gendanken: His clarity of thought was amazing, even these nasty, vindictive little phrases are just...brilliant. I mosh. I know. Puberty was quite a shock to me. "Patriarchy" is a nonsense concept for girl Quinzubros. "Discourse" is another one. Actually, I've tired of "society" as well. It's hard for me not to come off as some little bitch who thinks she's spunky and listens to Marilyn Manson when I use the word. Worst is, I do like Manson. Started calling it "atmosphere". Yup. Although... Who screamed at me to straighten my back? My mom. Who screamed at me not to scowl? My mom. Who screamed at me not to eat so much? Mom. There's the "within", all those Chinese women forcing their daughters to walk around crippled. The without.... Good fucking point. What I just love is the way the glossy mags prey on the women who are just beginning to wiggle free of all the bullshit. You get your first paycheck - you spend it on mascara and tummy-tightening routines. They even create insecurities, like the "single woman". Now, any person fond of independance of thought and true power knows that there are worse things than being without "a mate". For the herd it's different, but what the advertising campaigns have done is create a fear of being "alone" with no man to "hold" or to hear relentlessly one's "biological clock" ticking. Sob. It's like without the economic need for a man, they've amplified the emotional need to be loved. Or maybe the emotional need was only a cover for the economic need. The smell of a woman's bound feet was supposedly the most potent aphrodisiac known. The "fragrence" was that of her feet rotting from poor circulation. Then it's because women don't think mathematically, or structurally, or whatever the new justification is. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Odin! Sounds like amazing wicked fun. Toss a few Quinzubros in. Truth - "femininity" isn't something that I have much emotional investment in one way or the other. Don't have it, don't want it, but I find it quite fascinating to dissect. I know very few cool women. Interesting, because most of the women in my father's side of the family are intelligent and tough, but I've still ended up with something of a contempt for women. Don't like it though. Most of 'em are. Yeah well it's not like he can claim without hypocrisy that others are bitter towards the opposite sex. Shit yes. I can "touch" - and I can enjoy being touched - but not caressed. At worst, slapped as well as caressed, but there's just something there that I find unsettling. Back to moshing - I do love that. Just colliding with other people. "It's not so much a horror of touch, but of being gently exposed. There is a sensation that goes beyond danger, beyond horror, but into limitless vulnerabilities. The sensation is fascinating; ants crawling on rotton meat. One observes, but one also is*the meat. We touch objects, they do not touch us. Animate objects, humans, can touch us. Freud tells us that touching is a prelude to owning (Totem and Taboo). I think that's the fear of being touched – of being owned, fixed in someone else's values. Or do we? Is it the fear of being owned or rather of being dissolved? Whatever the threat is, the slap liberates us from it. The honesty of pain redeems us from the formless intimacy of touch. Conversely, the caress is a comforting lie, and does much to soften unpleasant honesties." Perfectly. For the same reason, I can't "hug" or be intimate unless there's some element of force or pain involved (I'm fucked up, I know) - and even touching-for-comfort I can't stand unless it's something like a pat on the shoulder. And even then they're rarely allowed to touch me. Lucysnow: Yeah but here's the thing - a pretty boy does nothing for me. I've found men attractive for all sorts of weird reasons - I remember this cab driver once who looked so fucking Saxon I almost invited him in - but never because they're "attractive". Conversely, I'm often drawn to men who are average or slightly above simply because they remind me of sommething. Lucysnow...pardon, but what the fuck do you mean by "sexual ecstasy"? Orgasm? It's all in the mind. I can make myself come without even masturbating. But as a general state...yeah, touch would be involved, but it's all a matter of what the brain is processing. His shame? Or is it just a convienent way of fucking and dumping? Too complicated a motive for him. All women are "bitches" to that sort of man - if he feels shame it's because those bitches have something over him, but I doubt it's because he's insecure sexually. Maybe I missed your point.
