George Zimmerman verdict: guilty in public opinion. Lawyer Mark O’Mara’s toothless defense is the culprit

Zimmerman’s guilt could not be proven

Top: 5 years ago little Trayvon and Geore on his booking photo  looked like thisGeorge Zimmerman is considered guilty in the public opinion. George, vigorously pursued little weak innocent Trayvon Martin, and gunned down an unarmed teenager who only carried skittles and ice tea and who dreamed of . Defense lawyer Marc O’Mara managed to raise reasonable doubt. Thus the jury had to acquit, because Zimmerman’s guilt could not clearly be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Zimmerman is guilty, but the prosecution just failed to to convincingly prove Zimmerman’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

George Zimmerman‘s lawyer Marc O’Mara’s defense won a battle but lost the war. George Zimmerman is a world-wide pariah. We read the press in Germany and Brazil.


trayvon-with-babyMSN Brazil calls Zimmermann Assassin.
  • Press media’s lies, deceit about George Zimmermann trial
  • George Zimmermann Acquitted: Victim of Government and Black Racism ("Der Spiegel" lügt: George Zimmerman, Opfer von schwarzem Rassismus und Verleumdungen)







    Below recent photos of Martin and Zimmerman

    Sheep succumbs to attack dog
    Aggressive, well trained Al Sharpton

    faces off with toothless lawyer Marc O’Mara

    Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


    Al Sharpton Grills George Zimmerman’s Attorney In Long, Contentious Interview

    How civil rights activists and the press would like to picture Trayvon Martin and George ZimmermannA firmly convinced partisan Al Sharpton

    Sharpton asked O’Mara how Zimmerman can plead self-defense if, as heard in the 911 tape, he was actively pursuing Martin, contrary to the advice of the operator.

    Al Sharpton firmly tells a damaging narrative "Zimmerman chased Martin". Sharpton is firm and convinced, and thus convincing. Sharpton does not care about evidence, proof, or if his story is true or not. He firmly believes what he says and thus convincing( Robert Trivers: Self deception, Robert Kurzban).  He is unimpeded by doubts, reasonableness, fairness. A partisan. Al Sharpton does not care if it is true or not.

    A pondering, objective, unsure O’MaraHow Media would like to depict them (Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman)

    O’Mara argued that there’s no conclusive evidence to suggest continued pursuit, nor is there evidence Zimmerman initiated any physical confrontation

    O’Mara’s lame reply comes over like this: "Well, Zimmerman is guilty, he chased down the poor teenager and started the fight. But it can not be conclusively proven. Of course, I understand and respect your opinion, Mr. Sharpton, but you can not prove it"

    OK, he did not say this, but that is what it sounds to an unsophisticated TV viewer that has been exposed to the relentless smear campaign against George Zimmerman.

    Marc O’Mara seems to be trying himself to figure out what really happened and who started the fight. A reasoned, legalese, open minded opinion behooves a judge, not a defense lawyer, much less a TV propagandist.


    Marc O’Mara lacks aggressive forward defense and counter attack

    1) tell the truth

    Mr. Sharpton, you are dreaming. Mr. Zimmerman stopped and waited, Trayvon Martin came back and viciously assaulted and attacked George. 


    2) challenge: Sharpton’s story is preposterous and makes no sense

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “George Zimmerman verdict: guilty in public opinion. Lawyer Mark O’Mara’s toothless defense is the culprit” »
    George Zimmerman verdict: guilty in public opinion. Lawyer Mark O&…
    » continues here »

    How feminists corrupt Domestic Violence research & warp world politics and legislation

    The truth does not prevail. Not even in scientific research. What are the reasons, that the entire world, United Nations. the US government, European Union and many other nations often sincerely believe patently wrong fact? Then, in profound self deception, believing in politically correct falsehoods, patently unjust, wrong and detrimental laws get enacted.

