Amber’s aggregate of the two that in the penultimate and ultimate paragraphs, it’s nearly impossible to discern to whom each set of remarks belong.

At the time of Kim’s Brethren’s formation, however, there was no real functional trolling group in the conventional sense of the word; all of our victories were Pyrrhic, practically handed to us on a platter; our conception of what a trolling group had comprised of was more akin to an insurgency revolutionary caucus in proof of the extents of Aspergian capability, in an endeavor in which we would often find ourselves to be the victimized party. In short, it could possibly be classified the first organized troll-shielding endeavour.

But certainly, there was no ill-will or malicious intent of mine involved: even the name was coined by Ryan McGrath, for instance, and most tactical and battle plans were usually devised by Robert Campbell; David Chac’s involvement with the group was virtually non-existent until the truce was declared on 21st December ’11, shortly after the death of Dear Leader Kim Jong-il.

Robert Campbell had a habit of repeatedly speaking me out of all and any of my convictions in this insipidly bro-tard way of attempting to normalize me. In one of the more egregious bids of his, he’s probably the first person who had actively attempted to erase any conception of mine as to an incongruous gender identity. He would pressurize me into accepting his characterisations of transsexualism, nearly universally all in the pathological but nothing too theoretically nuanced or high-order; they were freaks, inherent embarrassments to nature. This was a notion with which I disagreed; Emma, to a certain extent, though I held her to the secrecy of not vocalizing it, being the first individual I’d ever confided my feelings about this to, was vaguely supportive (though not overly enthusiastic) in that superficially moderate feminist way of hers that was an annoyingly prevalent ideological strand in her thinking. Eventually, however, the pressurization eventually had me kowtow to a public position where I’d feigned hatred of transsexuals solely to maintain my membership within the Kim’s Brethren.

That had backfired, proving to be a gesture too little, too late in its signalling. A spat between myself and Robert Campbell had eventually resulted about a month there-after, though the responsibility for the dropping of my first GIC appointment was thanks to him, squarely, solely, and specifically. In ingratiating myself to his favour, I’d partially been instrumental in ruining my own life, although somewhat unwittingly.

Fetishization, as a narrative, was something consciously contrived by me, in discrediting of myself. The true extent to which I did, however, was wholly non-existent. In this one editorially opinionative contributor to the Guardian I’d used to read, s/he would prattle on about fetishists, and it immediately came to mind as the best way to invalidate such potentially embarrassing expose. It was something I’d immediately disseminated to the creators of the respective atrocity videos vouching for my disgrace from the organization.

However, to say that Aspergian ideology’s creation, formation, and development was concomitant to Kim Brethren’s existence is an inaccuracy. David Chac and I’s partnership began somewhat later, and I’m not sure whom to attribute the conflation of these events, though I imagine that David’s recall on these matters to be somewhat degraded compared to Emma’s, even if the latter didn’t understand the significance of most of them.

To anybody who has bothered reading in-depth what hypermale/Aspergian idea comprises, it has little to do with gender neutrality; being gender-neuter is something he had sponsored himself in his own confusion, but as a position, bared little relation to the notion of hypermale as ideal, as racial spirit, as opposed to literally phenomenological substance of pathogenically aetiological entity.

Yes, there is a way neurological gender can indeed translate to a disparate binary gender paradigm

It’s called substance dualism.

Summed up, a substance is definitively the wrong thing from which its accompanying qualities emanate; mind is a quality amongst many qualia, but like all the qualiums subsumed under which, it isn’t tangible. The neurobiological substance from whence it emanates isn’t a direct correlate of the products of the former but simply a proximal facilitator through which it’s even possible. Certain neurological structures make specific subtypes of behaviour more unlikely, but not entirely impossible, barring wide-scale, diffuse damage over entire glial networks.

Because the brain of a person isn’t the sum-composite of one thing called the “neurobiological organism”, but rather constitutes of individual neurones within it, it would be extremely naïve not to conceive of a mosaic of individually differentiated testosterone, estrogen and other neuroendocrinological hormonal exposures. This isn’t the same thing as saying someone is “25% female” or “50% male”, this is a mischaracterization of my opinion. If we’re going to further qualify that in the simplest way person, it’s that somebody’s brain, however, most certainly can be, a certain percentage female and male, but even that’s a simplification.

Gender might not even a quality proprietary to brain, but merely a consequence of whatever sexually-indeterminate mosaic influences affect which brain region. Matter isn’t the right thing from which the sociological phenomenon of gender should emerge.

Sexes are binaristic products of karyotypical determinates except in those intersexual instances where the communication of influences down the cascade-chain of karyotypical, epigenetic, genetic and environmental influences fail, and the instances of those latter exigencies range at less than 2% of the population to varying degrees, and only 0.1% to diagnostically recognizable degrees (in disorders of the karyotype themselves).

Since these are what determine the sociological categorical designates of gender, it’s fair to say that gender is generally subsumed under two categories, the test of which these categories of gender to which an organism is assigned being the sum-composite of where in a sub-set of such categorical designates each behavioural expression falls under, arguments of appearance, presentation, etc. besides.

The feelings and sentiments of a person with respect to their gender identity, however, are ultimately going to be widely disparately influenced by brain-region morphological differences to the degree that, if determined in as localized an area as we can assume, they can be determined by so few areas as to make any expression thereof unobvious in some. And this is further complicated by such an argument as the substance-dualism one, in that feelings, in the first instance, are not the correct (necessary, rather than contingent) product of neurobioloigical matter and its constituent chemical, physical and electrical interactions as a necessary substrate.

And, in such examples, thus, where systematic discounting by the establishment of that person’s identity is prone.

I’m happy to expand more on this to queries in the comments section. KiwiFarms’ back-and-forth is proving fruitless on this particular debate.

Site rectifications

Leonard Park gets credit for redesigning the logo’s Chosongul font-face whilst a reader I shall keep anonymous is responsible for her (it’s a cisfemale; no it’s not Lagoona, no, it’s likely nobody you know) contribution is responsible for its total overhaul graphically speaking. I don’t know what she used, it could be Photoshop, GIMP, Paint.NET, but it appears to be something that deals in vectors; don’t ask me!

It is essentially the same logo, except far better presented and neatened up. Atpeojangiui Sasang, lt. tr. “Aspergian Idea” (which I thought was plural on its own but then later recalled for that to be the case, it’s “Atpeojangiui Sasangeul”; it was too late to change before my energy was completely expended) has been changed, because apparently Leonard didn’t like me making quasi-neologisms (although Atpeojaui is an actual root; “Asperger’s”, the quasi-pejorative “japyeyin” tends to be more often used now, which has connotations of self-absorption regalant of a more retrograde view of autism); it is now “the Ideas of General Sophie” (Sopi Jangeunui Sasang).

It probably did great disrespect to the culture of my admiration to have a logo so abominable as before, so my gratitude goes out to both!

