r/K selection

The Manipulations of Chinese Privilege


It has been a few years since Sangeetha started her Chinese Privilege gig, creating a meme that has managed to make significant headway into the ideological space of the English-educated and speaking crowd in Singapore.

While Sangeetha apparently hasn’t been able to make much money off her original subscription model of SJWism for her Singaporean Chinese Privilege blog, which apparently had only two subscribers after an extended run, she has moved out into farming Chinese Privilege by hawking it in educational institutions as well as shaking down guilty Chinese Allies for money or bashing whatever non-Southern Indian group that has earned her ire. The demands for money, resources and power can get quite comedic at times, and they make for good popcorn time material.

Whatever you may think of Sangeetha and her histrionics, you cannot deny that she has managed to create something that is expected to be around for quite a while which will be an issue that every Red Pill social insurgent will eventually have to tackle.

There are excellent takedowns of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege out there, and they provide deep analysis and deconstruction, showing why as a social theory to describe and approach race relations in Singapore it is not only highly suspect, but also dangerous for the social fabric of Singapore. These are works you should verse yourself in to better understand the issue.

But while I do think these works are great takedowns of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege, I do feel they lack something fundamental that has limited that effectiveness in changing opinions on the matter.

They are logical.

Yep that’s the problem, they are too logical.

The Chinese Privilege gig sells well to the progressive leftist crowd in Singapore not because it is a well-constructed thesis but because it is designed to push as many emotional buttons as possible among minorities and English-speaking Chinese Progressives in Singapore. As a work of manipulating emotions and recruiting minorities and liberals it has proven to be quite useful.

Logical takedowns of Sangeetha miss the manipulative nature of her ideology out entirely to focus on the rational merit of argument she is making, forgetting that Chinese Privilege sells not based on logic, but by provoking emotion.

While Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege may take the appearance of an academic exercise, it is just that, a facade.

Remember the whole Chinese Privilege meme is not meant to be logically consistent, but just appear plausibly enough so in order to stoke minority anger.

To understand how to best combat the damaging effects of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege narrative on the social fabric of Singapore one needs to understand that nature of how it persuades, provokes and spreads its influence. Logical takedowns generally neglect this, and end up serving merely as textbook answers that lack persuasive power.

So with that, Talon shall look at the foundations of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege memes in terms of how it is structured to persuade and manipulate.

Chinese Privilege has proven to be quite effective in manipulating people because it works on multiple levels. Let’s look at them now:

1) Manipulating Emotions- Casual Irritations as Systemic Racism

Understanding the meme of Chinese Privilege as one that generally spreads via an appeal to emotion becomes useful when you look beyond the academic writings that Sangeetha puts out to examine the secondary material in her inflammatory anti-Chinese hysterics on social media. These serve as an informal “real-world” expression of her ideology.

While these hysterics serve an to stoke emotions among her social circle in support of her social theories, and also provide us social insurgents some insight into her psyche, it is important to note that the “academic” side of Chinese Privilege gives justifications for Sangeetha acting in ways that could be quite reasonably considered racist.

For the people who have been harbouring large grudges against the Chinese majority in Singapore for various reasons, an academic justification allowing them to act out in is incredibly attractive. This is why a fair bit of people are willing to ignore the inconsistencies and sheer fabrications of fact even when they are glaringly obvious.

Sangeetha has managed to successfully up-sell latent casual racism in Singapore as systemic, exaggerating the actions of an insensitive minority of the Chinese as an institutional issue. On top of that, she has also redefined any inconvenience that minorities often face by virtue of being different from the rest as an issue of overt racism and discrimination, as opposed to finding alternative plausible explanations for that.

Remember under Chinese Privilege, any bad feels from the minority in regards to the majority is a result of Chinese racism.

Now casual racism is latent in all populations due to individual dispositions. This is unfortunate but it is another thing to claim it’s a systemic issue (ie. The system is actively out to get you.)

It is simple math in action. Even if all the races in Singapore had similar levels of casual racism, a member of the minority is simply way more likely to run into an idiot from the majority by virtue of the sheer numbers of them around. This does not mean that the majority as a group is out to get you, but that you are more likely to run into an idiot from it.

Sangeetha spins this statistical reality and distorts it to convince minorities that the Chinese as a class (if they aren’t self-identified allies on her bandwagon) are out to get them, and it works because most people can’t understand proportional representation.

To top this off, Sangeetha moves to reframe things that are due to simple demographic math in play as an example of deliberate systemic discrimination. The economies of scale that the Chinese can employ by virtue of being more numerous, such as being able to use Mandarin as a lingua franca for non-English speakers in employment are now redefined as racism. Advertisements targeted at the biggest demographic market is sold as discrimination against minorities (because targeted marketing ignoring is racist). So on so forth.

All unfortunate minor irritations (microaggressions) that minorities face are reframed as an example of a massive Chinese hegemonic conspiracy to disenfranchise minorities under the meme of Chinese Privilege.

It does not matter that there are alternative explanations that are more inane and don’t need to bring up accusations of racism, why? Because these explanations do not provide emotional relief in giving a bogeyman to bash.

A great part of the manipulative power Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege meme comes from the ability to continually redefine all minor irritations that minorities face as racism. While such “everything annoying is racism” sentiments are not new Sangeetha has managed to present an easily understood, applicable and seemingly academic method of codifying and concentrating such feelings under the banner of “Chinese Privilege”.

Know that the logic often does not matter, what matters is the emotional payoff an aggrieved person can get from putting a “Chinese Privilege!” stamp on anything about the Chinese that causes unhappy feelings.

2) Appealing to Rabbit Psychology 

Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege is also structured to appeal specifically the psychologies of the Rabbit people. If you don’t know what Rabbit means you can refer to the post with the grand summary on Wolves and Rabbits.

The core of Rabbit psychology is anti-competitive, seeking to eliminate all inequality of outcomes no matter the reason. Rabbits value models are also intrinsic, deeply focused on inherent rights, identities and status entitlements without the corresponding extrinsic justifications for such.

As such, claims that Singaporean Chinese are stealing resources and status from that should be rightfully accorded to minorities in Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege meme are deeply convincing to the Rabbit people that tend to populate the progressive demographic in Singapore.

Not that it does not matter if one can point out other more plausible reasons why there are different outcomes between the Chinese majority and the rest, Rabbit people are cognitively predisposed towards believing the narrative of a hegemonic racist Chinese conspiracy to oppress the rest because that is the quickest way to make the loudest noise and greatest push for resource redistribution.

