Dissidents Philosophy Forum

Internet Philosophical Community
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 The Feminization of Man

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
AuthorMessage
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Dec 25, 2008 7:31 pm

Satyr wrote:
As a product of this feminization, sex does not only lose its severity and purpose, but it loses its ability to fulfill.
I disagree; I think sex retains its ability to fulfill the libido.

It just requires a more extreme maturation from all the members involved.


Satyr wrote:
In males that exist and reproduce only because of social and cultural protection and in males who are forces to repress their full instincts so as to retain this protection and this access to reproductive possibility, dissatisfaction with sex comes forth through sexual fantasies and sexual dysfunctions.
Not only are men losing their fertility but they are also losing their virility at an early age.
Maybe.

Personally, my sex-drive is out-of-control. I have to do everything to restrain myself on a day-to-day basis. Though, I attribute this mainly to my advanced self-awareness or self-consciousness. I may be no different than another man in terms of repression. The compartmentalization may be very different though. I may not be able to compartmentalize anything at all, a psychological "defect", or, just an adaption to my specific purpose in life.


Satyr wrote:
The absence of culling and the forced monogamy, women lose their sexual choice by, increases not only physical and mental ailments but also sexual dysfunctions and insecurities.
Men express this dissatisfaction and release this repressed energy through their sexual fantasies and fetishes.
I disagree. Women have extreme sexual choice now.

They may have sex with a large number of different men. They have protection from Society & Law. They may marry an infertile male for his money and resources. Woman is sitting high on the cusp of Society right now. I think it is more about the Fall of Man. Men have no way to restrain these social forces in the West. The old ways are dying & dead. I don't know how to adapt or what the future is going to look like in these regards.

I am beginning to believe that almost all American women will have children from a plethora of different men. For every one mother, there will become perhaps all half-blooded children, especially when you consider the predominant non-culture of Multiculturalism. This is an observation that I have only begun to see since yesterday.


Satyr wrote:
In women this sexual dissatisfaction comes forth as an inability to enjoy sex altogether.
They are made to feel ashamed of their sexuality and their promiscuous nature and they are also forced to settle for males that do not inspire them sexually.
I do not see how women are becoming sexually dissatisfied in this day & age.

Pious men on the other hand...

...are forced to become even more moral and pious. That is a feat when religion is dead within the masses.

The global society, to me, resembles a mass of bodies in an orgy reaching and climbing over one another in a naked mess. The force becomes: as a male, go have sex with lots of women and trick a few of them into skipping their birth control. Then, pay some child support and you are finished. This is the life of men, no great Purpose anymore. I feel compelled to reject it.


Satyr wrote:
This is why most marriages result in a slow deterioration of lust, as the couple becomes more like friends, through habituation, with sexual rights over one another but with a waning sexual interest.
More marriages deteriorate as a Liberal sexual identity is massively reinforced and pressured onto the masses. Sexual selection and "choice" spirals out of control. Without a male authority (the Death of God), women have no reason to secede to male power. No Law compels them to be accountable for their actions.

Moral piety becomes a more valuable commodity exponentially.

Men don't want to marry sloven girls/women. Women don't want to be socially disgraced by divorce.

Men are in the more difficult position; women keep grabbing the advantage. It's good to be a woman today.


Satyr wrote:
The mystique is lost as seduction relies on heavy doses of lies and posturing and so women fail to be inspired by men that are emasculated and so forced to go to ridiculous ends to gain sexual attentions. They then place women on a pedestal the women themselves know they do not deserve and so they lose interest in the men that act or actually believe that they do.
They may be flattered but they do not respect the men.

In some males this emasculation can turn into a hatred, when their only sense of masculinity is derived through female evaluations and their lack of experience causes them to begin accepting, even if subconsciously, these judgments as valid...which in most cases they are.

Women intuit what men rationalize and so their judgments may not be conscious but they cannot be said to be wrong.
Females have evolved the ability to evalaute a male's genetic potential so as to offer her reproductive sacrifices to the one with the most potential.
This is the female genetic filtering role, that can then be turned into a social filtering role.
This is mostly correct.

What is not correct, however, is that women can be wrong. If men work together, and return to capture & uphold their old domains, then women cannot touch them. Women are not intelligent, rational, or reasonable. They are wrong in almost everything they say, because they cannot reason. They merely feel what is right. But, this is not what is "right", it is what is socially acceptable ... and furthermore, it is what is socially desired. Thus, if a woman agrees with you, then the whole of society agrees with your Philosophy/Ideal.

The problem is, though, that women mistakenly believe there is "equality" when men must turn themselves into pussies in order to procreate. This disgusts me, personally.

That is not the case at all. It assumes that men are not in control of themselves; this is just wrong. Men are supposedly the "rational" ones, after all...



Then again, all of this merely says to me that the exponential specialization of men is increasing. The best philosophers become exponentially better. The best scientists become exponentially better. The best warriors become exponentially better. And women flock to the best.

All this is ... competition anyways. Always.

Philosophy was never supposed to include women into the open forum, ever. I miss the days they had open forums in the town squares, so that men could come together and discuss intellectual ideas & ideals amongst themselves. Philosophy is/was supposed to be an exception, for due reason. A female would destroy the process. I would enjoy to see Kriswest and SS kicked off of this website in fact, but there will be no such thing. Because, there is no way this forum can even go about identifying females across the web and banning them.

I honestly do not see how philosophy can be engaged until every woman is absent. It is a competition, amongst men, to build a collective Ideal through competing ideas. It is the War of Ideas, not actualized in this day & age.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
creasy
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Number of posts : 75
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:06 pm

Unreasonable wrote:
The problem is, though, that women mistakenly believe there is "equality" when men must turn themselves into pussies in order to procreate. This disgusts me, personally.
Quote :
And women flock to the best.
If the second statement is true, the first is not.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Fri Dec 26, 2008 1:26 am

creasy wrote:
Unreasonable wrote:
The problem is, though, that women mistakenly believe there is "equality" when men must turn themselves into pussies in order to procreate. This disgusts me, personally.
Quote :
And women flock to the best.
If the second statement is true, the first is not.
Of course it is true!

Money is the great equalizer!

If you have impotent sperm, then money will make up for it, lots & lots of money!

Have you ever witnessed a human male driven to a goal with his whole life? It is an amazing sight.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:20 pm

To whomever it may concern...

My thesis on feminism has been modified.
Parts of it have been changed, parts have been subtracted while others have been added.

It is all part of my ongoing attempt to find truth.



Modifications to it can be found on my Blog here:


The Feminization of Man
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:01 am

Satyr wrote:
To whomever it may concern...
It concerns us all, if we are paying attention...

Here are some of my contentions/recommendations for change:


Satyr wrote:
The female form, the feminine biological type, is not accidental nor is it superficial. It is a product of a historical process motivated by need and determined by every environmental condition that each and every of a woman’s ancestors has faced.
The same holds true for a male and for any other type, be it a species or plant.
Each individual carries with him/her his/her entire heritage in his presence.
If the female archetype is based on 'emotion' and 'feeling', then she must be "superficial" by definition.

To not be superficial implies a certain "depth to one's soul", which I do not see that women have.

Emotions and feelings can be deep, but they always exist only on the surface. If this defines Woman, then superficiality defines woman.


Satyr wrote:
A fundamental characteristic of weakness, as a concept, is its willingness to sacrifice a part of itself to save its entirety. Weakness is furthermore characterized by its inconspicuousness, its ability to blend and vanish into the multitude, its non-confrontational incorporation within more powerful entities, its expendability, its commonness, its malleability, its reliability and willingness [when conscious] to conform and, so, adapt.
Weakness is consumed by what is more powerful, either by consumption or assimilation.
I think a distinction or clarification should be made here.

There are "feminine" and "masculine" weaknesses. What you are describing is "masculine" weakness.

To a woman, these particular traits are great strengths.



Satyr wrote:
Even the personal names man associates himself with become a generic stamp shared by many that possess no intimate relation to distinction. Tom, Dick and Harry are just non-specific labels of non-distinctness that can be easily replaced by a simple number representing a statistic. Mary, Susan and Helen names saying nothing about the individual besides their participation within a particular cultural and religious group and their sexual designation.
Here we see uniformity in practice.
While this conception is true, I do not know if your premise is true.