The meaning of the hypermale sigil is available with a quick search on a number of my works, but I’ll cover it again. It is a Stormfront Cross rotated 45 degrees and embellished with male gender symbols at each of the spokes on the cross (“hypermale”); its rotation represents an axial tilt point optimal for reception of the summer season, which shall forever bless the Eurasian races, spiritually if not physically. In addition to this, in the metaphorical, with embellishment of the four-point star, it bears similarity to a compass, and each spoke covers each possible point on said globe: this is to represent both the direction of the cause of hypermale ideals and the spread of its influence, the spread of Eurasian inventive ingenuity. At no point do I make secret the implicit ode to Cohen, whose ideas, although in their individual application abhorrent, nothing short of illuminating as to why Eurasians are whom they are: the systematizer needed to leave Africa for his/her own good.

It is no insult or slur to call either one of the European or Mongoloid races at least sub-clinically autistic. The image invoked is redolent of flapping hands, sure: you’re reading it wrong, ignoramus. I said sub-clinical. A tinge of hypermale neuromasculinization was probably necessary to conquer the vulgarities of the environs being tackled on the migration from the equator.

Most of the manifestations to this degree, rather than being of social disability, are just enough to result in intellectual optimization; Mongoloids, more than Europeans.

I’d defined a neuromale intellectual archetype as, broadly speaking, where whole-scale IQ = IQg > IQc, or, where IQ = PIQ > VIQ; translated from psychometric speak, “they perform better than they communicate, linguistically reason*, speak, learn to talk, or do any such superficial thing with flapping of mouths.”

*Although out of all verbal subsets, this is where by far they do best, at the expense of range of vocabulary, expressivity, or speed of articulation.

Europeans are more well-rounded than Mongoloids in this respect, but in saying this, it’s more classifiably “autismal” on a trait-by-trait basis than the completely schizophrenogenic negroidal neurotype, which is generally neurofemale (where the equality in whole-scale IQ subset reverses).

These are just the obvious psychometric implications of the differences in neurocognitive style stipulated by Cohen’s own principles: that a systematizer = S>E in his own self-developed rubric, and an empathizer = E>S.

If, by definition, a systematizer is driven to employ reason and perform on said basis at a high level in order to solve a task, the oppposite drive, towards empathy, would involve the employment of words, typically detached from strict adherence to reason. Hence these specific intellectual correlates. They’re not arbitrary.

Evolutionary pressures, when considered in the respective environs their populations had settled, further elucidate the obviousness of these principles. In an environment devoid of resources, such as the Tundra, where the nearest ports of call for their procurement are scarce, cognitive demands on the faculties of high-performance for survival and low-socialization to preserve energy expenditure are heightened; environments replete with resources, such as the sub-Sahara, where the nearest ports of call for their procurement are as near as to extend one’s hand upon a tree-branch for abundant fruit, these cognitive demands are displaced for ones of social domination and pseudoempathetic predation on the available resources, lifting the need to be creative with their cooperative procurement, and affording a highly socialized, culture-rich, yet reasoning poor culture.

I call it pseudoempathetic because the empathetic profile is further distorted. Africans are a specific case where cognitive empathy is extremely highly developed, whilst affective empathy is nearly absent; this archetype is something Cohen referred to as broadly psychopathic. There’s going to be no brotherly camaraderie spared where the battering winds and cold blizzards don’t encumber upon one to weather them, right?

Autism involves the opposite, typically. In the manifestation of the social disability, this shows itself inappropriately, poorly, and in a sort of but-in fashion. Where the neurovirilization is just optimal enough, however, it’s at its peak in presence. Strictly speaking, the Mongoloids are more likely an autisto/borderline-personality archetype, prone to deep feelings of aggrievement and revenge when the slightest betrayal from the tribe of one individual besets their collective.

Mongoloids had never developed an independent cultural identity after independence of their respective nation states, further affirming the borderline comorbidity claim. The north of Choson is replete with relics of Russian influence; the south, still smattered with Americanisms. Still, broadly systematizer-like IQ profiles remain in the continuous retesting under adherents of the mantle of Rushton’s previous work; this is a departation of usual pure-borderline intellectual talents (high verbal), suggesting there is a split of archetype between the emotional and intellectual styles.

As the Asperger, regretfully declassified, was at an impasse between autist and neurotypical in severity of social trait expressivity, but retained intellectual characteristics more stereotypical of the former than the latter, we have much to learn of the forms of nationalism specific to Mongolian cultures. Juche appears to be the best fit given its postulates.

It is without which that:

  • The risk of subsumation to even the mildest autistic archetypes represents trivialization of the emotionally sensitive qualities of the condition; any number of Cuntster’s KiwiFarms contributions are replete proof of this.
  • Identity at the level of its social group coherence maintenance is lost, from which point, these can be gaslighted. This is not in denial of the medical conditional nature of the phenomenon per se, but in affirmation of the nature being “generally pathological” in a wholesale sense being questionable enough that it serves distraction to the formation of such a cohesion, allowing erasure of such identity, and subsumation to the worst of autists.
  • As has been witnessed, denial of the emotional qualities attributable to Aspergians means denial of certain rights accorded to them; the struggles in the author of transitioning represent but one tiny example in a litany of them represented in disparate lives lead by each individual in the entire gamut of the collective; Chac’s domination under maternal matriarchy which has left him post-traumatically distressed and had, for a while, left him utterly disoriented as to his true sexual role, but without treatment, Negi’s work history being trivialized a matter of laziness rather than brow-beating by psychopathic Congoids out to intimidate and deeply aggrieve him, and an entire book of genuine life besides, not allowed breath of expression to continue on and effectively silenced of their experiences. We would never allow a single transwoman self-resolution of these issues, nor a single sufferer of traumatic flashbacks, nor a single sufferer of emotional abuse, apparently unless Asperger’s allows us to drop this understanding, and for which current neurodiversitarian paradigms remain ineffectual in arguing these rights.
  • Pursuant to allowing neurodiversity’s domination: their form of advocacy misdirects the issue as being one of not enough medical intervention, not enough scientifo-empiricist, technocratic, singularitarian domination, not enough denial of the chaju, not enough denial of self-guidance, not enough holding the hand of “self-advocates” who can barely string a sentence together, let alone argue with true ideological conviction. Amy and Gareth Wilson had run amok, only to betray their own in capitulation to the gang-scientists. They had secretly struck deals with pharmaceutical heterorthodoxy, denying the role of radical metals in neurodegeneration, and pressured a young boy to give up Lupron despite amassive intellectual improvements in the absence of evolutionarily unnecessary adolescent androgens (of which the Mongoloids are testament: high intelligence in systematizers is an ingredient of allowing the testosterone to be high amniotically and at no other time). The “neurodiverse” are the gaggle of imbeciles who would happily co-operate with medical Archons in confabulating the intellectually invalid with the neuro-evolutionarily divergent by nature; neurodivergence, in the Aspergian model, is actually a consequence of convergence among satisfactory evolutionary lines and eugenic consensus.
  • Giving up Aspergianism is giving up a resistance against medicalism, is giving up a group identity, is giving up a conscious on which to forge independence; it is surrender to medicalism, surrender to the personality-erasing tonics, socially normative to allowing the Aspergian a renege upon their candour, decorum, taciturnity, and stoicness, to be supplanted with un-hypermale, un-Eurasian, foreign traits of deceit-for-survival’s-sake, boorishness, garrulousness, and foolishness.

