Iceland Institutes Gender Communism

http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/iceland-just-made-illegal-pay-11789693

This article is a few days old, but surprisingly, I don’t see anyone else covering it.

What it basically says is that companies must get a certificate showing that they are paying men and women equally, after they “evaluate every job that’s being done” and report it to the government.  The law was passed last year and just went into effect.

Like any social leveling scheme, it doesn’t level the playing field, but levels the scoreboard.  It’s based on the incorrect assumption that you can gauge equality of opportunity by equality of results – as if all demographics are equally talented, motivated and capable, and every disparity between their levels of overall success can be explained by discrimination.  They assume that discrimination/bias is the only variable that affects success and income.  It’s false of course, but in countries like Iceland (and just about everywhere else anymore) people don’t understand that, nor will they ever.

Iceland, which has a population of around 323,000 people, has been ranked the best in the world for gender equality by the World Economic Forum for nine years in a row.

That means that you don’t want to move to Iceland.  Every western world country is like this to different degrees, but the last place you want to be is on the cutting edge of the insanity.  If anyone makes it out of the coal mine shaft alive, it won’t be the canary – don’t be the canary.

 

Advertisements

“Time’s Up” – The Next Phase of Sexual McCarthyism

Just as you may have guessed, they’re expanding the scope of the #MeToo in every conceivable direction, like hydraulic fluid under pressure.  It’s what we could have predicted: millions of Hollywood dollars behind a campaign that puts all men at risk – oh, sorry, I mean all but the ones whose asses are covered by tax dollars, that is.  Actually, I predict that the finger pointing at politicians is going to be winding down now (until just before the midterms this November) because the plan to gain moral high ground by throwing their own overboard, i.e. Al Franken, is already faltering, so they’ll put all their hopes in regaining the House and going after Trump that way.  But anyhow…

This new movement, known as Time’s Up, would actually be kind of funny, if it was a sign that Hollywood was actually planning on eating itself – especially during the doldrums of the movie business.  Sorry, no such luck.  This is aimed at taking sexual McCarthyism to every corner of society, right down to farm hands, providing a means to underwrite false accusations for blue-collar women against blue-collar men.  Of course they’ve also managed to dovetail in other social justice items on the feminism agenda, like gender parity, grievance resourcing for racial minorities and LGBTQ-?? (gender chaos groups), an end to due process for accused men, and even breaching of non-disclosure agreements (NDA).

There will probably be more gynocentric causes piled onto it until it becomes an incoherent cornucopia of left-fascist causes, just about like Occupy.  In fact, that’s probably what we should hope for, because it will become so unfocused and ballistic as to become a left ideological farce, just like Occupy soon did.  Movements are always more potent when they have clear focus and a relatively narrow cause – the wedge needs a thin edge, does it not?  This is something that the movers and shakers have forgotten over the years, and it shows.  At a time in history when they barely have the means to get anything they want – the era of the Trump/Brexit populist renaissance – they start demanding everything they can think of, and they get nothing.

For this reason, I think that the barometer of how much we should worry about Time’s Up, #MeToo or whatever else they are going to cook up is in how broad in scope it is.  Right now, I’d say we are pretty safe – true, there will be some male casualties, but $13 million so far isn’t very much.  If they narrow their scope and get a more efficient and specialized machine of finger-pointing firepower up and running – the kind that is palatable enough for pussy-whipped cuckservatives to sign onto – then you can start to worry.

Woman Given Tranny To Do Her Pap Smear

gender-two-1

UK NHS Patient Asks for Female Nurse for Cervical Smear, Gets Tattooed Trans Man With Stubble

There is only so far you can go down the whole gender-chaos rabbit hole before you run into the bedrock of reality.  Biological women demanding to be recognized as men, and biological men demanding to be recognized as women, and all wanting to get everything that comes with that recognition…what could possibly go wrong?  Mix in political forces, and you have true tyranny.

Tranny.  Tyranny.

Maybe that can be the 54th “gender” – they tyrant-sexual, who seeks to make its mental illness into a problem for others.

This video is worth watching – an offended lesbian calls transsexual activists out for precisely what they do: gaslight.  They try to make you think that you are the crazy one, when in fact, they are the whack-jobs.

