Play Anger

I wish there were a word for anger you don’t believe in.

I mean shallow anger, anger you ‘buy into’ like it’s part of a game. Anger you know would go away if you stopped for a minute to look at the source, but you feel it anyway because it’s fun, because it makes you feel like you’re symbolically supporting some sort of ideology that agrees with that anger.

I feel this anger when horny men message me really stupid things, like “can u send me a pic of ur butthole”. I have no actual right to be angry. I put nudes of myself on the internet, I welcome sexual comments, and I am completely unsurprised by horny men sending me horny messages. Of course. I understand. Deep down I am calm.

But on a surface-pretend level I think lots of terrible insults at them and think of myself as an empowered woman whose body is sacred and powerful, so powerful not just anybody can look at her butthole, _especially_ not people who sends her grammatically offensive tweets from an avatar of a penis.

I also feel this with okcupid profiles when I see people say they’re a feminist. I am a bit skeptical of feminism but I can understand how a rational person would agree with it, and it means different things to different people, and I’m open to discussion.

But every single fucking goddamn okcupid profile aggressively mentions feminism, usually in the first few paragraphs. What do you think you’re doing?? Everyone in your white college-educated town who isn’t turned off by you already is going to also be a feminist. It isn’t brave, it’s unoriginal. All you’re doing is signalling. I want to hit your stupid conformist face.

When I stop and breathe, I know I don’t actually think that. Smart people mention feminism on their profiles. People I like. They have reasons for it. I understand. Deep down I am calm.

I still need a word for the surface anger, though. For now I’m going to call it playnger but if any of you come up with a more clever term I’d love to hear it.

Categories Fun

Conversational Styles

I’ve been viewing social interactions lately through two spectrums – word count and conversational deference.

Word count is simple – the total amount of words peoples say, and if it’s high or low. Some people talk a lot, others don’t talk very much.

Deference is the amount of dominance you use when speaking. When two people start to talk at the same time, whoever lets the other person go is displaying deference. Someone who interrupts is displaying nondeference. Allowing someone to interrupt is displaying deference. Continuing to speak despite indications that the listener would like to chime in is displaying nondeference.

So there are then four categories, and because I have a guilty pleasure of personality tests and fun identity words, here’s my attempt to name the four styles.

High word count | high deference: The Catalyst.
People like this I view as conversationally meaty; they propel conversation forward, fill silences, but easily step back once other people want to participate. They are catalytic, and provide a steady background for the rest of the conversation to take place. When done poorly it can sound like nervous jabber, when done well it draws other people out without pressure or obligation.

High word count | low deference: The Elbow.
People like this I view as conversationally aggressive and forceful (whether they’re aware of it or not). They treat conversation as a service to them and their ideas. When done poorly it’s annoying and pushy, when done well it’s useful in leadership situations and for authoritatively directing the flow of attention to something better.

Low word count | high deference: The Wallpaper.
People like this I view as shy or thoughtful; will typically not speak much and not try to speak much if they feel like people don’t want to listen. They treat conversation distantly, as something they usually aren’t heavily involved in. Can be a pushover or introverted or both. When done poorly it’s indicative of insecurity, when done well it can provide a service of listening and attention that many people crave.

Low word count | low deference: The James Bond. 
People who speak rarely but expect to be listened to; treats conversation as generally unworthy or boring, and only selectively determines it as worth their time. When done poorly it can come across as a pretentious arrogant superiority complex, done well it can be mysterious, dominant, and charismatic.

Categories Fun

Loyalty Hierarchies

I like thinking of proper secret-sharing protocol in the context of loyalty hierarchies.

When I share personal information with someone, I have an implicit assumption that they will share this information only with people higher in their loyalty hierarchy than I am.

For example: I tell my friend Barbara that I am having marriage difficulty and I am worried my husband Bob is going to divorce me. I would consider it inappropriate if she shared this information down-rank with our casual coworker Beth, but it would be fine if she shared it up-rank, with her childhood best friend of 25 years Brittany, or Barbara’s husband Billy.

As in; every time I choose to share information, I assume I am sharing it with a tree of loyalty. I do not just share information with Barbara, I am sharing it with Barbara-Brittany-Billy.

A loyalty branch ends when information is shared to you by your closest loyal partner. If Barbara’s highest loyal rank – her husband – shares personal information with her, there is nobody up-rank to spread the information to, so the chain dies with her.