The dose of risperidone is a nanomolecular chainshaw representative in a pill of encapsulating at once the capacity to rip through tens of millenia of Eurasian adaptation, rejection of such, characteristic of a drapetomania away from a plantation of energetic parasites feverishly fueled by deracinative desire that one is simply not beholden to. It is at this entry-point that medico-normative crypto-neurodiversitarianism is indoctrinated; a degree of incapacitation has set in, to which one is ideologically malleable, a blank slate for empiricist gangster sponsored erasure.

Hypermale sigil is symbolic of the defiance of a group of peoples to give into the superstition of a technocracy, predicated on rationalist doctrinarianism, singularitarianism, gang-science, neurodiversity, psychiatric medicine, and neo-liberalism, having arisen by the racially pathological tendencies of cryptically-deranged cluster Bs — such “mass control-centered” thinking inherent to their nature, alien to an Aspergian’s innately tribal tendencies — whom autistoform-like peoples no matter of which degree should be charged the responsibility of overthrowing.

Threats by Cuntster persist

Today, a question by Cuntster was asked:

Do you have a case worker?

— Cuntster, 25th April ’17, KiwiFarms

The implication of this question is an emboldened, daring, and impetuously impudent call to action of the suppression of the personal autonomy of the blog’s author, titled Headquarters of the Aspergian Revolution by her adherents. No end is there to this pseudo-transsexual’s baiting by institutional means for the evincing of behaviours to be misutilized as evidentiary exhibits for the incarceratory confinement or otherwise home imprisonment by means of ‘tard wrangler, or to issue opprobrious lecture daringly challenging the legitimacy of such Aspergian’s reproach of flagrant transsexual lording-over of their unwarranted situational freedom and autonomy as “hate speech” in ignoring the incendiary nature of Cuntster’s remarks, and in doing so, implicitly boasting of liberalism’s natural distortion in the favour of their exclusive status as beneficiaries of the “democratic franchise” and “human rights franchise”.

Such bureaucratically-sanctioned ‘tard wrangler have been given numerous times briefing in the eventuality of this exigency; they have been advised to ignore it. In approach by them of the author in false and unearned commiseration with Cuntster’s non-existent plight, fair and strongly worded warning has been issued to ‘tard wranglers of varying degrees, interaction with whom having been diminished over the post-incarceratory course since February of this year, advising them a full cessation of contact should the context of what Final Retrospections had tried to advocate is missed whether inadvertently or intentionally by trying to opprobrious lecture out-of-place the non-existent disprivilege of transsexuals, and non-existent abuse received by him, exaggeratively imagined to endorse on his part an unwarranted persecution complex.

Philosophically reasoned, a ‘tard wrangler (“autism and learning disabilities” for as often as they are incorrectly conflated by services domestically) in its functions institutionally, as an apparatus supposedly in advocation and practice of their protection and the encouragement of such individuals’ extension of their participation within the community, has reneged on their duties and abandoned their principles in flagrant hypocrisy of what it is they had advocated if succumbing to Cuntster’s delusions of frailty, persecution and victimhood, whilst aggressively mischaracterising the victim — yours truly — as offender.

In such cases, then, their intervention would be roundly rejected, as it is in the reservation of such an individuals’ right to do in the absence of ward-status.

Checks were made with processes judiciarily speaking to confirm the absence of such status. The confirmation successfully nodded in affirmation of this direction.

Nevertheless, Amber Haselgrove’s impudence is concerning and disconcerting.

Nothing in the law prohibits theoretical exhibitions above and beyond ad hominem no matter how “offensively” such remarks are made of the illegitimacy of the positions both personal and philosophical of opponents, only escalating to a designation of “offensive remarks” to be institutionally actionable if direct ad hominem was made, if offensive remarks were specifically targeted and aimed in an unambiguously declarative way, or if the theoretical basis was somehow absent of exposition enough to constitute nothing more than incoherent delusional content to be subsumed in interpretation as “ad hominem attacks” and thus, “personally offensive remarks”. Care had been taken to ensure the legality of the statements in gross had crossed no bounds lain therein.

Beyond this, the clear categorical imperative on the part of Amber Haselgrove in the incapacitation of the personal autonomy of author and blog proprietor here-writing is to fully silence Aspergian philosophy, which could be only motivated by the truths inherent therein, and the threat they present to liberally heterorthodoxical transsexual-victimhood enshrined cryptically as a militant tendency within radical neo-feminist quarters, the same ones having dreamt up Cohenitic autism perspectives.

The debacle continues.

Geopolitical illiteracy and the psychopharmaceutical agenda go hand in hand


I’ve chosen to divide this article into two segments. The first, an introductory one, will discuss Cuntster’s recent impudent remarks on the geopolitical situation in the DPRK. That, as trivial a remark as it may seem, he confused ‘microcosm’ with ‘macrocosm’ is very telling of the sum-totality of ignorance which should compel anyone to shove the fecal fudge advice of “acting the authority without place” back up his own rectum, of course, it probably wouldn’t perturb the petulant, pestilential faggot-in-a-dress in the slightest.

Far more representative of authoritarian fantasies in the metaphorical is the current state in which his regime mascarades a democracy in extension of fully enfranchised rights to everyone. The medicalization and desocialization of autists perpetrated upon them from the earliest of days here, stands in stark contrast to the non-recognition of autism by Choson, in which many of the better ones will be accorded full rights, and the worst, sent to 49s. If it was a gamble I was, and I am, prepared to take, I’d play roulette with the “north” Koreans any day, knowing that, absent of deliberately conspired desocialization, I’d be spared of the 49 fate in the same way I wouldn’t be the predations of the NHS.

Brave New World Order, as encapsulated by David Chac and further elucidated in The Wisdom of Autphag, is a perfect descriptor for the circumstances in which the autist are now enshrouded, and not by nature; demelioration of IQc’s contrivance, in contrariety to the most genetically fit reality, only foments a strawman allowing petulant little childish faggots with immature etho-moral conceptions like Cuntster to run with them a while, all at the cost of the autist, ever aggressed against in this fashion, losing their colour.

Meanwhile, the state is ever hard at work to conceal Cuntster’s negritude with opportunities that by the rules of nature should rightfully be unafforded to him.

It really irks me to see Cuntster cite situations which have long since seen resolution, which he didn’t look at the GNP data for, the GNP/capita data, the communist equivalent measure of whole manufacturing production units, that per capita, calorific consumption per capita, height growth, or even his favourite measure, “let’s see YouTube videos and pretend it’s science.” He didn’t even restate, and so therefore reliably-in-likelihood never visited, either the history from the revolutionary perspective, or the Western perspective (a fusion of perspectives is actually available from a fairly neutrally written CIA country study, though it is already a decade out of date, with the next edition due for some time mid-next decade). He speaks about the multiplicity of aid supposedly being received by the country (amounting to less than 0.25% of the GDP officially, at only low-hundreds of millions USD; the DPRK earns that alone with a single shipment of arms), yet ignores the embargo (which only China has really ignored and many South East Asian countries are only ignorant of due to ineffectual bureaucracies), and the achievements of Chosun to spite it (50% of its GDP recovered in a decade back to pre-collapse levels, and, post-2007, an effective doubling of the size of the economy over in certain areas; agriculture is now at the maximum extent of self-sufficiency, despite arable land limitations, thanks to aquaculture and processed food innovations, and food-intake has returned to near pre-collapse levels). Instead, his thought process went something on the lines of, “let’s infuriate ‘Autphag’ with BBC-lifted platitudes, sprinkled with my usual angrily adjectivally-laden sass, feigned indignation, and pseudomoral parsimony, and let’s see where we go with this.”

