Pimp and Whores as Metaphor for American Society — BWIQ or Blacks with White IQ — How Prostitution went from Association with Madames to that with Pimps — Predator and Prey in Racial Dynamics

https://www.counter-currents.com/2020/08/american-pimp/

Black IQ will go up because of the BWIQ(BLACKS with WHITE IQ) factor. As more white women with jungle fever go for ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs, they will pass white IQ to their mulatto kids who will most definitely identify as black. Indeed, to compensate for their whiteness(evil), they will try to be blacker than black in attitude. Jungle Fever will raise black IQ. Many blacks at elite colleges are BWIQs. Race traitor white women pass white intelligence to blacks, just like renegade Jews(aka Early Christians) passed the secret of the Jewish God to goyim. As BWIQS are smarter than blacks, they will ably compete with whites(while also benefiting from Affirmative Action) and lead the blacks just like Caesar the talking chimp led the gorillas in CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES. They will be like Cyrus in the gathering of the gangs in THE WARRIORS. Things are now even worse for whites. Back in the gang-infested 1970s, whites didn’t worship blacks and detested black thuggery. But now, whites do worship blacks. Biggest passions for whites are Jungle Fever/Faith, Jew Worship, and Homo Celebration. Btw, Gary Oldman in TRUE ROMANCE made the best ‘black’ pimp. He was to pimpery what Eric Burdon of the Animals was to soul.




In a way, the black pimp and white ho’s are the perfect metaphor for our times. Just like white whores are sexually owned by black pimps, middle class white soccer moms are mentally colonized by ‘wokeness’ and beholden to the likes of Barack/Michelle Obama, Colin Kaepernick, and Fentanyl Floyd, pimp-as-saint. They are culture whores of blacks. Look at BLM ‘moms’. Soccer Moms as Sucker Moms. Even many white ‘conservative’ women are mental and sexual whores of blacks.

And to extend the metaphor further, many white populists go for Donald Trump’s pimpish style. He has swagger, which is why Mike Tyson and Kanye West like him. And, White-Jewish power dynamics is pimpish. Trump is both pimp and whore. He whores out to bigger pimps like Sheldon Adelson the Jewish oligarch. And white whore politicians are to Jewish pimp donors what young white girls were to Jeffrey Epstein.

Btw, didn’t prostitution fade big time because Jews legalized porn? Jews used to be major players in pimpery but got muscled out by others in the criminal world. But by legalizing porn, they came to dominate what is essentially electronic prostitution. If Jews were to legalize prostitution as ‘sex work’ across the nation, they may dominate the industry once again. It’s like Mexicans and others dominated the Pot trade when it was illegal, but now Pot is being cornered by Jews as legal business. Jews also took total control of gambling once it became legal all over America, decided more by lawyers and politicians than by hoods and killers.

Some pimps insist physical violence is actually appreciated by the prostitutes who come to respect their pimps as no-nonsense men of strength. It's useful to fuc*-up women whose business is to get fuc*ed. There may be a grain of truth to this. Athletes admire a tough coach, even if he's sometimes abusive. Jews beat on whites constantly, but this makes whites even more whorey to Jews. Even John Derbyshire, Jared Taylor, and Ann Coulter exhibit this quality. Jews beat them, but they still defend Jews. And Trump is constantly attacked by Jews, but he keeps sucking up to them with the same old song, "I Love Israel." And blacks rob, rape, and murder whites, but whites chant ‘black lives matter’. Whites = whores in a Junglo-Idiocracy. White fear of blacks also leads to white awe of blacks as badass mofos. “That’s my master.”


It's not always easy to tell pimps and preachers apart in the black community. MLK or Fartin' Poother Bling acted like an out-of-control pimp. A total sexual degenerate. Many black preachers were actually admired for their sexual prowess. Black Gospel easily morphed into Soul music. Little Richard was a pimp-preacher entertainer. Richard Pryor ran with this idea in THE CAR WASH. So many Americans are either pimps or whores. Some are both. Ellen Degeneris or Degenerate, a lesbian whore to Jewish Power, is also a pimp over those working for her.