I am only displeased by information sharing when it is shared down-rank. Sharing up-rank means that the information will end soon – the end being whenever it is shared with the highest loyal rank (husband to Barbara). If everyone shares up-rank, the information spread is contained. But in spreading down and up-rank, the spread can go indefinitely, until everybody in the world knows and is telling me to divorce Bob already and get it over with.

Of course this is negated if explicitly stated otherwise. If I tell Barbara not to tell a soul about my troubled relationship with Bob, then I would expect her not to.

I don’t know if other people operate by this rule or not, but I get the impression that most people vaguely adhere to it in general terms. Do you have any sorts of rules for privacy and information sharing?

Categories Fun

Wiki Links

Over time I’ve been saving some of my favorite articles from those inevitable Wikipedia doom spirals. Here’s a list of odd, interesting, unusual, or curious links straight from my juicy bookmarks folder!

Fatal familial insomnia


Common cuckoo #Breeding


Shutdown law

List of selfie-related injuries and deaths

HIV/AIDS denialism

Wright brothers patent war


Anula of Anuradhapura

Mass hysteria

Blonde versus brunette rivalry

Shotgun house

Dead man’s switch

Morbid jealousy

Black Death Jewish persecutions

Spite house

Work spouse

Privilege du blanc



Norman conquest of England #Origins

Adrian Schoolcraft

Lists of unsolved problems

List of cities by population density


H. H. Holmes


List of helicopter prison escapes

Perverse incentive

Congo Free State #Mutilation

Pataphysics #Concepts

Mill Ends Park

Garden hermit

Republic of Molossia

Project MKUltra

Liberia #Early settlement

Varangian Guard

The Miracle of 1511

Phaistos Disc


Toynbee tiles

Gobekli Tepe

Backmasking #Satanic backmasking

Kim Philby

Tower of Wooden Pallets

Animal suicide

Empress Dowager Hu #As Emperor Xuanwu.27s concubine

White elephant  #Examples of alleged white elephant projects



Pope Benedict IX

Late Bronze Age collapse

1918 flu pandemic

Sweater curse

Ching Shih

1% rule (Internet culture)

Five Punishments

Franklin’s lost expedition

Rosenhan experiment

Form constant

Moral panic

St Scholastica Day riot

Carnac stones


Categories Fun

Kinks and Kinkiness

I recently did a kink survey, where I had you guys rate how kinky (in the sense of taboo or socially scandalous) they thought various kinks were.

I picked 31 different kinks, fetishes, preferences, and types of play. I grouped together some kinks in the same family (monsters/tentacles, diaper/infantilism, etc.). A lot of people either misread or didn’t read my instructions at all, and so I unfortunately had to throw out around 15% of the results. Lesson learned – I’ll be clearer next time!

I ended up with a total of 443 usable responses, with 121 female and 322 male. (I eliminated the ‘other’ category because there were only 12 usable answers)

So without further ado, here is the Official Kink Rating:

  • 1.38: Sex positions (doggystyle, 69ing, etc.)
  • 2.37: Uniforms (costumes; police, maid, etc.)
  • 2.42:  Spanking
  • 2.68: Light Bondage (fuzzy handcuffs, silk blindfolds, etc.)
  • 2.7:  Anal sex
  • 4.08: Sex outside (at work, in public bathrooms, in nature)
  •  4.2:  Latex
  • 4.32: Voyeurism
  • 4.33: Dominance/submission
  • 4.46: Exhibitionism
  • 5.21: Masochism (arousal from receiving pain)
  • 5.29: Transformations (from smart to bimbo, growing muscles, limbs, inflation, etc.)
  • 5.8:  Sadism: (arousal from giving pain)
  • 5.74: Lactation (breast milk)
  • 5.81: Inanimate objects (attraction to shoes, panties, buildings)
  • 5.93: Asphyxiation (choking self or others)
  • 6.16: Futa (girls with dicks)
  • 6.32: Heavy bondage (full immobility, suspension, predicament bondage, etc.)
  • 6.59: Monsters (tentacles, aliens, deformities, etc.)
  • 6.62: Rapeplay
  • 6.82: Watersports (urination)
  • 7.16: Dirtiness (soiled things, decaying things, disgust)
  • 7.25: Piercing/cutting (the act of piercing)
  • 7.8:  Incest
  • 8.01: Diaper/infantile (or any other form of child roleplay)
  • 8.34: Insects (including other creepy crawlies, seafood, etc.)
  • 8.61: Vore (being consumed or consuming another person/creature)
  • 8.78: Bestiality
  • 9.05: Pedophilia (I am aware many do not consider this a kink please stop messaging me)
  • 9.07: Scat (poop)
  • 9.51: Necrophilia (sexual attraction to dead bodies)

Men rated kinkiness on average at a 5.86, while women rated on average of 6.0

There were some differences in gender for individual kinks. Here are the top 7 discrepancies.