Even with the lattermost measure, I can see, the youngest 2017 army recruits were, hmm, maybe about my height (5’8”) actually. This is a vast improvement from the 1998 videos, in which they were visibly smaller than somebody like, say, even my step-father, a measly 5’5” (i.e. the average “north” Korean recruit during the Arduous March was smaller than that, and has grown, on average, maybe half a foot). That doesn’t look like a cohort being starved to death, and these divisions are drawn in recruitment nationwide, debunking the “Pyongyang is privileged” argument.

There is nothing like, nor was there ever even at the worst severest periods in Korean history, anything like “99% of the population starving to death.”

Yet, he is one to speak of the arrogance of superimposing a view of how the world should work, yet expects to successfully superimpose the direct translation in empirical findings of a populationally incompatible cohort upon an introspection he denies attribution of me; the same arrogance from which stems that the Korean populace should ever be expected to swallow his hubris-fuelled way of life at their expense. That’s where one should derive their real disgust. Then, speaking so condescendingly of the Kim dynasty without qualification as to the observation of their true talent, probably surpassing this pseudo-negress’s by miles.

His disgusting pretences to sanctimony are then encapsulated to their epochal peak of consummation when he contents himself with his utter dissympathy for the autist’s predicament at home, enough to feel an unspoken, self-satisfied glee at their suffering, whilst expressing feigned indignation at that he supposes is similarly happening 12,000 miles away from him. We know where his true anger, then, stems; that he hasn’t enough autists to push to the brink of ruin.

Social reptoid perfectly describes his social attitudes. They are unoriginal to him and a pathetically transparent reflection of the environs surrounding him, with no backing conviction rooted in anything likable to “compassion”; how could a position of lamenting the woes of starved, outer-periphery Koreans be correctly reconciled as an organic statement when his internalised sentiment is best reflected by the spiritual equivalent of the same he wishes to push upon autists via. psychotropics?

His position about the psychotropization of autists to their certain spiritual, emotional, and intellectual deaths as to create perfect walking personified men of straw is something I’ll cover next, with respect to the actual scientific findings of an industry hell-bent on pushing monoaminergic/neurotransmission-monism with blatant disregard for long-term consequences.


Just a reminder:

In English, science is something like this:

n. “knowledge uncovered using the scientific method* to test hypotheses in the replication of methodology.”

Chosona Korean’s equivalent for science is “gwahak”; when used with modal particle, “gwahakida” (Kim Jong-Il’s 1994 thesis title in Korean is Sahuijuuineun Gwahakida). It means something, rather, like:

 “something unchanging, something perfectly developed, in reflection of the historical study in its development; something immutable as consequence of all these.”

The latter one is easy to admit defeat upon. The failure of various psychotropic regimes to effectuate change on a level on that barely countable beyond placebo in previous generations, leading to new pathways being explored, and primarily on accident rather than through a conscious awareness of it, are all, in their various degrees, implicit and explicit admissions of psychotropics to fail the test of gwahak. First, there was no perfect rectification before action, the primary Confucian-paradigm proto-scientific principle upon which most Korean science is still predicated; nobody actually knew shit before their “discovery”, so buffoonish Whites of imperfect intelligence are assigned the false recognition of “genius” for their discovery, without knowing full significance until they’re no longer alive to be accountable. Secondly, as for its implicit admission, the beneficial-adverse effects ratios were so heavily weighed upon the latter that the improvement for many was spurious in any meaningful way beyond subduing, but this is well known.

The first definition requires a little more rigour. Not because Western science is inherently more rigorous, mind you. Obfuscation is rife with the mystification and desire to make unobvious in implication the findings as to create the illusion of perfection: perfunctory attention to irrelevant fine detail at the molecular level, willing ignorance of its meaning in terms of wider, “cascade” as Ray Peat called it, ramifications for wider sects of the neuroendocrine and neurobiological systems these drugs, especially in their older generations but no less, except by degree, in their newer generations, are waging their assault upon.

Mongoloids were quite happy to keep the extent of their knowledge of euphoriant, inebriant, and other illicitly “fun” effects at the level of food. Food, in Confucianism, is considered a drug; herbs, etc. were generally subsumed under this definition rather than being considered the separate things known as ‘drugs’ in their own right today. They’d let nature take the course of the mentally ill, which would have varying positive and negative effects depending on the innate personality of that person so as such wasn’t all bad and even sparing of the more distasteful elements of society: I doubt Amber would be considered as the shaman it thinks he is, nor would I think myself to be immediately shippable off to the nearest whatever-the-precursor-to-a-work-camp was.

Amber’s reversal of that predicament of nature is predicated upon the pushing of an unnatural psychotropics agenda. It is Songbun at the level of medical (mal-)practice.

If you want to know of the ways the NHS is inherently held free of accountability by way of evasion of responsibility, read the version of Final Retrospections edited by Cuntster which remains on Scribd. Some of the original material pertaining to that is still there.

The following, in sum, is partially ethical contention, partially factual, and strongly vocal of a position in which, per the lack of intentional specificity of such treatment regimen, autism’s treatment is being sought on the basis of the presently available monaminergic intervention and the conception of which on like-paradigm (the monaminergic model); I call for its perception to be one of abhorrence. APANA or Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse, admittedly slightly neurodiversitarian in leanings, before it was starved of funding by Cuntster, still had material available on scant archives about the story in which a well-functioning young woman with autism was brought to the brink of ruin just with a small dose of risperidone (a fate spared of LagoonaBlue given an agreement struck by the two of them to spare her of the spurious-in-any-case diagnosis some time in future). The main anecdote is available if one looks hard enough.

As it has so far, I do expect it to fall on deaf ears; one will remember that my first initial contention with the inherently morally abhorrent nature of drugging autistics unconsensually with antipsychotics was followed with a flower though, ultimately, empty riposte by Cuntster, advocating, in particular, SNRIs (although Venlaflaxine is more accurately an SNDRI — the D component is a little weak compared to the amphetamines or even modafinil, admittedly), adjunct to an antidopaminergic agent. Understand that I’m not using the term for the same reasons as Cuntster. I don’t agree with its reallocation from the obviously psychotic (they’re getting progestins as treatment in the next half-decade or so, cf. Galaxone) as a suppressant for all autistic intellectual traits and behavioural ones, knowingly understood of its myelin-eating, grey-matter striking properties as to literally rip through neocortcial tissue, in the same way as one would literally open up the skull and tear the tissue manually (which I’m sure is a literal fantasy of Amber’s). I just happen to disagree with the designation “antipsychotic”, as it barely possesses those properties either. As a panacea for any condition, it should be discouraged, and the autist’s self-responsibility (indeed a component of chaju) encouraged.