    Human-Stupidity is NOT an anti-feminist site per se. It just happens that feminism is based on systematic logical falsehoods. Human-Stupidity postulates that the evolutionary arms race gifted women with special verbal manipulation skills to offset male superiority in physical strength and economic power in the EEA.  We hesitate to mention other such falsehoods, because the anti-feminist men’s rights movement will disagree and hate us for our commitment to the truth in other fields tainted by political correctnessRace and iq, world economics, faulty or correct science, evolution, Creationism, irrational drug policy, child porn, teenage sexuality  are other topics where self deception, politically correct dogmatism causes rampant scientific dishonesty.

    Our posts about Robert Kurzban‘s theory of hypocrisy, about, evolutionary psychology, faulty science, unhealthy lifestyle tend to get ignored. Interestingly, humor often tells the naked truth, like a court jester.

    True to our motto: Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception we quote this excellent article:

    How feminists corrupt Domestic Violence research

    ostrichPlease read the original paper by distinguished academic researcher Dr. Murray Straus. We will cite only a few points:

    Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence

    […]Graham-Kevan’s paper raises the question of how an explanatory theory and treatment modality could have persisted for 30 years and still persists, despite hundreds of studies which provide evidence that PV has many causes, not just male-dominance. The answer is that it emerged from a convergence of a number of different historical and social factors. One of these is that gender symmetry in perpetration of partner violence is inconsistent with male predominance in almost all other crimes, especially violent crimes. Another is the greater injury rate suffered by female victims of PV brings female victimization to public attention much more often.

    Cartoon_of_a_Woman_Slapping_a_Man_on_the_Cheek_clipart_imageDr. Murray Strauss omits the evolutionary based male chivalry and female victimhood as an instrument of power.

    Methods Used to Conceal and Distort Evidence on Symmetry in Partner Violence

    Method 1. Suppress Evidence

    Among researchers not committed to that ideology, many (including me and some of my colleagues) have withheld results showing gender symmetry to avoid becoming victims of vitriolic denunciations and ostracism (see Method 7 below). Thus, many researchers have published only the data on male perpetrators or female victims, deliberately omitting data on female perpetrators and male victims

    Method 2.  Avoid Obtaining Data Inconsistent with the Patriarchal Dominance Theory

    In survey research, this method of concealment asks female participants about attacks by their male partners and avoids asking them if they had hit their male partner.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “How feminists corrupt Domestic Violence research & warp world politics and legislation” »
    How feminists corrupt Domestic Violence research & warp world …
    » continues here »

    Human logic evolved to win arguments, not to find the truth, scholars assert.

    dont-listen-argumentOur brain evolved to win arguments, not to find the truth. In Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory,
    Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber defend the argumentative theory of reasoning. They argue that human logic reasoning evolved to win arguments, not to discover the truth.

    People Argue Just to Win, Scholars Assert.

    Hugo Mercier is among the researchers now asserting that reason evolved to win arguments, not seek truth. […]

    Rationality, by this yardstick (and irrationality too, but we’ll get to that) is nothing more or less than a servant of the hard-wired compulsion to triumph in the debating arena. According to this view, bias, lack of logic and other supposed flaws that pollute the stream of reason are instead social adaptations that enable one group to persuade (and defeat) another. Certitude works, however sharply it may depart from the truth. […]

    “Reasoning doesn’t have this function of helping us to get better beliefs and make better decisions,” said Hugo Mercier, who is a co-author of the journal article, with Dan Sperber. “It was a purely social phenomenon. It evolved to help us convince others and to be careful when others try to convince us.” Truth and accuracy were beside the point.

    Indeed, Mr. Sperber, a member of the Jean-Nicod research institute in Paris, first developed a version of the theory in 2000 to explain why evolution did not make the manifold flaws in reasoning go the way of the prehensile tail and the four-legged stride. Looking at a large body of psychological research, Mr. Sperber wanted to figure out why people persisted in picking out evidence that supported their views and ignored the rest — what is known as confirmation bias — leading them to hold on to a belief doggedly in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence.    Reason Seen More as Weapon Than Path to Truth | NY Times

    Relevance for real world issues

    argue2Human-Stupidity shares the frustrations of many activists, that logical reasoning and unassailable scientific proof are not enough to convert the believers in issues like men’s rights, race and iq, *evolution, political correctness, and drug war