Simple Carbohydrates of Cyberspace: Men Have Porn, Women Have Social Media

You see it everywhere – in blogs, forums, chatrooms and especially on Facebook, et al.  It’s always the same story, where a “queen bee” will grace internet spaces with their presence, and pathetic, thirsty cucks with no self-respect are tripping over themselves to get a morsel of her attention.  You see guys asking every (apparent) female who comes into a scene in cyberspace for sex – which there is no even remotely logical reason to think is a possibility – not even for the purpose of entertaining themselves or others, or to get a rise out of the (apparent) female, but out of sheer reptilian brain drive.  A man’s reptilian brain is able to get away with putting a sign up saying  >>>thirsty loser here<<<  because the internet has a way of making some people’s cerebral cortex fall asleep at the switch, for some reason.  In short, it’s habit and it’s compulsion, and it needs to stop.

But why?  It’s pretty harmless, isn’t it?  No, it’s not harmless.

Feminists might agree with that last assertion on its face, arguing that it’s sexual harassment, puts women everywhere at risk of rape, causes them to be paid less in the workforce, or whatever other hyperbole they can dream up – the most ridiculous notion would be that it harms women’s self-esteem.  Of course, that’s not what I contend.  The real harm done by over-inflating a woman’s self-esteem, to dangerous levels.

Just imagine what it would be like to walk into a room, and have everyone suddenly exalt you as being high sexual market value, and grovel for your attention.  Imagine if you logged into a chat room, with an avatar of your own picture, and people from around the world started begging your for sex.  What would that do for your self-esteem?  Would it make you humble?  Or, would it make you feel like you are the one in control of things?  Many will rightly point out that kissing women’s asses has been a big problem for ages, and we can see that it has gone right to their heads, as most of them act as though they’re royalty.  Of course, feminism has made this problem exponentially worse, but the internet has taking it to a higher level still.

Welcome to the epidemic of female attention-whoring on the internet.  Men have porn, women have social media.

Just like men have limitless dick-rubbing material with the click of a mouse, women have limitless ego-rubbing material with just as much ease.  They don’t have to leave their houses, they don’t have to mess around with one interaction at a time, they don’t have to put up with the burden of allowing guys to buy them drinks.  They put up a profile pic, and they get showered with what amounts to fan mail from guys everywhere.  The truly become celebrities in their own way, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that they have the egos to match.

The internet hasn’t made it easier for women only.  Men also benefit from the efficiency of trying to break the ice on the internet, because a). they don’t have to leave the house either; b). they don’t have to spend hard cash on drinks; and c). it’s less risky online.  Yes, the social (and even legal) risks of trying to engage with women in real life make the internet approach much more practical, albeit futile.  Why is it futile?  Because they have just entered what amounts to a virtual pool of applicants, all competing for one job opening – one that the employer might not even bother filling it, because they love the piles of applications coming in; truth be told, it’s probably already filled in most cases, but that doesn’t stop the desperate from applying.

So what can explain why internet dating sites/apps in particular are a sausage fest?  After all, don’t women crave male attention and worship as much as men crave sex?  Probably not, but it wouldn’t matter even if they did.  If there’s one dynamic that hasn’t change in the modern age, it’s that men still have to do the pursuing.  It’s not a conspiracy of gender politics or feminism driving that (although it does make feminist hypocrisy stick out like a sore thumb) – it’s the basic concept of supply and demand.  Feminism may have exacerbated the problem, by apparently bringing women’s psychological demand lower than their inherent biological demand, but the point is that it has always been that way to whatever degree – the onus is on men to break the ice, and that will never change.*  Now, when you consider that women get attention from every direction on the internet, not just in places like Tinder, et al, it’s easy to understand what’s happening: women are getting their attention-whoring needs met everywhere they go online – be it Facebook, Twitter, Youtube or any place where they can be identified as female – so there is less need to go onto a dating site where they are going to get more of the same.  On top of that, there is going to be more quantity than quality in explicit dating arenas – that is, more cliché hook-up begging and less unsolicited spontaneity.