Whilst nothing about what Cuntster has said about the neurochemical mechanism of such a substance is inherently technically incorrect, it is understated and oversimplified as to what that is and the implications of its effects; whilst not being mechanically untrue, it is implicatively problematic. The pharmacologically heterorthodoxical perspective demonstrates illiteracy of the very newest findings, and even some of the repressed, obscure older ones.

One final caveat: yes, I overuse caffeine, knowing its adrenal effects. However, I use plenty of other things, countering them, and many of my techniques are implied in this piece. Caffeine isn’t a “dumbed down” version of the SNRI-risperidone (or whatever of the latter class of drug Amber is suggesting) protocol; it’s a knowing choice in that I’m aware of its lack of interaction with the main neurotransmitters, upregulating of choline for the enhancement of memory (antipsychotics block choline synthesis and reception), and its main stimulatory pathway of action not being dopaminergic, but rather, through the release of vasopressin. Rather, it’s by the means Amber is advocating that he wants to dumb me down, which I’ll proceed to explain in due course.

Seretonin reuptake and true affective effects

Seretonin reuptake is an awkward and only vaguely understood process. The reuptake pump of the synaptic site is blocked but only indirectly through receptor inhibition; the other steps in-between are quite vague as to their action. During the intervening period of serotonin’s accumulation, it actually has the effect of an antagonist and a depressant, and the desensitization of the neuron to serotonin’s occurrence simultaneously with the blockage of the neuron only worsens matters. There is an inherently high risk for suicide during the period and thereafter if it fails, which it does at rates near-enough placebo.

Conscious return of the emotions isn’t really anything of a consideration, unlike with the few experiments of MDMA, or what transsexuals describe on estrogen, or even what I experienced on the latter. A cheap argument in counter to this is that it is only with estrogen’s upregulation of serotonin that such effects are achieved, but we know the serotonin reuptake process isn’t anything like applicable or analogous to how either estrogen or MDMA do it. With this numbing of affect, they literally only want to recreate negroidal, inconsiderate, r-select, lumpenproletarian psychopaths of the lowest degree, extrapolating this attitude over society at large. (This is also why, despite all the estrogen in the world, Amber is still an angry little boy at heart; he lacks the neurobiological make-up for it to take the appropriate effect.)

The opposition that Cuntster thus demonstrates to the conscious return of my own emotional state at the fullest experientially available level is thus reflective of a desire to have the reputation of his non-existent empathy salvaged, whilst seeing the non-existent “robot from within” come hither forth through unnatural (de-)melioration. If he had any interest in my reformation, it wouldn’t be, if we’re going to throw categorical misnomers around, in throwing at me a proautisticant. Even in NHS reviews of drugs, this context of usage (application in autism) is particulary problematic and suggested to worsen it beyond the apparent docility imparted. Drugs used in this way, despite seemingly rectifying affective states arguably misattributed to the autist in an absence of empathy which could only be described institutionally wide in that the preponderance of neurotypicals populating their ranks are beings for whom the TOM, discussed widely already, is in a state of incompatibility rather than superiority, are deployed only for one purpose: as a confirmation of the unchangability of autism, as a confirmation of its inhumanity, and to numb the autist to their socially deprived conditions so that he is oblivious to the blatant insult being encapsulated both in-metaphor and in-actuality in such a pathetic pellet of soma. The problems with such a conception being rendered invalid under a spurious claim to synergistic action shall be discussed later, but it is a serious weighing to be considered even on its own, and for the contention to disappear with such a flippant remark of dismissal is to callously expect its ignorance to be a substituion for critique.

Cuntster even admits it himself, in an indirect way. Nothing about any statement of his regarding my mood can be considered reliable, these are second hand readings of what was an about-face of the position Haselgrove herself had harboured, that any depression was reactionary. For such cases, called adjustment disorders, the drugs are inappropriate. He mischaracterises a major depression for the sake of pathogenesis without respect to the unchangeable personality (i.e. independent of autism; “happy, oblivious retard” is an archetype only applicable to so many) dispositions of the patient, also to be discussed further in the article.

Coincidentally, serotonin as a mood-regulator in an upward director and the reliability of its effects’ direct dependency upon it are something in question. Serotonin is known to cause cortisol release by overstimulating the adrenal cortex, raising ACTH. Granting a cortisol suppressant at the enzymatic level like ketoconazone had demonstrated an irresponsiveness to SSRIs, SNRIs, etc. Euphoria from SSRIs is thus a property of the cortisol-release in part, but independent of the serotonin, which is demonstrably ineffective in the latter’s absence; cortisol, by the way, is neurodegenerative, immunosuppressive, and an aging chemical — its strongest metabolite, decadron, is used as an artificial aging agent in Pakistani girls to increase estimates of their age by investigators in illegal underage brothels. So not only does Cuntster want me to acquiesce to oblivious retardation, he wants me to look even more pig disgusting! I remember how brown I turned under the influence of Venlafaxine, for instance.

5a-reductase activation is intellectual negrification disguised as an inadvertent euphoriant

There are two pathways by which antidepressants increase testosterone, a known mood-depressant, antiempathogen, and, as I term it, intellectual negrifier, in that its strongest metabolite, dihydrotestosterone, blocks estrogen at the receptor level to induce long-term degeneration (the opposite of long-term potentiation) at the hippocampus, and general, all-round neocortical damage ala antipsychotics. One works at the level of Cytochrome P450 sites. The other, works by increasing the activity of an enzyme called 5a-reductase. The former increases free testosterone; the latter increases the rate at which that is converted from the pure compound to its more potent dihydrotestosterone metabolite form. If there is one way that antidepressants eventually lose their effectiveness, it’s by this.

In increasing the activity of 5a-reductase, another endocrine hormone is used up which arguably has antidepressant effects working indirectly at the level of its testosterone and cortisol antagonism by unbinding its association from their respective receptor sites: progesterone. Progesterone also has neurolytic qualities in its own right, extending the glial sling to create new white matter myelin networks. Progesterone converts into allopregnanolone, nothing inherently bad in this process alone (and when uninterrupted, allopregnanolone converts back into progesterone). I will discuss progesterone’s role as a serotonin neutral antagonist which disproves the seretonin hypothesis and, in my experience having used it, is the only real euthymic agent.

Too active a level of 5a-reductase activity, and progesterone starts depleting. Allopregnanolone levels struggle to keep in parallel yield, also, declining with it. Although it’s not certain yet, the jury is still very much out on whether antidepressants interrupt conversion back the way. If they do, it’ll mean a gross-deficit of progesterone and an excess of unnecessary allopregnanolone which lacks some of its wider endocrinological qualities.

The end-result is excess cortisol levels. Progesterone is needed as raw material for cortisol. However, low progesterone will also mean what little cortisol there is (though comparatively more than there would be without antidepressants as they cause the latter’s upregulation via. adrenal stimulation, remember) will bind more tightly to glucocorticoid receptors. Neurodegeneration ensues.

