Why I Used the Words ‘Fat,’ ‘Ugly,’ and ‘Loser’

And a restack by the Critical Theory Marx-o-Matic 3000

One of my pieces last week garnered a restack-comment that is worth highlighting—not for how good it was, but for how hackneyed and tragic. I won’t mention the account—picking fights is not my style, and the fight would not be worth the time anyway, because it would go nowhere. But I do think you will find it interesting.

The piece in question was titled My Wife and I Got Rousted by the Cops, with the subtitle 'It's the Law'—the mating call of authoritarians, psychopaths, Karens, and losers everywhere. Needless to say, it is written from my anarcho-libertarian perspective.

Looking through the lens of three real-world events, the article discusses the morally impermissible enforcement of laws that violate our natural rights, and the different types of people who support and benefit from this illegitimate system. In the article, I express a special distaste for people who have nothing better to do than to deploy, co-opt, or worship at the feet of power: Bully cops. Psychopath politicians. Bureaucratic Karens and Kens. Low-status lickspittle losers.

I don’t normally use the word “loser.” In fact, I really don’t like the word. Yet what else do you call people who inform on their neighbors, family, and friends for the secret police…not because they’re scared, but because they’re bored and want to feel important. I used the word because I am pissed off.

It’s hard not to be pissed off with what is going on in our world. (I certainly don’t need to tell you how crazy and evil things are!) Then, on top of that knowledge, add the absolute surety, based on extensive reasoning from first principles, that all governments on earth (even the “good” ones) are violators of human rights. Not just when they have been “corrupted,” but every day, even when they are functioning normally. Even when the supposed “good guys” are in charge.

Others can delude themselves with the false hope that things can be made better by voting harder and getting better people and policies in place. I have no such luxury. I know that voting, politicians, and policies are a part of the problem. I know that the very existence of the system is a crime against humanity.

I am a happy, jolly, goofy, grateful person, but sometimes this knowledge is a burden, and even I have my limits. Still, those who follow my work know that words like “losers,” and ad hominem in general, are fairly off-brand for me. I try to make my writing, and our conversations, constructive.

Thus, you can consider it a testament to just how annoyed I was by getting rousted (at a distance) by some petty tyrant cop that I not only used the word “loser,” but also stooped to the suggestion that she was probably fat and ugly:

Not wanting to go through any legal hassles, we packed up and left. We never interacted with the cop, so I never got to confirm my suspicion that she is fat and ugly and has a chip on her shoulder, but I guarantee that she derives pleasure from driving around, with her cop lights on, rousting people who are causing zero problems.

I knew at the time that the ad hominem was out of range for me, and I almost stayed my hand. It should have been obvious from the context of the article exactly why I was angry. Apparently not, however, as someone restacked that quote from my article, with this comment:

Show me you hate (non-compliant) women without saying you hate women.

Sigh.

Is anything more boring, here in 2025, than this sort of hackneyed Cultural Marxist blather? Is anything more tragic than 95th-wave feminism, or whatever stupid wave we’re on now?

If this had been a male cop, I would probably have said “fat and porn-addicted” or something similar. I said it because I was pissed off. I said it because people who enforce and support morally impermissible ‘laws’ are fat ugly low-status jealous gross losers.

Naturally, this commenter/restacker completely missed the boat. Instead of understanding my actual point, (s)he just plugged my words into the Critical Theory Marx-o-Matic 3000 and extracted the desired output:

*said in robotic computer voice*

Transgression by cisgender straight white male oppressor of women.

Proceed with accusation of sexism and fear of strong women.

I “hate non-compliant women”? Jeepers tap-dancing Christmas…have you met my wife? (Or most of my girlfriends, for that matter.)

The redhead guitar player in this band is my wife (about ten years before we met). She doesn’t play in bands anymore, but she’s still this person. Mess with her and she’ll non-compliant your face. She’s a bit prissy when it comes to spiders, but other than that, I strongly recommend that you not get on her bad side.

If there were an apocalypse, she is the first person I would want by my side. Not just because she’s my wife, but because I would have no question that she would join me in doing what needs to be done. Compliant? Bah.

Again, this commenter just ran my words through the NPC leftist trope filter. But, in the immortal words of Skeletor, “Joke’s on you—I’m into that s___.”

I am an anarchist. I don’t want chaos, but I absolutely despise involuntary authority. I want women to be as non-compliant as they possibly can be. I may not agree with

Kulak

on everything, but she is far closer to the mark than the Victorian wallflower of Naomi Wolf’s nightmares.

It is not my style to poke fun at people’s appearance, and I have already explained why used the words I did. Only a leftist would read what I wrote and infer that it meant that I “hate women”—as opposed to hating involuntary authority, and the thugs and lickspittles who impose it.

P.S.: Once one becomes a libertarian or anarchist, there is an increasing temptation to look at conservatism and leftism as equally bad. This can be said to a greater degree about political parties, but when it comes to ideologies, they are not equally bad.

Leftism—fueled by the same sort of preening virtue-signalers who are running mainstream culture today—murdered 150 million people in the twentieth century. Conservatism can be irritating, but it is not the same. Indeed, Western/Anglophone conservatism shares the same classical-liberal roots as libertarianism does.

Never ever forget how dangerous modern leftism is, or how easily it can return to its French Revolutionary roots or its statist heyday of the twentieth century.