*Xev* Quote: Lucysnow...pardon, but what the fuck do you mean by "sexual ecstasy"? Orgasm? It's all in the mind. I can make myself come without even masturbating. But as a general state...yeah, touch would be involved, but it's all a matter of what the brain is processing. Orgasm is not in the mind, its sensation is felt in the body, its simply stirred by the mind. So what you can come without masturbating so can every woman, coming is not orgasm! Damn it woman someone should saw off your head during one of your mental orgasms...I am sure then you would see my point. Quote:His shame? Or is it just a convienent way of fucking and dumping? Too complicated a motive for him. All women are "bitches" to that sort of man - if he feels shame it's because those bitches have something over him, but I doubt it's because he's insecure sexually. Maybe I missed your point. Yes, shame. You are what you fuck. If you despise the woman for 'condescending' herself to your pleasure its because you despise even the need for such pleasure. The only way to cleanse himself of his shame and disgust is to project it unto her. She was a prostitute you don't have to find a convenient way of 'fucking and dumping' a sex worker. Quote:Yeah but here's the thing - a pretty boy does nothing for me. I've found men attractive for all sorts of weird reasons - I remember this cab driver once who looked so fucking Saxon I almost invited him in - but never because they're "attractive". Conversely, I'm often drawn to men who are average or slightly above simply because they remind me of sommething Yes but Xev this isn't anything unusual. Many women are not attracted to pretty boys (Brad Pitt does nothing for me!); There is alway this other 'something'
I try not to, but fucking animal planet always has those depressing "animal precinct" shows on and I have to change the channel and watch other shit. Maybe. Although I'm sure rape would be something a solitary wild female human would need to worry about, I don't think it would occur as frequently as simply being beaten to death for being vulnerable. By males, females, and a mixture of both. Solitary outcast males would probably rape solitary females, last chance to spread the inferior seed they were blessed with, and gangs comprised of young males only might give it a go as a way of tightening the bond of their clique, but the wild human is quite combative for many reasons, not just sexual. I think I saw human behaviour in its rawest form in a documentary about homeless teens in romania. They were so caught up in their wild life that sex wasn't such a huge focus. A solitary girl was beaten to near death for being in out of the rain where some other teens usually go in out of the rain. That was their excuse, in reality competition for resources is fierce in this environment, and she was one mouth that could be easily removed because she was alone. Nothing sexual was involved, unless kicking heads into concrete is considered sexual. I think in history the solitary female was vulnerable from just about every angle, I mean you and I think if we were wild humans and we saw a woman walking along we'd smile and wave, i seriously doubt it. If we were living in that environment we'd be finely in tune with its natural politics. We'd look at her and be filled with anger, we wouldn't be sure why but we'd have this overwhelming urge to just beat the crap out of her. The fact i'm a psychopath has nothing to do with what i'm saying here, under natural law the human does not behave like it does in modern society. Those romanian kids really showed me how animal humans are and exactly what kind of animal too. Females aren't all that feminine once in a clan, they use their femininity to get into one. I think gendanken, xev, lucy snow, under the right conditions you would all join in the killing of an innocent person. If you were born 100 000 years ago you probably would have killed a few outcasts already, with sticks and stones and your feet. You wouldn't have even known why, or cared, you would have done it because they had the ugly face of a stranger. If you didn't get into a tribe, you would have the ugly face. Being socially skilled is strived for now, but we're not sure why, once upon a time it had a real meaning. It was the difference between life and death. And thats why we mindlessly strive for it now, vestigal instinct. Yeah it helps you get laid as well, but so does taking your clothes off(trust me, have you ever tried it? just get nude next time you're with someone who's in a good mood, I guarantee you'll have sex, straight after they say "what the fuck? are you naked?").