I’ve felt the SSRI-ineffectiveness burn-out. You’re brown, you’re mentally negroidal as fuck (brain fog, although I’ve honestly just called it “oogabooga” when otherwise-inebriated), you feel more worthless than when you started because you know the system has cheated you out of your Aryan qualities. It’s almost as if Amber knew all of this and disingenuously tried to disguise his fetish for seeing monkeys like him walk everywhere.

Norepinephrine is a stimulant of the overstressed geriatric; its presence isn’t causative of eudemonia, but coincidental to years of damage

When all is said and done to years of the natural aging cycle, simulated at an accelerated rate due to the ACTH-upregulation of SSRIs and SNRIs but which is nevertheless something that occurs in all of us unless you’re an estrofem-microgest abusing whore like Amber, norepinephrinergic neurons are the only ones left after the dopaminergic and serotonergic ones are burnt out. Your brain is basically just a soup of norepinephrine on the function level thereafter, and there’s poor interactivity of the other neurotransmitters in terms of affinity with norepinephrine receptor neurons. This form of docility is understood to be a disease (albeit itself of a natural phenomenon) conventionally, yet its iatrogenically induced simulation by neurochemical means to supress the behaviourally inconvenient isn’t seen as problematic; geriatricizing the autists and, to a certain extent still, the schizos, confining their neurocognitive function to a premature death-panel, isn’t seen as inherently wrong, because of whatever hyperbolic alternative the dumbshit pseudonegress Amber wishes to dream up at that particular time of day.

Norepineprhine reuptake inhibitors are used as ADD-medication in children, sometimes; dopaminergic agents are the preferred norm nowadays. Atomoxetine has long since given way to dextroamphetamine, but on the occasions the former is used, I can chime in as to their personal effects: it was my “babby’s first nootropic” when starting out on noots. I did feel genuinely relaxed, without the serotonin-induced cortisol-release, or the dopamine-blockade induced retardation. I felt a genuine sense of focus. It also had some pleasant sexual side-effects which may be attributable to its upregulation rather than estrogen itself in the instances an estrogenic agent is used in transsexuals; the refractory period is increased, as is the length of orgasm.

Now, this is different from an aged state in which dopamine and serotonin neurotransmission is markedly reduced, but even when this is taken into account, I doubt the sexual effects would change even if the intellectual faculties are compromised by way of this neurotransmissive deficit.

I’ve a theory, therefore, as to why hons even exist. It’s spelled in the aforementioned, in black and white!

Crosstalk synergistics between norepinephrine and serotonin don’t exist

Admittedly, Cuntster added “synergistic” as a bullshit non-word with no pragmatic application to fool everyone into thinking there was a substance behind the individual effects, mostly not cross-transmissible, of adding an anti-dopaminergic to a pseudo-proserotonergic and norepinephrinergic. The clue is that the former is in blockade of something, whilst the latter is in upregulation and part of the latter doesn’t even involve genuine upregulation (cf. why serotonin reuptake isn’t genuine antagonism). We’re not speaking of additive effects, so down the inferential chain of the definition provided by him, we can’t possibly speak of compound effects above and beyond the sum of individual effects. Drug interactions of a more superficial sort — antidopaminergics work on 5HT/serotonin receptors as well — are arguably more of a shot in the dark at the perpetuation of an unworkable serotonin-reuptake hypothesis, perpetuating the symptoms of depression down the longitudinal line of pan-endocrinological burn-out.

In the one respect we can speak of additive effects, it is in side-effects, the only thing known to be dose-dependent over many drugs, the only thing known to have a direct correlation in all of the aforementioned drug classes, and thus, the only thing to which this logic could possibly apply. It is, in any case, the thing that Amber wishes me to be disabled by, per the Final Retrospections thesis, that autism is a designation to be perpetuated of its disability rather than meliorated of its eudemonia per other conditions’ treatment.

The negroid should have his skull physically incised to access those preciously misused neurons of his, ripped apart physically as a punishment for his impudence.

Serotonin antagonists of the neutral sort are the real antidepressants

Serotonin, as has been expounded to death at this point, is not a meliorator of consciousness, emotional awareness, lexithymia, or conscious cognizance of one’s thoughts. Dependent upon itself, those processes are only dampened. It down-regulates dopamine which worsens the intellectual manifestation of the antidopaminergic anti-nootropics, as if their blockade of cholinergic action wasn’t enough. Wouldn’t it be all better if we could just… I dunno, flush it all out?

This is where progesterone comes in. It’s a serotonin neutral antagonist. Unlike inverse agonists, which compete with agonistic subtrates to prevent agonism of it to a receptor, or antagonists, which are tantamount to a receptor blockade whilst causing its post-synaptic and extracellular accumulation, neutral antagonists sit on the receptor, do nothing, and neutralise the build-up of the displaced substrate around it. Progesterone essentially causes a whole-scale seretonin antagonism both extracellularly and intracellularly, thus, “flushing” it all out, in a way similar to substances like tianeptine, an SSRE which I’ve also tried to brilliant effect. My brain was denegrified in an unprecedented way.

If we want to see self-esteem emerge from the recipient of any drug thereafter, it’s not enough that they just “feel better”, but have long-lasting intellectual improvements concomitant to that, otherwise it is meaningless, especially for those personalities for whom social endeavours are just a source of disgust. Progesterone is a neuralator, extending the glial sling to replenish the myelin sheath and expand white-matter networks. The exact opposite of what any antidopaminergic does in the long term, or any serotonin-reuptake inhibitor by way of its glucocorticoid upregulating effects.

Secondarily to this, it antagonises testosterone, whose demonic qualities in terms of neuro-generation and mood I’d discussed earlier. What a better argument for more denegrification? I can see that Amberite witch melt into the puddle of water it should’ve inevitably always disintegrated into, the wicked witch of the transsexually dominated Occident that it is.

Neurodegenerative qualities of antipsychotics and antidepressants

Moncrieff (sp?) did some work on the former, the latter is entirely my speculation which only wraps up in an encapsulatory summary the reasoning from before. The neurodegenerative effects of antidopaminergics on both the grey and white matter volume are quite well-established over a series of studies. The main riposte in critique of the proclamation that it is aetiologically accountable to the disease itself is that over the longitudinal course, there is neither improvement of this situation on antidopaminergics, nor a more rapid rate of degradation.

When we look at the reasoning from a Peatist perspective, where I’ve learned most of what I know about endocrine and neuroendocrine biology, it becomes clear to us. A dopamine blockade causes an accumulation of dopamine; newer drugs imperfectly blockade it by rapidly associating and disassociating from the receptor, causing a burnout. Dopamine’s extracellular presence is inversely correlated with intelligence — the reckoning behind this is less due to the presence of dopamine itself, and more due to its interaction with the wrong kind of receptors, resulting in the wrong connections (in the inferential chain of neurotransmitter interaction resulting in influences upon the directionality of glial sling; hormones, again, do this more powerfully still), nothing a whole-scale blockade really does anything other than worsen in the long-term; keep in mind, not everyone who has high levels of extracellular dopamine is a retard, for when one has endogenously high progesterone, it’s utilised better.

