Alan Konig retweeted
if you ever wondered what the opposite of farm stands where you take a dozen eggs and leave $5 in the jam jar is:
it's needing anti-vehicle barriers to keep people from murdering people in christmas markets.
Some good news for a change!
Today, after 31 years, we are saddened to announce that Salon is ceasing publication. It has been an extraordinary privilege. salon.com/2026/11/05/goodbye…
55
Alan Konig retweeted
Replying to @RichardHanania
There’s plenty of rational arguments, you just scream “racism” at all of them because you’re an idiot
Alan Konig retweeted
I used to review officer-involved shooting reports generated by a D.A. explaining the decision to exonerate officers, and recall often thinking “I mean, could that *really* be how it went down?” I suspected there may be some fog of war or selective memory or post-hoc justification to give the officer a rational justification and paint the victim in a negative, irrational light.
But with the post-2020 adoption of body cams, I now believe it all. There is no behavior too insane for a huge number of suspects when confronted with literally any command by an officer requesting some form of compliance.
Even I thought body cams would shine a light on some substantial percentage of clear officer abuse, but it’s clearly negligible, while dangerous and erratic behavior by suspects is widespread. It is impossible to overstate how wrong BLM and reform activists were on this count.
Alan Konig retweeted
I didn't go to college until I was 30. This gave me a chance to see it with the perspective of an adult.
One lecture in Industrial Psychology, in particular, I will never forget.
The professor spoke about how an effective job description focused on concretely measurable tasks, not vague instructions, or characteristics.
For example, "maintain an 85% or greater average on customer feedback surveys", instead of "be cheerful and upbeat", or even "interact positively with customers".
This means that goals are clear, and performance is measurable. A job is to do something, not be something.
Once some of the students had wrapped their minds around this concept, the professor decided to do a class exercise.
He asked the female students to come up with a job description for "husband". At first, this went fine. The girls noodled around a bit with things they wanted their husbands to be (tall, etc), but he was able to gradually steer them towards describing what they wanted in terms of actions.
But then he asked the male students to define a wife in the same way.
And all the girls became upset. Some of them had full-on meltdowns.
Every single thing that a male student wanted, or expected, from his hypothetical future wife was sexist, oppressive, old-fashioned, misogynistic, patriarchal, etc.
They were literally screaming. Some of them in tears.
And I realized something pretty quickly. It wasn't the actual, concrete responsibilities of the female role that they objected to.
It was the idea of there being a female role at all, with any attached responsibilities.
These women didn't want to be wives. They wanted to be pets.
What's a pet? Well a pet is not a wife, or a friend. A pet is a creature of instinct, which you bring into your home because you like how it naturally behaves.
You get a cat because you want to behave like a cat, and do things a cat naturally does, like play with string, and purr when you pet him. If he's smart, he'll adapt to you somewhat, but he doesn't have responsibilities other than "be a cat".
If you get a wife, you get a wife so she will do things for you, specific things that are the responsibilities of wife, like care for your home, bear and raise your children, cook nutritious meals so you don't have to eat processed slop, look after your emotional well-being, and so on.
These girls didn't want to be held responsible for those things. As married women, they might have anticipated doing some of them, but only some of the time. Only when they felt like it.
The cat chases the string if and when it wants to, not because chasing the string is its job.
These young millenial women didn't realize it, but they wanted to be pets. And that's what they were in their college relationships. They hung out with guys when they wanted to, had sex with them when they wanted to, broke up with them for someone new when they wanted to.
Their relationships had no element of reciprocal responsibilities. They were perfectly at home with the idea of men having responsibilities to them, but they would repay those men if they chose, and how they chose, not how the men actually wanted.
And as I've said twice already, someone you have responsibilities to, but who has none to you, is a pet, or a child.
Since our ancestors, in a moment of foolishness and weakness, allowed women to vote, it is no longer legal to dole out the corrective spankings a great many of them both need and read pornographic novels about.
Therefore, the corrective measure, for any man who finds himself with a pet instead of a wife, is to withdraw from any husbandly duties and start actively searching for alternatives.
This can either result in a correction of the behavior, or the end of a relationship that offers no value. Either is acceptable.
This may strike some of you as dishonorable, but there is no honor in keeping a broken pact, or in serving those who despise you.
Men must have the pride and self-worth to say "I will be honored and respected, or I will depart to a place where I can be, even if I must be alone there."
Men must honor and respect themselves.
Alan Konig retweeted
חיפשתי את הקטע הזה בנרות - וסוף סוף מצאתי אותו. ביום ראשון, אחרי המהומות, פראנס 2 שידרו כתבה של 12 דקות בשם ״בלב האלימות״ שהראתה, עם מעט מאוד קריינות - מראות פשוט מהממים של האלימות הגדולה של המהומות של יום שבת. אני זוכר שצפיתי בזה מרותק - כמו במלחמה בלייב. רואים שם הכל מהכל: משטרה מסתערת ונסוגה, את מארגני המחאה שמחלקים לאנשים טיפות עיניים נגד גז מדמיע, אנשים ששוברים ״פאווה״ כדי להעיף על השוטרים, ונדליזם, ביזה, הצתות וגם חובשים מתנדבים ומכבי אש ותזמורת ואת מלנשון החלאה צועד, מתמוגג ומאושר עם חבורת המנוולים שלו. אלו רגעים טלוויזיוניים מרתקים. אני זוכר שצפיתי בזה ולא הבנתי באותו רגע במה אני צופה. זו טלוויזיה טובה. טובה מאוד למעשה. ערוכה היטב. מסמך נדיר מסוג שכבר קשה לראות היום. בצרפת, מהדורות החדשות אינן סיפור מתיש של פורנו מוות ושכול על פני שעתיים עם פרסומות כמו בארץ ועם מריחות בלתי נגמרות והאכלה של נראטיבים בכפית. 12 דקות של תיעוד, כמעט ללא קריינות הן דבר מאוד יוצא דופן. הרבה מאוד נדל״ן במהדורה צרפתית שנמשכת כחצי שעה בלבד.