Naturally, this is all going to get worse before it gets better (if it ever gets better).  As the vicious cycle continues, and a greater number of men are becoming thirstier and thirstier, while women tend to narrow their focus to a shrinking proportion of hyper-alphas…it’s not going to be pretty.  About all you can do is rebuke your fellow loser for his behavior, and try to shake some sense into him, for the sake of manhood at least.  Men who grovel and pussy-beg, particularly in places where there is no chance of it turning into something, need to be corrected and made to see the error of their ways.  This is something where each one of us can make even a small difference.  Even if you don’t convince some idiot on the spot, at least you’ll get him to think – you’ll plant seed.  You might even get one or two females to think about their own attention-whoring, though this is much less likely.  Whatever the case, there is no point in remaining silent, now that you know the truth.


 

*It’s worth pointing out that for attractive men, “breaking the ice” is more or less a formality, because she will make it easy for him.  She will give him indicators of interest (IOI) which are a green light for him to jump on her, so he’s not really risking rejection.  On the internet, there is no way to give an IOI (hence the Tinder protocol) but the risk is smaller (and the rewards non-existent).

Why Sex = Love To The Untouchables

What makes a man hate women?  He may not hate them, but what he says gets interpreted as hateful.

Why would he say things about women that anyone would interpret as hateful?  Because women have proven that they don’t love him, so he has nothing to lose by speaking candidly about them.

Where did he get the idea that women don’t love him?  Simply put, no women are sexual with him.

Why does he think that a woman has to prove her love through sex?  He probably never did think that; but the fact that she is sexual with other men is proof of who she loves, and more poignantly, who she doesn’t love.  She didn’t have to prove anything with sex, but she did anyway, and of her own volition.

What made him think that sex and love are mutually-inclusive?  Because he was taught that they were.  He was taught that it was wrong to use someone for sex whom you didn’t really love.  He chose to live by that standard, and and thought women would live by it too.

Why did he assume that women were also going to live by that standard?  Because he assumed that women and men, being equal, are held to the same standards.

Where did he get the idea that men and women are equal?

Yes, where did he get that idea…

 

The $300,000 First Date

http://www.gazettextra.com/entertainment/police-woman-ruined-k-worth-of-art-on-date-with/article_b9c7457e-0ca3-5a3f-acda-431956c3e788.html

Read this article, and take note of the behavior of this drunken 29-year-old tornado that tears through this guy’s house.  Usually women don’t start throwing massive tantrums and destroying property like that until the guy is a little more entangled with the woman than than a first date (when they are married, all bets are off)…but it’s a teachable moment about just what entanglement really is.  At the very least, it’s a lesson that you don’t take a drunken woman (no, drunkenness doesn’t account for all this – don’t take a woman period whom you don’t know better than that) anywhere near valuable assets that can be damaged.  A woman can be a loose cannon.

Clearly, her plan was to dig for his gold, and when it was looking obvious that he wasn’t going to be her sugar daddy, she retaliated.  She hid in his house like a child and then went on a rampage.  Again, it wasn’t alcohol doing this, it was childishness, and confidence that there would be no consequences for her actions, inasmuch as she is a woman.  That confidence may not be all that unfounded, actually, especially if she gets a woman judge.  We’ll have to see how this story shakes out.  Personally, I predict that she gets a slap on the wrist.  Remember, we are in the age of #MeToo, where a mere disparity in wealth and power between the man and the woman factors into the outcome more than ever.

I am tempted to say that this might have been political as well, but no, I doubt that – female childishness can easily account for this.  I think this is just what it appears to be.

 

 

Nice Guys/Betas Are Sexual Academics

No, I don’t mean that they work in sex education (last place you should ever find a cuck like that)…I mean that guys who can’t get women, because of their supplication to women, act that way because their ideas about how to treat women were not learned through experience, but taught to them by gynocentrics – all theoretical, no hands-on.  They won’t ever get any hands-on either at that rate, but women themselves sure as hell won’t cry for these men whom they helped screw up.

You could call an “academic” a person who has spent all of their time in a classroom and none of it in the real world.  In the literal sense, as it pertains to career, academics get little respect from those who learned their trade in the school of hard knocks – “college boys” they call them – because the academic often doesn’t fully understand how things function in reality.  Academics often have little respect for the non-degree people who they have to work with, and a contentious situation often develops; yet, if they can get along well enough to stay focused on the goals at hand, between the academic’s book learning and the tradesman’s raw know-how, sometimes they can achieve great things together.