In a low-progestin environment with high glucocorticoids, high seretonin crosstalk interactivity, and high androgen levels, that dopamine is basically useless, blockaded from pet-receptor sites of the adherents of stupid, antiquainted schizophrenogenic hypotheses, or not. Studies into schizophrenics show that the endocrine burn-out had long preceded the neuroendocrine one, manifestations on a neurochemical or neurobiological level, and the last stage of this chain (in the powerful exertion of behavioural control by the willingness of some), the manifestation of symptoms themselves.

Social approachability from making self-unaware retards? I think not.

I’ve seen the retards sludging their way through the corridors of autism support organizations when I used to attend them long ago. Many of them were on some kind of psychotropic regime of the variant to Amber’s suggestion (I did have the good sense to ask those who were even able to speak to any sort of level resembling normal-range human speech). Their consciousness was visibly compromised in a way as to make the beneficial-adverse effect ratio’s weighing to the latter obvious. I would, honestly, rather have been situated in the “fat, drugged up psychopaths eating chocolates” scenario of Ronson’s work, because at least there, they had the neurobiological make-up to feign at an advanced level the trappings of human behaviour to a high level, which these autists had lacked, and were being compromised further of their ability to do.

Amber isn’t oblivious to all of this. He intentionally wishes to worsen the social meliorability of autists to get across an agenda; the deservingness of their neglect as they walk their proverbial death-rows to the death panel of a psychotropically induced, premature mental death via. dementia. To somebody undrugged and free-range like myself who had a very socially conscious awareness of how one had represented themselves in the presence of these iatrogenically-autistified ‘tards (wasted on them, in retrospect of the realisation they were devoid of interpreting cue, of course), this didn’t make them any more endearing to me. I wanted to avoid especially the socially hyperactive ones driven on the kind of regimes probably prescribed per Amberite fashion.

They were made insensitive, obnoxious, stupid hypermales, from an infrastructure in which those traits’ previous presence were more than doubtful, per the anecdote of the founder of APANA whom had regaled risperidone’s effects on her daughter.

Paranoia is cultural when its source originates from perspectives of experience specific to the organic situational “badness” of the disenfranchised

The last thing psychotherapy is going to do is improve the situation when the drugged autist interacts (I use this in a sociological context, the one Amber likes to ignore) with the prejudices of the practitioner to result in the presumption on the latter’s end that they were always this obnoxious, insensitive, boorish and beastial. If there is any sort of cognizance left on the autist’s part, they will pick up on this and disengage. If there isn’t, one can’t expect the autist to be anything near articulate enough to contribute in any wise or meaningful way to the psychotherapeutic process of mutual dialogue, and s/he is left short changed.

I can speak with some experience to the former situation, and it was without drugs having caused the production of inappropriate social cues resulting in their misinterpretation. My anxiety (if it were food, I’d have enough to feed all of Amber’s starving ancestors in the Kenyan outback) was misinterpreted as anger; a theme Haselgrove has since purposefully run with, though this was with a bit of a duller psychotherapeutic-model type for whom this misapprehension can be assumed to be sincere. That a study would come a year later (my psychotherapy sessions took place in 2015; the study was published 2016 — my own suspicions as to the hypothesis however have been something going back to my extremely introspective adolescence) to confirm a fundamental incompatibility at the level of such an interactive process with two different forms of mind-theoretical make-up would be sheer luck, though Amber has only since run with it again, to be abused to his benefit.

Autistics don’t have a nuanced differentiation between fight and flight, I reckon. In credit to Amber’s demeaning trivialization of all features of autistics to be likable to children, in this one respect, it would be in accordance with such a model. An autist is afraid? They’ll fight it. An autist is angry? They’ll fight it. I’ve noted it with myself.

Because, in a world where I’ve experienced nothing but the antipathy of neurotypicals even preceding my encounters with psychiatry, I have only ever known the neurotypical to be an adversary, a hostile party, a traitor, a psychopath, a manipulator, a demon, the beast I should conquest by taming it, through force if necessary. Would you want to show fear in front of such bastards? Instinctively no! Beat that Ambeirte demon up no matter what it is you actually feel, and you show a sense of formidability that would otherwise not invite sympathy had you done the opposite, but snivelling disdain, exactly as the psychopath does, to any display of weakness.

Does Cuntster really want an individual’s autism to improve?

If that were the case, not only would he haven’t have misdirected the conversation to some sort of categorical imperative for their eradication justifying a withholding of basic resources from them, he wouldn’t so callously advocate a drug regime which experientially not only has ended in failure or use specious noise-constructs (“muh synergism”) to distract the attention away from his misrepresentation and scapegoating some unspoken, non-existent misunderstanding on my end, but whose stated (marketed) effects are better supplanted by alternative substances procured by the grey-market.#

Categorically, I’m thoroughly unconvinced that this is the case.

This is more disgusting than any of the supposed “atrocities” misattributed in abhorrently perverted historical revisionism to the regime of Chosun. Amber’s relationship with me is an actual microcosm, of the harm mischaracterised of the Kim dynasty to his people and the narcissistic thrill of power he derives from it.

The Absurdity of Medico-centric Heterorthodoxy as Embodied in Cuntster’s Rhetoric

We have come to an impasse in the outer-limits of Cuntster’s argumentative abilities, quite clearly; throw all the post-graduate education in the world, and show it fail to take beyond the mnemonic in a lack of like-imparted critical analytical skills which would naturally have grown in parallel in his all-Caucasoid counterparts, proving illustratively an example of where the epithet “19th century antiquation”, among other shibboleths, fail to hold substantiative ground. Childish exaggerations in the form of simplistic and infantile hyperbole, presumptive a priori assertions, and a defaulting back to the “definitions” of a heterorthodoxy he has tried to massage the “existing evidence” to fit a congruency of picture otherwise lacking in the most autistically linear way possible, are only affirmations of the point of negroid intellectual deficiency in personified form, which serve to discredit whatever refutations Cuntster tries his most conscious efforts to fashion out of contrivance, even if not with any sort of self-convinced well-meaning, such has been the decreasing spiritedness of his rhetorical craft.

He tells people “let’s not over-complicate things”. I would tell those same people, “if you want to infantilize yourself intellectually, be my guest and unquestioningly beckon to the open request for thought-termination Cuntster has implored you to accept; if you’re interested in rigour, don’t accept the cliché of some badly used idiom as if it was an actual refutation of the critique of methodological failure; he is the one swiping things away dismissively.”

Brevity is never always a guarantee of wit in the true sense of what that should entail; there’s a very false illusion of it in the condensation of statements to remove their argumentatively parameterial specificity. It creates the illusion of an argument having been presented beyond assertion; negroids, however, have no real gauge of knowing consciously their own implicit meanings, half the time. He’s hoping, in this almost stereotypical-to-his-kind “lookame” exhibitionism, that in your own substitution of meaning, probably invariably far superiorly developed to his own, that you will be fooled into thinking there’s something deep to apprehend. It’s from this that emerges the source of his reductio ad absurdum arguments constructed with only one purpose: not to explicate wider understanding of his opponent, and hence, the lack of the demonstration of any understanding of an argument by the opponent on his part, but to terminate thought, typically in a clichéd fashion, where dismissal by sarcasm is presumed to be a new norm baseline for the standards required for defeat — it is the ground he wises to set; a sass over substance.