What is the white-black psychological power dynamics? The logic goes like this: If all animals were lions, it would be hell on earth. For lions to thrive, most animals must belong to other species, esp herbivores, for the lion kings to feed on. Blacks see the world that way. They are the special kings whereas the rest of humanity exists to serve blacks or to be devoured by blacks for their pleasure. Ideally, a society should not have too many blacks as the excess of lion kangz would lead to total mayhem. Other races, as the herbivoric majority, must exist to run and maintain the social order of industry and production. Still, all their work must ultimately go to serve the black kangz, or so the blacks like to believe. And the current BLM madness suggest that many whites agree with this worldview. White herbivores as serfs exist to serve the superior black kangz as the new aristocracy. So, while 'lame' white herbivores(and beta-predators) must do all the boring and square stuff to maintain productive nations in Europe and North America, the blacks as lion-kangz shall be the idols and lords at the top because they make better athletes, rappers, and studs. But this works ONLY IF blacks are the minority whereas non-blacks are the majority, just like an eco-system works when the prey far outnumber the predators. But what will happen when ultra-fecund black Africans migrate to Europe in increasing numbers and become the demographic majority? It will be like an eco-system with many more predators than prey... like South Africa. How are things down there?

RISKY BUSINESS really put pimpery on the map for suburban kids:


The pimp style in WEIRD SCIENCE:


Hollywood is one big pimp operation. Ask Harvey Weinstein. Who were bigger influence on Rappers? Drug dealers or Pimps? Speaking of pimps, wasn’t HAMILTON the biggest musical in ages? And the Founding Fathers were presented as a bunch of rapping pimps. It goes to show how far pimpery has come in America as a metaphor.

In American Westerns, prostitutes often work in whore houses run by ‘madames’. In MCCABE & MRS. MILLER, Warren Beatty played the businessman, but it was Julie Christie who ran the place as the madame(and was a whore herself). I didn’t see THE BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSE IN TEXAS, but it has Dolly Parton as madame of a 'cuntry' club. And Jo Van Fleet played mom-madame in EAST OF EDEN. A madame again in PRETTY BABY. When did the association of prostitution with madame change to one with the pimp?



One used to get the impression that prostitution was a ‘matriarchal’ than a ‘patriarchal'(or thugarcal) thing. While prostitution was always sleazy, in the age of the ‘madame’ it put on airs of respectability. Even the title of ‘madame’. Also, when traditional morality was a thing and when the great majority of women got married at young age and remain faithful, even respectable men had to seek out prostitutes for sex. It was disreputable but still at the margins of respectability. Also, there were many stories of older men helping young men to lose their virginity by taking them to a brothel. Or soldiers doing it for the first time with a hooker, thus developing a fondness for her as an aid in the rite of passage to manhood. (Mrs. Robinson in THE GRADUATE is like madame-whore rolled into one.)


Back then, it was not normal for young girls to put out; that came later with youth culture, laxer attitudes, and automobiles — “Elaine Robinson got started in a Ford”.
Prostitution eventually became less associated with the normal world precisely because mainstream morality became looser, more permissive, and more whorey. In the past, it was mostly fallen women who were sexually loose. Now, even educated elite and middle class women use Tinder and hook up like hookers. Indeed, prostitutes of old seem downright demure compared to many young women today.
But this process began long before the internet with the rise of youth culture, the coming of the pill, legalization of abortion, and the sexual revolution. Why go to brothels when the girl next door is willing to put out(and her parents don’t mind)? There was a time when it was a huge scandal if a teenage girl got pregnant. And her father and uncle might force a shotgun wedding on the fella. And divorce was rare, and adultery was a grave thing. Now, there are TV shows and advice columns encouraging the swinging lifestyle and etc.