Voyeurism (.8)

Men: 4.1 Women: 4.9

Lactation (.6)

Men: 5.6 Women: 6.2

Dirtiness (.6)

Men: 7 Women: 7.6

Futa (.6)

Men: 6.4 Women: 5.8

Inanimate Objects (.5)

Men: 5.7 Women: 6.2

Diaper/infantile (.5)

Men: 7.9 Women: 8.4

Light bondage (.4)

Men: 2.8 Women: 2.4

Followups, all at .3, are incest, bestiality, monsters, creepy crawlies, and sadism, all which women think are more kinky.

The two that men consider more kinky is futa and light bondage, while they think all the others are less kinky than women do. I’m not really sure how to interpret this. My first thought was that people were rating according to perceived backlash, so for example men think futa is kinkier because society might mock them for being gay, but that doesn’t explain things like voyeurism, which has a worse stigma against peeping men, but is rated less kinky by men.

I also asked people to count how many of the listed kinks did turn them on (a good test being – have they or would they have searched for porn of it – or does it make your penis hard/vagina wet?).

Men: 10
Women: 8.5

so men on average liked about 1.5 more items on the list than women did. This might because I subconsciously listed more male-friendly kinks? I’m not sure. I initially thought it was too woman-friendly, because I am a woman and a lot of kinks I thought of were kinks that I had. But who knows. So I added up the score of all the kinks I have and got a total rounded sum of 68.

Is that a lot? I don’t know. Add up your total and reblog this post with your kink score!

(if you would like to be notified for future surveys and results, submit your email to the mailing list)

Strange Subculture List

I was shocked the other day at discovering there was a Hillary Clinton subreddit. Who the hell supports Hillary? Turns out – a lot of people.

Same with the police subreddit. For every police shooting, you can go to that sub and watch police giving every possible explanation for why the shooting was justified.

So I decided to collect “alternate culture” subreddits – subs that support strange views, or just views that are unpopular against the general social narrative. The narrative changes depending on what culture you belong to, so I’ve also tried to include things that might seem strange to you but not me.

The presence of a sub on this list does not mean I support or denounce it – only that I think some would find it strange.

NSFW/trigger warning: Some subs may be shocking or highly offensive


Consensual incest relationships
Sex Workers
Big Dick Problemss
NoFap – for those trying not to masturbate
Cuckold Community – for those who enjoy “unfaithful” partners
BDSM Community
Cocaine Gone Wild
Sex With Dogs
Yiff – furry porn community
Little Space – those who roleplay as small children
Escort Review – where people discuss how good the paid sex was
Sugar Lifestyle Forum – women looking for a comfortable life

Politics and philosophy

Protect And Serve – police subreddit
Black Power
White Rights
Hillary Clinton Support
Donald Trump Support
Purple Pill Debate – where traditional and liberal sexual philosophies clash
Dark Enlightenment – traditional anti-progressiveism
Critical Shower Thoughts – Shower Thoughts, but with teeth
European – subreddit name sounds innocent, but content is anything but
9/11 Truth – Jet fuel actually seriously can’t melt steel beams tho
Libertarian – in support of minimal government
Conspiracy – everything is out to get you
AntiPOZi – anti-immigration


Reformed – strict biblical interpretations
True Christian – for the Christians who thought r/Christianity was too tolerant
Dank Christian Memes – a hilarious sub run by a Christian trying to quench the atheist-submitted memes
LDS – a sect of (maybe?) Christianity that has some weirder-than-normal beliefs
ExMuslim – a heartbreaking sub of exMuslims trying to escape being beaten by their families
MuslimNoFap – for Muslims trying to remain holy
NonGolfers – for those fed up with golfing
Explain Like I’m Not a Theologian – religious reason broken down for dummies
Reasonable Faith – for the rational religious believer
Quakers – on the internet somehow
Intelligent Design – distrust evolution, trust in God
ProLife – for the preservation of unborn innocents