    We are awe-struck how manipulative language successfully distorts words like *consent, *child, *rape, distorts facts about prostitution. Feminists and religious zealots thus managed to take over the United Nations and enforce world wide law changes based on voodoo theories  and forged science, like sex trafficking and one in four myths. Harvard President Larry Summers was persecuted for questioning some feminist victimization theories. Human-Stupidity posits that women have evolved especially acute language manipulation skills to make up for their physical and economic disadvantages in the EEA. As a result, peer reviewed sound scientific studies get condemned by both the US senate and the US congress by unanimous vote (Rind Study).

    Nobel prize winner James Watson had his reputation ruined for well-meaningly stating scientific truths, the same truth that earned renowned scientist J. Philippe Rushton constant persecution. *Discrimination is the explanation for every gender and race difference. We are awe struck how people in high academic positions can get away with drivel like race does not exist.

    Don’t miss Robert Kurzban‘s book on the evolution of hypocrisy and meddling in other people’s sex life. Which explains, partially, why lying about a blow job (Bill Clinton) seems to be a worse transgression then starting a trillion dollar war based on lies about weapons of mass destruction (Bush)..


    Original scholarly article

    Mercier, Hugo and Sperber, Dan, Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory (June 26, 2010). Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 57-74, 2011. Available at SSRN: 

    Excerpts from Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Human logic evolved to win arguments, not to find the truth, scholars assert.” »
    Human logic evolved to win arguments, not to find the truth, schol…
    » continues here »

    Repressive sex laws in the "Land of the Free". Polygyny in birds & human meddling in other people’s sexuality

    Why do we, in the land of the free, have a prohibition of polygyny, a victimless crime? Why does the law restrict people’s freedom needlessly? Why do consenting adults have many legal restrictions to their sexual liberty? Teenage sexuality is full of legal problems (Consult a lawyer before playing doctor. Perverse sex laws traumatize children).  

    Why do we feel a compulsion to meddle in other peoples freedom to form whatever form of marriage or sexual relationship they might want to engage in?

    Many women would rather be the second (or fifth) wife of an attractive, rich, powerful man like  Tiger Woods or Brad Pitt, then the first  and only wife of boring, fat, jobless, broke alcoholic Joe Bloke in a Detroit ghetto.  Even just being Tiger’s mistress is much more exciting then Joe Bloke. Why does our law restrict the liberty of these women, and of Tiger Woods?

    Repression of other people’s sexuality is in the reproductive interest  of older married women, of unattractive men. Even vor the successful alpha male it is advantagous to repress sexuality in others,  while hypocritically pursuing his own promiscuous sexuality (remember Eliot Spitzer?). 

    In this post we show that evolutionary theory suggests evolution has created mental modules in our brains to repress sexuality in others,  The gut feelings caused by these modules get rationalized into theories that give rise to repressive legislation.

    Polygyny in birds

    When good males are scarce, a female bird may prefer to become the second mate of a higher quality male with a bigger territory.

    Why Everyone (Else) Is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular Mind by Robert Kurzban $27.95 0691146748

    (all quotes are from Kurzban’s book. This book is a must-read to really understand this topic here)
    • mating pattern of certain bird species illustrates what’s known as the "polygyny threshold model," which has to do with how female birds choose a mate in certain complex environments. […]

    • Is it better to be the only mate of a poorer male or share a better one?
    • I [a female bird]  can either nest with one of the remaining single – but lower quality- males, or I can nest with a [better high quality] male who is already paired, becoming the second female on his [bigger and better] patch. […]

    • When the payoff to being the second female on a patch is greater then the payoff to being the only mate of an inferior male, there will be polygyny. (Kurzban, pg. 208)


    Morality for the birds?

