Cvcks, Pr0n, and Dissident Politics
Read this post at your own risk.
This is something that I personally would rather not write, or at least would rather not have my name attached to it. I even decided not to email it because frankly, it’s kind of embarrassing. It’s also not on brand for me. Yet I’m compelled to put it out. So here it is. If people find it, cool. If not, whatever.
The inspiration for this post came from the podcast of one Dr. E. Michael Jones. This podcast episode is formally called EMJ Live Episode 110: The Searchers and White Identity; click on the following link to watch it on Twitter/X. In this episode, Dr. Jones delved into The Searchers, a 1950s Western movie starring John Wayne. One aspect of the movie that Jones zeroed in on was the kidnapping of white settler women by American Indian tribes like the Comanche. In time, these women would assimilate into those respective tribes, and even marry their captors. When the heroes of the movie finally rescued these women, they discovered to their horror that the women had become animals in all but name. And one of the men (who was part Indian), even said that they’re “no longer white”.
Jones - who are known for his opposition to “white identity” - fired one rather devastating rhetorical salvo: “whiteness” is a quasi-sexual identity. Jones likened it to virginity. Which means that you can lose it. Thus, it is not genetic. Because if “whiteness” is genetic, then you can’t lose it.
To me, this is where everything just clicked. Of course! Why else are these dissident white boys so hostile towards white women who marry/had sexual relations with men of other races? Yet somehow said hatred, though it existed (e.g. JD Vance), is nowhere near as strong when the situation is reversed (white men who married colored women). But of more importance is the rise of what I call “race incels”. It’s not lost on many how a lot of these “save the white race” people are those who are not only single, but rejected the very idea of getting married altogether.
And at the risk of pointing out the obvious, a lot of them hate white women. Well… women in general, but white women seem to occupy a special position of hatred for these people.
Is it a coincidence? Of course not. If whiteness is like virginity, then of course it would be better for a white person to be an incel than to “racemix”. The fact that the racemixer is in a better position to pass on his/her genes seems to be utterly lost on these people.
But that’s not all. As per usual in EMJ Live, Dr. Jones answered many questions from his viewers/listeners. One person asked if it’s natural for people to want their kids to look like them. This is a simple enough question, one that the average person (including yours truly) would say yes. But Dr. Jones is not the average person. And he brought up an important point: your kids won’t look like you. Dr. Jones brought up personal examples, including his son who looked like his father (Jones clarified that he himself doesn’t look like his own father).
To put it in a less confusing way: the son looks exactly like his grandfather, who didn’t look like his father.
As a single person, I never really though about this. But it makes sense in retrospect. Taking my own personal examples, my nephew looks more like me than his own father (my older brother). But a more powerful example is my younger brother. Like most Southeast Asians, my family is mostly hairless, both my father’s side and my mother’s side. One exception to this is my younger brother. The explanation: the “Harahap” gene. To simplify things a bit, my mother’s side of the family has ancestry that hailed from the Muslim area of Northern Sumatra (our family are Christians). And many people in that place trace their ancestry to the Middle East, specifically Yemen. As some may know, East Asians lack body hair, but Middle Easterners are quite the opposite. Thus, my brother’s hairiness is a subtle reminder that my ancestry isn’t as straightforward as it seems (and I’m a purebred Batak, or so I thought).
All this is to say that genetics are weird. Genetic inheritance isn’t as simple as most people think, and the “Mendelian genetics” that people like me have been taught in school is an oversimplification at best.
Dr. Jones came to the conclusion that people’s desire to have their kids to “look like them” stems from a desire to play god.
That might be true, but Jones overlooked another key factor. Either because he didn’t know or because it didn’t occur to him at the time: pornography.
If you spend enough time in dissident politics, then you will hear the term “cuck” thrown around a lot, always as an insult. For example, if England lets in massive amounts of immigrants from the Middle East and India, then that country’s cucked (according to these people). But why “cuck”? Why that term? What is so significant about cuckolding that the dissident right keeps using the term as an epithet?
Pornography.
At least that’s my instinct. I’m not a sociologist, nor am I an expert on pornography. I also didn’t want to stumble into something I wouldn’t like in my (brief) research. That’s why I made use of ChatGPT.
Yeah, I know. But hear me out here.
I asked the robot how often do pornos involve “cuck” or “cuckold”. Its answer:
Now of course the robot is known to hallucinate and make mistakes. So please take this with a grain of salt. But personally, I find this to be very revealing. Is it possible that the reason “cuck” is a very common epithet in these circles is because the people there are addicted to pornography?
I tried to have a deeper look by following up on the robot’s question. Unfortunately, I ran into a dead end:
So I’m back to square one. But at least we have a hypothesis.
For the sake of transparency, here’s the link to the discussion on OpenAI.
Now let’s go back to Dr. Jones and the question of “wanting your kids to look like you”. Could it be that the reason why this is such an obsession amongst the white boys is because they are deathly afraid of being cuckolded? But why are they afraid of being cucked? Why is anyone afraid of being cucked? To be honest, I’m not sure. But hold that thought for now.
Now let’s go further back in the podcast. Let’s return back to The Searchers and the historical cases of Indians kidnapping white settler women. Here we have a group of non-white men kidnapping white women. Those who were only there for about a week like Daniel Boone’s daughter were fine. But what about the case of Cynthia Anne Parker who were there for 24 years and had three children with a Comanche chief?
Well… isn’t that a case of cucking? Not in the strict sense of the word. But in the political/4chan sense of the word, it’s definitely cucking.
Now to return to the questions I posed earlier. What is it with this obsession with cucking amongst the race crowd? I will say again, I’m not sure. I don’t know. But if you don’t take pornography into consideration, then you don’t deserve to be taken seriously as a researcher.