Very nicely and reasonably put. You pretty much just undermined everything Lev has ever said on these forums in a devastating yet polite manner. Ouch. =D>
I get the essence of what you are saying, the female is the “basic” block of life, the blueprint, that all fetuses begin as female, maleness being a mutation, and therefore female is the order of life. However, females have always traditionally represented chaos, because mentally, they are less ordered than males.
I have already noted this in one of my other posts - women are indeed acting as though they are men…women are the do-getters, the motivated…But they are less capable, biologically, than men…Men, suffering poor treatment from women, lose their motivation - reversal of roles…yet the biology is not reversed…so you end up with mad dashes, Catty Jenners.
I do not believe people should throw in the towel so easily…If its something they want to do, they should keep trying until they get good at it. Passions the most important thing.
I believe that as well, and have said as much. If you are passionate about something and really dedicated to excelling at it, then you are instinctually drawn to that talent. I think people should follow that instinct. If you feel doubt, or a lack of pride or accomplishment in your passion then that’s another story. People who do mediocre work are aware that they are doing just as much as is needed to look successful. They will often describe themselves as worker bees or drones and don’t take much pride in what they do. They do subpar work, and they know it but don’t care because they have things. And things are good enough.
You will know the people who have followed their gut instinct. They have pride in what they do and you can see it in their eyes, in the way they carry themselves and in the way they care more about their families and people around them than all the pretty trinkets they have. They care about elevating others instead of dragging people down to their level. They inspire you, they are exemplary even in small bits. Their enthusiasm for who they are and what they do is infectious and does not come off as bragging or self-centered to anyone.
Most people do not follow their passion or instinct. They bow down to societal pressures all around them, and become good little drones. Each generation only different by the clothes they wear and the drugs they take to escape their mediocrity.
Trixie,
Arcturus Descending wrote:
Take another look, male and female are BOTH.
Think about this - observing and judging from the past where females were at one time, the positions or non-positions where they were, where they were held down, where they felt non-persons - do you think that it is the male or the female who has more come into HER own <img src="/uploads/default/original/2X/4/442e459c5ced45cb70e8a05e77e07cea6fee4928.gif" width="15" height="17" alt=":mrgreen:" title="Mr. Green"/> - ultimately becoming more the DOers or at least being "nose to nose" with the man?
C’mon Trixie. Sure, there may be many women out there who are acting like men - many might actually prefer to be men. That’s just part of who they. But I wasn’t speaking about them.
I might just as well say that there are many men out there who are acting like females and it could also be true. Many men are switching roles with women - where the woman makes more money, sometimes she is the breadwinner and the man stays home and takes care of the child[ren]. Does that make the man less a man? Not in my book it doesn’t. It’s more reasonable and more harmonious that way.
But I was not speaking of women in general acting “as though” they were men - just as women who have finally come into their own, recognize their validity and purpose and niche in the world, affirm autonomous selves. I never said that women are equal to men in all ways and/or vica versa.
For these women there is no “acting” going on - it is just the BEING and the DOING - just as it is with men.
Let’s keep it real, Trixie. The same holds true on the part of a woman being abused in all ways by a man.
If you’re going to get at the truth, you have to see the whole panoramic scene.
I say kudos for Jenner. “She” made the decision to be to become who it is she felt in her heart of hearts to be. You certainly can’t say that of all men who are out there experiencing that. Can you imagine the courage that takes?
Maybe what we need is less biology reversal - unless we do - and more consciousness awareness.
I think you missed my point…
Men are the innovators, the engineers…artists, creators
If feminists spread negative ideals, that men are worthless, gross, and only good to women if they make money for her…
The results are plain to see…you’ll get a swamp of Catty Jenners, and guess what you’ll read on the cover of Top 20 geniuses?
Top 20 “Geniuses” of the world talking about makin new kinds of fuckin’ ipods and apps. That’s what modern “genius” has declined to…"
In the 1970’s men thought they were going to get civilizations in space by 2015…instead they all they got was fucking internet porn.
No no, men traded it all in for internet porn.
Do away with the porn and men will have civilizations in space, in no time at all.
Men must be denied sexual outlets, to become most productive again. Men should be denied sex systemically (to justify the greater goal and good, like civilization in space).
I don’t believe porn was the doings of men, but of Jews, and rednecks.
Feminism is trying to systemically deny men sex and love, and I don’t believe disembodied men have the drive to build space civilizations for a culture that hates them.