    To better understand how evolution could have formed modules for anti-polygyny morality, Kurzban analyzes a hypothetical bird population where moral rules prohibit polygyny.  He asks

    Which birds stand to gain reproductive advantage when polygyny is prohibited?
    1. "Clearly, female birds already paired with the best male mates will do better. Their mates won’t be able to acquire secondary females whose offspring would compete for the man’s resources." (Kurzban, p 209). Women married with good males have reasons to be feminists. Hillary Clinton only loses if hubby Bill gets entangled with interns. In contrast, Monica Lewinsky probably would have fared very well as Bill Clinton’s second or even fifth wife.
    2. "There’s a natural alliance between monogamously mated females and low quality males because they both gain by enforced monogamy". "low-quality males benefit, since they now might get mates who would otherwise wind up as secondary mates of high-quality males" (Kurzban, p.) In a polygynous animal, primate, or human societies, many low-quality get no wives and no offspring at all. "Low quality males would have a deep, abiding, even crucial interest in rules that force everyone into monogamy" (Kurzban, p 213). Remember, evolution selected for mental modules that gave us reproductive advantage in the EEA, in small groups of hunter-gatherers. It seems that for low quality males, monogamy is the only chance to get a wife, rear  offspring and thus have reproductive success!  Low quality males that successfully prevent the high quality males from monopolizing multiple females would have considerably more offspring then tolerant open minded men who would remain empty handed while the high quality males would get all the females.
    3. Almost all males "benefit from all other males being monogamous, even if they themselves are not [monogamous]? […] "it’s best to constrain others’ sexual behavior. We’re all in favor of moral rule that prevent others from doing things that harm our own interests, but it is to our advantage to not obey our own rule. 
    4. High quality alpha males can profit from imposing monogamy  on other males.  Powerful males have a better chance to remain unpunished if they violate these rules (at least in birds with no feminist dominated court system)
    5. The losers of polygyny prohibition are un-paired females who have to settle for a lower quality male (‘a loser’)  because they are deprived of the freedom to choose to be wife #2 of a high quality male (with better genes, bigger territory, and more resources). 
    6. The other losers  of enforced monogamy are the "cads" the sexy good looking promiscuous players. They are attractive to women for having good genes, but they can’t win the battle over who brings the most worms. "Without promiscuity, sexy males can’t make the most of what they’ve got." (Kurzban, p. 211). 
    7. "Dads, however, win if the sexy males can’t be promiscuous. (They also benefit from keeping their females at home, rather than searching for the good-gene cads)"  (p 211) "Dads" are mated male birds that invest in their family and bring home worms for their kids.
    We have an "interfere in other people’s private sex life" mental module.

    "Humans are extremely social, and our survival and reproduction are determined in large part by how well we navigate the social world. Given this, it’s reasonable to expect that our minds are designed to compete fiercely-if not subtly- for the benefits in the social world: the best mates, the best friends, membership in the best groups, and so on. The outcomes of these competitions would have had massive effects on reproductive success over the course of human evolution."

    So birds, mammals, and humans that increase their reproductive success by restricting other people’s sexual access will out-compete the democratic, personal-liberty-respecting tolerant liberal individuals.

    We will post more about Kurzban’s theory of the modular mind, and the evolutionary advantages of internal inconsistency, self-deception, hypocrisy to explain this further. But to get a deep understanding one probably needs to read evolutionary literature

  • Evolutionary Psychology Primer & Reading List | Human-Stupidity
  • Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite (Robert Kurzban) |Human-Stupidity book review
  • Social Evolution by Robert Trivers $40.00 080538507X  (Amazon)


    Humans have "moralistic modules designed to favor rules that promote their fitness interests".

    "The hypothetical birds would vote for policies that prevent others from engaging in sex outside mateships and anything else that goes along with promiscuity. "they probably would not know why they were opposed to these practices. Their decision would be based on the output of certain modules designed to limit other people’s promiscuity.  They would be insensitive to arguments about freedom and individual choice, and unaware of being inconsistent. They would probably rationalize this as being ‘pro-family", pro-life. Their resistance against abortion might be based in the desire to punish the females for having sex, and not in the desire to save embryos or in theories about the beginning of life."  (Kurzban)

    "They might be opposed to abortion -the availability of which by reducing the costs of sex, might well be linked to promiscuity" (Kurzban)

    Feminist anti-promiscuity sex laws are also in the reproductive interest of most (hypocritical) males

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Repressive sex laws in the "Land of the Free". Polygyny in birds & human meddling in other people’s sexuality” »
    Repressive sex laws in the "Land of the Free". Polygyny …
    » continues here »

  • Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite (Robert Kurzban)

    Why Everyone (Else) Is a Hypocrite: Evolution and the Modular Mind by Robert Kurzban.
    Robert Kurzban is a student of the “modular mind” theory of John Tooby & Leda Cosmides.