Bells, The nature of life is change, because without change and our being able to adapt, we die. The "nature" of life is regarded as feminine, which is why we inadvertently use the term "mother nature". Women are seen to be the weaker sex because we are women and because we exhibit the so called feminine traits. Because they are seen to be the weaker sex, does not mean they are, the basis of that description, i think you will find, is based on physicality. I believe the correct terminology is "the fairer sex", which does not imply weakness, but a different kind of strength. A man will be considred weak if he exhibits his feminine side. The whole notion that society has placed on the trait of being feminine is one that is weak, regardless of change. That depends on what you regard as "feminine". That statement makes me want to scream. In fact I think I shall... aaaaarrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!! There is no need to feel anxiety over this, because it is not a personal statement. Women and men both enjoy, and both enjoy being enjoyed, so both parties exhibit male and female attributes. It is all about relationships, sometimes a man wants to be dominated, sometimes he wants to dominate, and it is the same with a woman. Both will gain pleasure from either situation, if that is their desire. I think, you think, that what is meant by that statement is that women are here entirely for the pleasure of men, which couldn't be further from the truth. Refer to above about women and femininity being a weak trait.. by society deeming it to be so weak, men are SEEN to be the 'enjoyer' and we weaker women are automatically deemed to be the 'enjoyed' because society has deemed that she should be so. This is not natural. I agree. When you read male=enjoyer, female=enjoyed, you assumed that i was going with the flow of how society sees the genders, you defaulted right into that position. It is the same generalisation and default which occurs why society sees men as the enjoyer, not an understanding of what nature actually is. A woman who is an 'enjoyer' is seen to be masculine or butch and not conforming to the roles society has deemed that she should inhabit... in other words, a woman who is not feminine or who is not the 'enjoyed' is not deemed to be a proper woman. What do you mean by "enjoyer"? In my mind, if a woman goes to the doctors for a nip and tuck, in the hope that it will make her more attractive to the opposite sex, and as a result of surgery achieves her goal. Then effectively what she is doing, is using her femininety, to increase a pleasure/goal, the decision to do this is masculine as she is enjoying being enjoyed. Therefore she is using both, masculinity and feminity, the only criticism she will encounter will be personal. She then becomes the enjoyer and the male becomes the weaker sex. Now you look at any lioness and see if she's feminine? Try and find any animal and see if you can find notions of femininity? Is the lioness feminine? Yes, because she is a nurturer, her prime concern are her cubs. The stakes to what exactly? To social status? To finding a mate? To looking 'purdy'? The stakes are not higher Jan, they are the same as they were at the start. Of course you are correct. But what i am talking about here are aspirations, ideals, and ambition. These are not necessarily fixed, once a goal is set, one can spend so many years trying to attain it, and while engaged thus, can easily become embroiled in a whole network of other goals, which can lead to forgetfulness of original goal. B]It's because women in general have a womb. [/B] I doubt that this is the "feminine aspect" we refer to. There obviously exists women who are very masculine, who have wombs, and very feminine men who do not. Females can reproduce. However, where in other creatures do we see notions of femininity? Again it depend on what you regard as femininity. The ability to reproduce does not make us the weaker sex in need of male protection. We all find pleasure and comfort in being protected, and wanting it does not make a person weak. It means, at the very least they have common sense. The act of "protection" is a masculine trait, wanting to be secure is "feminine" and such traits can be seen in both men and women. You try telling a woman who's just pushed out a 3 kilogram baby that she's the weaker sex and she'll likely tear your limbs off. I do not believe that "women" are the weaker sex. Oh my God! That statement actually made my eye twitch. Please tell me that you're not equating that to the human society. Please, because if you are then that will bring on another scream. The activity may be different, but the point is the same. Protection from other lions is a good way to keep her offspring alive, otherwise they would die. It is basic common sense. In human society, do we not want our children to be protected from harm? Is that not the first thought of a mother and father. A mother (who loves her child[ren] might not want a man in her life, as she may quite reasonably feel that one would serve no real purpose, but she would be damned stupid if she didn't want some measure of protection. Jan Ardena.