אחד מועדי העובדים הגדולים של צרפת, ה-סה-ג׳ה-טה שזה סוג של ״הסתדרות״ אולטרה-שמאלנית. יחד עם ועד דומה אחר (סה-אף-דה-טה) מאוד זעמו על השידור של הכתבה הלא שיגרתית הזו. כי היא מראה שם את פרצופה האמיתי של ה״מחאה״ הזו בלי קשקושים ובלי התייפיפות ובלי פילטרים.
עכשיו הם דורשים לא רק את פיטוריו של המגיש הותיק - לורן דלאוס - אלא את פיטוריו של כל צוות החדשות של המהדורה הזו.
אתם קולטים? **ועדי עובדים**, שדורשים שמנהלי הערוץ הציבורי הצרפתי - יפטרו צוות שלם כי העזו להכין כתבה שאינה לרוחם. כתבה שבה ברוב השוטים - המצלמה פאסיבית לחלוטין ואין אף נקיטת עמדה או תיווך.
זהו השמאל הקיצוני העומד על רגליו האחרויות כנגד, ובכן, - המציאות עצמה ואלו המשדרים אותה. הם מכנים את הכתבה הזו ״פרופגנדה״. אל הדרישה ההזויה הזו, הצטרפה גם ואלרי לרוז׳ - נשיאת אירגון העיתונאים סה-דה-ז׳י. מבחינתה, מדובר ב״התדרדרות טוטאלית ובלתי נשלטת״. אל ועדי העובדים ואליה הצטרפו עוד קולות עיתונאים ואחרים מן השמאל בזעם קדוש.
הנהלת הערוץ הציבורי פראנס 2 ששידרה את הדוקו הזה - מיהרה להוציא סוג של ״מאה קולפה״ - הודעת התנצלות די מבועתת שבה היא מצרה על כך שהתמונות לא היו בתוך ״קונטקסט״ יותר רחב. כלומר שלא ישב שם איזה מישהו וחירטט לאנשים שצופים במסמך המרתק הזה - מה עליהם לחשוב או להרגיש.
אני אתן לכם לשפוט בעצמכם. מזל שמישהו העלה את זה לטוויטר:
Alan Konig retweeted
Cockroaches don’t build their own homes, but they’re great at finding the cracks in yours.
Pakistani man arrested for allegedly running USPS scheme that cost $126M in losses trib.al/tQGHoUP
Delusional.
Replying to @BaronWilder1
Behold the average trans women!
*literally the most normal looking person on the internet*
1
48
Alan Konig retweeted
“Women talk a lot about how scared of male violence they are, but from their behavior it's clear they never actually consider it a possibility”
When I was eighteen I was out for the night with my bf and some friends, we were barhopping in Kings Cross. I was tipsy & occasionally lippy & obnoxious towards strangers (who were asking for it!).
My bf quietly & discreetly at one point during the night said “babe, I love you, but fuck sometimes I worry that you’re writing cheques I won’t be able to cash, if it comes to and I’m on my own”. I was like “wtf are you talking about?”
He literally had to explain to me that if I was being a fuckwit starting trouble, he’d obviously have to defend me if anything went down, and if I’m being a massive smart ass and it’s just like him & me & my best girlfriend, then he’s going to be in a fight on his own. All because I was being an antagonistic smart ass to some strangers who couldn’t take a joke.
The idea that I needed to be able to back up my words with violence if it came to it, was something that had literally never occurred to me. Ever.
It was a total revelation. Suddenly i realised talk wasn’t “cheap” in this context, it was expensive. The idea that I could effectively get him beaten up, or put him in real danger, by being a precocious little shit arguing with idiots because I could, was horrifying.
From then on I was extremely reluctant to ever argue with strangers or act like a smart ass unnecessarily, because I was suddenly keenly aware that the guys we were with could potentially be expected to pay with their lives for any poorly received flippant comments we made.
It really was totally novel to me. This isn’t how women see the world, at all.
Ideally, he wouldn't have reacted like this
But any guy is aware that when you shove another man, getting lightly swatted (or more) is 100% on the table, so they won't do it unless they're being intentionally aggressive
Women talk a lot about how scared of male violence they are, but from their behavior it's clear they never actually consider it a possibility
We don't live in the 60s. You're shoving a steroid user on an athletic scholarship in the middle of a football game. You have to understand that this inherently comes with a degree of danger
1. Is obviously true, and intelligent, honest person on either side of the debate would disagree.
2. Why would anyone on the right agree to changing laws that are already ignored by the left?
It’s under-discussed that:
1. Trump and his supporters are obsessed with immigration as a civilization-defining issue
2. They haven’t tried to pass an immigration bill of any kind
slowboring.com/p/trump-hasnt…
3
137
Alan Konig retweeted
Replying to @JamieBonkiewicz
Just try pretending he's a moderately right wing political pundit who speaks on college campuses and has a wife and some kids and never hurt anyone in his life.
You know, instead of a mass murderer.
Alan Konig retweeted
I don’t remember Somali clan wars in American suburbs when I was growing up…
There is no magic soil.
A nation is simply it’s people.
You can always tell when someone has no real confidence in the truth of a statement they post, because they turn off replies.
Replying to @HippoAdam
Patriarchy doesn’t happen naturally. If it did, it wouldn’t require constant violence to maintain it, and it wouldn’t be rapidly leading to the destruction of humankind. Best of luck.
1
2
73



