    The modular mind

    “The human mind consists of many, many mental processes – think of them as little programming subroutines, or maybe individual iPhone applications – each operating by its own logic, designed by the inexorable process of natural selection”

    “the mind consists of many different parts. These parts often “believe” different, mutually inconsistent things. Sometimes this is obvious, as illustrated in case of brain damage and optical illusions. Other cases are less obvious, but no less interesting.”

    “the different bits of our brain have functions. Just as some of our mind’s subroutines are for seeing, some for processing language, and some for controlling muscles, […] choosing mates, […] making friends, and – one subject I currently study – some with morally condemning others for doing things.”

    With the concept of the modular mind, human irrationality, ignorance and self deception cease to be a confusing riddle.

    “This book is about contradictions. […] It’s about how you can, and one at the same time, want the government to leave people alone as long as they’re not hurting anyone and also very much want the government to interfere with people’s lives even when they’re not hurting anyone.”

    Evolutionary Psychology Primer & Reading List

    The usefulness of being wrong and ignorant

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite (Robert Kurzban)” »
    Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite (Robert Kurzban)
    » continues here »

    Ultrasound abortion laws, unconscious denial, beef and caged hen eggs

    A few states, in a desperate attempt to create obstacles, require ultrasound before abortion. Not for safety, but to show women their fetus, with a heart beating and little arms and feet, to make women feel bad about killing such a little thing, even if it still has no functioning brain or capacity to feel pain. On the other hand, the same conservatives try to shield the agricultural industry, so that unconscious consumers of eggs, or hamburgers, have no awareness of the cruelty towards feeling adult animals involved in the creation of the meal. No pictures of sick caged hens on supermarket egg cartons!Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading »
    Ultrasound abortion laws, unconscious denial, beef and caged hen eggs
    » continues here »

    A few US states, in a desperate attempt to create obstacles, require ultrasound before abortion. Not for safety, but to show women their fetus, with a heart beating and little arms and feet.  To make women feel bad about killing such a little thing, even if it still has no functioning brain, no capacity to feel pain, no conscious will to live.

    On the other hand, the same conservatives try to shield the agricultural industry, so that unconscious consumers of eggs, or hamburgers, have no awareness of the cruelty towards feeling adult animals involved in the creation of the meal. No pictures of sick caged hens on supermarket egg cartons or of movies of slaughterhouses at the butcher’s!

    The new ultrasound law not only requires the medical procedure, but also requires that women know they have the option to hear a description of what is seen in the ultrasound, to receive a photograph of the ultrasound image and to view the ultrasound.
    There is no exception for victims of rape or incest.
    The lawsuit argues the ultrasound requirement is “unconstitutionally vague” because it doesn’t explain whether a person performing the ultrasound exam must try to force the woman to accept the envelope containing the photograph. The lawsuit also says it could violate a patient’s right to confidentiality by “exposing their private information to the risk of delivery by third parties.”
    During legislative debate, supporters of the new law said they hoped the ultrasounds could dissuade women from getting an abortion by having to learn more about their pregnancies. Opponents said requiring a procedure that might not be available at a free clinic nearby will make it more difficult and costly for women to get
    The Center for Reproductive Rights has challenged similar ultrasound laws in other states.

    Normally, human-stupidity is in favor of increasing consciousness. Though, this is more about emotional sentimentailsm then about intellectual awareness.  We also agree with abortion foes, in that i t would be better if abortions could be avoided. If not by abstinence then responsible sexuality with diligent use of birth control. We think these abortion ultrasound movies should be shown BEFORE women have unprotected sex that gets them pregnant in the first place. Of course, consciousness raising would also require showing movies about the hardship of unwed pregnancies and child rearing.