gendanken Funny thing is one day you are complaining that I’m being overly ambiguous and the next you focus on one of my unambiguous phrases and use it to beat me over the head with it. See why I’m ambiguous? But no matter, I enjoy a good fight, especially when I can get cut and feel the blood over my skin. It’s invigorating. You still haven’t said what I’m selling though only that I am selling. Man you really, really hate yourself. I never realized how much until now. I’ve got the opposite problem, I love myself too much. That’s why a cares is so heavenly for me. I don’t see it as something that exposes me or diminishes me or as an act of domination, it is too soft for that. I see it as an act of intimacy and interconnectedness between two people sharing the same experience or existential condition. Yes, it’s called the power to accept your own vulnerability and remain strong despite it. You rely on extremes because you offer yourself up to them wholeheartedly and completely and you can’t express different parts of yourself to different people or in different situations. No fucking kidding. Point: Things that need an exaggerated hard exterior are protecting an exaggerated soft interior. Like a crab. When the interior isn’t as weak, then the external shell softens and is replaced with a spinal-cord, a backbone. Like an elephant, like a human, like a lion. Notice the difference between the two survival strategies. The outer armor makes one inflexible, un-maneuverable and limited in sensual connectedness and reach. The inner armor makes the other able to adapt and it replaces the shield with a supple and quick nervous system. I would rather be the octopus than the lobster. I'm in the process of mutating myself out of that shell. Too much ocean out there to be weighed down by metal exteriors. Xev I waltz. I prefer the horizontal version. Point: When someone embraces you and pats you on the back or if someone pats you on the shoulder it’s disingenuous. When they rub it is more honest. What do you mean, you want the hug to squeeze the air out of your lungs and for it to feel like it’s going to break you? I think you just might want to be hugged by the right person not in the right way. What if they remind you of Quasimodo or the Elephant Man? ‘Cause I have a few friends if you are interested…. His shame but also his disgust for enjoying it and getting it from a woman he doesn’t respect. It’s self-hatred turned outward. He despises the one that can stoop to the level of giving him head. He feels unworthy and so he assumes the woman is far beneath even him for performing this act on him and for taking him inside her or placing him in her mouth; for placing the basest and vilest part of him inside her. Only a man that hates himself can hate those that want to pleasure him or love him or accept him. He’s fucked but no more than a woman that despises a gentle caress from a man or avoids a kiss. Who was criticizing you or are you and gendanken twins? I never used the term ‘misandry’. If anything this is a case of self-hatred projected outwards. I never mentioned “My Suffering” but suffering as it is experienced by a myriad of others less fortunate than all of us here. Watch the news you’ll see them. They are th ones that don’t have the time for introspection or discontentment.
Wanderer: Of moshing? Sounds painful. Yeah and I don't like fucking strangers trying to fuck me. Gee sorry, I know that's not communal. That's not the "something" Then explain why most men are the same way. You'll ascribe self-hatred to all of them? That gets unnecessarily elaborite. Dr.Lou Natic was honest - he cannot respect a woman who is too interested in fucking him. It's common. It has nothing to do with self-hatred, maybe it's caused by Christian brainwashing but maybe not. I don't abuse prostitutes - let's not confuse the issues. You're ignoring me, I'm fishing. You implied the sentiment. You mean (hairflip) because I cannot stand the trivial bullshit they yakk about, the way they demean themselves to get laid, the disingenuous "niceness" concealing trivial vindictiveness and the complete lack of any sort of intellect whatsoever? Umm....yeah. That's all because I hate myself. Or did you mean femininity? No, if I hated myself I'd waste time and money trying to fit into an ideal I could never live up to, I'd stifle my personality so that I appeared "sweeter" than I really was and I'd stop eating and wear the most uncomfortable, ridiculous shit so that maybe, just hopefully, someone might want to fuck me. And I'd feel validated by it. I can just see you in the room of an AIDS patient: "You know, Mkki Tikki in Somalia has it way worse than you" I mean seriously - what's your objection to my thread? Don't give me psychology, give me analysis. I find femininity mythical because I'm so utterly repulsive that looking even normal is difficult for me. Plus I'm a lesbian and I don't shave. Now! Give some rational objections.
*Xev* Quote:Then explain why most men are the same way. You'll ascribe self-hatred to all of them? That gets unnecessarily elaborite. Dr.Lou Natic was honest - he cannot respect a woman who is too interested in fucking him. It's common. It has nothing to do with self-hatred, maybe it's caused by Christian brainwashing but maybe not. Most men? Nah, there are many, many men who do not fall into this category. Dr. Lou speaks of 'the chase', the example you gave was of a man receiving services from a prostitute. Men don't have to 'chase' prostitutes. That same guy would go home to his wife or girlfriend and treat her differently. Its the separation, the schizophrenic whore/madonna factor. The separation of the base from the sublime, the nice, good girl as opposed to the slut/whore.