So, paradoxically, prostitution became more disreputable precisely because more men and women began to act like gigolos and prostitutes. Thus, prostitution became more low-grade, and the Negro trash took over the business, and the clientele was far less reputable than in years past when even upper-middle class men might visit a brothel of some repute. I suppose at the higher end, there are still ‘madame’ services. Ghislaine Maxwell was a kind of ‘madame’, the ‘Mrs. Miller’ to Epstein’s ‘McCabe’. And Heidi Fleiss got busted as the Hollywood madame. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Fleiss

https://www.bitchute.com/video/2nC0epuifpU/

The What-If-Most-People Game: An Easy Way to Tell if YOUR IDEAS & VALUES are Sound and Valid for Most of Society

What would be the simplest way to test as to whose ideas, values, attitudes, and mindset are best or most ideal for society as a whole? One of the easiest way would be to theorize as to what society would be like IF most people think, feel, and do as YOU do. After all, while any society can tolerate, weather, and overcome some degree of bad behavior and destructive tendencies, NO society can last for long if too many people indulge in wrong kinds of behavior. So, a sane, sound, stable, and healthy kind of society is one where most people do what is good, right, responsible, and constructive.

For example, suppose there are two people: Bob and John. Bob doesn't use illicit drugs whereas John is into drugs. Now, which is better? Not using illicit drugs or using them? Bob says it's better to forsake drugs. John says it's better to use them. So, who is right? First, imagine a society where most people are like Bob and don't use illicit drugs. Then, imagine a society where most people are like John and use plenty of illicit drugs. I think most of us can agree that a society where most people don't use drugs functions better than one where most people indulge in drugs. Does anyone want to live in a society full of meth-heads, heroin addicts, and the like? Even most druggies will likely admit that they don't want to live a society run by druggies. Even as they argue for legalization of many drugs, they surely don't want engineers, managers, and other essential workers to be druggies.

Now, take gambling. Is gambling good or bad for society? Suppose Jerry doesn't gamble and finds it to be wrong. Suppose Billy thinks gambling is awesome. What would be better? A society of Jerrys or a society of Billies? Would it be better if most people don't gamble or do gamble? My guess is that even people into joys of gambling would agree it wouldn't be such a great idea to have a society where MOST people gamble. Gambling is not only a vice but mass theft by oligarchs(who in the US happen to be Jewish) from the middle class and working class(and even from senior citizens and poor folks who don't know any better and become addicted to the habit).

Or take prostitution. Suppose Sarah is against it while Skankura is for it. Who would be right? Would society be better if most women are NOT prostitutes? Or would society be better if most women are prostitutes. Even among proponents of legalization of 'sex work', can they honestly say that a society where most women are involved in the sex industry would be better than one where most women aren't? Would it be good for families if most mothers were hookers on the side? Would it be good for society if fathers raised their daughters to be slut-skank whores? Would it be a better society if your mother, sister, cousin, aunt, niece, and daughter were into stripping, porn, prostitution, or S&M for money? Seriously? While we can understand the logic of libertarians who argue for legalization of 'sex work' on grounds of individual choice and free enterprise, surely even most of them know full well that it would NOT be good for society if most women were skankass whores.

Now, take homosexuality and tranny-stuff. Granted, this has less relevance to reality since most homos were born that way and only a handful of kooks are trannies. The fact is most people will never be homo. Even with all the gender-confusion pushed by MSM and academia, most men and women are not going to declare themselves homo. Still, there is the PC notion that homosexuality and trans-genderism are just as valid as real-natural-normal sexuality. They insist that 'heteronormativity' is some kind of mentally sick social construct. They say 'gender is fluid' and anyone can declare himself or herself to be anything, and all these various 'genders' are equal in value and validity. Okay, that being their premise, suppose there is Cary and Nico. Cary is real-sexual and believes a society where most people are proudly real-sexual is best for society. In contrast, Nico is a homo and believes his fruitishness to be just as valid as real-sexuality, aka heterosexuality. Nico believes homo fecal penetration is just as valid and 'natural' as real-sexuality between men and women. So, who is right? Imagine Cary's Society where most people are straight real-sexuals where men and women procreate to produce kids. Then, imagine Nico's Society where most people are fruitkins who bugger each other in the ass or tranny freaks with their dicks and balls cut off and equipped with fake vaginas. Seriously, which society would be better? Which society has better chance of mental health, moral equilibrium, and chance for continuance & survival? Is it really true that all 'genders'(as social constructs) are equally valid? (Also, if 'gender' is a social construct, why does PC say homos are biologically born that way? Is there any consistency in the logic of so-called 'woke' folk?)