Now in the case of the sexually academic “nice guy”, great things are not going to happen.  He is not working with other guys as a team, but in direct competition with them.  To make matters worse, his ignorance disadvantage is far, far worse: instead of merely not having a well-rounded foundation in the subject at hand, he as actually been given misinformation and brainwashing to make him behave in a way that’s 180° opposite of what actually works with women.  Few men will try to tell him about his folly, and those who do will be met with his smug dismissal – after all, why should he believe them over women themselves?  Surely the advice from the women themselves would be the best, as it’s coming straight from the source, right?

Eventually, life will force the red pill into his mouth, but that usually won’t happen until it’s too late.  He will be too old and too stunted in his sociosexual development to be able to turn things around.

What will be the gene pool result of this?  Well, after a few generations of nice guy genes being rubbed out, we’ll start to see males becoming less obedient to, tolerant of and sympathetic toward females.  These new males will be tougher and less civilized, as males must become to survive childhood without a father figure – after all, the “alpha fucking/beta cucking” child-rearing strategy, whereby females get the alphas to sire children with their superior genes and then the females sucker the thirsty betas into raising that spawn, can only work until the beta genes are all rubbed out.  When it comes to female genes being rubbed out, you’ll see fewer women who raise their sons to be “chivalrous”…all of this assuming that characteristics that give older, feminist females over younger, gullible males are genetic.

The only hope that a young incel has is to be made to realize that he’s headed in the wrong direction…before it’s too late.  Whatever happens to him to disrupt his course, no matter how drastic, can’t be any worse than ending up far from the goal and not enough time to turn back.

Sex In Swedenistan May Require Written Consent

Just when you thought that Sweden’s sexual politics could not get more absurd…

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/12/20/new-swedish-consent-laws-require-written-permission-sexual-relations/

I know what you are all thinking – that the Muslims in Sweden are not going to respect any such laws – and you would be right.  I can’t imagine being a woman in Sweden, and realizing that my safety depended on people who hand down such absurdities as “written consent”, while at the same time continuing to import Muslim rape gangs from North Africa at as the highest rate possible…

Then again, I can’t imagine what kind of thought process allows people like that to come into power.  Wait, yes I do – it’s call feminism.

Anyone who realizes that feminism is a shit-test, instituted to screen out men who capitulate to its nonsense, can see clearly what the rape of Sweden by Islamic invaders is all about: an orgy for women who dream of Muslim “bad boys” defeating the weak native Swedish male cucks and impregnating them with much higher quality semen.  This is the unconscious group desire of Swedish women (not of all individual Swedes) as we know, but more troubling, it is the very conscious agenda of Sweden’s government.  It’s one thing to have politicians who are merely derelict in their duties to protect their citizens, but in Sweden, the government is actively undermining their own people.

That nation is far beyond the point where anything short of a bloody revolution will bring them back from becoming a failed state under a new Muslim caliphate.  The only way that the real men of Sweden can win back their country is to start with the original culprit…

Feminism.

Silver Lining For Incels In The Era Of #MeToo

What’s the #1 reason that women would try to get at a man who truly keeps to himself?  Rejecting her advances.  That’s not going to be a problem if you’re incel.

Some may have seen the news that a woman politician (and a Democrat, no less) has been accused of sexual harassment and retaliation against a guy who refused her advances.  Of course we all know that this is a one-off, and it won’t lead to a wave of women being accused – what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander, in the eyes of women.  This whole #MeToo movement is not going to work unless there is a double-standard, as is the case with all gynocentric and feminist causes and grievances.  I just need to say that right of the bat: don’t fool yourself into thinking that the tide is turning.

Oh, but let’s take a minute to revel in the irony…

“In its rush to claim the high ground in our roiling national conversation about harassment, the Democratic Party has implemented a zero tolerance standard,” Ramsey said in a statement Friday. “For me, that means a vindictive, terminated employee’s false allegations are enough for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) to decide not to support our promising campaign. We are in a national moment where rough justice stands in place of careful analysis, nuance and due process.”

Oh the wisdom…the wisdom of the presumption of innocence – wisdom they have always had access to, but have brushed aside until they needed it themselves.  Isn’t that rich?

She denied the allegations to the Star in two interviews over the last two weeks and said the lawsuit is surfacing now for political purposes.