In short, the radical claims of Sangeetha are specifically designed to best provoke Rabbit instincts among local progressives. This provocation is powerful enough progressives are compelled to move along with it, with the less-rabbity of those who attempt be the moderate voices largely ignored or even attacked outright.

Sangeetha has also hedged her bets well by setting up a local version of the progressive stack and making a hard sell for it in the opening arguments for her Chinese Privilege gig several years back, conveniently placing herself, an overweight, dark-skinned southern Indian woman sorely at the bottom of the stack in order to claim the right as progressive moral arbiter over everyone else. This has allowed her relatively free reign to control and redefine a great deal of discourse on race in progressive circles although there is some indication that she might be overreaching of late and alienating segments of her ilk higher up her stack.

To sum it up, Chinese Privilege has been rather convincing to anyone of a progressive disposition due to it being able to appeal well to various aspects of Rabbit psychology. This has allowed Chinese Privilege as a meme to entrench itself deeply within liberal circles in Singapore, of which uprooting it will probably require monumental effort from moderates.

Interestingly, the specific construction of Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege in order to appeal to Rabbit people can be seen via the contrast of reactions in minority individuals who have more Wolf dispositions- they tend to be less welcoming of Sangeetha’s assertions, and sometimes even outrightly hostile. The Wolf people rightfully reject all this race-baiting as nonsense, even when it promises them a moral high horse.

3) Memetic Hijack of Western Progressive Memes

On a technical level there is nothing terribly original about Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege- it’s original presentation was chunks of writings on White Privilege by Western Progressives taken wholesale with the racial terms swapped to turn White to Chinese, completely ignoring the differing cultural and historical contexts that exist.

Criticisms of Chinese Privilege as being plagiarised and shoehorned to fit a local perspective miss the point. Sangeetha doesn’t need Chinese Privilege to be original or even appropriate for application here as a cultural theory- all she needs is something that will catch the attention of local liberals already using all the buzzwords and rhetoric they are familiar with.

This outright appropriation of White Privilege serves several purposes: being a cookie-cutter term-swapped social theory Chinese Privilege can piggyback on established memes within the headspace of local progressives already set up by the White Privilege narrative, giving the same feel of authenticity and credibility White Privilege already has.

This is why the output of local progressives on Chinese and White privilege often appear indistinguishable, in their heads it is literally the same meme, just with different skin colours.

The power of this transposing effect was so much that several minorities I observed who drank Sangeetha’s cool aid started equating their situation in Singapore as equivalent to that of African Americans!

Far from being a weakness, the shameless plagiarisation of White Privilege in Chinese a Privilege is a rhetoric strength, a memetic hijack that has paid dividends for local race-baiters.

Remember, an argument does not need to be valid to be convincing, it can take on the guise of other accepted arguments in an act of rhetorical mimicry to slip in and set root.

4) Meeting Regressive Idealogical Demand

One also needs to examine and understand local idealogical market forces to understand how Chinese Privilege has obtained it’s manipulative power.

For a long time liberalism in Singapore has been largely tied to opposition politics with parties such as the SDP being the flag bearer for the further left of the spectrum. While civil society did exist and was ideologically leftist and probably more so, the bulk of minds in the populace on the left was occupied by local opposition politics.

Then came the the stunning opposition victories of 2011 which built up support for opposition politics to a frothing fever pitch (as a matter of fact opposition supporters often behaved in a manner similar to SJWs), with local liberals confident that GE 2015 would be another stunning success.

Then came the crushing defeats they routed and discredited the opposition as the ground swung to the PAP in 2015, a trend that has not let up in a series of losing streaks and misfortunes for local political parties.

This was however a boon for local Progressives as there was now a power vacuum in local leftism since the collapse of the political opposition. Where your idealistic young uni undergrads may once have seen opposition political activism in the years of 2011-2015 as an outlet to their inflated-self perception of revolutionary righteousness, the post 2015 environment only has SJWism for them to sign up for.

This has consequently led to a swell in the ranks of progressives in Singapore. This sets up a buyers market for any progressive idea that can be successfully localised- after all it’s more payoff to SJWing on stuff here as opposed to posting about social issues in America.

This demand for local progressive memes is a natural market for Sangeetha’s Chinese Privilege narrative and its various permutations. While basically repurposed White Privilege, Sangeetha has managed to hawk a meme that appears localised enough for local regressive to latch onto and propagate.

Conclusion and Initial Insurgent Strategy 

Chinese Privilege as a meme has proven to be effective in infiltrating and entrenching itself in the idealogical landscape of Singapore. While currently generally restricted to the English-educated and speaking liberal demographic one expects that barring the takeover of another more attractive progressive ideology it is expected to progress.

Chinese Privilege as a meme finds it’s success and appeal not because it is a valid work of academic social commentary, by manipulating several key centers of gravity in the idealogical battlefield to becoming rather convincing, they are:

1) Manipulating the emotions of aggrieved minorities by providing a plausible and codified belief system to concentrate, amplify and direct the negativity.

2) Manipulating the Rabbit psychology of liberals by structuring the rhetoric within Chinese Privilege to trigger instinctive Rabbit anti-competitiveness and aversion to differential outcomes, biasing such individuals towards be ideology.

3) Appropriating accepted memes such as White Privilege to take advantage of meme hijack in order to expedite acceptance of Chinese Privilege in the headspace of Progressives.

4) Meeting pent-up market demand for localised ideologies among local Progressives looking for a justification to conduct local activism.

These 4 main factors are why Chinese Privilege by Sangeetha as been relatively successful as a local progressive meme, which is at this point largely self-sustaining without much action on its originator.

Many traditional attempts to address Chinese Privilege are conducted on logical validity of the ideas themselves instead of understanding these 4 factors, and hence they fall short of even starting to dent it’s memetic appeal.

Red Pill social insurgents operating outside traditional paradigms of discourse need to realise that Chinese Privilege as a meme can only be defeated if these 4 centers of gravity are addressed. Fortunately as Red Pills, you are in possession of powerful knowledge that allows you to do just that. Talon will be addressing those in other posts on the matter.

You need to realise that the ultimate endgame of Chinese Privilege is not the elimination of racism from Singaporean society but rather the amplification of fault lines within the social fabric of Singapore. As a meme that finds its sustenance for existence by finding and defining racism in everything it will never stop until it’s acolytes are completely offended by everything, no matter how innocuous, with the races further from common ground as they have ever been.

We only need to look to America to see how badly this can turn out and mark my worlds that this is the outcome if the destructive meme of Chinese Privilege is allowed to run unchecked.