How about gluttony? Some argue for 'Body-Positivity' Movement. They say that being a fatty fatkin is glorious and a badge of pride(and lard of honor). But is it really good to eat like a pig and be grossly obese? Suppose Jack believes in eating moderately, exercising, and staying slim. He believes a good society is one where people watch what they eat and watch their weight. In contrast, Otis believes people should eat all they want and there's no shame in being a fatty fatso. So, which society would be better? A society of Jacks or a society of Otises? One where people eat healthy and stay slim, or one where people eat grossly like hippos and look like hippos as well? Again, the answer should be obvious. Then, one wonders why the media, via fashion magazines and the like, push the notion that Fat is Beautiful and just as okay as being slim and trim around the weight?

How about Open Borders? Would it be better for society for most people to oppose the Great Replacement or welcome it? Would it be better for Hungary if most Hungarians were against the Hungarian Nakba or if most Hungarians were for it? For those who are unfamiliar with the term 'Nakba', it was the national tragedy that befell Palestinians when they were colonized, expelled, and replaced on their native territory by European Zionist-Immigration-Imperialists. (As you all should know, Endless Immigration = Genocide or Nakba. If just a trickle of Jewish Immigrants had entered Palestine, Palestinians would still have owned their land and would have tolerated a small Jewish minority. But Jewish Immigration was endless and came to replace the Palestinians... just like endless non-white immigration turned whites in California into a minority. Endless immigration also turned native Hawaiians into a minority in their native ancestral islands.) Anyway, suppose there are two Hungarians. Viktor is opposed to the Hungarian Nakba. He says NO to Endless Immigration, or Replacement Immigration. He believes Hungary will fare best if MOST Hungarians agree with him. Against him is Miklos who sucks up to Jewish globalists like George Soros and welcomes Endless Immigration, one that is sure to lead to the Hungarian Nakba where the native folks are turned into a minority in their own ancestral lands by Africans, Arabs, Muslims, Asians, and others. Miklos wishes MOST folks would agree with him and welcome the Hungarian Nakba. Now, which Hungary will be better off? One where most people think like Viktor or one where most people think like Miklos? If most people think like Miklos, the fate of Hungary will be like the fate of Palestine where the native Palestinians were replaced by European Zionist-immigration-imperialist Jews.

How about Jew-Worship? Would it be better for society if most people said NO to Jew-Worship or if most people said YES to Jew-Worship? Suppose there are Kevin and Lindsey. Kevin thinks it is dangerous for goyim to mindlessly worship and obey Jews who, though smart and creative, tend to be cunning, hostile, vicious, nasty, contemptuous, and exploitative over 'dimwit goyim'. Kevin thinks society would do best if most goyim, while not going full-Nazi, remained wary and cautious about Jewish narratives, agenda, and power. Don't dehumanize Jews but don't deify them either.
In contrast, shabbos goy Lindsey says Jews are oh-so-wonderful-great-awesome-wise-holy-oustanding-and-etc. in every way and then some. Jews are the most sacred, most tragic, most tremendous race of noble folks that ever existed on the face of this planet(and maybe the entire cosmos). If Jews want it, we must give it. If Jews demand, we must fulfill. If Jews command, we must obey. Lindsey believes goy society will be best off if MOST goyim were committed in blind faith to serving, honoring, and appeasing Jews on grounds that what Jews want for themselves and for us must be the BEST thing.
Now, which society would fare better? One where most goyim are like Kevin and remain skeptical of Jewish claims and criticize Jewish abuses OR one where most goyim are like Lindsey and grovel at the feet of Jews as the god-race? Especially since the end of the Cold War, the US embarked on Lindsey-ism and look at the results. Have they been good? The Wars for Israel, bailouts of Jewish banksters, the pornification of mainstream culture, the spread of interracism-jungle-fever-and-ACOWW(Afro-Colonization of White Wombs), anti-white PC propaganda, feminist wedge between white men and white women, Christianity replaced with Globo-Homo Queertianity, White Nakba & Replacement Immigration, new 'cold war' with Russia, and etc.? Has Lindsey-ism been a blessing for America?