*Jan Ardena* Quote:A man will be considred weak if he exhibits his feminine side. The whole notion that society has placed on the trait of being feminine is one that is weak, regardless of change. That depends on what you regard as "feminine". I totally agree. I love being a woman and embrace my femininity. Its not anything I need to either justify or rebell against, never in my life have I been made to feel 'weaker' because of it. It isn't an issue and there is no conflict so I don't have to contemplate it with any degree of importance.
Same principle. I agree with you on schitzophrenia, but I fail to see how this is uncommon. So...why are you responding? But answer one thing - when's the last time you felt secure walking alone at night?
*Xev* Quote:I fail to see how this is uncommon. Rest assured I have dealt with more men than you. Quote:So...why are you responding? Well look at what I respond to. I have posted questions concerning your or gendy's point of view but I have made little or no arguments about femininity and society to any great length because I feel no imposition from society. The how's and why's of feminity are not of any interest to me, sexuality interests me so I respond to that aspect of the debate. Quote: But answer one thing - when's the last time you felt secure walking alone at night? I do it all the time. I take the subway home at 3 or 4am without fear. My gym has a 24hour location and if I have a really late workout and gibber-gab with staff its not unusual for me to leave after 1am. I am an urban animal, even lived in Harlem for a year, I know my environment and have no fear of it. The only time I would alter my behaviour is when I am in another country where the clues and risk may be different. In the case of Cambodia I would hire a driver if I intend to stay out very late, but so what so would the western males, but even there I felt no 'threat'. I am a woman who travels alone extensively and I am very good at taking care of myself...curls and all.
*Xev* Missed this one: Quote:Same principle Not at all. The 'chase' especially for men is an aspect of seduction (its the game). The madonna/whore priciple I outlined concerns why a man would be disgusted by this prostitute, or some girl he devalues, giving him a blowjob. This same man may not even ask his wife or girlfriend to do it because he believes the act would 'devalue' her. If this man is comfortable with himself and his desires, if he does not suffer from this 'schizophrenia' then he can explore the entirety of himself with a woman (whether wife or whore) and accept the give and take of pleasure without devaluing himself or the other. The schizophrenia occures when one cannot accept the entirety of themselves and their desires. If one accepts there is no shame.
Lucysnow: *Chuckles* I'm sure you have. No no - read what he wrote. A woman who seems too eager turns him off because she seems too eager. "I love you all - all you bitches. I hate all you bitches" He's referring to the enemy sex in general, yes? Oh... I grew up in and around Detroit. Has nothing to do with how or where one is raised. Meh, whatever. I think my thread is dying. Dr. Lou: Is that like "Animal Cops"? Interesting. I had assumed - but the instinct could just as well be "it's in my territory, I'm going to kill it" And it reinforces pack solidarity. Of course not. You'd kill anything in your territory. A solitary anybody would be fucked, let alone a solitary female. To an extent, this is why humans are so dysgenic - they value the tribe above all else.
For the record I don't bang hookers. Actually I'm the only one of my friends who has not and will not. I like girls that like me, but I like to learn that they like me via subtle means. Its just a preference for one kind of girl over another. Its hard to explain, but say i grab a girl and start mauling her, she better scream and hit me(not during ofcourse, that would be wierd), if she's all into it, or worse if she approaches me and gives me a "lap dance" or something, I'll be far less interested. In truth, a girl acting eager will make me feel like I'm too good for her, even though that has nothing to do with it. Very attractive girls can be eager and homely girls can be reprehensive. But thats just the sense I get. Its why i don't bang asians, I like a challenge(this might be a regional thing, but around here it seems any loser can score an attractive asian girl, noticing this makes me less interested in them, its not a racial prejudice as much as a not wanting to be a loser prejudice) I don't think this is how most men are though honestly, it seems more and more guys like "whorish" girls, I'm looked upon as bizarre for my fascination with prudes. Another thing about the eager girls is I don't buy it, it always comes off as fake, like its not natural behaviour, they're trying to be something they've heard guys like and I can just see through it and it looks pathetic. JMPO(just my penis opinion) Oh one more thing, a wierd phenomenon i've noticed is if you do a background check on eager girls you'll usually find they went to an all girl school. Either there's something to analyse there or me and many other people I know have experienced a healthy string of coincidences. They probably don't realise how easy guys are or something.