Wolf and Rabbit People: A Summary


I’ve noticed an uptick of readers to this blog recently, especially on posts involving social commentary. Be you a new or regular visitor to this blog you might have realise I often use the terms “Wolf” and “Rabbit” when describing people. This might be confusing to new readers who are not aware of the basics of r/K Selection theory and how it has been used in many aspects of Manosphere thought to analyse social issues.

It is from r/K selection theory that we get the terms “Wolf” and “Rabbit”, which are archetypes used to describe the psychologies of individuals based on how they fall on the r/K spectrum. These terms are useful because their namesakes closely resemble the types of psychologies we see in r or K selected people.

Understanding r/K psychologies can provide you with a useful model to decipher the underlying instincts and motivations that drive human behaviour. Man is often an irrational creature that gives retroactive justifications to his actions to give them a veneer of rationality, more so if he has subscribed to reality-denying ideologies like Progressivism.

A common mistake many new social insurgents make when they first enter the ideological battlefield is that they attempt to achieve their aims by convincing neutrals and defeating enemies through the brute force approach of attempting to “logic” their way to victory. While Red Pill truths can be a powerful knife that cuts to the core of many Blue Pill psyches the brute force reasoning approach rarely works as the natural inclinations of people to avoid cognitive dissonance will cause them to deny reality even if it stares them in the face.

This is why you often can’t unplug many invested Betas just by hitting them with cold hard reason and truth, more often than not they will just double down because that feels better.

To be effective you need to truly understand their underlying subconscious instincts and motivations, making your influence felt there instead of just on the intellectual plane. This is why a good understanding of how the Rabbit and Wolf people tick is imperative for your success in the ideological battlefield.

So without ado, a short cheat sheet and some exposition on how things work regarding the psychology of the Wolf and Rabbit people:

The Grand Matrix of Wolf and Rabbit People




Attitude towards Competition Competitive Anti-Competitive
Resource Perspective Resources viewed as limited- needs to be worked for and carefully managed

Resources viewed as unlimited and readily available

Value Model Extrinsic, based on merit (eg. social ranking, meritocracy) Intrinsic, assumes value by virtue of existing. (eg. basic unalienable rights)
Sexuality Favours late sexualisation of young, controlled breeding, conservative and puritanical

Favours promiscuity, young sexualised early. Novelty seeking prioritised

Investment in offspring

High- young receives high level of parental investment. Parents want best for offspring

Low- reduced investment in raising young, parents less interested in offspring outcome
Resource Distribution Merit-based
(earn what you eat)
(everyone gets an equal share)
Group Loyalty High- loyalty to in-group is seen as important, associations tend to be deliberate and formal Low- trust and loyalty is not important to in-group, associations tend to be a matter of convenience
Response to Threats Fight/Resist Flee/Submit
Violence Highly structured and ritualised with formal rules of combat Unstructured, spontaneous mob violence with no rules of combat
Value System Principle Based- making and breaking the rules structured on formal principals even if unpleasant Emotion Based- rules are made and broken based on how good they make one feel
Favoured Environment Harsh, Resource-restricted Easy, Resource-abundant
Gender Model Dimorphic- clear division of roles between the genders. Males tend to be more masculine and females feminine

Androgynous- males can be more feminised while females more masculine. Genders roles more interchanagable  

There you have it, the main attributes and differences between the Wolf and Rabbit people summed up in one big table, you will probably start to realise that a good deal of your friends mainly fit into one archetype as you go down this table. You would also realise that your Progressive acquaintances tend to be hardcore Rabbit.

While nobody cleanly fits into either archetype fully- it’s a spectrum after all, understanding the key aspects of Wolf and Rabbit psychology will allow you to better deconstruct a lot of the leftist memes that are flooding the ideological battlefield. Understanding your enemy will also allow you to choose better approaches.

For example, if you realise that a people you are engaging are hardcore Rabbits, appealing to their sense of loyalty in order to make an argument is a very poor move as Rabbits have low in-group loyalty. Calling them as disloyal is unlikely to illicit much of a response as Rabbits do not really understand the concept of loyalty to the in-group and might even see it as a virtue to sell everyone out for personal gain.

A common mistake that people make when formulating rhetorical attacks is creating them based on what they personally fear instead of their enemy is actually afraid of. This is psychological projection and is a poor method of picking your linguistic kill-shots. I’ve also seen many Wolves who engaged Rabbits expecting a fair and honourable fight on the plains of logic only to get dogpiled and Doxxed because they didn’t understand Rabbit violence is unregulated and anarchic with no respect for the rules of war to limit damage to all parties involved. You need to understand your Rabbit opponent and know what makes them tick in order to safeguard yourself and be effective.

Being anti-competitive, the real fear that Rabbits face is the prospect of being trust back into a competitive environment where they have to compete with the Wolf people for resources. This fear underlies much of their rhetoric on why resources should always be redistributed regardless of merit and society be made as “equal” as possible. Hence, forcing through verbal guile to make a Rabbit conclude that they need to earn their keep is a good way to make them freak out and lose control.

Understanding that Rabbit morality is emotionally rather than rule based will also pay dividends in making sense of the various SJW ideologies that are churned out en masse by the Cultural Marxist machine. When you know that they are structured with the end goal of making sure there are no bad feels on the part of their holders, the various logical incongruences start to make sense because the ideology, despite having an appearance of being a logical argument, was never intended to be one in the first place.

Know that the a good way to attack these ideologies are by taking advantage of the emotional nature of Rabbit emotions to make them dismantle themselves. Very often you can mobilise one SJW ideology with greater emotional impact to demolish another one simply by setting one SJW to clash with another, the low-trust and unstructured nature of how Rabbits conduct violence will mean that it often ends up being a zero-sum game between the two. All this is way more effective than attacking the fortress of their ideas from the outside of the Rabbit warrens.

As always, knowledge is power and as a social insurgent you need to know the enemy and attack all their weak spots. Know your Wolf and Rabbit people well.

Sangeetha Antics: Give Me Power!


Sangeetha has an important message for her allies on how they can be good ones:



Remember, you are not an ally until you give the oppressed free stuff.

Because the quickest way to build true respect for and give dignity to someone else is to simply transfer status and resources to them.

If you haven’t noticed, Talon was being sarcastic.

The anticompetitive r-selected mindsets of progressives mean they always gravitate towards ideologies that always involve the redistribution of resources, progressives hate K-selected competition and an inequality of outcomes regardless of the cause because competition of any sorts is greatly distressing to the r-selected mindset of the rabbit person.

The history of giving away stuff to “help” an “oppressed” group is rife with how these attempts rarely built true respect and dignity among less-privileged groups, and there is a good reason for this- as long as you are always demanding for and getting handouts you can’t shake the impression that you only got where you are because of the self-flagellation kindness of your “allies”.