For example, the name "Helen" strictly refers to a Helene, linguistically-speaking.

It is also a matter if that Helen knows this or not, which she probably does not.


Satyr wrote:
As such her power is achieved by how well she understands, manipulates, is assimilated, conforms and reflects the morals, values and virtues of the group she participates in and in how close to a physical aesthetic ideal she reaches. An ideal that exposes her fertility and genetic history.
And who decides what is aesthetically pleasing, except men, I wonder...?



Satyr wrote:
Females bask in all the attention, taking it as evidence of their unappreciated value and as proof of their never openly admitted dominance over males.
And for good reason.
When a man hungers he may lose all sense of dignity and self-control in pursuit of fulfillment. He may even feed on excrement or on the flesh of his loved ones. So too, the basic average male will slither in the dirt if there is the slightest hope of satisfying his sexual hunger.
Who wouldn’t take advantage of such decrepit creatures when they offer themselves up as willing victims to be exploited?
Such fine poetry is nigh impossible to find in this day & age...


Satyr wrote:
The secret liaison of the deprived instinct finding release away from the prying eyes of cultural control, is now unmasked as another human contrivance.
The lovers are uncovered and their shocking activities revealed. Romanticism is dead, along with God.
So much for the mystique.
Not while I am alive and draw breath, Grecko.

We will see if I can breathe life back into this festering corpse that we call "Civilization"...



I have just now finished reading your new version.

It is a substantial improvement to previous versions!

My first contention is that you should add in a few paragraphs or a section with a more definitive description of what the "Feminization of Man" both means and implies. Throughout the whole essay, I understand what it implies, because I have kept up on it for a long time. For a first-timer, I do not see that he or she will necessarily understand what you mean by how a man is "feminized". What is the man feminized by? What is its result? What is causing it? Your essay goes into detail, but I do not see that it clearly explains these things to somebody not well-read with the essay.

My second contention is that you remark about homosexuality in your Epilogue. However, I believe that you should also recognize the fact that bi-sexuality in young girls is also significantly on the rise. Bi-sexual women are becoming much more valuable, because of what they offer and represent to the alpha male archetype. If a girl is bi-sexual, then one male (an alpha male) can satisfy himself with a whole group of girls/women at the same time. In other words, he may fuck and impregnate a whole slew of girls in one sitting. This also demonstrates the further destruction of the institution of Marriage and the Traditional Family & Moral structure of Western Society. But, of course, these deconstructions will someday result in a backlash of values and consequences. These possibilities go unsaid in your essay. What could they be? What happens when Empires become excessively-morally decadent? Do not the males become increasingly impotent? Does not generalized Hedonism force once-allied "citizens" onto one another through violence in order to procure what each other had easily procured in a time and age beforehand. It is an extreme taking-for-advantage those things (moral lessons) that brought about your individual & social success from the beginning...

My third & final contention is this: you should edit and publish your essay & thesis so that the masses may have an institutionalized approach to this madness. What do you feel and think about this? I do not see that you should become a sophist, because I detest such "thinkers", but the word and message that you present is both an important and paramount one to those of whom may succeed in the centuries and lifetimes to come. Should you not mark your work with a name to go by? I do not see why not. I would also be willing to edit and critique your finalized essay if it pleases you or if it is something you would consider.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:21 am

Interestingly, I was watching this show Chelsea Lately while writing my response just now. I have seen this show before and find it rather funny.

The host is a white, Western woman. From an "objective" point-of-view, she is extremely racist and sexist with her jokes. BUT, since she is a woman, she is immune from any possible criticism or hypocrisy. She is the archetypical Western Matron Mother. She can say and do whatever she wants without any threat of retaliation, because ... she is a woman. This is where Society is at now. This is where Society is going in the future.

Where are men, except bowing to this Aphrodite?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:51 am

This is the gold mine of all social interactions, purified truth-serum.

LucyJames wrote:
I like this guy, Ryan, that i hang out with, it's not even that i find him hot, it's just something about him that i can't resist, like when he's not in the group i'll wonder where he is and if he asks me to do something i'll do it for him.


The problem is, as a friend i actually really dislike him. He's really rude to the group but everyone makes allowances because "that's just what he's like".
He acts like a spoilt brat and like the whole world should revolve around him without him giving anything back to it and even b*tches about everyone.
But i can't resist him, if he said "go get my coat" a part of me would be saying "go get your own coat you bastard" but then i'll still get it.
Like i REALLY don't want to have a crush on him because i don't think he deserves it!!

Has this ever happened to any of you?
I don't understand how this can be!?!
PLEASE explain to me how i can like him but hate him at the same time!???
Asg wrote:
if you hate how he acts but still like him..

that means you overcome your dislike for his personality with his incredible looks.
Mental-domination in action.

What will people do for sexual attraction?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:31 pm

Happiness Machines


Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
deepthought
Potential Contributor
Potential Contributor
avatar

Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:40 am

Unreasonable wrote:
This is the gold mine of all social interactions, purified truth-serum.

LucyJames wrote:
I like this guy, Ryan, that i hang out with, it's not even that i find him hot, it's just something about him that i can't resist, like when he's not in the group i'll wonder where he is and if he asks me to do something i'll do it for him.


The problem is, as a friend i actually really dislike him. He's really rude to the group but everyone makes allowances because "that's just what he's like".
He acts like a spoilt brat and like the whole world should revolve around him without him giving anything back to it and even b*tches about everyone.
But i can't resist him, if he said "go get my coat" a part of me would be saying "go get your own coat you bastard" but then i'll still get it.
Like i REALLY don't want to have a crush on him because i don't think he deserves it!!

Has this ever happened to any of you?
I don't understand how this can be!?!
PLEASE explain to me how i can like him but hate him at the same time!???
Asg wrote:
if you hate how he acts but still like him..

that means you overcome your dislike for his personality with his incredible looks.
Mental-domination in action.

What will people do for sexual attraction?
The woman is psychologically weak and attracted to a man that will control her and give her life direction.

She hates herself for it but is powerless to change her nature.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:47 am

deepthought wrote:
The woman is psychologically weak and attracted to a man that will control her and give her life direction.

She hates herself for it but is powerless to change her nature.
Does this not apply to men amongst men as well?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Tue Jan 06, 2009 8:18 am

Here's a question for Satyr:

Would feminism ever been able to take root without the hysterias, superstitions, and abstracted guilt of morality?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:58 am

Regarding feminization of man - prefix


Quote :
[quote="Satyr"]
Quote :
So it will be clear that there are men with female dispositions and women with male ones, even though the majority of us will express the characteristics and psychological leanings of our own sex more often than not.

Interesting. Could you expand on this?


Quote :
There would have to be a science focused entirely on me, one on you, and every category and label would be absurd and meaningless.

Genetics? It is now possible to 'map' the genomes of individual organisms. Humans cannot read and understand it all yet but it's coming with the advent of advanced computing. As such a far more useful tool for human engineering than social manipulation. However the two together......more powerful than guns.

Quote :
Yet, general patterns and characteristics are what man uses to construct understanding and the recognition of patterns is a fundamental aspect of consciousness. Through the general assessment of phenomena, and by keeping in mind that they do not fully express the subtle degrees by which each diverges from the general rule and the overtly exceptional circumstances that sometimes lead to a complete non-adherence to a general law, man creates comprehension that benefits him by allowing him to construct abstractions. These abstractions are then symbolized with words and are then used to create strategies.

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, think no evil. Pattern, colour, language, emotion, thought, imagination. I think.

Quote :
Even exceptions to rules follow their own rules of exception and chaos and randomness may only be human prejudices caused by the incomprehensibility or complexity of the rules themselves.
But more than all this, the following critical analysis of man and woman within social contexts are based on my personal observations and deductions and will not be defended using popular beliefs, political-correctness, scientific studies, or any third-party sources, even if this is also is possible.
It is up to the reader to test or dismiss my positions or to challenge them, if he or she wishes to do so.

I believe. Therefore I am. Only humans can do this, humans think. Amazing. Very little can change your belief. Especially if you reject second and third party 'evidence'. When reason is your guide what do you do when you see things that defy reason? Can you see a rainbow? Can you explain it from just looking at it? I'm asking what your methodology is. OK.