Modest Dress
Red Pill Women – women who support traditional lifestyles and sexual submission
Red Pill Wives
Men’s Rights – a group focusing on men’s legal disadvantages
Incels – unwanted men looking for marriage
Forever Unwanted – for those who have never been sexually desired
Slut Justice – pro-slut shaming
Seduction – helping men learn what women want
Men’s Lib – a more moderate male support group


True Women’s Liberation – radical feminism supporting male castration
Misandry Fetish
Shit Reddit Says – SJW den of mockery
True Female Supremacy – radical radical radical feminism
Gender-Critical – women before men
Actual Women – trans-unfriendly feminism

Crime, horror, and mysticism

Adultery – for the unfaithful
Shoplifting – shoplifting support group
Eating Women
Witchcraft – complete with spellcasting tutorials
Astrology – for those guided by the stars


Dark Net Markets – trading discussion for the drug underworld
Mensa – For people who have very high IQs and want you to know
Tulpas – For the creation of imaginary mental people

Feel free to submit further suggestions for more strange communities. I will keep updating this list.

Categories Fun

Spectrums of Identity

1. Belief

The Apatheist
This is the guy who doesn’t believe anything. Completely unconcerned with politics, religion, or even opinions about himself, he’s infuriatingly hard to pin down. Frequently contradicts himself and doesn’t seem to care. Ask him what he thinks is true and he’ll shrug his shoulders, exhale a bong rip, and say “what is truth anyway?”

Your Uncle.
This is the guy who is very right and wants you to know it. He knows exactly what is going down with the world and is hostile to any opinions contrary. This guy is present in every belief system known to mankind. He builds himself a castle of opinions and a fort of cherry picked facts to keep away the marauders with their links to objecting internet articles. His strong convictions also mean he’s a signpost for others who aren’t sure what they believe yet, and in the public sphere can help sway opinion.

2. Memory

The Now Girl
This is the girl who says “the past is just a story we tell ourselves” and frequently avoids questions about her childhood. Ask her what she did yesterday and she’ll make a joke. Has memory problems, probably from systematic lack of caring. Doesn’t tell you about herself, not because she’s mysterious, but because she doesn’t consider it relevant to your friendship with her. Why would you need to know if it doesn’t matter?

The Photographer
This is the girl who presents herself carefully and loves it, even if she thinks she doesn’t. She can give you her life story in three sentences but often chooses to do it in three hours. She wants to write an autobiography. Her life is divided into “before” and “after” some sort of important event. She can point to aspects of her personality and tell you exactly where they came from. Doesn’t consider you intimate with her unless she’s told her Story(tm). Brings all her past experiences in to justify her actions and absolve herself of blame. Probably into photography.

3. Ability

The Slacker
This is the guy who doesn’t take a lot of pride in what he does and isn’t particularly motivated either. He might enjoy activities, sure, but he doesn’t do them for you. He gives off a confident ease that comes only from not caring if people think he’s smart or not. You might know him for a year and then suddenly find out he can draw really well, or maybe has a Diamond ranking in League of Legends, but more likely you find out he deals weed with upsettingly lax security.

The guy with the Asian parents
This guy, on a deep level, views his life as worth living only if he hits the bar of ‘good enough,’ which he always sets just outside of his reach because subconsciously he can’t handle the idea of actually being good enough. He is usually terrifyingly competent, motivated by low self esteem and the need to prove something to anybody. He knows his IQ and wishes someone would ask him. He owns a really nice suit which he doesn’t get to wear as often as he’d like.

4. Society

The Manic Pixie
This girl doesn’t like being labeled, and fitting into the liberal counterculture is too much fitting in for her comfort. She doesn’t wash her hair out of sheer laziness, she’s pegged at least three guys on tindr dates, and she’s lived in four cities in the three years. Floating between groups, she’ll come in and out of your life without much predictability. She’s not doing this because she is trying to make a point, but because her parents didn’t give a shit and she operates on a strict ‘whatever feels good’ rule. Will sleep on your couch till you kick her out, and the next time you hear from her will be 6 months later asking if you saw her vibrator.

The Lemming
This girl loves playing by the rules of the social group she’s in. In conservative culture, she is the perfect housewife who shakes her head at homosexuals. In liberal cultures, she tweets “radical” messages even though she’s only followed by people who agree with her. She is the archetypical dedicated group member, flag holder, activist of whatever community she belongs to. She is more likely to join a cult. People are frequently loyal to her and a good deal of her mental attention goes towards the cohesion of her group.


rate yourself, with 1 being the first one and 10 being the second

I’m 5/10 belief, 8/10 memory, 4/10 ability, 5/10 society.