And we can go on and on with the game of What-If-Most-People. Given that the health of society depends on what MOST people do, a good society is one where most people do what's right while a bad society(soon to be no-society at all) is one where most people(or enough people) do what's wrong. Needless to say among those cognizant of HBD(human bio-diversity) truths, this isn't only a matter of morality but biology. Some races are more prone to do the wrong thing given their genetic inclinations. Blacks, having evolved to survive in a state of savagery, are hardwired to act against civilizational norms. So, freely left to their own devices, most(or too many) of them will act wrongly and turn once-fine cities like Detroit into hell-holes. White people are genetically hardwired to make more civilized choices while blacks are genetically hardwired to make more savage choices. Whites tend to Europeanize, blacks tend to Africanize. So, a healthy modern society is one where most people are white than black; indeed, blacks in the West can enjoy modernity ONLY BECAUSE they leech off whites; even black achievements under slavery in the Americas owed to white supervision as, after all, black slaves under black rule in black Africa wielded no great results. Though, hypothetically speaking, it's possible for a society made up mostly of black people to have righteous Negroes who act responsible and moral, real-world results invariably show that too-many-blacks lead to 'savagerization'. Likewise, while we can hypothetically imagine a society full of Japanese where most act like jive-ass jiggerish savages, the likelihood is that a society full of Japanese will act in a cooperative and stable manner.

Another factor to consider is that one mustn't confuse 'most' with 'all'. While society is best off if MOST people act in a certain way in accordance to certain values and norms, it wouldn't necessarily be good if ALL people or each-and-every-person acted that way. This is especially true in science and the arts. Certain talents and abilities are inseparable from certain neuroses and eccentric(and often troublesome) tendencies. Many great artists tend to be half-mad or nutty in some way. So, while it wouldn't be good for society if most people had the personalities of Beethoven, Richard Wagner, Brian Wilson, Bob Dylan, and John Lennon, creativity and artistry have benefited from the presence of a small minority of mavericks, rebels, outcasts, and eccentrics. Indeed, this is why homosexuality has been beneficial to civilization as a creative outlier. While homosexuality is biologically useless, morally troublesome, and culturally problematic, the 'gay' sensibility has a way of seeing things that has contributed greatly to the arts, design, and perspectives. So, just because society is best off if MOST people act such-and-such, it doesn't mean ALL people should be that way. Certain social rewards are inseparable from the problems that surround them. It's like there's no honey without the bee stings, there's no championship in boxing without getting hit many times. The good can be attained only through the bad.

Still, for MOST people, there are certain values and standards that are best for society-as-a-whole, and it is essential that the great majority of people adhere to certain values and attitudes. But in our sick, decadent, and degenerate order, such sane-majoritarianism is looked down upon. Fashion magazines push fatties as idols of beauty and health. Cities put on massive globo-homo parades and children are read to by trannies on the premise that 'gay is sacred'. The once-Christian West totally bows down to the demands of Jewish Supremacism as if Jews are deities than flawed humans. Once proudly white nations welcome the Great Replacement or White Nakba. Even though blacks are the most destructive race(by their genetics), the White West worships blacks as demigods and celebrates ACOWW. Even though drugs are harmful for the most part, they are pushed on everyone as soma, soma, soma. Gambling went from a vulgar vice to a 'moral' industry that provides 'reparations' to American Indians. Women get their values from shows like SEX AND THE CITY and GIRLS by Lena Dunham. Skankery has been made the New Normal by Disney run by Jews. Under Jewish Power, society is made to push MOST people to choose the Wrong over the Right. Apparently, Jews fear any notion of majoritarian morality because they are a minority-elite and, as such, fear majority values as threatening to Minority Privilege. So, Jews are hellbent on making the majority accept minority-deviance as the New Normal. This is a terrible thing for the West(and the Rest that still looks to the West to lead the world).