Quote :
It is clear that one can find a study defending most perspectives making the studies themselves and the way they are conducted questionable.
How popular opinion is constructed and maintained is an issue that does not fall within the purview of this topic; how science has become dependant on wealth and how censorship is conducted in these modern, more sophisticated times is, also, not within this topic’s focus, even if some aspects may be touched upon as required.

Science and wealth tend to go 'hand in hand' don't they? Great thinkers (of the famous variety obviously) have had time to think, generally speaking. In order to 'buy' time they need to be outside, above (or unnoticed by) the system. I can't think of many great thinkers who haven't had wealth at their disposal even if at some point their wealth has been spent on their obsession. I will think on it.

Quote :
Those minds dependent on the assessment of others, to create personal beliefs, inadvertently expose their weaknesses and limitations, and it also exposes the quality and motives of current educational systems as they are but a part of the entire mechanism that attempts to shape and control human destiny.

Hmm. Washing around in an educational system, no matter how poor the mechanism, might have the unintended outcome of exposing the recipients to cleansing thoughts and well as conditioners. Better not to educate them at all. Reading is certainly a no no. Even the most uneducated human is curious. Have you noticed? But prey also to indoctrination, just as the 'educated' are. How should we overcome this? By trusting ourselves?

Quote :
In areas where direct observation is impossible a reliance on second-hand accounts is understandable.
But in areas where personal experience is possible and sensual awareness is feasible, a personal assessment, is often, more preferable and constructive over a parroted one.

Aaah.... parrot, repeat. Who to trust? Tell me how did this universe begin do you think? Waves, particles, bangs, strings?

Quote :
Philosophy isn’t a mere repetition of past hypothesis or a reassessment of previous theories. It is an exchange of critical thoughts and personal analysis as they have been shaped by experience and affected by environment – including the influences of mentors and authorities. It is normal to be guided and influenced by the work of others but to completely become dependant on them and to mimic or imitate them only reveals our own quality in comparison.

Philosophy is an exchange. Does one need to know what philosophy is in order to participate in philosophising? Does one need to belong to a predetermined group? Does one have to have a particular brain size or capacity?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:59 am

Part 2 - Regarding: feminization of man - prefix

Quote :
[Satyr] What follows is my perspective, based on my personal experiences and observations, using my own senses and mental faculties.
Any similarities with the perspectives of others are coincidental and/or the effect of inspiration, and not of plagiarism.
Any contradiction of popular scientific or other common beliefs is understandable and irrelevant.
Each age has its own ‘unquestionable truths’ and social prejudices, and each mind must struggle to be more than a mere product of its age.

I agree. We must struggle. Hard though, isn't it?

Quote :
You cannot judge the accuracy of an idea by its popularity but by the strength of its argument, the supporting evidence the ordered reasonable manner by which it is presented and by the accuracy of the predictions that can be formulated using it.

I will expect nobody to take my word on anything, nor will I expect the reader to simply agree with me - I actually expect scepticism and personal supporting or contradicting observations to prove or disprove the precision of my own.

I feel a little damned if I do and damned if I don't here. Can you explain why?

Quote :
It is normal that the subject of males/females and of sex in general, is going to raise some controversy given the central role sexuality plays in human existence and given the popular sentiments of our western, ‘modern’ world, but my intent is to insight thought and debate, not anger and shame.
When and if it does result in insecurity, fear, resentment and feelings of inadequacy it is unfortunate but natural when considering the pitiful state of the human condition and our modern world full of delusions and illusions.

If there are illusions and delusions there's only one thing to blame for it. What is that?

Quote :
To dismiss me as being a sexist, a male chauvinist or one suffering from some mental or psychological ailment or sexual dysfunction is to not deal with the subject at hand but to try to redirect the subject using some apparent human imperfections, upon which much speculation can be dedicated.

This is always a risk when you say something 'unpopular'.

Quote :
But I remind you that by using this easy strategy of slander and insult any and every human idea can be dismissed out of hand since all human ideas are the products of imperfect human minds with imperfect psychologies and imperfect senses.

This statement should haunt you. I don't suppose it does. Guilt by association here.

Quote :
The only way to fight an idea is with another idea and before one deals with the human imperfections that lead to a supposed error, the idea itself must first be shown to be wrong.

He he. Indeed. One must be shown the error of one's ways because one cannot always see them personally.

Quote :
One must also keep in mind the constantly changing moral standards and popular beliefs that may make some ideas shocking in one time and within one cultural context, and a matter of common sense in another time and a different cultural context.

Things have a nasty habit of coming in and out of fashion. Ergo they must be true or false. God what a thought!

Quote :
One must also keep in mind that the terms modern or future or popular does not always mean better or superior, and are not by themselves argument supporting the validity of a conclusion.
Every position has been at one time or another, a current and a modern one, and it inevitably becomes an old and primitive one.
The idea that the past is inferior to the present or to the future is one with no real substance and a whole lot of subjective reasoning.

Can the past or the present be inferior or superior? What makes the past better or the present worse? Sounds like moralising about something that has no morality. Does the future ever arrive? Assuming it does; is it ever as it was anticipated? The future is subject to change. Only now is. For better or for worse.

Quote :
Evolution Theory has shown us that genetic alterations often answer to changing environments and make some mutations into advantages. The label of superior or inferior is dictated by the environmental demands of a specific time and place and also based on an ideal.

Evolution Theory = adapt and survive according to the prevailing conditions. Conditions always change. What came before determines what is now. What is now will determine what is to come - subject to changing conditions.

Quote :
It is my hope that my own attempts to uncover myths and ailing ideologies should help in this search for power and purpose in a universe where man has neither.

Are you searching for power and purpose? How are you doing with this; human? What is the meaning of life? I'm only asking.

Quote :
As a pre-emptive response to one of the most common responses to what are deemed sexist remarks I must say that the label of sexist by itself is no response but an attempt to defame the other using current cultural and social standards of agreeable behaviour and thinking.

So you are not a sexist then. Welcome to my world realist.

Quote :
The fact that certain opinions are disruptive, insulting and/or painful to any one individual or a group of people is not a case against their validity but only a case for censoring them with ulterior self-serving motives.
The error of assuming that reality is positively inclined towards humankind or that nature is in any way interested in our personal preferences and feelings is based on a fearful reaction to an indifferent universe. It is an error that eventually goes as far as to imagine omnipotent, omniscient benevolent parents watching over us or that comes to deny the world altogether so as to escape its awareness.

Fire! Fire! Cry wolf! Bleat! What is popular depends on the company you keep and their circumstances. If you have no desire to be popular then you are 'free' from popular opinion. You have only yourself to blame for your unpopularity if indeed you are. If you wish to belong to something you MUST find someone to agree with you. So carry on howling. I bet they are flocking to you aren't they? I wouldn't be surprised.

Quote :
Reality must be faced honestly and completely before any hope of overcoming it can be ascertained with any seriousness. The tactic of escapism, either through invisible, self-contradicting Gods or through extreme ascetic ideals preaching self-denial and the debasement of the human experience, are the usual effective ones.

I agree. If this is your reality then it must be true.

Quote :
Promising relief from the very essence of existence these haters of existence and that which makes them possible mask their death cults behind pretty words with no definitions and practising a form of self-delusion that promotes non-thinking and makes of irrationality a profound virtue.

It is the very desirability of thoughtlessness amongst its members that makes these nihilistic cults into systemic tools, spreading complacency and docility.

Yep. Humans seem to be searching for something. I think it might be meaning. Don't you? Or is it life?

Quote :
The assault upon human sensuality and awareness reaches as far as to discredit the very senses and interpretations that have enabled man to survive in a turbulent and unknown universe.
In an effort to eradicate all remnants of human nature and sense of identity the human is trained to believe that his senses trick him or that his perceptions are superficial and extraneous when they represent the very center of his existential position.

I bet you don't wear perfume.

Quote :
That appearances are ‘skin deep’ or the mythology concerning a deeper, unchanging, unaffected inner core are cultural methods of levelling man into a uniform paste that can then be remoulded into any shape.
Appearance is the very essence of what we are, since the word phenomenon (φαινομενον) is that which is apparent. In it no notion of a thing is present - alluding to an absolute - but only the notion of activity and of movement is inferred.