Never at any point does he dismiss the implications of the racio-scientific philosophical postulates set forth. In all truth, he probably barely understands them (I’m sure his various post-graduate horse training programmes have given him plenty of understanding of statistical methodology at the literal level, or else, he wouldn’t have bothered composing his own studies for whatever doctoral thesis he had to write; implications outwith a direct setting of the disciplines in which he is trained, however, are either lost on him, or create a disinterest where he’s unmotivated to become “unlost” on them). He knows that screaming catch-phrases like “WACIST” and “ANTIQUAINTED” are enough to shut down their active consideration by others and subsequent conversation. He actively jumped in seizure of the opportunity presented by the pet-liberal of KiwiFarms, one Alberto Balsam, to gauge the flavour of what precise catch-cries he was going to use that day, and bolster his own equally unsubstantiated positions.

So we can adduce, therefore, that my criticisms of methodological laziness are far from being some sweeping dismissal of the seriousness of my opponents, but are very real expositions of the thought-processes which drive Cuntster’s motives; not only that, they work with cross-contextual simultaneity, because racial science was more than just an awkward cousin discipline unto itself, but was the real anthropology before its hijack by the leftists; it is the study of human nature, and thus encompasses an essential spread cross-disiciplinarily into a number of subsets of study.

We can further adduce that, in the laziness to mount a genuine critique that doesn’t amount to an invitation to a pity-party for liberal sympathy baiting qua the racial situation, we can assume a similar laziness had compelled the formation of a lacking problematique regarding anything whereasfar as autism or the extent to which it is suffered by his opponents are concerned — fairly ubiquitous a theme amongst his KiwiFarms cadres.

Emotionally loaded adjectives and loaded language are littered to describe in desperation a contrariety to the actual dearth of evidentiary exhibits in substantiation of the above. Several posts earlier, he strawmans a quotation from me, only to embed a video, the source of which one should be duly prudent to observe is dated far from a time warranting contemporaneous comparison. In ignoring the racial angle, he will also try to peddle the idea that a Caucaso-Aryan autist would have the same maturation cycle as any of his negroid companions, to close the developmental argument; the reality is a differential, when considered with the compound dimensionality of autism’s own maturation cycle, so vastly divergent, that even Amber’s 15, let alone Amber’s 25th, 26th, or 27th anniversaires of socio-manipulative and parasitic existence, can’t be compared to an Aspergian’s 19th (such as, to my best recollection, was shown in the video exhibited) with fair respect to the latter’s rightfully presumed deficiency, for neuro- and socio-developmental alineraity would mean the White Aspergian is still in a state of potentiation long since burnt out by the early maturation of, hell, even Amber’s 12th.

False/redundant-negatives are a very effective rhetorical method for emphasis, “there isn’t X where [soandso] does not show Y…”. (If he was trying to hide the full extent of his arsenal of childish hyperbole, he would’ve done well not to actually italicize the very construct as to make it obvious.) It is however but an exaggeration whereasfar as the availability for adducement of the evidence in actuality is properly concerned. Here are the facts concerning the problems inherent to such a methodologically foibled means as to review the YouTube output content, when considered with adjutant factors of autism (and in particular, the full totality of facts of what we know, rather than this quasi-psychopathic strawman Amber has designed to elicit the maximal dissympathy from the audience):

  • None of these videos actually demonstrate a situation in which an interaction is taking place apart from one video. The video can be quite simply discounted on the following proviso: the interaction took place with an adversary, the adversary with whom was encountered for the first time, meaning background hostility intensifies whatever performance and social anxiety resultant such as to render an unknown what would’ve occurred in the same interaction if familiarity been greater and stereotype-threats (it was unknown to the author if Ryan McGrath aka IndispensablePeaGuy wasn’t a malingering pseudo-Aspie, a real problem with the community in its earliest days when trolls would go as far as to maligner the condition) were ruled out and removed.
  • In future videos to be embedded showing interactions with other users, the reliability of Amber’s strawman of a stutteringly hopeless autist is predicated ultimately on his knowing omission of the factors above: the vast majority of them were with Ryan, a situation Ryan had contrived with acquaintances of his or, in one case, a talk-show radio host, all of which were situations in which none of the other aggravating factors can be ruled out, and thus a normal conversational environment can’t be proven; therefore, one’s behaviour in such a circumstance can’t be proven.
    • Outwith the conversational settings where the author was speaking directly to a camera, no connection emotionally, socially or otherwise was even being attempted, such as is the predicament in autist is placed in when situated in front of an inanimate object. In nearly all of those cases, the audience was not “the public” as would be known in a generic sense to the idea of the body of people with whom an appeal or connection would be conventionally seen as worthwhile (and that one demonstrates a conscious awareness of this should disprove an incapability to conceive the need, and, for that matter, do), they were other hostile parties antagonistically vying for an infuriated response whose cold and unnurturing nature were explicated fully to the video’s subject beforehand. Basically, all intellectually inferior versions (individuals like Ryan McGrath, Jacob Trollope, and Shaun Britter, were all testably retarded — invariably falling somewhere in mild retardation ranges — per the RAPM I’d forcibly administered) of the kind of persona Amber endorses on purpose to create friction in the emotional confidence required to carry fully and successfully oneself through conversationally, rhetorically and argumentatively speaking. In what circumstances would, unless you’re a sociopath like Amber, hesitation and intimidation not be induced, bluntening the affective presentation, affecting adversely the conversational course?

The most insulting thing about every argument he’s attempted to present in forwarding the position that my autism is irrevocably debilitating unto itself over myriad domains, is that he expected, through the psychotherapeutic course of clandestinely abusive “treatment”, for me to integrate within a community like my local town’s, whose intellectual, emotional and personality characteristics of its denizens didn’t remarkably differ from the online trolls, a vibe, per his presuppositions, would supposedly be magically conducive to the resolution of my autism and the reversal of my feelings of existential ennui, intimidation, and alienation on both psychosocial and emotional levels; that I would be consciously aware of such as is the implicit meaning of “Good morning” from a Blackburner’s mouth (it is in the tonality, and also keyly the demographic; this was a Chav child, to whom my business was not owed — other than, perhaps, a rapid bongo-drumming on the head with my fists — it’s mocking sardony on a humiliating level), vis-a-vis a middle-class non-subhuman’s mouth, should be enough to evince a higher level of development of social cue preclusive of the degree of autistic severity Cuntster has been desperately trying to attribute to oneself.

Let us not oversimplify the matter. Assertive declaratives do nothing in proper assertion of the actual extent of the condition or the affirmation of any arguments or presupposed truths supposedly contained therein; many autists perfectly fit the definitions he and his adherents have advanced, but it is definitively only through massage and obfuscation of the incongruous outliers of my behavioural presentation unrecorded with the rare unhostile parties, and the advocation of treatment courses which would situate me well away from such interactive opportunities forever-more, that he has managed to strike a definition and make it fit obfuscatorily. Amber’s sass-laden and in themselves, negroidally hypermale and faux-feminine rhetoric, is meaningless on all the levels described aformentedly.