Impossible!  Listen and believe – that’s how it works now.  Politics have nothing to do with it, just like the timing of the Alabama Senate race had nothing to do with Roy Moore’s accusers coming forward when they did…or the timing of the release of the Billy Bush tape had nothing to do with the 2016 presidential election…

Anyway, all humor aside, why do I start out with that?  No so much for the main point of the news story itself, but for a nuance within the story.  She retaliated against a guy she worked with for rejecting her own advances…

Before he rejected her advances, Ramsey “repeatedly told me she heard great things from others about my performance,” Funkhouser wrote. “After I rejected her, she told me she now was hearing bad things about my performance and on June 13, 2005, terminated my employment.”

To be honest, he’s lucky that getting fired was the worst that happened to him.  There are numerous stories out there of women crying rape, etc. due to her advances being rejected by the man; but if you look at how many of these cases fall apart in court or during the investigation, it’s obvious that they were often impulsive acts of retaliation.  They are usually not very well thought out accusations, and frankly, they don’t need to be.  It’s very rare that there are any consequences for false rape accusation, so it’s a low-risk thing for a woman to do; and anyway, many people will still believe her story, and chalk the outcome up to a failure of the justice system to get that monstrous guy.

Bottom line: if a woman, who happens to be morally contaminated by feminism, makes advances in your direction, you’re a sitting duck.  If you reciprocate, you’re going to walk right into her web, become entangled and eventually eaten like a bug in divorce/criminal court; if you don’t, you’re going to find yourself battling for your freedom in a kangaroo court system that is hopelessly biased against you, as a man.  Tough luck, dude.

But wait!  What if you’re incel?  What if you are an untouchable omega, either a prolonged virgin or a non-virgin via hooker, relegated to junk-bond status omega male?

There is a (mostly) baseless platitude that says that women reject low-status males when they are younger, but will go for them later in life “because they have matured” in their tastes in men.  There is some truth to that, in the sense that females aren’t really going for financial resources when they are younger, in part because few males in their own age group have any resources yet to speak of, but mostly because the females are at their highest fertility at that point, and so they want to secure the best (bad boy) genes they can get at that time.  When they get older and their fertility goes down, their priorities shift toward resources, and that’s when beta males supposedly have a shot (to raise the bad boy’s kids and be a cuck).  Roger Delvin and others have postulated that female sexual market value for females is much higher for females early on, but that the tables turn and males eventually become higher value, going into their 30s and beyond.  I agree with the first half of that, but I don’t agree with the charts that show males and females having a crossover point, where males become higher value than females on the sexual market.  Realistic observation will tell you that the gap indeed narrows, but they never really reach parity.  Still, odds do get better for beta males…as if an opening opportunity to get cucked & gutted out by the same females that rejected him during their best years is any consolation.  Many beta males will go for it, nonetheless.

Now as for the omega incel, women will still not touch you with a 10-foot pole.  It doesn’t matter how much money you make, what you look like, what kind of car you drive…you will still be invisible to them at best (or should I say, if you’re lucky).  Despite what they say about how the women will supposedly come running to you the second you stop trying to pursue them, the real truth is that the second you drop out of whatever scene you vainly searching for inroads within, womankind will effectively cease to exist.  “Normal” men would never believe that it’s possible for a guy to live in a major city for literally years without ever even meeting a woman, but that’s because they fall over backwards into into opportunities with women – never believe the “nothing ventured, nothing gained” lie.

It should now be obvious how this actually protects undesirable men from predatory women: when you take the risk of retaliatory false rape accusation from rejection out of the equation, there really aren’t very many more reasons that a woman is going to accuse you.  If you are discreet about your financial prosperity, and you never run for political office, you just might be okay.

Oh, and don’t bother worrying about running for office, if you are an incel…the tradcons won’t vote for any man who doesn’t have a wife and kids, no matter what his politics are.

MGTOW: Don’t Talk About It, Be About It

Why does it seem like MGTOW is more of a tribe that many are trying the be the leader of, instead of the simple phenomenon of men going their own way?

Since the time I first heard of MGTOW, I have seen dozens of proclaimed “leaders” come and go, trying to define it for everyone else and tag on riders that mirror their agenda/ideology.  As much as I appreciate themes like free economics and personal ownership per say, I don’t really see that they are integral components of MGTOW.  What’s wrong with MGTOW being exactly what the acronym stands for, nothing more and nothing less?  Maybe it’s because the phrase men going their own way is too vague by itself; what it needs is proper elaboration, not constant evolution or modification by a loose group of online self-proclaimed experts.  