We appear to be human. Is there something else that you can see? Can you see to the very core of human? You might be surprised if you really could. Mind over matter or matter over mind? Or neither? Those are MY questions.

Quote :
That we exist is evidently a process culminating in our appearance which is continuously changing and flowing.
Each man and woman, each phenomenon, is the sum of its entire becoming as it has been affected by the forces it has interacted with and has affected in turn.

The female form, the feminine biological type, is not accidental nor is it superficial. It is a product of a historical process motivated by need and determined by every environmental condition that each and every of a woman’s ancestors has faced.
The same holds true for a male and for any other type, be it a species or plant.
Each individual carries with him/her his/her entire heritage in his presence.

I MUST repeat this and mangle slightly.
Quote :
Each individual carries within it its entire heritage.
What makes you believe this? And what would 'prove' it to you? Senses?
In order to find 'fitness' should one mix or should one match?

Quote :
If this were not so then the entire evolutionary premise is debunked with a simple denial and the very category of species is made into a human blunder.

Whoops. 'Species' is an innaccurate and clumsily human form of categorisation especially when there are 'overlaps'. I suggest we keep certain groups of the same 'species' apart for a goodly long time leave them to the elements. Then, bring them together again and see what happens. What do you think would happen if we did that? I'll make some suggestions if you will.

Quote :
Returning to the topic at hand let me first admit that gender roles only make sense within a social context.
But is not man a social animal and are not social unties continuations of natural processes?

Do other 'social' animals that you have observed have gender based roles? Can you illustrate these to me so that I might agree with you?

Quote :
The position that man invented gender, and their subsequent roles, is one attempting to exterminate yet another source of human identity and to deny an entire past.
Gender roles and their accompanying cultural limitations, symbolisms and positions of status, are the extension of natural processes and biological roles, as they have shaped our species.

I don't see gender as an 'invention'exactly. I see gender as a human misinterpretation of something. I must find a way of explaining what I mean!! Before 'feminism', before industrialisation were there individuals who did not conform to 'traditional' or 'biological' roles? What happened to such people, I wonder?

Quote :
That these roles are currently under attack and being reinvented, for multiple social and cultural reasons, is having many psychological and social consequences which man will be forced to deal with, as he does whenever he dares to intervene in nature’s ways.

Can wheels be reinvented? Can what by your assertion in not an invention; be reinvented? If humans attempt to intervene in nature's ways does nature have ways of 'overcoming' such interventions?

Quote :
The reasons for this will be explored in the following thesis.

Good. I look forward to reading it. I will respond if I can.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 8:23 am

[quote="maryshelley"]Regarding feminization of man - prefix


Quote :


Interesting. Could you expand on this?
I believe I have in my thesis.
Simply put, the feminine/masculine are not monopolized by either sex but coexist within each individual as drives, as they are part of the same species and the same human condition.

That one sex is prone to one disposition more than to another is owed to the fact that its sexual identity is necessary for it to carry out its biological function.

The male has a predisposition to masculine traits because these facilitate carrying out its sexual role ...the very reason it is male at all.
That some males may exhibit mutations that do not aid in this function is part of natural selection and the evolutionary process.

Quote :
I believe. Therefore I am. Only humans can do this, humans think. Amazing. Very little can change your belief.
Of course your belief can change, sweetums.

I believe that if I jump off my roof and flap my arms I can levitate...i try it....I fail and hurt myself or i kill myself.
My belief is thwarted.

Reality does;'t care about what you believe...you care about reality and try to adjust your beliefs to best reflect it...because this determines your success within it.
Only within human environments are false beliefs sheltered agaisnt this ultimate cost...pampering...feminization, dear.

Quote :
Especially if you reject second and third party 'evidence'. When reason is your guide what do you do when you see things that defy reason? Can you see a rainbow? Can you explain it from just looking at it? I'm asking what your methodology is. OK.
trial and error...analysis of explanations and then testing their validity, a constantly skeptical mind, debate so as to eradicate any emotinoal and self-serving influences, repetitive predictability and consistency.

Quote :
Hmm. Washing around in an educational system, no matter how poor the mechanism, might have the unintended outcome of exposing the recipients to cleansing thoughts and well as conditioners. Better not to educate them at all. Reading is certainly a no no. Even the most uneducated human is curious. Have you noticed? But prey also to indoctrination, just as the 'educated' are. How should we overcome this? By trusting ourselves?
By placing our judgments above all others and then accepting the responsibility for whatever ensues.

Quote :
Aaah.... parrot, repeat. Who to trust? Tell me how did this universe begin do you think? Waves, particles, bangs, strings?
What a naive human conception...begins?
Do you perceive any beginning or ends anywhere? I don't. I perceive flow, one form changing into another, being absorbed, fragmenting and then uniting and then repeating....
If you cannot perceive a beginning nor point to a single one, then why do you assume that one is necessary?
Fear? The desire for a certain absolute?

The universe did not spring out of nothing because there is no such thing as a no-thing.
The Big Bang is not a start...it is an event horizon of a near absolute than never completes itself. It is the nexus where human perception becomes aware of the flow towards and away from the absent.


Quote :
Philosophy is an exchange. Does one need to know what philosophy is in order to participate in philosophising? Does one need to belong to a predetermined group? Does one have to have a particular brain size or capacity?
One needs to only be able to engage reality directly and then formulate models and share them with others...this presupposes a brain size.

Philosophical reading should be used as guidance, inspiration and as a way of referencing other mind's and their perspectives on a common world.
If it stays there, then it is sophistry...the endless chatter about what others have thought and the engagement of reality through a proxy...a position of insecurity and weakness seeking empowerment behind and with anther.

How many use Nietzsche as a proxy and find power in thinking themselves his ally? How many contradict the very message of Nietzsche by replacing one idol with another and trying to find self-esteem and power by turning themselves into his shadow?

The religiuos drive turned away from a god that is dead, away from mankind, that is to be overcome, and towards an ideal individual, to replace the lack of individuality in themselves.
A surrogate.

He too must be killed, as a son only becomes a man when he overcomes his father and a student becomes a free-thinker when he overcomes his mentor.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:40 am

Quote :
[Satyr]
I believe I have in my thesis.
Simply put, the feminine/masculine are not monopolized by either sex but coexist within each individual as drives, as they are part of the same species and the same human condition.

I don't believe I've read it. So you are saying there are male and female 'drives' within every human.


Quote :
The male has a predisposition to masculine traits because these facilitate carrying out its sexual role ...the very reason it is male at all.
That some males may exhibit mutations that do not aid in this function is part of natural selection and the evolutionary process.

Can the same be said of mutated female 'drives' 'traits', then? Exhibited mutations that do not aid in this function.... are part of natural selection and the evolutionary process. An interesting thought.

Quote :
I believe. Therefore I am. Only humans can do this, humans think. Amazing. Very little can change your belief.

Quote :
Of course your belief can change, sweetums.

I believe that if I jump off my roof and flap my arms I can levitate...i try it....I fail and hurt myself or i kill myself.
My belief is thwarted.

Reality does;'t care about what you believe...you care about reality and try to adjust your beliefs to best reflect it...because this determines your success within it.
Only within human environments are false beliefs sheltered agaisnt this ultimate cost...pampering...feminization, dear.

Only humans 'believe'. Other animals 'know'. Isn't that strange? A bird will 'jump' off a building knowing it can fly. Only a human would jump off a building 'believing' it could fly. So much for belief false or otherwise. However somebody somewhere believed that humans could fly. Not by jumping off a building though, eh?

I've never thought I could fly by jumping off a building. I've only imagined how fantastic it would be if I could. I'm trying to grow wings. I don't believe I'll succeed.



Quote :
trial and error...analysis of explanations and then testing their validity, a constantly skeptical mind, debate so as to eradicate any emotinoal and self-serving influences, repetitive predictability and consistency.


By placing our judgments above all others and then accepting the responsibility for whatever ensues.

What if you have been made to believe your judgements are faulty? You know through some manner of indoctrination. Or a good and consistent beating just for being what you are. It might take a mind a while to overcome that. Or even realise.