This is why affirmative action often fails- you can change the distribution of resources but the problem remains if the inequality of outcomes is due to factors other than racism (which is mostly the case in Singapore), all you’ve done is to “equalise” outcomes via a massive pumping operation based on social demands.

The end result is never permanent, you can only gain true respect and dignity by earning it and showing your K-selected value in competition.

But being a rabbit person, Sangeetha will never get it.

Insurgents vs.The Weakening Liberal Narrative


The stunning defeats the mainstream progressive narrative suffered recently offer a good study in how a smaller, but more nimble and motivated force can punch way above it’s weight while facing a larger and more powerful foe.

On paper it shouldn’t even be a contest, over the past decades since winning the culture war progressives have controlled mainstream dialogue on what is considered moral and managed to emplaced the all-powerful memes of “racism/sexism/whateverism” in popular consciousness to serve as gatekeepers to their narrative. Run afoul of liberal dogma and see how quickly these terms will be used on you to bring you to heel.

On top of that, the progressive movement has enjoyed virtually uncontested support in mainstream media coverage, being able to bring the heavy hand of the media and associated lynch mobs upon any who threaten the modern progressive narrative with heresy.

While most of this has been happening in the West, even Singapore is not immune to the rise of such regressive culture, having seen several incidents in which local regressives have mobilised in an attempt to bring Western-style liberal outrage mobs to respond to any breach of the liberal narrative. While Singapore may not be fully aware of it, the frame of public consciousness, especially among the english-educated crowd is shifting to the liberal narrative, slowing uprooting the traditional Singaporean mindset as the various memes of regressivism sink their roots.

In any case, in most parts of the first-world in the West liberals control the frame. They are the new moral majority have have been since the won the culture wars of the 60s. They hold many advantages over other idealogical narratives and have the means to ruthlessly crush opposing ideas without much effort.

So how they they suffer so many stunning defeats of late? How did the cultural juggernauts of progressivism, feminism and social justice packing all the advantages lose out to an unorganised rabble of deplorables?

That’s because they’ve gotten fat, complacent, and are fighting yesterday’s war.

Your modern progressive is a descendent of the original liberals that fought and won the culture wars against the traditional right. As much as the modern progressive/feminist/SJW claims to be fighting, they actually function more like occupation troops seeking to police and entrench their narrative in a cultural battlefield that they have already won. The various strategies, tactics, and weapons were designed to be effective against traditional conservatives and people who have accepted their framing of social issues.

By and large they are playing by the rules of the game that have more or less been accepted by everyone in the mainstream on both left and right since the 60s- diversity is good, racism and sexism are bad, equality is an unquestionable good, and all the various conventions that have come to make up what is considered the modern progressive dogma.

Traditional conservatives, foolishly accepting the progressive framing of morality, are constantly on the defensive will never be able to out left the left and are stuck trying to explain why their position is more moral in a time when everybody is shifting left from them. This is why traditional mainstream conservatives cannot, and will not win the culture war.

It is in such an environment where liberals, now victorious as the new mainstream moral majority have made themselves into the cultural establishment. It is in this cultural establishment that modern progressives, feminists and SJWs patrol and carry out their various forms of cultural policing and politicking for higher positions in the liberal hierarchy. The traditional right is not a threat because the methods to contain them are established.

But the victory of the left sowed the seeds of the Red Pill movement that would eventually burst out into a fully-fledged social insurgency that would prove to be immune to most of the traditional weapons that the left could bring to bear in the battlefield of ideas.

This social insurgency was unlike what the progressive establishment was used to fighting- there were no central figures to take down in a classic decapitation strike and what few figures that appeared to be important were just riding the wave of the insurgency as opposed to guiding it. While there were many differing strands of ideology within the insurgency, several contradictory at times they were all united and focused in their common goal of taking down the left.

The traditional tools of suppressing ideological opponents by drawing from the traditional rhetorical toolbox of calling them racists and sexists didn’t work, drawing dismissive derision instead of capitulation.

This social insurgency was also fast and nimble, being able to quickly react to changing circumstances and put out memes and counter-memes much faster than what their mainstream opponents could do while the progressives were at a loss to finding something that could work.

The energy was infectious, as it gained momentum more people joined the insurgency or supported it quietly from the sidelines, seeing it as something that could finally deal damage against the progressive juggernaut that previously seemed untouchable.

While all this was happening the progressive response was confused and muddled, unsure of how to respond to a new and deadly threat that was unlike anything they had seen before. Worse, the politicking in their own ranks prevented them from forming a unified response with a good deal of energy being wasted on infighting.

The progressives were fighting yesterday’s war while the insurgency is fighting from the future. The progressive narrative was maintained by vested interests in existing structures by virtue of being the establishment and hence intrinsically tied to defending them while the insurgency was free to move and strike and will.

While the progressives are spread out defending a massive memeplex of ideas in all areas of mainstream public thought the insurgents could focus on individual areas and attack them in strength, cycling through many different methods of assault while possessing few apparent weaknesses that their opponents can exploit.

All this wasn’t apparent at first, as in their arrogance progressives have assumed themselves to be the endpoint of history and did not foresee a effective large-scale challenge to their stranglehold on mainstream ideological space. It wasn’t until a series of stunning defeats to the liberal narrative did they realise that the barbarians are sacking Rome.

It is in this battlefield that you, the social insurgent find yourself now. You are part of a global reactionary movement to save your culture against the extinction of regressive progressivism that has made several key victories recently. While these victories are encouraging more work still needs to be done.

The progressive narrative has been dealt several heavy blows recently but it remains dangerous. It is now fully aware of the threat the social insurgency poses and more likely that not will become more effective in tackling the insurgency. There is no time to rest and every social insurgent needs to move fast.

The new culture wars have started, and things are about to get real interesting in the coming years.


Regressive Liberals, Rising in Singapore

I managed to accrue quite a number of liberal friends in my social circle during my days of studying a humanities major in university, which is not surprising given that this is the kind of stuff that left-leaning millennials tend to lean towards.

Not surprisingly, the humanities tend to be a place full of ivory tower intellectuals who think the masses (the rest of Singapore) are unenlightened knuckle-dragging conservatives who need to be dragged into the light of liberal enlightenment.

The Beta among the males taking these university courses was rather high, but these Betas are not your run-of-the-mill halpess Singaporean Beta, but rather the insufferable english-educated, social justice White Knight kind who make it a point to signal to the entire world how they are a new kind of enlightened liberal feminist man (that by collary, women should like).

It is no surprise that I started losing some of these friends as I fell towards Red Pill awareness and what they deemed the dark side. The usual pattern usually revolves around getting unfriended after not parroting or fact/logic checking a certain piece of liberal social justice dogma they were attempting to virtue-signal with on social media.

What I find interesting is that conservatives that I disagree with don’t do the whole unfriending gig even if our disagreements can be heated, this pattern of unfriending largely comes from the liberal quarter. Although that is not very surprising once you look into studies of how conservatives and liberals deal with disagreement. 

There is a lot of criticism of liberalism and leftist leaning ideologies in this blog, what one needs to be aware of is that I am not opposed to liberalism per say (as much as I think is is a naive ideology for dealing with the world), but rather the substitution of the modern, infantile form that has taken the place of what we know as classical liberalism.

The sleight-of-hand here is that modern liberals pretend that they are continuing the grand traditions of classical liberalism while substituting in their own version of it that actually contradicts many of the original tenets of liberalism. While these liberals may often appeal to the dictionary-definition of liberalism and claim that is what they are, their actions and ideologies show something entirely different and contradictory.

This is what we know today as the regressive left, the illiberal liberals, the social justice warriors, the third wave feminists.

How did things get this way? To understand how most modern liberals operate you need to realise that despite claiming to be on the idealogical bandwagon because of enlightened ideas and motives most modern pop-culture liberals have far baser reasons for self-identifying as one.

As noted in posts on r/K selection, an affluent soceity has less need for K-selected competitive behaviour and starts to shift towards r as the environment becomes more comfortable. Many memes in the memeplex of modern liberalism fit very well into the r-selected mindset, which is why you tend to see a lot of soft-minded, anticompetitive rabbit people who self-identify as liberals.

The r-selected environment of a comfortable civillisation also favours behaviours typically associated with modern liberalism. Conservatism and their associated mental states start to look more and more quaint and outmoded as the dominant societal narrative starts to shift towards the left. This, coupled with the fact that one stands to gain in social capital identifying with the liberal memeplex leads to all kinds of people jumping onto the bandwagon.

Including the kinds that you really shouldn’t be letting into any idealogical movement because they are in it for anything but staying true to the ideas. This swamping of r-selected immigrants in it for the benefits with vastly different motives and values into the idealogical pool of liberalism leads to a shift of liberalism away from it’s classical form and towards the form that is Liberal In Name Only.

The lack of any serious idealogical challenge to this mutating liberalism also means that it’s acolytes soon become ideologues. They stop seeing reality for what it is and adjusting their world view to fit the truth because there is no need to do so, they have the power to determine the narrative for everyone. There is no serious idealogical competition to the frame that makes them sit up and consider their ideas properly.

As the narrative grows dominant it also grows decadent. Classical liberalism has been substituted by a modern mishmash of infantile social theories and ideas by competing ideologies spending more time trying to come up on top of their social space instead of seeking the truth.

In Singapore we are seeing a gradual shift from K to r selection that has accelerated in the past few years. Unfortunately, we didn’t need to mutate classical liberalism into it’s regressive form because we can import it wholesale from the west, complete with all the terms and theories copypasted into Singapore wholesale.

Observe your typical arts-educated uni liberal here- you’ll see plenty of various regressive memes taken in wholesale and preached as gospel truth. You’ll see the same holier-than-thou attitude taking root. You’ll see the contempt they will have for anybody who don’t share their beliefs.

How far will they make it here? It’s anyone’s guess but Singapore has a very different cultural landscape with different memeplexes from the west. Regressive ideology is currently restricted to the english-educated vocal minority but hasn’t made much headway into the traditional ethnic cultures. We see some attempt to localise regressive theories such as transforming White Privilege to Chinese Privilege but more often than not these concepts mainly swirl around in the english-educated memespace.

But expect to see the ranks of regressives swell as such ideologies are fashionable and popular with the younger folk. It’s anybody’s guess if this will have wider implications for Singapore in the long run.

But if the societies west who have been afflicted with regressivism are any indication, Red Pill social insurgents here best do well to be ahead of the curve to fight the creeping influence of faux liberalism in Singapore.

Unlike larger nations which have social, economic and resource buffers to afford the damaging social experiments of faux liberalism, Singapore runs on the knife edge. The last thing we need are the rabbit people running the show with a never-ending legion of resource-sucking, no-ROI, trust-destroying, regressive ideas.


Pivot Point


Many great wars in history have had pivotal moments in which one side lost the strategic initiative in a decisive battle and never gained it back, being forced to be on the defensive until the final, inevitable defeat.

The war may still be far from over following the loss of the decisive battle and the side that lost the battle may still be a formidable opponent with many advantages, but for all purposes the cause of the entire war had already been decided in that crucial battle where the.

For the Germans in World War 2 it was the Battle of Stalingrad that finally checked their advances on the Eastern Front and forced them into retreat till the inevitable end of the Third Reich several years later. For the Japanese it was the Battle of Midway in which they lost a huge portion of their carrier fleet and was no longer able to maintain their strategic initiative in the Pacific Theatre. Before those battles the outcome of the war was still a toss-up, but the slow slide to defeat became inevitable following the loss of the strategic initiative.

Feminism and the various ideologies espoused by the memeplex of cultural marxism have all but won the culture wars using the left as it’s trojan horse, slowly making headway into all aspects of modern culture to erode the bulwark of traditional values designed to keep civillisation healthy and thriving.

The slide of societal values left was slow at first, but soon kicked into full gear and more institutions fell under the thrall of cultural marxism, even conservatives, the self-styled protector of traditional values, often found themselves ideologically cuckolded and helping to propagate the meme virus of cultural marxism.

And so we find ourselves today on the brink of modern civillisation, at a point where societal values have gotten so distorted by the reality-denying ideologies of cultural marxism that the societies in which it had been allowed to run amok have all but lost the will to survive and thrive.

The cultural marxist-meme viruses represented by feminism and social justice movements now act early, infecting children and youth as they are indoctrinated in educational institutions that have been all but taken over by CM ideologues. The aggressive and hostile reactions by offence culture has all but suppressed open speech on any opposing views. Modern feminism preaches a one-sided, misandric and dyscivic ideology of gender relations, destroying harmonious gender-relations vital for the functioning and propagation of soceity and replacing it with an antagonistic, gynocentric system filled with “empowered” women aging out of their biological prime and emasculated, listless, directionless Blue Pill beta men.

While some thinkers in the Manosphere think that cultural marxism is part of a Globalist Conspiracy by the elite to smash the notion of nationalism and enact a New World Order I am somewhat more skeptical about these conspiracy theories. Sometimes a bad idea could just get popular as developed civillisation shifts to an resource-abundant r-selected environment, even if it is ultimately unsustainable.