    Now, interestingly, the same conservatives who want to increase women’s consciousness about their fetuses and their abortions, often decry birth control education in school sex ed.

    The anti-abortion conservatives also normally back up the meat industry who actively hides their cruel activities  from the general populace.  The average meat eater would be appalled and turn vegetarian if he were constantly reminded of all the cruelty in industrial caged animal raising and slaughtering. Peter Singer, and many TV stations were consistently denied access to filming US industrial animal farming enterprises.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Ultrasound abortion laws, unconscious denial, beef and caged hen eggs” »
    Ultrasound abortion laws, unconscious denial, beef and caged hen e…
    » continues here » sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor & silence dissent silences dissent

    Hi Stupidity, it seems that you have been on a bit of a crusade the past day or so on lots of posts from the last month related to rape.

    Call it an anti-crusade. Feminists have been on a very successful crusade to re-define language and change legal due process. So a vengeful women’s lone unproven accusation can instantly get the real victim, the falsely accused, into jail. Unlike all other crimes, where proof or multiple witnesses are needed.

    Specifically, you have posted fairly demeaning dismissals of victims and the definition of rape.

    Demeaning dismissals of linguistic definitions. That is how far we have gotten. Even definitions of terms can not be questioned. The essence of taboos to perpetuate witch hunts and make sure the masses are deceived by misleading perverted re-definition of terms like “rape”

    Your comments are not particularly welcome here. Rape is a serious offense and it is incredibly traumatizing for it’s victims. I have removed all of your comments, links and have blocked your account before you post any more comments which would cause pain to real victims of real crimes.

    And real victims of real rape get confused with “victims” that consented to fondling!? That is demeaning. And the “perpetrator” of consensual acts then gets gang-raped in prison, because of a pervasive attitude that (falsely convicted) rapists deserve getting raped. That is pain to real victims of real prison rape.

    ‘Women’s rights at perpetuate manipulative language distortion to foster feminist political goals

    It is essential for a witch hunt that dissent gets silenced, made taboo.’s feminist watchdogs invoke emotional terms (“cause real pain to real victims of real crimes”) in order to avoid discussing the issues and silence dissent easily.  This is the central issue of how Taboos, Dogmas, Religion make even the Intelligent blind, irrational, “stupid”. And self deception makes the censor believe s/he is a liberal person.

    Thus, of course, the real pain caused to real victims of witch hunts is totally ignored.  Guys who spend years in jail for consensual sex with an adolescent, or for a unproven false rape accusation. And who get special attention from prison rapists who like to prey on alleged rapists in order to exert cruel and usual punishment.

    But my main issue here is not even sex laws. It is manipulative Abuse of Language to deceive the masses. The concerted world wide conspiracy to use the word “rape” for “seducing an adolescent” or for “indecently fondling a minor”. And the perverted inversion of due legal process. Alleged sex offenders are “guilty until proven innocent” and any accusation by a lone alleged victim is taken as proof of a crime. dispute: full text follows here

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “ sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor & silence dissent” » sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor &…
    » continues here »

    Tiger Woods: Breach of (Unfair) Contract? Hypocrisy & (Self)-Deception


    Tiger Woods: a free man?

    The Tiger Woods scandal has many facets. I wrote that Tiger Woods is a free man entitled to have fun and Tiger Woods sex addiction treatment is an absurdity.

    Tiger sold his freedom to have fun & right to privacy for US$ 100 Million

    People countered: Tiger sold his freedom for 100 Million dollars, He made advertising contracts as being a “good boy” athlete: Hey, Tiger, Lack of Privacy Is Part of the DealTiger Woods has destroyed $12 Billion in Stock value So maybe, after having charged huge amounts of money for his “clean boy” image, it is his moral and legal obligation to keep up to moral standard he himself agreed to. Like a catholic priest who signed a celibacy vow and now has to keep it. 