Quote :
What a naive human conception...begins?
Do you perceive any beginning or ends anywhere? I don't. I perceive flow, one form changing into another, being absorbed, fragmenting and then uniting and then repeating....
If you cannot perceive a beginning nor point to a single one, then why do you assume that one is necessary?
Fear? The desire for a certain absolute?

Do animals other than humans percieve a universe? Flow impies direction. Do you perceive a direction?

Quote :
The universe did not spring out of nothing because there is no such thing as a no-thing.
The Big Bang is not a start...it is an event horizon of a near absolute than never completes itself. It is the nexus where human perception becomes aware of the flow towards and away from the absent.

How small is the smallest particle?


Quote :
One needs to only be able to engage reality directly and then formulate models and share them with others...this presupposes a brain size.

OK. What does a brain need in order to be able to do this?

Quote :
Philosophical reading should be used as guidance, inspiration and as a way of referencing other mind's and their perspectives on a common world.
If it stays there, then it is sophistry...the endless chatter about what others have thought and the engagement of reality through a proxy...a position of insecurity and weakness seeking empowerment behind and with anther.

Philosophical reading is reading philosophy books. Reading allows us to engage with all kinds of books and other written things. Speaking, listening and writing allows us to engage with others directly, where such is possible. Just think about anything philosophically is the key. Keys open locks.

Quote :
How many use Nietzsche as a proxy and find power in thinking themselves his ally? How many contradict the very message of Nietzsche by replacing one idol with another and trying to find self-esteem and power by turning themselves into his shadow?

I don't know how many do? I wonder sometimes if I should read Nietzche. I suspect it's a bandwagon to be jumped upon. An idea to be grasped. I mean is one taken seriously if one hasn't read Nietzche? And then I think for myself. I should read Nietzche just for the sake of it.

Quote :
The religiuos drive turned away from a god that is dead, away from mankind, that is to be overcome, and towards an ideal individual, to replace the lack of individuality in themselves.
A surrogate.

He too must be killed, as a son only becomes a man when he overcomes his father and a student becomes a free-thinker when he overcomes his mentor.


Is that Nietzche or is that you?
After birth death becomes us. Eventually. It's what happens inbetween that really matters. It's central to each of us alone and peripheral to others. Ripples on a pond after a stone has been thrown.
Reflect on it why don't you?
And then accuse me of being a buddhist; or something.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:15 am

maryshelley wrote:


I don't believe I've read it. So you are saying there are male and female 'drives' within every human.
No, I am saying there are organic drivers, if you want to use that metaphor, which are selected as part of the psychological makeup of a sexual type, because they facilitate the function of the sexual type.

These, then, become associated with that sexual type and can be called masculine or feminine traits.

Similarly a species nurtures certain dispositions, finding a niche or a strategy that takes advantage of a dominant disposition that offers it an advantage, and so that trait becomes part of that species's makeup.

Quote :
Can the same be said of mutated female 'drives' 'traits', then? Exhibited mutations that do not aid in this function.... are part of natural selection and the evolutionary process. An interesting thought.
The unfit, from a procreative standpoint, traits then find secondary roles or face the fate of all mutations that fail to offer an advantage...they are culled out of a herd.

That homosexual traits persists means that this mutation found a secondary function, as an aid to heterosexual coupling and so the group sheltered it from elimination.
Furthermore group dynamics forced males to either submit, and be emasculated, or leave the group, as inferior males.
In females the sexual act, as in homosexual males, took on a social role of bonding and of displays of dominance and submission.

That today homosexuality is flourishing is due to the sheltering effects of the group, in this case the system, that benefits from feminine traits and so ensures their continuance and their safety.

The male, in his quest to gain dominance and then retain it, has seeded the causes of his own obsolescence. This in conjunction with environmental conditions...such as population growth and diminishing resources and spaces.

Quote :
Only humans 'believe'. Other animals 'know'. Isn't that strange?
No it is not.

If you understand what intelligence and consciousness are, and why they evolve, then you understand the modification of awareness that differentiates man from animal.
A modification, just as in the case of female/male, of degree.

Intelligence is an evolutionary tool that takes the mental models consciuosness produces using the senses and estalbished methods of interpretation, and projects them into the future.

The difference of intelligence, between man and animal or man from man, is in the breadth and accuracy of these projections.

Quote :
A bird will 'jump' off a building knowing it can fly. Only a human would jump off a building 'believing' it could fly.
The bird does not project beyond the limits of its perceptions and so followed the estalbished, insitnctual traits of its nature.

A man, using the imagination, can project beyond the limits of a bird's understanding.

The broader you project the more riskier the projection.

Quote :
So much for belief false or otherwise. However somebody somewhere believed that humans could fly. Not by jumping off a building though, eh?
Then flight became possible by understanding natural laws and finding patterns to use in achieving this goal.
Belief and hope was not enough. a perspective is an interpretation of reality that may or may not be accurate.
The practical application of this perspective is what makes it more or less valid.

Quote :
What if you have been made to believe your judgements are faulty? You know through some manner of indoctrination. Or a good and consistent beating just for being what you are. It might take a mind a while to overcome that. Or even realise.
Then your will has been stunted and your mind has been retarded.

Do you think I use the insult "retard" accidentally?
Retardation is what social sheltering produces out of necessity.

Quote :
Do animals other than humans percieve a universe? Flow impies direction. Do you perceive a direction?
a direction requires a will to focus the mind.
Because no absolute exists, no point, no final destination, the mind constructs it as a way of orienting itself and then directing its energies. This focus is called, by me, desire.
The will is the movement towards it.

An ideal is also a towards, a non-existent destination.
the best way to control and direct mnids is to offer them a common ideal. Then, in unison, they will move towards it - the common will.

Quote :
How small is the smallest particle?
There is no particle.

A point is the mind's abstraction, through generalization/simplification, of the flow into an ambiguous, non-existent, goal or ideal or idea.
The point, as the #1, only exists as a human metaphor which freezes the flow so as to make it comprehensible, testable and useful.

Quote :
OK. What does a brain need in order to be able to do this?
Consciousness, self-consciuosness, intelligence, imagination.
The abstraction potential of the mind, that is its ability to percive and incorporate as many details as it can from the sensual stimulations it constantly receives, is inherited. how much of this potential is nurtured is determined by the particular environmental conditions the mind finds itself in.
A sheltered existence will stunt this potential whereas a more challenging one will cultivate it.

How accurately these models are projected, using the imagination, determines the mind's intelligence.
Eliminating self-serving emotional influences affects their accuracy, because the world, once again, does not care about our emotinoal responses or our wishes or our hopes.

Quote :
Philosophical reading is reading philosophy books. Reading allows us to engage with all kinds of books and other written things. Speaking, listening and writing allows us to engage with others directly, where such is possible. Just think about anything philosophically is the key. Keys open locks.
So, it facilitates communication and it stimulates thinking.
If, then, this mind remains stuck in that cosntant reading and sharing what is read, how does it experience its own reality directly?

Quote :
I don't know how many do? I wonder sometimes if I should read Nietzche. I suspect it's a bandwagon to be jumped upon. An idea to be grasped. I mean is one taken seriously if one hasn't read Nietzche? And then I think for myself. I should read Nietzche just for the sake of it.
You should, as you should read everything.

But if you misunderstand or become seduced by his messages then you will wind up just another follower and so a contradiction to the message itself.
Quote :

Is that Nietzche or is that you?
This is me, but like with everyone, I am influenced and guided by everything I've ever read or experienced.

Quote :
After birth death becomes us. Eventually. It's what happens inbetween that really matters. It's central to each of us alone and peripheral to others. Ripples on a pond after a stone has been thrown.
Reflect on it why don't you?
And then accuse me of being a buddhist; or something.
And what, the hell, do you think I've been saying for all this time?
scratch
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:53 am

Satyr wrote:


Quote :
After birth death becomes us. Eventually. It's what happens inbetween that really matters. It's central to each of us alone and peripheral to others. Ripples on a pond after a stone has been thrown.
Reflect on it why don't you?
And then accuse me of being a buddhist; or something.

And what, the hell, do you think I've been saying for all this time?
scratch

What, the hell, do you think I've been asking all this time? Tell me what's my need, oh needless one?