In any case, the damage caused by Cultural Marxism is undeniable and massive, and it’s dominance over many aspects of modern life is indisputable. They won the culture wars.

But that was when the insurgency started.

It wasn’t much at first, just a bunch of frustrated men trying to apply their objective observations on human nature to get quick lays. But the hedonist is often the most honest seeker of truth, and going down that rabbit hole of taking the Red Pill ended up giving them a whole new perspective to view things by. With these new perspectives, these men shifted out from just trying to be successful with women and started applying their Red Pill awareness to the culture around them, realising just how broken things had gotten.

While these Red Pill men are hardly monolithic as a group and focused on many different issues, they all recognised Cultural Marxism at the main threat to their civillisation and way of life. As more men got chewed up by the system their ranks started to swell, and what was just a bunch of men trying to best make their way by in a system with the cards stacked against them had now become a full-fledged countercultural insurgency taking on the occupying force of Cultural Marxism.

The enemy was not prepared for this new challenge, having being used to waging pitched battles to unseat conventionally organised incumbent idealogical opponents . This new social insurgency was nebulous, had no central leadership, no obvious organisations or assets to attack and were immune to the usual methods of labelling and shaming used to silence opponents. Worse, they were more than capable of using the very same tactics they had used on the traditional right.

But while all this was happening, the excesses of Cultural Marxism in attempting to impose it’s ideology over everyone’s way of life had led to a rise of disenfranchised, silent classes in many of the societies in which it had taken root. They provided welcoming demographics for the insurgency to thrive and recruit more members.

Despite all this was happening, the enemy had had grown complacent and put too much trust into the strength of their dominant narrative to suppress the insurgency from breaking out into full force. Despite having the system on their side, the general quality of their idealogical foot soldiers also tended to be on the poor side as the bars for entry to Cultural Marxism were very low and relied more on being able to recite dogma than actually being useful.

They did not realise just how strategic control over social narratives were slipping from their hands and into that of the social insurgents until it was too late.

In a series of stunning defeats in which the reactionary insurgent forces won upsets over the incumbent Cultural Marxists, the left was sent reeling in shock as they suddenly found themselves defeated in decisive battles that they expected to have utterly crushed the insurgency.

Brexit, the American Presidential Elections. All these were supposed to be the final victory for them where nationalism and the patriarchy was finally put down for good.

Instead the rag tag basket of deplorables somehow pulled off a series of wins.

And the liberals are sent reeling, trying to make sense of their sudden defeats and finding some way to explain them.

The funniest thing about all this renewed vigour to “fight on” by many liberals and their social activists to start a revolution in the light of their defeats is that they don’t realise that a real revolution had started, they had missed the boat, and they now weren’t invited.

Pop culture liberals, feminists and SJWs had always been manufacturing a victim narrative in order to grievance monger and justify their various inane revolutions, but and are now left completely out at sea and flabbergasted when a demographic of insurgents with REAL grievances and plenty of motivation to carry out a social insurgency had brought a real battle to them.

They have been caught entirely flat-footed, and hit with several sucker punches.

Cultural Marxism is not dead by a long shot, in fact it has now started to wake up to the insurgency and take it seriously. Future battles will be a lot harder than before when the insurgency could sneak in shots under the complacency of their enemies.

But everyone has now seen that the seemingly invulnerable dragon of Cultural Marxism can bleed.

And if it bleeds we can kill it.

They have lost the strategic initiative.

The social insurgents of the manosphere have been spending the past few years preparing for open battle, and in the wake of these recent momentous victories that have set a new normal.

The time is now.

So It Begins

There are people actively trying to import the American culture wars into Singapore, and 2016 will be known as the year where things start to get hot.

The various memeplexes of the social justice movement have been gradually extending their tentacles across the internet and slowly infecting other cultures with access to Western popular culture. While the spread is somewhat slow in Asia due to language and cultural barriers, Singapore contains a seizable english-educated graduate population of millennials that are especially vulnerable to the SJW rot.

And we can see the rot has taken hold and is starting to spread.

I have been watching this situation for a while, and the number of local social justice incidents are certainly seeing an uptrend this year. Beyond the mainstream antics of AWARE, Sangeetha (who has now relocated to annoy the Australians) and some local academics, SJW incidents have started to appear from the grassroots with an emergence of common latte liberals self-identifying with the SJW cause.

Unlike SJWs, feminists and the ilk who are pathologically bound towards having a distorted view of reality, we do not have the luxury of self-delusion as unplugged Red Pills. The SJW infiltration is starting to go hot and they are looking to start a cultural war, you have to be ready to take them on.

My prediction is that SJWism will becoming increasingly popular in in the future, riding on the glut of disillusioned millennials looking for the next big cause to jump on following the collapse of the political opposition in the 2015 GE. The new era of freedom and opposition resurgence predicted following the death of LKY never materialised, and the new heros and icons leftist millennials need to look for will no longer be in political opposition but rather local social justice ideologues.

So mark Talon’s words- if you are a majority male in Singapore, you will be a target. If you are a masculine man, you will be a target. If you show any sign of being anything but in line with their dogma, you will be a target.

Now all this may seem alarmist but Singapore contains several key advantages over America in how it can resist the influx of SJWs in the culture wars. There is still a silent majority that will not drink the SJW kool-aid. The SJW narrative at present is still restricted to the english educated latte liberals who haven’t found a way to translate it to the various ethnic demographics. Locals in general are still practical and K-selected, realising that unpleasant realities need to be addressed to keep Singapore going. These render the idealogical and social landscape of Singapore more defensible to the SJW rot.

But that may change. As I have noted, Singapore is slowly shifting to r-selected mindsets over time due to affluence. With anticompetitive r-selection comes more acceptance of SJWism.

As a masculine Singaporean man your job is to start fortifying your social circles against the SJW rot. Subtly influence your trusted friends and let them know that there is an Red Pill insurgency that is willing and ready to resist the SJW culture wars. Know who are your enemies and start being aware.

Start building and preparing your tribe.

Because tumultuous times are up ahead.


Cheaters, Suckers and Grudgers

monkeysThe concept of “Cheaters, Suckers and Grudgers” is used within the Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins to examine various evolutionary strategies within a population, here is the chapter in question:

Suppose a species […] is parasitized by a particularly nasty kind of tick which carries a dangerous disease. It is very important that these ticks should be removed as soon as possible. […] An individual may not be able to reach his own head, but nothing is easier than for a friend to do it for him. Later, when the friend is parasitized himself, the good deed can be paid back. […] This makes immediate intuitive sense. Anybody with conscious foresight can see that it is sensible to enter into mutual back-scratching arrangements. […]

Suppose B has a parasite on the top of his head. A pulls it off him. Later, the time comes when A has a parasite on his head. He naturally seeks out B in order that B may pay back his good deed. B simply turns up his nose and walks off. B is a cheat, an individual who accepts the benefit of other individuals’ altruism, but who does not pay it back, or who pays it back insufficiently. Cheats do better than indiscriminate altruists because they gain the benefits without paying the costs. To be sure, the cost of grooming another individual’s head seems small compared with the benefit of having a dangerous parasite removed, but it is not negligible. Some valuable energy and time has to be spent.

Let the population consist of individuals who adopt one of two strategies. […] Call the two strategies Sucker and Cheat. Suckers groom anybody who needs it, indiscriminately. Cheats accept altruism from suckers, but they never groom anybody else, not even somebody who has previously groomed them. […] the cheats will be doing better than the suckers. Even if the whole population declines toward extinction, there will never be any time when suckers do better than cheats. Therefore, as long as we consider only these two strategies, nothing can stop the extinction of the suckers and, very probably, the extinction of the whole population too.

But now, suppose there is a third strategy called Grudger. Grudgers groom strangers and individuals who have previously groomed them. However, if any individual cheats them, they remember the incident and bear a grudge: they refuse to groom that individual in the future. In a population of grudgers and suckers it is impossible to tell which is which. Both types behave altruistically towards everybody else […]. If grudgers are rare in comparison with cheats, the grudger gene will go extinct. Once the grudgers manage to build up in numbers so that they reach a critical proportion, however, their chance of meeting each other becomes sufficiently great to off-set their wasted effort in grooming cheats. When this critical proportion is reached they will start to average a higher pay-off than cheats, and the cheats will be driven at an accelerating rate towards extinction. […]


This has some rather interesting implications for humans and human society when played out on a grand scale, and you will start to find many of the concepts rather applicable to in the modern culture war of progressivism versus tradition.

The suckers are your average Blue Pill sheeple who are still going by the old social script, they go by the playbook and they have the mistaken notion that they will be repaid in kind for what they are contributing. The Blue Pill Beta male is a good example, he follows his social conditioning thinking that he will be rewarded in the end for holding up his end of the bargain only to be friendzoned, taken to divorce court and generally made use by being the chump for the cheaters.

And we have your cheaters of course, people who intend to make full use of the system for maximum personal gain and advantage without giving in anything in return. Progressives, feminists and Social Justice Warriors fit well into this mould. They have a victim narrative that places themselves as the ultimately oppressed, demanding a free transfer of power and resources to themselves without ever seeing to give anything in return.

Asking for unqualified power and resources is a pretty common thing for SJWs, and it’s not just limited to trigglypuff in America asking for people to donate to their Patreon, we have one nice example right here:

Screen Shot 2016-07-15 at 5.37.54 pm

Note that no where in this Sangeetha writes about what she intends to do in return for her useful idiots allies who help her out. Her ideological system is an entitled one-way transfer of power and resources going in her favour taking full cynical advantage of the groups she is asking for help from.

Feminists set up social structures to ensure that women as a group can extract maximal benefits and resources from soceity without needing to give anything in return. As Kenneth Minogue sucintly puts it “They suppressed almost completely the idea that their project involved a transfer of power and operated entirely on the moralistic principle that their demands corresponded to justice.”.

Basically progressives, SJWs, feminists and their ilk intend to make full use of the system to extract maximal benefits, but have little intention to repay any of that. Why should they? After all it’s their right.

And as long as there are suckers in Blue Pill sheeple and Beta Chumps, they can keep this scam running.

Ultimately cheating is not an evolutionarily stable strategy- as cheating gives the cheaters an advantage their numbers swell to the point that the population of suckers they extract those advantages from cannot sustain them. Being cheaters they have been getting ahead not by generating any real value for civillisation, but instead by gaming the system. Cheaters are ill-equipped, nor do they have any intention of, maintaining civillisation even if it’s collapse means disaster for them.

This is where the grudgers come in, and this is where you should be as a masculine man. Being a grudger means you put your back to the plough to keep things running but at the same time you are no sucker who thinks you will be rewarded simply by doing the work, you know there are lazy and unscrupulous people out there who are out to take advantage of you.

It is the job of grudgers to fight the cheaters, to make sure that the cheating strategy is not only contained, but utterly stomped out and eliminated. Unfortunately, modern soceity is conducive to the conduct of cheating, so the grudgers are going to be busy folk.

Look at the people in your social circle, how many are suckers? How many are cheaters? How many are grudgers? The suckers are useful and generally harmless people that often need to be protected, the grudgers you can be ideological allies with as you will share the same worldview.

It is the cheaters in your social circle that you need to give a hard time to, these are the people who are of no use to anyone except themselves and will have no qualms about betraying the group if it so suits them. Do not have any dealings with them, and if necessary you may need to engage them aggressively to drive them out of your company. Remember that cheating behaviours can be contagious if they are allowed free reign, so nip the problem in the bud before it starts.

Civillisation Is Not An Entitlement

People who work tough, blue-collar jobs on the edge of civillisation are not prone to coddling you by blowing smoke up your ass to make you feel better. They have been on the front, seen the hard stuff that needs to be done to keep things going, and have little tolerance for self-delusional excuses and bullshit.

In the video above we see a Chinese worker drop some hard truth bombs on his African counterpart over the current state of Africa, a place in which China has put in significant investment. As he succinctly points out in a layperson’s riposte to the African’s excuse that Africa is still new to this civillisation thing, it’s one thing for the White man to pull a number on you via colonial oppression but another when you start messing things up for yourself.

Rabbit people like progressives, liberals, feminists and Social Justice Warriors don’t understand this. They see civillisation as a right, the it’s safety and abundance as an entitlement. In the Rabbit view, civillisation is an asset to be exploited, not a system to be maintain or built up to keep everyone alive. This is why they are more prone to explain the suffering that comes from a failing civillisation as the fault of some oppressor, minimise personal faults that are causing problems, or at the worst may even attack the very institutions that sustains the very civillisation that keeps them alive in their mad rush to obtain ever more entitlements.

Wolf people know otherwise- they know that civillisation is a not a given thing and can easily crumble if not properly tended to. Wolf people know that barbarism is always waiting to take over and hard work and hard choices are required to make sure their children get a future worth living in.

A safe, stable civillisation is not an entitlement, it requires making a lot of hard choices and real work to keep functional. Societies who attempt to excuse dyscivic behaviours under layers of justifications will quickly find that reality intends to collect on the debt sooner than they think.

Aisyah Gala: Genuine Fortitude


In this blog we cover a lot of the worst behaviours from the left side of the bell curve for rabbit people as part of every Red Pill’s duty to reveal the harsh and ugly truths in our quest to stem the creeping tide of regressive degeneracy.

But one must also remember to look to the right side of the bell curve and realise that there are high-functioning wolf people that remind us that there is still hope for civillisation, and in this case Singapore.

Aisyah Gala is a professional rower that does her sport under the Singapore flag, her story is a remarkable one as she faced significant hurdles in order to keep doing her sport. At one point she had to scramble to cobble together funding to keep her dream alive, as she was not getting any handouts from the state.

The remarkable thing about all this is that you don’t get any sense of resentment or entitlement from her at all about what she needed to do. Here’s the long Facebook post she posted on it in whole, emphasis mine:


“I can tell you from personal experience that it’s not easy. But I can also tell you that it can be quite rewarding.”

I thought it’s a good time for me to share something really important with all of you.

I started off my rowing career and Olympic campaign with my own savings- we all know this story. But I think it is time people move on from the past. Yes, the start was always the hardest part of the journey- putting my job aside, spending months considering if it would be worth it to train full-time knowing that I might not be getting any financial benefits out of my goal- in fact, I know that I will never be getting any money from chasing my dream. Qualifying for the Olympics and representing the nation at the Games do not bring us, athletes, any financial benefits (unless of course if you win a medal). That is why in sports, we never do it for money. Unless you’re a professional football player or playing for prize money in a prestigious golf tour. Otherwise, you won’t be rich being an athlete. We do it for pride, we do it to see how much of an athlete we have become and to test ourselves against the world’s best. We do it for passion and just out of pure love for the sport.

So we also know the story of how I have put myself out there and pleaded for money via my crowdfund. To be honest with you, and I’ve said this before, I don’t even remember the last time I asked for pocket money from my parents, what more asking for money from strangers. But I was desperate because I couldn’t even pay for groceries and rent. I was lucky to be living with the most generous and kindest soul in the world to give me a shelter over my head and who paid for my groceries while I scramble to find ways to support myself. It was utterly humiliating to be 28 with a negative balance in my bank account. But you can’t blame the govt for not supporting me in the first place. They’re right- why should I be given money if I couldn’t even win a medal in the SEA Games? Why should they support me if I’m so far from qualifying for the Olympics? Belief- you say. If they believed in me even before I proved to them what I’m capable of, what about the thousands of other athletes out there who hasn’t achieved anything but had all these big dreams? Should they be financially supported too? And if the pie is shared amongst all of us, doesn’t it boil down to the same problem of having lack of support?

The good thing that came out of the phase in my life where people didn’t believe in me and no one supported my dreams was that I was eager to prove others wrong. (Thankfully, I’m very good at that.)

The crowdfunding was an immense success (Alhamdullilah) and I managed to crawl my way out of the hell hole of being desolated with the help of each and every contribution I received. A few weeks after the crowdfund campaign ended, Sports SG introduced the Race 2 Rio programme which was supposed to help athletes who are trying to qualify for Rio ease their financial burden. After I qualified for Rio, I found out that I was awarded the SpexScholarship which was the 3rd year applying for it. (Emphasis on my 2 years of getting rejected and trying again to remind you that the funding didn’t come easily.)

There are stories in the media which occasionally pop up to remind you of how I got to where I am today, how I overcame the lack of support, and how the govt isn’t doing their job to support the local athletes and things along those lines. But hey guys, look, I’ve already gotten out of that hole. I’ve managed to secure a good deal with my sponsors, the SpexScholarship has immensely reduced the financial burden and I can finally focus fully on my trainings and competitions. The support I’ve received so far has been amazing- I would never imagine receiving these not only from Sports SG but Singaporeans themselves. Of course similar to how Joseph Schooling’s prize money will never be able to cover the costs his parents have spent on sending him overseas to study and train, the amount that I am receiving now will never be able to cover the costs that I’ve spent throughout my 12 years in rowing. But it’s not about breaking even. It’s not even about profiting. Like I said before, being an athlete would mean that I will never be rich. I believe that what is most important about all these money issues is about who genuinely believes in you and is willing to invest in you. To have fellow Singaporeans write to me after the Games congratulating me and thanking me for representing the country and doing them proud- guys, really, that is something money cannot buy. I am truly honoured.

So basically what I’m trying to say is that, the story of Aisyah being the self-funded athlete, that was me last year. And this year (and the many years to come, if God permits), I hope you will support me as the athlete who overcame all odds to achieve her dreams, the girl who didn’t listen to her mum who wanted her to quit rowing because it had “no future” and went on to making history and now made her mum one proud mother, the Olympian who is truly honoured to be representing a nation full of generous, beautiful individuals who have the power to make the world a better place, but just need a little push to make things happen. I hope Singaporeans support me because they believe in me and not because they pity my past.

To everyone who have contributed to my journey in one way or another- thank you from the bottom of my heart.

And to those who are still sour about my success story (haters gonna hate, they say), thank you to you guys, too. ♥️♥️♥️

‪#‎teamaisyah‬ ‪#‎row2rio‬ ‪#‎lifeasarower‬ ‪#‎oneteamsg‬ ‪#‎proudtobeasingaporean‬


It is pretty clear that Aisyah is highly K-selected in the way she thinks, she believes in meeting challenges head on and overcoming them. She does not expect handouts from others to support her. She spends her time and energy productively focusing on things she can improve and change instead of blaming other people for problems.

Aisyah is basically the anti-Sangeetha. She refuses to be a professional victim or declare that she is awesome simply because she exists and has self-declared as the best rower ever. Instead she sees her dreams and goals as something that she needs to put tangible personal effort into achieving to be truly considered great instead of raging at the challenges placed in front of her

Compare and contrast with a certain feminist race “activist” that constantly goes around declaring she is a goddess, blaming every bad thing that happens on her select oppressor group.

We know who is just posturing and who is really great.

We know who is mediocre and who truly has genuine fortitude.

There is a lot that Red Pill men seeking to overcome challenges and self-improve can learn from Aisyah’s attitude towards life. In fact anybody would do good to take life lessons from the practices of elite athletes instead of self-declared liberal social activists, because elite athletes need to tangibly come up with success as opposed to the empty social prestige farming of latte liberals.

Here’s the Aisyah, she has well and truly earned the respect she has gotten. Singapore has still has a chance of avoiding the regressive trap if we have more people like her.