    Why Is Tiger Woods in Trouble? It’s Not His Steamy Sex Life; It’s His Family Values Hypocrisy: Woods made most of his fortune through his “squeaky-clean model athlete” reputation. Last year, of the $117 million Woods made, $7.7 million was on the golf course; the rest came from endorsement deals. And that endorsement empire is built on the image of a hardworking, clean-living family man with wife, kids, dogs, and “values”.

    Tiger Woods And Global Media Hypocrisy
    Tiger Woods, Linford Christie and the stars who are sworn to the Hypocrisy Oath
    Bob Schieffer To Tiger Woods: Stop Whining (VIDEO)

    Breach of contract. But is the contract fair?

    Of course, he also signed a marriage “contract” with fidelity vows. He broke the contract. I think it is unfair that the terms of a marriage are non-negotiable. Consumer and tenant law has invalidated many such one-sided contracts, but “feminist” law-makers make sure that men cannot easily negotiate freedom in marriage contracts.

    So men who want to retain their freedom have only the choice not to marry, or do what men (and apes before them) did for millions of years: cheat and lie to cover up. Promise what women want to hear, and then secretly do what the man himself wants to do.


    Deception is huge part of human social life.  Our education and social norms demand honesty, and in contradiction to that they also demand politeness, courtesy, ….  From “I am fine” when I feel bad, to “your dress looks great” when I think it is awful, to “I have eyes only for you and love you forever”.  In spite of us lying constantly, we feel we are honest. We deceive ourselves that we are honest.

    Self-Deception & Self-Deception

    You deceive better if you yourself believe in it.

    So Tiger probably believed in his wedding vows. He also believes he is an honest person. Which usually he is. Except for white lies. And lying to spouses. Well and to sponsors and the rest of the world.

    And before you throw the first stone: think of your own secrets. What if the press published your photo nose-picking? or about some secret sexual urge you once followed?

    And now all these hypocrites condemn poor Tiger Woods. Of course, if you are a public relations manager for Nike, your job is to worry about Nike’s sales and corporate image. Not about hypocrisy, or if the same people who condemn Tiger (and Nike for promoting him) are hypocrites. Try YouTube to see some Tiger Woods commercials: they all manipulate your unconscious: they don’t really sell you superior merchandise, they associate Tiger’s image with the product, thus making you buy the product.

    • Maybe the problem is that we demand unrealistic role models, who are supposed confirm unrealistic moral norms?
    • Maybe the problem is that society demands that we lie about romantic “transgressions”.
    • Most healthy adolescent boys or adult men would probably admire Woods for his sexual conquests. When talking to their peers. But, of course, would not admit this to their wives.

    Should male promiscuity be repressed or sexual freedom be tolerated?

    • There are of course philosophical questions: is monogamy better? there will be less fights, less diseases? or better family life?
    • Is male promiscuity something that should be eliminated by therapy, drugs etc because it causes problems?
    • Or do repressive laws, false morality cause the problems?  People should just be honest, open and be allowed to have fun without any need to hide. Why can’t everyone have their sexual freedom, and we devote out resources to avoiding unwanted pregnancies and diseases, instead of spying after celebrities’ private life.

    Hypocritical double standards about domestic violence

    Tiger Woods’ wife Elin should be under investigation for domestic violence:  The first news stories sounded suspicious: How can an intelligent man total his car and get face injuries when backing out his car from the garage? And require a women with a golf club to break the windshield to free him? 

    If the suspected victim were a women, police would investigate, even if the victim denied violence having happened. But Elin is a woman, and police and law are biased in favor of women. If she were innocent, they should have demanded an investigation to dispel any doubt.

    I think Tiger lied when he swore in public that no domestic violence has happened. If this could be proven to be a lie, then Woods would be proven to make false public statements . An explicit public lie, almost an oath, that could haunt him (like Bill Clinton).

    But as now Tiger’s and Elin’s interest in cover-up coincide, nobody will ever admit the truth. Of course, this can cost him dearly. A domestic violence conviction would greatly favor Tiger in any potential divorce settlement. If he was intelligent, he made her sign something in exchange for his covering up the domestic violence.