Now don't get me wrong but you do seem to enjoy the company of sheep in wolves' clothing.

Don't you find that the behaviour of wolves becomes almost as predictable as that of sheep if you observe them for long enough? Even though admittedly the wild ones are far more exciting. For a while.

Small mammals are often overlooked but they do fit into places where wolves and sheep just can't or won't go. Darwin didn't understimate the significance of them. He also appreciated finches. Small brains, relatively speaking. But without them where would we be? Asexual for sure.

Anyway thanks for calling me an idiot. It did me good. It reminded me of something. rendeer
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:16 pm

maryshelley wrote:
Satyr wrote:


Quote :
After birth death becomes us. Eventually. It's what happens inbetween that really matters. It's central to each of us alone and peripheral to others. Ripples on a pond after a stone has been thrown.
Reflect on it why don't you?
And then accuse me of being a buddhist; or something.

And what, the hell, do you think I've been saying for all this time?
scratch

What, the hell, do you think I've been asking all this time? Tell me what's my need, oh needless one?

Now don't get me wrong but you do seem to enjoy the company of sheep in wolves' clothing.
Like you?

Quote :
Don't you find that the behaviour of wolves becomes almost as predictable as that of sheep if you observe them for long enough? Even though admittedly the wild ones are far more exciting. For a while.
When you understand something it always becoems predictable.

Quote :
Small mammals are often overlooked but they do fit into places where wolves and sheep just can't or won't go. Darwin didn't understimate the significance of them. He also appreciated finches. Small brains, relatively speaking. But without them where would we be? Asexual for sure.
And worms and bugs too. Snakes, no less, are important to the ecosystem.

Quote :
Anyway thanks for calling me an idiot. It did me good. It reminded me of something. rendeer
Your dad?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:01 pm

I was watching a news broadcast on my local television channels within the past two weeks...

There I saw it: The Feminization of Man. Us Amerikans have already stole your thesis Satyr. Hopefully somebody will remember where it came from beside me, as if that really matters. Anyway, the news anchors, a girl and this guy were stating that "there may be hormones in the environment that leads to the feminizing of male-species". I was staring at my television set shock-eyed and in horror. It was a little disconcerting to me that you are indeed correct about your hypotheses. Regardless, these two idiots on the television, along with wherever they got their information were completely wrong in their reasoning.

There is not "hormones in the water, food, and air". This is a horrible misconception. The Feminization of Man is predominantly passed-on memetically, not physically in the sense that people are really aware of anything right now. It is the ideas & ideals that are contaminating everything, not really the "hormones". These news people were confusing the source of the cause, because they were just a couple of Echoers, regurgitating crap they really don't know anything about. Wherever they got their information was also wrong. The Feminization of Man is not predominantly 'physical' if it is a strictly memetic and ideological phenomenon, which it is. The causes are ideological.

And they are fairly simple:

1) Mankind can no longer wage conventional war with each other due to Amerikan Globalization.

2) Without war and violent competition, at the cost of death-for-failure, the male animal becomes emasculated over time due to pressure.

3) There is no escape from this without "new frontiers", which subsequently allow for violent world war again, as you have stated.


This evolutionary force to emasculate all males into females is occurring exponentially, and soon, within the next century, I predict that there will be only a handful of "men" left. The genetically-male phenotype will be nearly gone except in a few dominating areas of society where competition is still requires: business (although this will recede), sports, the arts, and military/technological innovation. There may be more that I am missing. Simply to be male will be one of the most grandiose status-claims of the centuries to come. It would be like owning a rare fish in a fish tank, a collector's item. You may also observe this phenomenon in how women almost-everywhere are claiming "Where are the real men at!?" I see this statement all the time.

The Spirit of Man will eventually come to a close as evolution takes its next steps and the human species fragments, breaks off into a series of sub-species (with numerous 'genders'), and the Man and Woman that brought civilization to its domination of the entire planet fade away into mere relics of the past, a history of the world that is passed on through genetic & memetic memory, saved for a few. And, the populace will not know nor observe this shift. It will be a forgone conclusion as the ants toil away and progress towards a Utopian force that is innate within them.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:46 am

Now don't get me wrong but you do seem to enjoy the company of sheep in wolves' clothing.

Satyr wrote:
Like you?

I wear a woolly jumper with a picture of a wolf on it. It makes me howl.


Quote :
When you understand something it always becoems predictable.

Which is useful to know when one is wandering alone in the wilderness.

Quote :
And worms and bugs too. Snakes, no less, are important to the ecosystem.

I know. But, then, I'm only human. I can only pretend to be something else. Or empathise.

Anyway thanks for calling me an idiot. It did me good. It reminded me of something. rendeer


Quote :
Your dad?

No, not that poor emasculated male.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:59 am

Quote :
[quote="Satyr"]The levelling of mankind continues.

Centuries of social engineering and civilization have resulted in a type of human being unlike our ancestors and, still to this day, socialization persists to filter out all the culturally and socially “unwanted” human characteristics, altering, in this way, human nature and degenerating, in my opinion, the human spirit into indistinct oblivion.
The result has been a growing uniformity, producing a desirable, to the system, conformity which is then marketed as a virtue.

What happens here if I replace the words 'social engineering' and 'civilisation' with evolution? Are not the former the products of the latter? If they are not then how has man managed to 'over-ride' evolution? Which ancestors are we not like? All or some?

Quote :
There is no conspiracy here, no invisible entity or secret group directing things from the shadows. We might even say that the process is natural, given the circumstances, and the consequence of a normal social progression which started in the tribal unit and has resulted in the emergence of a huge socioeconomic machine, with its own logic and interest, assimilating, conforming, levelling and eradicating everything in its path.

Are you talking about capitalist democracy here and its modern bedfellow globalisation? The system has certainly made slaves out of many and is continuing to do so. Communism the same. We are all in danger of becoming slaves to a mechanism.

Quote :
We might also say that this ‘natural’ process has its roots in human physical disadvantage as it confronts reality, causing psychological insecurities which make the cooperation of individual beings a forced necessity.

I'll give you some of this if you'll give me some of that and maybe we'll both survive the winter?

Quote :
But this degradation of man, besides being a typical consequence of interdependence and socialization, demanding a certain sacrifice of individuality for the sake of survival, has been exacerbated by the infiltration of slavish moral systems into a human psyche that has already been demoralized and undermined by extreme scepticism and mental fatigue – particularly amongst the intellectual elites - and by interbreeding between a growing intellectual subclass and a continuously diluted intellectual upper-class that finds itself incapable to resist social and religious pressures and socioeconomic prerequisites.

Demoralised by nature; remoralised by god? Or the other way around. Or both? I prefer to see it as akin to a divorce. We have perhaps in our inimitable way sought to conquer nature by divorcing ourselves from it? We have held ourselves above nature because we're clever that way? But without nature there is no 'meaning'; no 'purpose'?

Dilution is a chemical term. Can humans really be diluted or diversified? Dumbed down - yes but it isn't the same thing as dilution.

I will have to come back to interbreeding. That is a huge subject all in itself. We should refer to mules. Not to humans. Humans don't interbreed they only mate with humans.

Quote :
The growing need for resources, requiring hands to forage, cultivate and maintain the infrastructures man has become reliant upon, makes it inevitable that more and more mediocrity will be produced and then flattered by making it into a virtue.
These growing populations, in turn, require organizing and to be made malleable and disciplined.

Oh yes many hands make light work. You don't need a huge cerebral cortex to grow and distribute wheat though. Even less to press buttons in a factory. Best not to think in such a situation. Consumption requires production and distribution. If a body consumes more than it needs or can produce it will end in trouble.


Quote :
No surprise then that moral systems and religious dogmas, which accomplish and promote just that, suddenly appear, as if by chance, and then spread amongst the masses like wildfire.
That they then find ready fuel, for their fire, amongst the meek that “shall inherit the Earth” and are then quickly taught as an “enlightened” state, is also quite understandable.

Do such systems suddenly appear? Was there no religion before monotheisms. Were there no systems before capitalism? Some do I suppose but something has come before. The Romans had gods. The Greeks? The Incas. The Mayans. The Pagans. Worship the sun; worship nature then substitute god/s.