hehe Yeah, you know, they rock up to some low lifes house; "hey who's starving dogs are those in the backyard?" "dogs? I don't know essay, what dogs man?" "aaahh, we'll come back in a few weeks, those dogs better be lookin better" *few weeks later dogs are dead in the backyard* "hey I thought we told you to feed those dogs" "dogs? what?" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Its fucking irritating. Well yeah. Its a combination. The vulnerability though would make them less hesitant to attack. I imagine teenagers especially would have been dangerous. Its just the nature of the teenager when in a group, they recently would have left or been kicked out of their family clan and joined up with others in the same boat. And they'd just overdo everything trying to outdo eachother. Older humans may naturally have a bit of empathy, not sure. An established family might just threaten an intruder but rogue teenage gangs(which I'm sure would have existed) would have gone out of their way to find vulnerable people and animals to hurt and kill. Yes. There'd be lots of good reasons to kill people if you were a wild human. True. But I think maybe a solitary adult male wouldn't be at as much risk. A solitary woman would have to worry about groups of other women, groups of teenagers, solitary men, groups of men. A solitary man probably only has to be concerned with the last 2, and probably only the last one would be a real threat. A solitary man might be confronted for a fight, but a solitary woman would be preyed upon by other people. Which is something organisms in general are alot more willing to commit to than a fight. I'm sure some women would have been hard as nails and battered the shit out of young punks hasseling them. But generally, they would have been a pretty easy target, which then naturally means they would have been targetted regularly. Which is indeed a good explanation for why todays female is hyper-social, and todays teenage male as well for that matter, the slight air of independence that adult males tend to have could be for the reason I mentioned. They didn't have AS MUCH to worry about. Perhaps you descended from a rough bitch who'd kick the shit out of gangs of teenagers and womenPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! which might account for your "masculine" attitude towards society.
*Xev* Quote: No no - read what he wrote. A woman who seems too eager turns him off because she seems too eager. Yea but its still the chase he is referring to. I mean don't we (as women) abhor a man who is too eager? The chase is part of the game, part of seduction, the other guy who was being blowed by a prostitute wasn't disgusted because the woman was 'eager', he was repulsed by his own vulgarity. Quote:"I love you all - all you bitches. I hate all you bitches" He's referring to the enemy sex in general, yes? Yea well the enemy is his own desire. ...men can be so stupid sometimes! Anyway, I'm annoyed today.
Xev: Definetily now that Jan and Lou are just...dangling around..... but I've been dying to post since last night but time was short, so I'll indulge. I've got aaallll day for you folks to put up with me now: So true- if her pockets are full and her home is a nice one then her heart must be empty and her uterus, god forbid, what's a uterus without children? Never mind that men have nipples too. But her biological clock is going tick, tick, tick and the neighborhood lends it a microphone so she can hear it louder. I'll say what I've been saying here again, roughly: Never allow her to forget her sex. Glamourize the articles, the movies, everything material you can trademark and spread it out before her just out of reach- make it as alluring as a bitch in heat is to people like Spooky but never quite give it to her so that she's never satisfied and keeps buying. Let her worry about the formulas for Romance. Let her keep encouraging it becuase of this very uncertainty. This too is what makes her Hyper Social, my dear. Let her be told by magz and Freud that love is something heavenly and grand that makes the world go round- don't tell her what it really is: primitive animalism civilized into this profitable scheme we call Romance. I said this once in your "I Hate Love Songs" thread, remember? This is the ugliest exploitation in my book since it can be called harmless and socially convenient- the consumers are ignorant and they don't even have to teach their daughters to be just like they are. All the little girl does is watch and she's off to her room trying on lipstick and blush dreaming of the day she'll one day get married. The little girl, curls and all, has no idea that she's setting herself up to be either a pet or a parasite. The double p's. Ha! Not surprised though considering these people eat dog kabobs and cat fur. Not to mention 'snake wine blood' and fried scorpions http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~gleicher/Travel/China/DiFamily_Restraunt/ This is where we part though: If you mean you don't have feminity as in you're very masculine then we'll part. I happen to have it and its fairly pronounced. Don't misread me- I don't hate it, I do the whole lip gloss and boy shorts when I feel like it. Between moods I cover it up and hide it, but I'll be damned if I find myself a baggy old crone one day and realize I never used it while I had it. That would be if not unforgivabble at least regrettable. Its very human of me- has nothing to do with the intellect. While not exactly advocating rape, I see what you mean. There's insecerity or slyness in the human touch that when its soft comes off as a desire the person who's doing the touching has no right to. I'm not only speaking of men- women who touch you in such way have a desire not to console you but to show you that they're one to console, as if they desire to exude their abilities in showing you pity or understanding. Like the philosopher who writes to let you know that he knows- NOt so that you would know something he does not. Showing off. Spurious little fuckers, aren't they? Implied, my culo. The man wrote: "Oh, I hate the world because it opens doors to me I did not earn, I hate men because they just want to fuck me, I hate myself because I like it"- Wanderer And then went on to say I not only hate myself (gendanken throws head beack and guffaws) ......but do like Schopenheaur and hole myself up in a cave to masturbate over the world's pain and beauty. 150f19: ::reluctance:: I concede. However, don't assume I've never moved a whole pile, that's right A WHOLE PILE of lumber before, or mounds of granite and gravel to set a new porch on my own before....with machines of course. I've laid tile and set concrete and cement. I may have looked silly doing it but that floor will last ages. Head borg, monsiuer. I'm a head borg.
Wanderer: Cute. "Despise" is your word. Finding something repulsive has more to do with one's bilogical makeup then their intellectual one. Humans, at least most, instinctively recoil from feces. The human palate is genetically predisoposed to find bitter tastes repulsive and when you find that poisons are naturally alkanine and bitter to the tounge you see why. You had it right the first time and then fucked it up with more commentary: There *is* something disengineous in the caress, depending on who it is that is doing it and at what point in the liason so and so is caressing. Go back and take out your reading glasses, monsieur, read what I said: The human touch has always been unpleasent to me, you have no idea- but I'm not immune to it. Depending. Depending, bubba. As in on whom and why. Sevi? You're painting pretty little pictures of me never being held for you to smack your lips on and gloat. Good for you, but the sly caress is bitter to the senses where the right one, with strength behind it, is sure of itself and honestly sweet. Not bitter. And it ain't 'rubbing' either. I wonder how you manage to pee in the dark. Honestly. The man claims to have the whole spectrum of humanity down to a science and somehow manages to show up here and fit in gendanken in all the wrong places. ::Hellatious:: You're more than welcome to ask Tessie and those who know me what I mean by 'fantastico'. And you have no right to claim you've managed to work it out any better than anyone else has. Says who, you? There are pieces of me floating around on this planet that was given to all those that would have it. There are few, but I'm alive in every single one of them- a few like it, most hate it but at least they hate what is real. A rarer few know how to understand it. Then you're free to end up on someone's plate as mushy calamari. Beautiful analogy though, and its funny you don't see what it is that you're doing- NOTHING says there isn't a tender wad of crab meat inside. You only choose to keep up with your gibberish becuase I have not chosen you to show it to. For sale: A small patch of Greek soil to grow beautiful gardens in and grown old together with. OR Lotsa and lotsa of rhetoric. First question: Do you think I don't already know you only consider me a plaything?
gendanken: Bingo. And romanticize children until the dumb bitch thinks having them will compensate for her lack of any real life. And the more she lacks it, the more she'll romanticise it. You ever notice how in romance books they devote more attention to describing the heroine than to describing the love interest? All wish fulfillment for fat girls who don't know men. Ha! Don't get me wrong, I love men, but the more one gets to know them the less romantic one is. A good thing rightly, romance is built on false expectation. "Love" if I may be forgiven such mushyness, is based on knowledge. Disagree. She doesn't know it because the double p's are treated as so natural that she doesn't realize what they really are. Disgusting. Oh I mean it's like - I'm missing some module that allows me to be feminine. As a woman, I'm cute as hell and I'll flaunt it, but that's my body. My mind and my actions aren't in any way feminine. I can't be coy, I can't be submissive and I'd starve to death before I fucked a man because he bought me dinner. It's my German blood, I'm just too stern. Schitzophrenia see? I can be an attractive woman without being by any stretch of the imagination feminine. What, so you're only subtly advocating rape? Making a vauge argument for rape? What? Seriously I don't either - but the gentle touch is just so insinuating. Like they're not one who is entitled to touch you. Comes down to - does this person deserve to touch me? Noticed that when I got hurt. It's "oh dear, are you okay? you poor thing!" versus "holy shit, you're tough if you can just walk around like that" One diminishes you, the other compliments. Showing off. Can't stand it about women - their constant need to enrich themselves by being nice to you. And they know they've got you fucked if you accept that, 'cause then you fucking owe them and they hold it over your head like the sword of Damocles. Looks like she got you, Wanderer. Speaking of which, you asked me about men and schitzophrenia:
Masculinity is just as much a state of artiface, only the goal is to appear stronger and more imposing than one truly is. A certain ostentation of power is necessary, ad to maintain it endless techniques and props. A man is allowed no self - he sacrifices it to conform, and his props compensate for this lack. A man! as the hysterical feminine creatures cry over the more vicious - that is to be a master. To achieve mastery over others he becomes a disciplined and dedicated slave, always chasing after money and social status. Yet he cannot stifle his (rightful!) thought that as slave he cannot be a man, and that his props serve only to advertise his lack. Ever he tries to prove his conformity - ever he tries to fill his lack of self by cannibalizing others. He is by no means as strong, either physically or mentally, as he pretends to be. Ever fearful that his ruse may be discovered, and ever hateful to the enemy sex that may discover it, he sullies any subtle or delicate feeling that he may ever have. Any healthy instinct for mastery quickly becomes a needy attempt to remain in control, and thus he clings to the rules and roles of "chivalry". It's central that people in a truely "chivalric" age would have left the weakling to perish of exposure. The decadence of industrialized society has bred a creature that romanticizes the brutality of past ages - he will thus claim longing for a more romantic age in which "men were real men and women were real women!" He is enamored with warfare, knowing nothing of pain or bloodshed. Thus he spends thousands on pseudo-wars: computer games, his tedious attempts at seduction, and huntin'. His entertainments give him the sense of conquest he so lacks - as he also lacks self-comprehension, they fill his lack for a time. His need extends to the political arena, and he denounces the "libruhls" who object to the wars that fuel both his displaced masculinity and his S.U.V. He is rapacious and he loves the status quo - in a word, he is macho. For this, he punishes most stringently those who defy it, clinging tenaciously to the scraps of power society throws his way. The current fluidity of the gender construct frightens him, for he senses (again, quite rightly) that his tentative claim to manhood is further undermined - if not demolished - by it. As he could never qualify as a man, he looks longingly for the time when social authority was his birthright. Thus he is a conservative, although he'll be the first to tell you that he is your friend - he simply wishes for the return of family values and the safety of those poor unborn babies. A vulgar, vicious weakling - behold modern man. How far from the noble sons of Tyr our "progress" has taken us. A hysterical, miserable weakling enamored of brutality - behold modern woman. How well she conceals her viciousness by slobbering over his brutality, by her constant declarations of attraction to "apha males" and "macho guys". Should she ever detect vulnerability in her "man", she'll leave him with an expression of contempt. Her weakness is to be protected (he is her attack dog) - his is ever to be despised. How far from the loyal daughters of Freya our "progress" has taken us.
Originally posted by Xev: Well Xev, you certainly can't say that you didn't have this coming: I think women who prattle on about what it's like to be a man should be sentenced to three months hard labor laying sheathing and finishing drywall. I'll look for you and Gendy on the jobsite Monday morning. Something about turnabout.... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You're not the only one that remembers things around here.