It’s both.
Men have a natural desire for pornography. However jews/feminists/cultural marxists really jacked the lock off of Christian morality in the 20th Century, fully unlocked by the “counter-cultural sexual revolution” of the 1960s and 1970s. Many anti-Christian groups banded together to make sex “Open” and “Loose”.
This has led to a downward spiral in the united states, and other nations.
The male libido needs to be suppressed, in order for men to work diligently, passionately, and organized for a greater purpose.
Without a greater purpose, and pornography/drugs still rampant, there can be no great social organization nor civil advancement.
Threaten to cut-off pornography from the world’s population of men, and offer to turn it back on, after we have civilizations in space.
We’d have them tomorrow.
Controlling male and female sexuality is necessary to have, maintain, and also continue Civilization.
This is why men need real sex, not fantasy games of pornography they will never taste, or false promises of a hippie utopia they will never experience. This is why japan has so much pornography, because the men are used as slaves, their only value to the woman is their money. They are sexually frustrated over there, so their libidos are high. Sexual frustration is a feminizing agent…and also an agent of distraction, and decay. It is not condusive to science…Tesla had no sex-drive, so it didnt affect him. Largely what will happen is a reduced body of scientists, seeing only scientists who are either married, or asexual, because sexually frustrated scientists have little enthusiasm for life, so they might even be dead.
Now one may say, well, Japan has good technology, despite their cultures obsession with sex (due to sexual frustration.) However, if Japan was sexually satisfied, perhaps their technology would be even better.
Classically, religious organizations and churches, such as Catholicism, took the role as sexual suppressor and controller. No sex, without the permission of the Church. History repeats. As the west descends into a new dark age (to coincide with the advent of Globalism and civilization of all areas of earth), eventually new cults will spring up, and seek to suppress sex once again.
Moralize and outlaw sex. However, the current trend points to more liberalism, looseness, and “sexual freedom”.
The popular transexual, Bruce Jenner, who castrates himself, is “popular”.
Ultimately however, sexual potency is always a threat to civilization. Women want to control the men who want to control their own sexual fate and choices.
Everybody battles for sexuality. Sexuality has power (Reproduction).
Popular because he has money…I have openly heard from the mouth of a [waiting for Trixie to supply a new terminology to insert here] that she only ‘respect’ rich and famous transsexuals (materialistic culture.)
Moralize and outlaw sex only for the lower life forms…Once my DNA device is created, there will be a federal fine for anyone who has a baby with low IQ. DNA device is a simple scanner, that maps your offsprings characteristics (it is not the DNA mutation machine.) Promote sex for the high IQs and society will flourish. Otherwise, suffer a world overpopulated with the modern and base…and it will be too late for any hope of recovery…
The current trend is to promote sex for the most base, idiotic of the bunch, while ostracizing genius types on TV (for instance, Steve Urkel.)
May I suggest that posters DM each other, instead of sullying the formal boards with their off-topic exchanges.
edit --wrong thread–
Objectification
Feminists bitch about the “Objectification” of women…but how about the objectification of men, as-if subjectivity of either gender were presumed? Are men objects or subjects? From the standpoint of history, rulers and governments use men like pawns. The average male is a worker, farmer, or soldier. A trained machine. A simple object. Females traditionally use men for their social status and security. Marriage was classically the means by which a female could earn a decent living and be afforded basic luxuries in life. Modernity has changed the rules somewhat but not entirely. Females today, “Feminists” no longer need marriage, or to have sex with men (or children) to be socially accepted into society and earn “Human Rights”. Thus marriage has essentially disappeared in western (degenerate) culture.
Western males struggle with a new form of objectification. Even though, classically nothing has changed, and men are still objectified by The State or The Church, the loss of marriage means that men will lose a last bastion of subjectivity, which is access to sex and women. This is another “feminist” device. Females want to control access and permission to their sex/vaginas, which was traditionally controlled by either the Church or State. In Christianity, sex is forbidden, ostracized, and illegal outside marriage. But also it was illegal for women to have “basic human rights” or own land outside marriage. A single woman had no human rights. She needed to marry. Today females have both “rights” and control over sex, in the west.