Quote :
Natural selection implies the elimination of any substandard organisms so that a few can then pass on their more fit traits.
Once the process of evolution is diverted or when nature is “corrected” by human ingenuity, guided by some idealistic principle or other, and when man intervenes, producing many more unforeseen, side-effects, then the very weakness that was eliminated is made to flourish and then to dominate, out of sheer numbers.
The consequence of this intervention, as it is motivated by a specific ideal and a specific mindset, shaped by particular environmental conditions, and then promoted by particular mythologies, moralities, and cultural manipulations, is what this thesis is all about.

Evolution happens. Interfere all you will. Is a motor car from 2009 the same as one from 1920? Is a motor car the same as a cart? They will all point in the right direction and get you somewhere. Circumstances are almost always unforseen and unpredictable. Different to our intentions!

Quote :
A fundamental characteristic of weakness, as a concept, is its willingness to sacrifice a part of itself to save its entirety. Weakness is furthermore characterized by its inconspicuousness, its ability to blend and vanish into the multitude, its non-confrontational incorporation within more powerful entities, its expendability, its commonness, its malleability, its reliability and willingness [when conscious] to conform and, so, adapt.

Weakness is not strength. You don't need hammers to kill flys.

Quote :
The ‘If you can’t beat them join them’ strategy is one most often practiced in nature and in our universe. What cannot survive on its own inevitably either perishes or winds-up as a part of something bigger and stronger, by means of consumption, via having its parts absorbed, or assimilation.
It is this fundamental principle that is primarily responsible for the constant state of flux and fluidity, we experience as change and time, and which characterizes our state of being and our perspective of reality.

What cannot survive on its own perishes. If an organism has not reproduced in some way some of its genes die with it. Hopefully it has siblings. If you cannot protect yourself; then protect your family; if you cannot protect your family invest in a group.

Quote :
Man, as an isolated individual being outside any group, is certainly a weak creature when compared with other beasts, making his cooperation with others, of his own kind, a requirement and his participation within unions of need, a matter of survival. But despite mans physical weaknesses he possesses the gift of intelligence, self-awareness and abstract thought that can lead to an alteration of environmental conditions and the revolutionary redefinition of what is weak and what is strong within them.

A human is a weak creature compared with some other beasts - not all! Strength and success increasingly lay in the ability to perceive and understand. Others and self.

Quote :
This human ‘gift’, which can take advantage of external resources through the application of the imagination and the utilization of man’s providential opposing thumbs, has produced the need for social units of vast scale and intricacy and has resulted in the added need for an adaptation to human environments that have replaced or surpassed the importance of natural ones. In addition to this, human psychological insecurity and physical frailty has imposed the need to armour mans feebleness with technological artifices that place a wall between man and his true spirit and distances man from himself and from nature entirely, by means of self-contained artificial systems.
{The concepts of artificial and natural are used, in this thesis, as a designation between environments that pre-existed humanity or that are independent from humanity, and those that are a direct result of humanity}

Eyes that perceive colour, language, articulation of limb - useful survival tools. Understanding can lead to manipulation. Imagination to artifice. Such are the joys and dangers of thought.

Quote :
This artificial ‘wall’ is the source of man’s current sense of separation and feeling of uneasiness that is expressed through the arts and through politics as the demonization of technology and the machines we’ve created but that now we’ve come to serve.

Physiological and psychological unease.....Irrational fears....sleeplessness...... So divorced from 'nature'....

Quote :
Machines and the machinery of modern social existence, in fact, function as our surrogate targets of hate, anxiety and fear in place of the real culprit of human enslavement: modern society, religion and culture, that engulf us in this unconscious, invisible matrix of artificiality and superficiality in order that we may serve its requirements by undermining our individuality, our essence and our uniqueness - all the while, in true Orwellian newspeak, they claim to do the exact opposite. As this engine of civilization grows its parts lose value by becoming expendable and disposable (uniform) and man becomes an insignificant wheel in a huge engine (alienation).

Hate the shackels and hate the oppressors. The shackels are representative aren't they? I certainly hate the TV. Still undecided on the computer. Love thyself and love nature and all that entails. Use the tools of the oppressors to thine own ends!!


Last edited by maryshelley on Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:25 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
maryshelley
Animated Voice
Animated Voice


Number of posts : 242
Registration date : 2008-12-16

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:24 am

Satyr wrote:
The levelling of mankind continues.
Like with all closed systems, a social system has its own methods and mechanisms by which it meets its needs and creates environments and participants which ensure its continuance and its health. In doing so each system replaces or mutates past systems and refocuses and redefines their premises.
This, too, mirrors the natural process of consumption and assimilation; of creation/destruction.

Closed system? Isn't that like a perpetual motion machine? A figment of imaginations. If there are moving parts there must be fuel to provide energy. Put a bug in a sealed jar - even better put several in. See what happens. Pave the world with concrete why don't you? See what happens. Keep consuming, keep sucking up without replenishing and you will run out of stuff. Alarms! System collapse! System collapse!

Quote :
In human cultures and civilizations the struggle between the present and the past environmental demands, upon the individual, manifests itself in great psychological strain and in sometimes contradictory behaviours. These behaviours are trained into the human animal and are reinforced by using intimidation tactics, such as religious dogma and the rule of law. When these behaviours are detrimental to the harmony of the group they are diverted and defused through the entertainment industry, sports and political ideologies.

Keep them busy then distract! Do this do that but whatever you do; don't!!

Quote :
By trying to replace or restrict the influence of past natural environmental affects upon man, by promoting human characteristics that are desirable and restricting those that are detrimental to the social or cultural group’s premises, each system reshapes its parts into particular types, ideal for the given group’s fitness.
This is what I call specialization and it is the result of indoctrination, mind control and compartmentalization.

We learn not to rely on ourselves but on 'them' for everything. Nor do we trust ourselves or others. Frightened and frightening we become. As opposed to aware and fearful.

Quote :
By controlling resources the system makes of itself a monopoly the individual must bow down to before it can be rewarded for his/her loyalty and surrender.
The innate desire to survive makes every mind easily swayed by anything that promises its own continuance, either in the short term or, as in religious promises for eternal life, in the long term.
Thusly, the training of the mind, which is already of a questionable stock as we’ve mentioned earlier, to use different standards and different reasoning so as to maintain its focus on its own well-being, becomes an easy affair.

God is dead so we need money to worship.

Quote :
We can witness this affect on human behaviour by studying the specific systemic types created by different cultures throughout history and in how each utilizes, or utilized, sexuality, human nature and psychology through institutions and moral codes in similar manners but with distinctly different orientations and dissimilar results.

The usage of direct threats and force has given way to more subtle methods of a constant state of anxiety and the method of training the mind, from an early age, as to what to think, rather than how to think.
Making the slave believe he is the master or that he can be the master, is just the modern way authority imposes itself on the weak, during these, modern times.

A good beating will still suffice. But that leads to discontented slaves. Who rise up and supplant the master.

Who are the slaves and who are the masters in nature? Parasites; yes but kill the host and there goes the meal ticket. Keep the host alive and you are on the gravy train. But there are other ways; symbiosis and co-operation have mutual benefits for all concerned parties. Best to keep your eyes open for exploitation though. Man is susceptible to that.

Quote :
All human cultures may use familiar methods for parallel reasons but each has a noticeably different motivation leading to diverging human ideals, guided by each cultures ethical standards and value systems as they are inherited, through time, from ancestral backgrounds, historical experiences and philosophical/ideological pasts.

Forgive them for they are only human. Haven't had that much time evolving in the general scheme of things.

Quote :
This is what I refer to as essence.
The essence of each man, for example, is the sum of each and every environmental effect and of how his accentors reacted to them, culminating in his presence.
Each organism represents this culmination of effects. Its biology, behaviour, needs, traits, appearance is this end result.

Someone else might label this genetic inheritance. Or categorise as Linnaeus did. Humans - homo sapiens sapiens. That's us on our journey through history!

Quote :
In cultures where paternalistic dominance is still prevalent, such as in the Middle-East and India [And only until recently in the west], social engineering is still controlled by males that are governed by their particular cultural perspectives and it is facilitated by the supremacy of religious dogma, by existing totalitarian political systems and by the subjugation of females to the culture’s demands.