The tribalism seemed the worst in the MGTOW Forums, and thank goodness those days are gone…well, as far as I know, or care (please take note).  Still, there is a cetain amount of tribalism around bloggers, youtubers, etc. and their loyal hangers-on.  By the time you have online social media wars driven by pack mentality against “intruders” who bring contrary ideas.  It’s also pathetic when you have certain MGTOW pundits like Sandman whom guys actually pay to sound off on the issues, as if they were fortune tellers or prophets.

For one thing, tribalism is antithetical to MGTOW in the first place, is it not?  For another thing, if these guys have really gone their own way, how much left is there to talk about?

I’m not pitching the line from the blue pill folk, saying that once you go your own way, you need to be silenced and made to go away.  I think that the most valuable information in the mgtowsphere are the basic facts and stories about what happens to guys who stay in the matrix.  That said, the last thing MGTOW needs is a sense of community.  It’s called going your own way, not going into a huddle.

So how would I elaborate?  How would I define describe MGTOW?  I would simply put it this way: to go one’s own way is to avoid entanglements, as much as possible, with females.  Does it really need to be more complicated than that?

I think that if everyone accepted that simple principle, we’d at least have more people knowing where they stand on the issue.  Right now, most people on the inside and outside probably think that it’s synonymous with MRA.  Well, when you have guys who carry the MGTOW sign while preaching men’s rights activism really loudly and still getting entangled with women, how can people not be confused?  Oh, that’s right…there are “different levels of MGTOW”, which is strange because everyone seems to want to stay a green belt, right?  Guys want to divorce themselves from womankind, but they still want to get laid somehow — being a monk or a recluse isn’t cool.

No no, I’m not getting back on cocaine…I’m just going to nibble at it.

Turd Flinging Monkey has some of the best commentary on the subject, and I respect the fact that he is being real about the sexual side of things, going all-out on love dolls.  On the other hand, I was a little bit disappointed at his video, “Talking Shit with Jaydie” (what I saw of it anyway, because I could only bear so much of it)…I mean, why someone like him would give time and attention to, and throw pearls of wisdom under a little twat like that is hard to explain, other than chalking it up to that good ol’ hardwired leash of influence that few men acknowledge, and many others think they can somehow beat — kind of like those people who think that they can drive drunk.  Now I’m not saying that Jaydie is going to worm her way into TFM’s brain or anything, but I do know that that’s how it starts.  Just because the average woman may not know how to change a car battery doesn’t mean that they aren’t very clever social tacticians and manipulators — never underestimate the amount of leverage they have on you as a man.

Avoiding all path-crossings with them is kind of hard, if you don’t live in a deserted island; but there is a difference between doing what you have to do in order to navigate around them through life, and becoming entangled.  Where is the line?  I would take it to the point of refusing to give them your contact information or befriend them on social media, unless it’s for strictly professional reasons (in which case you can put up the professional barrier and compartmentalize that engagement off from everything else).  I also think it’s wise to steer clear of any non-essential conversations with them, thus preventing them from finding a way to get into your head.  It’s understandable to make an exception for females in the family, but in some cases, even they may use female manipulation tactics on you, and it may be necessary to limit those relationships as well.  

Once you realize what MGTOW really entails, you may decide that it’s not quite for you, but unlike the futile exercise of trying to appeal to women, at least you’ll be clear about what the terms are.  No, you don’t have to be part of some online club and cheer on MRA rants — and as a matter of fact, you don’t even need to identify with the MGTOW acronym, because it’s a phenomenon that needs no name.  It’s a simple matter of having a true understanding of the hazard known as modern females, and staying away from that hazard.  It’s not a misogyny thing either — to quote a line from The Gods Must Be Crazy…

Even a poisonous snake is not bad.  You just have to keep away from the sharp end.

Just always remember: women, like men, are people…and that’s where the similarities end.  Do not become entangled.  Even the most innocuous and innocent-seeming entaglements can turn into big entanglements..and before you know it, you are in a bind that you wish you were out of.  It’s like one of the pilots’ favorite sayings: it’s better to be on the ground, wishing you were in the air, than being in the air and wishing you were on the ground.