In fact this topic spills out between Liberalism and Fundamentalist Islam. Liberals see Moslems as evil, for strictly controlling their females, and Moslems also see Liberals as evil, for letting women run completely “free and wild”, which essentially means, forming harems around a few men, and offering free, perverse, recreative sex to beta males and cuckolds. A few western men seed all the women, and the average slut/whore using contraception, has sex with the lower males to make them feel still relevant, important, or necessary in society (when they’re actually not). Bragging about having impotent sex (using contraception, birth control, condoms, pulling out, etc.) is a sign of severe state of male sterility and impotency, also including homosexuality as another pervasive sexual perversion.
Just another form of impotency.
The difference between men and feminists is this…inherent male expendability already implies and imparts all boys, from a young age, that men are objects, to be used, rather than subjects who have ‘worth’ and value in life. Which men are valuable, why and how? This should be a simple question, but who ever questions or speaks about it? Based on gender, what is the utility of a man or woman?
Again I echo Karen Straugh (girlwriteswhat), whom she quoted, that “men are human doings while women are human beings”. This very much explains the difference between genders of objectification and subjectification. Men earn subjectivity and “Humanity” by doing something great, called “success”. Women earn subjectivity and “Humanity” by spreading their legs, getting fucked, and birthing a child or two. This is the difference between a man’s “Honor” and a woman’s “Honor”, based on gender alone.
I’d like to get more complex about this topic and these issues. But you have to work with what you’ve got. And most people aren’t ready for a deep discussion about these topics, problems, issues, solutions, etc.
The average western mentality is still too childish, too infantile, too prepubescent…
Partial Man
A man living within the confines of human civilization can never be a complete, whole man. Instead he must sacrifice a part and percentage of himself. Imagine chopping a finger off a newborn baby infant. Imagine severing a baby girl’s finger or thumb. Imagine detaching her foot or leg with a saw. Imagine knowingly, consciously amputating and handicapping future generations of humanity. Such is the nature of men. This is what it means to be born male in the modern world, of global civilization.
As a male, you are, intrinsically, a prisoner. You are born a criminal, for no other reason than your gender and anatomy. You are born into a class of “potential rapist”, a threat to society a priori. Can females ever “rape” each-other? No, at least, not in the way that most people conceive of these social constructs today. Instead, all males are born in slaves, prisoners, within a globalized world. All males must become obedient to a higher willpower, a “heavenly father”, a “god” figure. The abrahamic religions are more advanced, christians, jews, moslems. These males are already emasculated and feminine, to varying degrees. Their spirits and souls are crippled, from birth, and even before birth.
These are manifestations of the slave-dialectic.
Females are more content with their slavery, secure within comforts, rights, and “Privileges” of society. This is the idea of “human rights” and “equality”. Females and children are pampered, like babies. And males will be castrated, like neutered dogs, if they disobey and want to transcend above or beyond the female-world. The home-world.
Imagine being a modern man for a momeny. You live in a house, which you slaved years for, or you inherited. How is your “home” any different than your prison? What’s the difference between the penitentiary of prison, for socially sanctioned criminals, as opposed to the “innocent criminals”, who represent every other male on earth, not yet tried for crimes all men are already guilty of…???
Let me rephrase this question for the more simple-minded members of my audience…
If all males share the same (sexual) desire for women, and would fuck without explicit permission from women, then which men are innocent? Wouldn’t it be best for all males to castrate and remove this aspect of ourselves which, for example, the christians teach and reaffirm as our shame and guilt. Must all men be ashamed, and guilty, of sexual desire? Of wanting to take, without asking first?
Do you know any exceptions? No, you don’t. You only know the ways in which men suppress themselves, lest that “harder, darker” truth become revealed.
At least, with philosophy, truth and honesty can burst outward and overflow, from time to time, on rare occasion…
Remember “men”, or should I say partial-men and half-men, imprisoned across this earth…you will never truly be welcome nor “fit” inside the interior of society, within the wombs of women, as a totally welcome guest. Because that’s what men are, just a “guest” inside a stranger’s home. That you paid for, but you never truly owned.
The only authority, the only ownership, the only “completeness” of a man, must exist far, far outside human civilizations and societies. And you know, deep inside, that you want to be away from all this as well. That the potential threat and suffering of a severe life, outside, can be much better, but at least equal to, living inside this human zoo, this prison planet, for lifetime, after lifetime, after lifetime of slavery. Of your sons. Of your grand-sons. Of your male descendants, forever.
You want out. And you are not alone.
Partial-men
Half-men
Are only ever “humans”.
Let me pose a dilemma to your idea.
Imagine being a modern woman for a moment. You live in a house, which you have slaved years for as the sole breadwinner without inheritance or assistance from your mate. Your mate who happens to be male, is going to school so he can pursue his dreams without hindrance while you work. Is this any less of a prison because you are the woman? Does the male not have his freedoms? Is he prisoner still?
Could it be possible that the woman does not feel at all trapped, values her husband and family so much that she would make sacrifices for them to help them rise above all others? That she could support her children so that they would have all their own freedoms and still be a happy woman and not a prisoner? Are they not equal?
Why would a man feel any different, that he could not be a leader and help his children achieve greatness and not feel like a prisoner at all? Do you not believe that either scenario exists? Could a man be both an Alpha male, and not the sole breadwinner? Does he cede control over to “woman” just because she is earning the money and supporting the house?
The status of women and slavery has always been the same: complacency and willing accomplices.
Since all women share the same obligation and loyalty to an abstracted alpha-male figure (who christians refer to as their ‘God’), females work together knowingly or unknowingly to restrain others and restrict freedom, for all, including your own children. Females never truly care nor value freedom, as males can and must. Freedom is, intrinsically, a masculine value, and not a feminine value. It is a masculine status. It is a masculine biology.
Females value “freedom” much, much less than males. This is most easily and readily demonstrated by rates of violence in males, incarceration rates of males in prison, and casualty rates of males in war, all compared to females. The numbers are near absolute. There is no dispute, no real arguments, never has been, is not now, and never will be. Feminists steer far, far away from these points and topics. When backed into a corner upon these issues, feminists are silenced and remain silent. There’s not much to say about true gender differences.
A deeper analysis of freedom, security, and gender reveals the truth.
Imagine that “freedom” directly points to sexuality. A man who is “Free” can fuck any woman he wants, without permission, what would he do? He would pick lots of beautiful women, the most beautiful. And to this end, all men find a solidarity and commonality. Female beauty is objective, not subjective. But now reverse the equation, and give a woman “Freedom” to fuck any man she wants. Does she need permission? Does she want lots of men, and necessarily beautiful? Who would women choose if granted “sexual freedom”?
But here the difference is exposed…females have always had “sexual freedom”. Females have always been able to spread legs for the mate they want. Almost no man on earth, (or any at all?) would decline explicit sexual seduction by a beautiful woman, who demands a one-night stand. As-if that were a reality. As-if females have the instincts or reflex to care for children, alone, rather than as part of a social group?
No, that’s not reality. Neither in nature or the confined artifice of human civilization. Therefore it can be discounted and exposed.
The true gender differences are so simple, easy, and common that they cannot be denied and lied about except through massive social programming and indoctrination (enslavement) of young children. Without this enslavement, these issues are well-known and regarded by civilization. Boys and girls, men and women, are both forced to deal with it, and understand it. But such is not the case today, when the degrees and levels of indoctrination (slavery) are so excessive and powerful, that the vast majority of the human population repeats, verbatim, lies that they intuitively know are false, but lack the words, insights, and foresight to speak against.
Exposing lies is one thing. Speaking against them is another.
So slaves are welcome to speak about “Freedom”, being “free”, and valuing “freedom” by gender, according to their dogmas. They will reassert, almost every sentence, that men and women are still “Equal”, still deserving of the same “Rights”, and as most repeat around here, that both are always, always, still, merely “Human”.
A final question for this response:
Are females more, or less “Human” than males?
Are blacks more, or less “Human” than whites?
Are children more, or less “Human” than adults?
Be honest.
Sex in the Liberal State
According to liberalism (state power), hedonistic (infertile, impotent, sterile, perverse) sex is morally good while procreative reproductive sex is morally bad/evil. Liberalism inverts Conservative (moral) values. Thus liberals will promote non-reproductive sex, such as condoms, contraceptives, birth control pills, homosexuality, and even extremes such as necrophilia or pædophilia. Ultimately the end of liberalism forces its adherents (Statists) to “withhold judgment” and “tolerate” sexual perverts and freaks, as long as it “doesn’t hurt anybody else” or is “consensual” (based on women’s consent, not male consent). Here is the hypocrisy and contradiction. Male consent, in the liberal state, has no power nor value. What a male agrees to, or not, has no legal or social weight, compared to any woman.
In the liberal state, males have no sexual power (no consent), and females have all sexual power (consent). This is why males cannot be “raped” (powerless consent) in the liberal-state.