Social engineering again. Has much thought gone into it do you think? Or are they just following religious dogma until somebody thinks about it. And acts. It's all too familiar isn't it. Prophet, ideology, followers, priests, religious education, learning by rote, rules to follow, enforcement of rules, ruthlessly curb dissent by manipiulation or force.

Patterns! Think!

Now liberally apply to wound humans.


Quote :
In the west, where centuries of world domination and due to its contamination by Judeo-Christian ethical systems and altruistic ideologies, the paternalistic system has eroded enough to make equalitarian impoverishment and spiritual degradation possible.

A cash cow the west is. Cash releases certain pressures. In certain communities cows are everything if you can get you hands on them.

Quote :
Democracy is the result of weariness, caused by the constant conflict and uncertainty of previous political systems, and the natural consequence of population explosions that enabled individuals, of questionable quality, to unite and achieve political relevance through the strength of numbers.

Questionable quality? The ability to see the power of like-minded groups? Stand United. Fall alone? Adapt and survive.

Quote :
It is also the expected result of increasing demands for resources, caused by a prospering civilization, shrinking spaces and a human psychological predisposition for peace and stability.

A comfort zone? Peace and prosperity are seductive. Preferable to war weariness?

Quote :
This social circumstance, caused paradoxically by the very natural tendencies that eventually become dangerous and unwanted {survival, dominance, control, violence, selfishness, arrogance, procreation, power; all sexual male drives} unleashed upon the world by the unburdening of the human mind from matters of immediate survival, through prosperity, and from primitive religious myths and superstitions through intellectual enlightenment, lead to a western world dominion that exponentially increased populations and the accompanying need for resources and made it necessary to then suppress these very same instinctive drives in order to maintain stability and social harmony.

Do you currently see selfishness falling or rising? Greed, arrogance, control freakery diminishing? Are you wearing rose tinted spectacles? Or seeing clearly? We are still in thrall to something. Not god; money! What will we replace money with?
And if you equate all these traits with masculinity rather than humanity well then......? Let's blame somebody. Us?

Quote :
This trend towards larger and more malleable populations, existing within smaller spaces and dwindling resources, has made equalitarian, servile moralities essential and vital.

And is it working? Or only where the resources are currently abundant? Been to a city recently? Been to the countryside where folks like to 'keep things' in the family?

Some have too much and others have not enough. We can understand how and why things get out of hand when there is no balance.


Quote :
The more complacent, unaware and gullible a population is the more governable and controllable it becomes. It is therefore understandable why unsettling ideas must be quarantined and eradicated, why free thought must be restricted and why defiance and uniqueness must be controlled and punished as an example to be avoided before it becomes one to be emulated.

Comfort is infectious.

Quote :
In our modern western world this dummying-down of the masses has resulted in populations that, despite their relative affluence, information access and general prosperity, display the apathy, ignorance and naïveté of the less fortunate in third-world countries.

You think the 'less fortunate' are naive and apathetic? Or tired, hungry and uneducated? Come on now. Aren't they the realists of the world? They may lack many things but awareness of life is not one of them. Lazy thinking.

Quote :
The complete indoctrination of man into artificial [manmade] environments, sometimes demanding behaviours contrary to more primitive natural ones, has moreover been facilitated by the gradual diminution of man through unnatural sexual selection, re-education and the slow eradication of the, before mentioned, human characteristics that made man a natural dominator and a survivor in a threatening universe.

If there is peace what need is there for aggression? Such drives manifest in 'extreme' sports, corporate competition, etc, etc. What we are will out.

Quote :
It is derisive that the very intellectual superiority that resulted in human dominion is also contemporary society’s greatest foe, that must be controlled and even narrowed, and the very male spiritual attitude that knelt to no natural demand and accepted no holy authority is now to be atrophied and warped.

In the west socialization/institutionalization/domestication, population control and mind manipulation has taken a distinguishing subtle, subliminal and indirect approach, to maintain the illusion of free-will and individuality, upon which all of western culture is based.

If there is no such thing as individuality; individuals have no need for independent thought, then?

'There is no such thing as society' to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher; a greatest believer in capitalist individuality; after Ronald Reagan. Why not buy for yourself that which you don't need or once shared communally. Brilliant marketing Margaret! An endless supply of individual consumers guaranteed.


Unlike the more direct and obvious controlling practices in other cultures, it is more difficult to always perceive where and how we have been manipulated into thinking and behaving in certain ways. For many the current state of affairs, in the western world, is taken to be the epitome of human achievement, the height of human development and the worthy successor of a cultural revolution that began on the rocky Aegean shores of ancient Greece and has reached for the distant Martian plateaus in our time, but they neglect to consider the true spirit of this ancient stance towards life and only judge it from its superficial constructs and external facades.

We need only to think critically, don't we? Is that the rub?
What kind of brain would an organism require to think, critically?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:59 am

maryshelley wrote:


What happens here if I replace the words 'social engineering' and 'civilisation' with evolution? Are not the former the products of the latter? If they are not then how has man managed to 'over-ride' evolution?
Force of will...masculine resistance.

Quote :
Which ancestors are we not like? All or some?
All. Each representing a stage in a process.

Quote :
I will have to come back to interbreeding. That is a huge subject all in itself. We should refer to mules. Not to humans. Humans don't interbreed they only mate with humans.
They breed with their lesser and so they dilute their genetic heritage.

Quote :
Do such systems suddenly appear?
No, like all evolution, it is a gradual process.

Quote :
Was there no religion before monotheisms.
Is not monotheism a leveling of all deities into one?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:14 am

maryshelley wrote:


Closed system? Isn't that like a perpetual motion machine? A figment of imaginations. If there are moving parts there must be fuel to provide energy. Put a bug in a sealed jar - even better put several in. See what happens. Pave the world with concrete why don't you? See what happens. Keep consuming, keep sucking up without replenishing and you will run out of stuff. Alarms! System collapse! System collapse!
read the Laws of Thermodynamics


Quote :
A good beating will still suffice. But that leads to discontented slaves. Who rise up and supplant the master.

Who are the slaves and who are the masters in nature?
Master/Slave is a relationship.
The one taking advantage of the other proportionally greater than being taken advantage of, is the master.

The master can dissolve the relationship. The slave is bound to it.

Quote :
Social engineering again. Has much thought gone into it do you think?
some, in more recent times.
Propaganda.
Read Bernays.

Quote :
A comfort zone? Peace and prosperity are seductive. Preferable to war weariness?
But war, struggle, suffering, is productive.
Comfort, peace is stagnation...sorry.

Quote :
Do you currently see selfishness falling or rising?
It is being directed and controlled.

Quote :
Greed, arrogance, control freakery diminishing? Are you wearing rose tinted spectacles? Or seeing clearly? We are still in thrall to something. Not god; money! What will we replace money with?
Money is the replacement.

Did I say greed was diminishing or that it is wrong?

Quote :
And is it working? Or only where the resources are currently abundant? Been to a city recently? Been to the countryside where folks like to 'keep things' in the family?
In the country trends happen later than in the city. They are not immune to them.
Besides populations are becomnig increasingly urban.

Quote :
Comfort is infectious.
And a lie.
Life is all about discomfort.

Quote :
If there is peace what need is there for aggression? Such drives manifest in 'extreme' sports, corporate competition, etc, etc. What we are will out.
Aggression is not soemthing you choose.
Merely existing is an act of will.
But there are levels of aggression just as there are levels of suffering and discomfort.

It never goes away; it ebbs and flows.

Quote :
If there is no such thing as individuality; individuals have no need for independent thought, then?
Independence is the ideal, the missing, the lacking...the movement towards it is never completed but only achieved in degree and in relation to another.

Quote :
We need only to think critically, don't we? Is that the rub?
What kind of brain would an organism require to think, critically?
A discriminating one.
A critics brain.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
Satyr
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 540
Age : 51
Location : The Edge
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:14 am

By the way, the thesis has, once more, been revised.

I think, for the better.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://calicantsar.blogspot.com/
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: The Feminization of Man   

Back to top Go down
 
The Feminization of Man
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 10Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Fashion & Feminization
» Critique of Satyr's The Feminization of Man:
» The Modern Emasculation and Feminization

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Dissidents Philosophy Forum :: Sociology-
Jump to: