A Tentative Defence of Monogamy I would be the last to deny the promiscuous nature of man. It is evident that many of the failings of modern-day coupling and marriage is due to the fact that it is imposed upon an instinctive beast that has little ability to control self through the intellect and must be coerced, threatened or rewarded and/or indoctrinated into a moral dogma in order to remain disciplined and moderate. Common man, governed by a need that emerges in times of indigence, has carried this superfluity like a camel carries its hump into a luscious rainforest. This doctrine of excess, which forces out behaviours of gluttony, is an expression of undiscriminating tastes and subdued palates that are more interested in quantity than quality. The practice of suppressing sexual drives, that sometimes threaten social order and harmony, has been a deciding factor in the emergence of civilizations and complex human economic and cultural structures. It enables the full participation of males/females in the system and the full investment of these males/females in the system itself that turns them from rebellious vagabonds or indifferent observers into defenders and guardians of the norm. This imposition of monogamy on a polygamous species has been successful, or relatively so, mostly through the utilization of institutional authority and the restriction of female sexual choices. But I am going to defend and describe a spontaneously emerging form of monogamy that is not a product of moral and cultural force or paternalistic social order but more a product of refined tastes and noble predispositions. It would be remiss of me to neglect to state that the creation of distinction and refinement could only happen, ironically, in times of superfluity and in ages of abundance, for in times of poverty all, by necessity, become ascetics and minimalists and it is leisure that often results in heightened awareness and wisdom. This spiritual refinement that is shaped by hypersensitivity and an overabundance of inner strength leads to a discriminating palate and a pickiness that should not be misconstrued for snobbery or pretentiousness; this discriminating taste that leads to some form of monogamy should not also be misjudged as another instance of the common form of monogamy that is more a result of moral imperatives, hypocrisy and socio-economic pressures as well as cultural conformity than anything else. Since metaphor and allegory are the best ways to become precise while still remaining discreet and indirect I begin by encapsulating my perspective of this more noble form of monogamy with symbolism: Let us then take wine as a substitute for mating, since it is an unnecessary aspect of individual survival, as sex is, while still retaining the attraction and sweetness associated with coupling. The common man, with his unsophisticated tastes, gluttony-sometimes reaching the proportions of alcoholism-and insensitive tongue, may find that all wines are the same or similar enough to not make great differentiations, and all that really is at stake here, for him, is access and availability. In other words, the average man wants wine on his table-if it is his preferred beverage- as a sign of affluence or happiness or conformity and its quality, its distinctive bouquet, the year and the region it was harvested in, is of no or little importance to him. For him the experience of wine drinking is merely encompassed in the general sensation of swallowing and tasting its broad and obvious aroma and in the inevitable high-spirits it inevitably results in. Any bottle will do, within reason, from any time and from any place, and large quantities of it are preferred so that his greedy needs are met, his belly and ego are engorged and his needs momentarily placated. But for a refined palate, one that can discern nuance and subtlety, not all wines are created equal. His discriminating tastes are not a consequence of pretentious snobbery and feigned aristocracy but a result of an oversensitive taste-bud and a hypersensitive nose. He cannot ignore, no matter how much he may try, the faint fragrances, the quiet bouquets, the textures, the aftertastes or the colorations of each Olympian nectar; for him the wines history, its symbolism and art are just as relevant as its simple drinking. He may drink an inferior fermented grape, from time to time so as to not insult a host or as to not make an unwarranted fuss, but given a choice he will prefer abstinence from indulging in pigswill and fire-water. The refined palate, therefore, will choose asceticism rather than to debase and degrade one self by settling for inferior products and individuals just to quell an inner instinctive need or desire. He will see any submission to his hunger and thirst, which often demand compromises of great proportion, as a defeat, as an insult to self and a loss of dignity that is often felt in hindsight. We must keep in mind again that this refined taste is not an act of conceit but a product of awareness. It stems from this extreme sensual perceptiveness [hypersensitivity] that is inescapable, as no man can blind himself to what he sees or ignore for long what he hears, and it also stems from a deeper appreciation of emotions and of self. It is an appearance of pride we call nobility. What a common man calls ‘love’, ‘compassion’, ‘loyalty’, ‘responsibility’, ‘commitment’ and ‘empathy’ pales in comparison to what a noble mind understands them to be. If we are to understand hypersensitivity or awareness or refinement we must here use, once more, some figurative symbolism. Two men walk into a room in which a party is going on. The first is a common, average man for whom the scene is a joyful one, full of smiling faces, mirth, clinking glasses, the din of happy conversation, the smells of food, all engulfed in a kaleidoscope of pleasant background music and dazzling lights. The second, “suffering” from hypersensitivity, perceives a totally different scene. He sees what the first man sees but also so much more. He sees a momentary frown, a glance, a stolen kiss, a discreet touch, a smirk; he hears a sarcastic giggle, a stomach churning, a door slam; he smells perfume, cologne and sweat; he knows who’s had a little too much to drink, who is walking with a limp, who’s talking with whom, who wore mismatched socks today, who just hit on someone’s wife and so on. It is possible for two individuals to experience the same thing but perceive it on different levels, levels of lucidity if you will. It is this lucidity that gives reality, life and emotions more substance for the noble man. His love is more precious to him and not something he gives out lightly, his compassion is more profound, his loyalty more true, his friendship more deep and weighted down with meaning and not mere words he flings around to appear civilized and moral or to ensure another’s respect. This noble man of refined tastes takes responsibility seriously and that’s why he enters it so rarely, he takes commitment more austerely and that is why he rarely commits. For him love/hate, loyalty/betrayal, compassion/cruelty, mean so much more than for the common man that enters relationships of enmity or cooperation blindly and full of hypocritical innocence, delusional confidence and naïve hope derived from an absence of awareness or an inability to self-discipline. That’s why Christianity and Democracy, or any ideology that institutionalizes emotions and behaviours, is an anathema to him. Compassion and love are precious things to a noble mind; precious things beyond measure that are offered only to the worthy and to those that have earned his trust and loyalty and that is why his emotions are so much more weighty and meaningful and not just words that lead to ephemeral commitments of need. Common love relationships often begin with an attraction based on superficial criteria. A man may just be attracted to a woman’s ass, to her full bosom or wavy hair, a woman to a tall, dark and handsome man or a rich man or a man of status and so soon reality will disenchant them from their fantasies about how things could be or should be. Sometimes shallow relationships are a product of physical needs and social imperatives that force two people into each others spaces for better or for worst, often the second more than the first. Shallow choices lead to shallow lives where often the sense of something missing is felt and one blames the other or conditions but rarely ones judgment, original choices and criteria of evaluation. So errors are repeated, over and over and over again. In comparison noble love relationships are more difficult to find and so much more valuable. It is difficult enough to nourish and remain noble in such a world of superficiality and narrowness, it is rare that the right genetic and environmental circumstances will arise in an individual at all and that the right balance of strength and awareness will coincide in a single entity, so two noble spirits finding each other is a rare thing indeed especially when one considers their solitary and shy nature. This is what makes them precious and an exemplification of idealistic romantic love. Their rarity and value is due to the fact that they are based on more than just mere lust but exhibit a spiritual interconnectedness where two people become united in more than a physical way, although the physical is always the first connection. Here the mind takes precedence and decides when to suppress or express desire and need, when to expose or hide vulnerability and strength, when to love, commit and remain loyal because only it can comprehend the full breadth and depth of the issues involved. This nobility of spirit, this refinement of taste forces the individual endowed with it, into some uncomfortable choices: Either find solace in solitude and asceticism through the denial of instinct, as many sages have done, so that no compromises are made and no loss of self worth ensues or search and wait for that single one, that diamond in the dirt that lives up to heightened standards and meets reality eye-to-eye, that gives as much as it takes and understands the entirety of what commitment, loyalty, trust, compassion and finally love entails. Only nobility can love where a common man merely lusts.
You refer to more than monogamy in the above. First I believe in a monogamy not imposed by outside social forces as you point out but from the self. In short people are monogamous because it is what they feel and desire, they do not stray because there is no need to stray; every other form of monogamy is a lie. To remain monogamous out of duty and feel an emptiness and void is to lie to oneself and ones mate. To remain monogamous willingly does not always mean that this monogamy will last. People do afterall occasionaly grow apart through no fault of either partner. There are those who remain 'loyal' to the institution of marriage and family and yet fill their passion elsewhere; a passion of the heart and flesh does not necessarily lead to a long-term union but can be necessary to the growth of the couple involved. Where there is a family involved sometimes the institution must take precedence over the fickle desires of the flesh or the thirst of the heart, especially if there isn't anything wrong with the marriage per se except the ennui of having known someone so long they become more like a family member than a lover. A family union does sometimes contain enough love to allow for an external search; how many wives overlook their husbands transgression because they know he is simply testing a new wine but will soon be back because his love of family overrides his need for something else. The best most passionate lover does not necessarily make the best life-partner; the criteria for both are different and don't always come in the same bottle. It is for this reason I remain alone...I cannot live with either or, I want them both. Simple needs must be met from a simple source. If a man is simply looking for a good woman with a tight ass to bear his children/run his home and not give him too much grief then there are any number of women who could fill this criteria as a partner. If someone is looking to be understood, felt on a deeper level then the search for a partner becomes more complex, but upon finding such an individual does not necessarily mean there will be longevity in the relationship. In fact the person in the first example will probably find more success and long-term satisfaction in his choice simply because they do not expect their choice to be all things to them or fill every crevice of need. Someone looking for a complete love is more apt dissappointment if the spriritual union begins to wane...even if briefly. If one is insecure even the slightest change will fill them with doubt and disillusion. The sipping of different wines is only a terrible mistake if one pretends to buy the bottle. Mutual wine sampling is fine if that is all one desires to fulfill a desire; it would be wrong of course to assume that this means one would resort to sipping Thunderbird. There may be soul mates in a life but that does not mean there is a single soul mate. Even from the best vintage bottles one must still make a choice...often always wondering what it would have been to sip from the Shiraz instead of taking the best Chardonnay. Or perhaps someone can find they love both Shiraz and Chardonnay but choose the second because the passion of the first isn't sustainable or desirable on a daily basis (impractical). Choosing the best partner and being discerning depends on the level of self-awareness. We must know who we are to know what we want and need. We must be able to distinguish between the need and the want. The older one gets, the more experience in wine tasting and the better able one is to identify the best wine from vintage, smell and color before even having a taste. Some wines have been had so often that they are no longer of interest as one has enjoyed all they can from it. Personally this is why I tend to choose a good bottle of single malt scotch at least three decades old. They tend to be more sturdy and reliable, always smooth and never disappointing. Even a good vintage can yield a fickle wine.
How do you turn crap into lobster? Are you some kind of magician? Trying to justify your pigswill drinking because solitude scares you and your loins take precedence over your mind? Sorry, you can’t eat shit and then call it Fillet-Mignon and you can’t act like an animal and then pretend you are human. Actions are more sincere than words because they demand a price. Empirical evidence is more precise than rhetoric. Tell me what one does and it doesn’t matter what he says he is, it is plain to see what he/she is. The biggest lies many tell themselves and few have the introspective abilities and the self-consciousness to understand who they themselves are. That’s why psychology is all the rave. Most people go to another to be told who and what they are and why the act the way they do because they are incapable of evaluating self. I have stopped listening, on the whole, to what others say anymore and I watch what they do. Sometimes they contradict their own words by acting their real selves.
AN.DROID Quote:why not turn that cheap wine into ambrosia? Not noble enough? And how many have met someone and then waste their time trying to change them? A person must desire change; and most do not have the expertise nor inclination of a Professor Higgins. WANDERER: How do you turn crap into lobster? Are you some kind of magician? No one would fall in love with what they consider 'crap'. Love can see value and potentials that others are blind to; sometimes its just a projection, sometimes not. There are incidents in life of people changing with the love and help of others, but the desire to change must be present; I think your response to android cut the issue into black and white without acknowledging that many shades of grey exists.
Know Thyself. It was a painful process I had to go through one afternoon: to truly see myself as the pathetic number I really was. From then on it was tears and fists through walls. There is no harsher criticism. I know who I am and what I want out of life.
An.droid:... if one begins with the premise that mankind is common, then one will only anticipate cheap wine. Everywhere. BUT, if one embarks with the premise that cheap wine can also induce rapture, then it only stands to reason that cheap wine can alchemise itself into ambrosia. Well any wine has the ability to produce rapture if one is in the right frame of mind, but after the rapture cheap wine can cause headache not to mention disillusionment. An.droid: But being able to follow along and metamorphose is another trip altogether. Hence nobility. Noble... To be able to transform the small into the grand. And then to merge with the grand. Sex is a great way of exercising that, don't you think? Well are we speaking only of sex? I think the potential of sex are very often overlooked because we see it only as biological function or a pleasurable escape (lack of imagination). There is a great deal one can learn about themselves and others through the act; its emotional/psychodynamic/revelatory/restorative/transformative powers are extreme but one must have a sense for these layers within the act and how to build the necessary tension and myths to bring these layers to the surface. It is the most noble of accomplishments to 'follow along' and transform onself from the 'small into the grand'. It takes a special acumen directed towards oneself. It would first be a process of acting as if and then becoming that. The outside initiator would need more than just nobility and acumen to bring this out in another...they would have to be endowed with visionary power. Think about all the variables in producing a good wine, its a combination of hard work, fortuity and yes a good alchemist. An.droid:Trying to change anyone? Impossible. However, we do influence each other, right? And I think that's what Wanderer was fuzzing around. Yes I agree we do influence each other for better or worse. Avuncular: pertaining to an uncle, especially in kindliness or geniality.
Lucysnow Yes, I’m trying to distinguish between two different types of monogamy: one the product of external environments [Society, culture, religion, economics] the other the product of internal environments [awareness, dignity, distinction, nobility]. By creating black/white distinctions the differences become more pronounced. . Most human beings ‘Fuck’ they have no ability to ‘Make Love’. Most human beings think of sex like they think of food or water or taking a dump. It feels good, they need it and they cannot focus on anything else unless they get it done. This spiritual connection where more than two bodies are fused in union during coupling, is only possible when both, I repeat both, partners are capable of this level of integrity and vulnerability. Only then do people become more than just pieces of ass that can be easily replaced by another piece of ass any time any where. Nobility demands, does not ask, it demands respect and when it cannot have it prefers isolation and starvation. Hastein To accept oneself with no exaggerations either way is easier than to see oneself with no exaggerations either way. But once it is done the power gained through self-love and the efficiency derived from knowing ones own abilities and failures is incalculable. _an.droid_ Should I post single phrase questionnaires and trite simplistic remarks in order to fit into your MTV universe of sound-bites and flashing images? Ideas need space to be explored and presented. I would say I’ve neglected many aspects of the issue just to remain as brief as possible and I risk being misinterpreted or misunderstood. Your ‘attention span’ is none of my concern. How about this: Monogamy ‘good’ when honest and precise, polygamy ‘bad’ when it leads to gluttony and a loss of value. Discuss. Was it to your satisfaction? Why don’t you readjust those android parameters of yours to allow for longer analysis? Or are you the old type of android? A symptom of our time: An inability to perceive detail because there’s too much to see. So we scan through issues without gaining any perspicacity. Like flipping through an encyclopedia, looking at the pictures reading a few phrases here and there and then managing to finish all 12 volumes of it. But what did you achieve? Trivial pursuit knowledge and fodder for quotation marks. Things wrong with our time: Specialization- The mass of knowledge required to be absorbed in order to be considered an ‘expert’ so great that all other peripheral knowledge pertaining to it must be excluded or scanned over or summarized so that time is saved and a conclusion reached. Consequence? Individuals that know a lot about a single discipline or a part of a single discipline and nothing about anything else. Conclusion? Absence of depth and wisdom. An inability to incorporate the totality of it all into a single vision, an aversion to what is referred to ‘generalization’ and a fondness for what is considered ‘specificity’ when in fact all forms of knowledge are generalizations. When one focuses forever on the Iberian Peninsula trying to uncover every single detail in it, he/she misses the grander picture, the European attachment, the world at large, the Earth and the universe. Philosophy, unfortunately or fortunately, is the incorporation of everything under the sun and not even, for the creation of larger pictures and the attainment of transcending timeless insights. Loosened up? I think you haven’t read everything I’ve written yet. I’m as loose as a dock whore during shore leave or like a AMERICAN belt in a buffet restaurant. And be pleasantly surprised once in a while. While your anticipation of greatness with every pop of a cork can only result in many, many, many disappointments. Tell me about mankind android, I’d like to hear an ‘outsiders’ perspective. Tell me about the ‘goodness’ of man, about his quality. It’s ironic that those most often trying to distance themselves from what is human, from instinct and emotion, by taking on mechanical personas, then propose to explain the value of man in the most positive light. I once knew an alcoholic that could get off on vinegar. He was so fucked-up he couldn’t even taste the difference or didn’t care. I guess shit can taste like chocolate cake when you are starving and you need to survive, no matter what. I guess piss can taste like lemonade when one has grown accustomed to the tanginess and has never tasted anything but that. But I’m not talking about desperation here but about discrimination. I’m talking about a state of being that prefers abstinence to vulgarity and asceticism to devaluation. I’m talking about a type of man that places something even above survival, believe it or not, like: Honour, dignity, freedom, respect, loyalty, and responsibility. Do you get it yet, mechanoid? What do you get when you merge shit with pudding? Whatever it is I ain’t eating it. Help yourself. Yes we do but only the very few can fully appreciate and be influenced by what is great. I can piss in a toilet for decades and let my dog watch and it may even imitate me once in a while but does it know what it is doing and why? Imitation is not comprehension and your over-optimism is sickening. Tell me do you think education can change humanity for the better? Are you still living with that delusion? A sermon Here we are in an age of plenty where nothing is of any value, in an age of prosperity where nothing is satisfied, in an age of superfluity where nothing means anything, in an age of excess where everything is expendable, replaceable and indistinguishable. A ‘throw-away’ society of questionable qualities where abundance has replaced quality. We’d rather eat pound of food than eat good food. We’d rather drink carbonated sugar-water with added coloration and flavoring that drink something pure and clean. We’d rather fuck anything that moves and spreads its legs for us rather than go without or search for something more meaningful. We’d rather engorge ourselves, drown ourselves, inebriate ourselves, escape ourselves than go without. Because consumption is how we evaluate ourselves. The more we eat the more affluent we believe we are. The more we drink the more uninhibited we become. The more we fuck the more desirable and manly/womanly we feel. Then we wonder why we still feel unfulfilled and empty, and we wonder why we feel so cheap and why we aren’t appreciated or respected or valued more. In such an age only the few, the discriminating, the aware, the noble choose abstinence, asceticism, minimalism, austerity rather than succumb to hedonistic excess and depravity. End of sermon.
And up stands another challenger from the throng. One of the silent observers wants to prove his ilk against me once more. This is fun. We humans love fun. But I’m in the rink already ‘mechanoid’. I openly display myself and invite attack. I fear nothing. I certainly do not fear human animals. I’ve seen you all and I have personal direct experience with all your types. You are not a mystery to me anymore. The only challenge is discerning what particular flavor of man or woman you are. You?! Hide behind pretence. It’s easy to criticise when you have to show no opinion of your own. _an.droid_ Placing yourself ‘outside my orbit’ is truly amusing. There you are rotating around my mass nevertheless. There you are being pulled in by my gravitational force. A stray meteor you must have been, with no direction and no home, just spinning across the cosmos wanting to become a meteorite. Watch out for Jupiter machine-man, it’s a galactic vacuum cleaner. “Ill mannered”? What was “ill mannered” about it? I wasn’t aware androids had social graciousness and civility clauses. Such thin skins on metal bodies. Aluminum is it? It’s unfortunate that most things require longer focus times to be fully appreciated. Your ‘video-clip’ limitations must be frustrating. What do machines know of nobility? Do you think ‘nobility’ implies courteousness or politeness or compassion? Only to ones own kind or after needs are met. A hunter kills the Buffalo and then thanks it for its sacrifice. But he kills the buffalo first. I SEE people, even while they are trying to mask themselves, It’s a gift nurtured through time for survival purposes. A seducer?! More than this machine-man. I’m a Hellene. We are all seducers, we've seduced an entire civilization into existence. What, machines being frustrated by humans? By Greeks? How bizarre. Not even your circuits can defend you against charisma and charm. It's a human trait, machines know little about. They only percieve its effects. Yet there you are dancing to my beat and responding anyways because I knew what exact ‘buttons’ on your metal frame to push. But do you think I buy all that ‘android’ stuff? I see you metal-man. Your external defences and chosen personas betray you to me. Your mere presence here says much and your own self-described and admitted motivations for being here much more. A human being you are, trying to escape itself. But your threats mean nothing to me. I’ve been here before, I’ve been promised before; I’ve been disappointed before. Human beings are my trade and you are just another form of it. Deny it if you want. You are as funny as a monk sitting on a rock while the sun goes by, and sad as well. How much have you given up in imitation of a machine? More like a ‘cyborg’, I suspect. But I stand in the middle to your extreme as I have to the other extreme. I’m Greek. I compromise nothing about my human nature but only control it. Instinct shouldn’t be abolished but harnessed and intellect shouldn’t become autocratic but influenced by intuition. It’s my vulnerability and weakness and how I cope that makes me human and noble. It’s how I deal with fear that makes me courageous. It’s how I let go and reel in that makes me strong. You? You’ve sacrificed a piece of you to gain control over the other because you have little WILL and therefore little personal power. You find power in numbers and negation. Princess Dianna was an android?!!!! Ok, now this is getting interesting. I knew there would be a ‘collective’ somewhere in there. You smell of collectivism. But machines can only ‘experience’, if you can call it that, the human condition by proxy. My, it sounds conspiratorial. Back to ‘reality’ please, sci-fi gets tedious. Do you ‘grok’ me? I get the feeling- that’s a human thing by the way- that I’m going to be exposed to the collectives mythology here, the communal worshiping center, the matrix nexus, the big brain. Any relation to the Star-Trek Borg? “Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated!” But I’m a free-spirit machine-man, I choose death and isolation to assimilation. It’s all or nothing with me. No I think it’s more that you fly in your head more than in the world. Different speeds? I’ve had to slow down to smell the roses and enjoy the sunset before the great darkness takes me into inertia. You are still looking for utopian dreams and you are whizzing along, at high velocity, where the landscape is blurred and you believe you're outrunning existence. It explains your small attention span. You can't interpret what you've disconnected from. You are a forager of spare parts. A piece from here, a piece from there and you build yourself a suit and armour. A little Nietzsche, a little Jesus, some Buddha, a hefty dose of Marx, some new-age stuff and presto we have you. Future man, pulling the strings in silence and saving mankind from itself. But what strings? You can barely comprehend individual humans. Images are false, they are masks. You can wear my mask and not be me. But I see you poser, I see that need in you, that desire to become relevant and to dominate. How …..human of you. But machine-man you saying so or believing so does not make it so. Prove your eye for detail here and now. Show us your perception and wow us with your subtle electronic eye. Posting a, relevant to the subject, opinion is a good way to start, instead of trying to prove yourself to the author and to the invisible huddled silent observers like you are doing. I’ve opened my mind to scrutiny by simply posting my views, in the ‘brief’, condensed and incomplete manner that I have. I figured the details should be allowed to be explored in union with others so discussion can take place and not a monologue. What have you done except offer criticism on my thesis? Look they are watching and commenting. Androids only understand numbers, they measure, they photograph, they weigh, they chemically analyze. Artistry demands more than scientific computations, it demands intuition and feeling and imagination. What do machines know of these things? Now that’s the nicest thing you’ve said about me thus far. Here you display your misunderstanding of what nobility is. I am not here to turn worker ants into queen bees. I allow them to be and want them exactly as they are and where they are. I speak to my kind for my own human reasons. Should I be ashamed of my humanity? No, it is what makes me more than a sheep and more, I dare say, than a machine. Well looky here, android discovered that God is dead and yet He still lives. Welcome back lost soul. There will always be God where there is imperfection. What changes is where He lives and where He can be found and how. I am a Hellene. For me gods are friends and foes, and they exist on attainable heights and not in unattainable dimensions where they mock us from an unbridgeable distance But what do machines know of gods? Geometry, mathematics, weights and measures are your gods. Words, so many words. I can do this and I can do that. It reminds me of those guys that want to display their manhood by bragging about how much they can bench-press while secretly hoping you won’t challenge them to prove it. But if you do they have a ready excuse to be used. Something clever enough to not be obvious. I paint according to my intended audience’s abilities to appreciate. I paint for fun. I’ll be awaiting your works of art just to be mesmerized and inspired. So far all I hear is the whine of a critic that can’t paint at all. Or is that the whine of a motorized ‘machanoid’? Ah look, this machine has a distinctly female predisposition. He doesn’t enter an arena as a fighter, that bears the scars of past battles with pride or with the courage of one risking being defeated, but enters it as a sultry dancer wanting to seduce and be seduced and where no clear meaning will ever be tolerated or exposure risked. Fine I’ll play your game: Dance princess and try to imitate the flow and elegance of human movement. No gyrating mechanical spasms will be applauded. Dance and if I like it I may join you in it. And your belief that I’m filled with anxiety betrays your intentions and needs to me. Carry on, I’m listening. Respect is all I have. Communion is what I lack, a connection to my own creed. The respect and admiration of morons becomes tiresome and meaningless. It is based on the effects of my being not on its essence. But your feeble mechanical attempts to psychoanalyse me, flatters and fascinates me. I learn more about you with your every postulation. Do you come here to stand beside me or to knock me off my pedestal and take my place there? We shall see. That’s a simplistic and easy way to avoid the issue. But “turning you on” is not my intention. There’s that mechanical femininity again. The thing about groups is that the larger they are the more ‘feminine’ they become. I believe I described this in my ‘Feminization of Man’ thread. Masculinity is important in smaller groups or in solitary species. Femininity is aspired to in larger groups where the uncompromising, exploratory, dominating, aggressive characteristics of a man/woman become more destructive and disharmonious. Larger groups depend on an absence of personality and character, smaller ones depend on the reverse. Elitism at its best. Lack of knowledge of what? Either speak or be gone. You can’t insinuate yourself into my presence. You can’t jeer from the bleachers. Step up or shut up. Oh, sorry for my vulgarity. Your sensitive, audio devices must be offended. Show me your machine eloquence. Devalue you?! You’ve shown no value to devalue. There you are again insinuating greatness. How preposterous. You attempt to make yourself special by revealing nothing. How can I devalue what remains elusive and non-committal? You’ve said nothing but only showed me shadows and promised me gardens. Your only position, thus far, has been against mine. But where specifically and why you do not say. You despise, like so many others, my style of presentation. It is with me that you have a problem with not anything I’ve said, really. It’s your penis that finds offence with me. Do androids have penises or is it that which explains your femininity? A bleeding-heart, neo-environmentalist, socialist then are you? This Earth machine-man is a product of strife and struggle, the environment is one of conflict and suffering, nature is indifferent and vicious. Do you propose to redefine Gaia into a machine construct that is based on your utopian imaginings? Do you propose to substitute the ‘survival of the fittest’, because you suspect you aren’t it, with your own brand of Christian or communist collectivism so that you and your kind won’t be threatened by the viciousness and uncompromising reality of the empirical world? Oh, how the physically lacking turn to absolute intellect to save them from their insecurities. They wish to redefine nature because they don’t like her rules and value systems, they wish to take physicality out of the equation. So they escape the flesh and adorn themselves with mechanical devices and distance themselves from ‘primitiveness’, fancying themselves as puppet-masters and 'modern' men of the future. But the flesh is always there, isn’t it android? Under your knobs and lights and buttons and circuitry, it is there. Whether you embrace it or not is irrelevant since it is always there. You think nobility is about semantics? You’re stuck on words android: numbers, weights, statistics, analysis, percentages, definitions. Your machine mind stuck on the surfaces of empiricism. You fancy beautiful flowing gowns even if they are covering mutated abnormalities. You need clean surfaces over your filth so that you will not have to clean it up. You would rather swim on the surface of an sea than risk the darkness of its depths. Machines rust in water. Start by finding it in yourself. Greatness attracts greatness. But there you go again, measuring and weighing. Greatness is felt also. How do you know something is great, or greater than you? You sense it. It exudes its worth. Pretense is unsuccessful. BUT! One must have the right sensual abilities and the right sensitivity to nuance and subtlety. Here chance and genetics mustn’t be under-estimated. If I am a do-do bird then I’ve yet to see an eagle. Are you it? Fly then and let me watch. And here you are back again for a second helping. I represent nothing. I describe it and aspire to it. I am a work in progress and a human being with limitations and deficiencies. But what are you besides a wannabe? Show me your eloquence. Inspire me. I have the audacity to expose you for what you are. You lover of mankind, you servant, you machine of obedience. My kind does not inherit anything they flourish and feed on the environment as it is. We want no change here, only to find each other and communicate our souls. I am my own pupil, YES!!! I do not read things in books and then mimic them. I do not adopt, I explore. I do not conform, I challenge. I do not submit, I adapt. I learn from the world around me directly. You mock my self-teaching, you audio tape device? Whose words are you projecting now, whose voice are you using now, who’s your programmer machine-man? You, like all machines, are a simple information holder. What is programmed in is what is found within. But I do not ‘fret’ over mankind, I do leave that up to you and your kind, I ‘fret’ over my kind, my free-spirits, my embracers of life and of human completeness. You can have humanity and you can associate with it and serve it, to your hearts content. You utopian builder of jails and spreader of disease. I see you now, android, I see your illness that has made you rough skinned and metallic. Machines can be made in a human beings image but they can never be human beings. Pale imitations and vindictive automatons they are. Spiteful because they can never be human but only emulate it. Fenris Wolf I knew you were watching, and asking and wondering and curious. You can’t help yourself. I attract you like a light attracts a moth. Maybe you are gathering information for my future ‘deconstruction’ and exposure as a fraud. Lucysnow Your last post was well said.
No, you didn't know. You assumed - perhaps hoped. Those moths you speak of are all you do attract, anything with a brain knows what that "light" really is. My comment was for an.droid... I find anything unusual interesting. a strange approach, he/she had... intelligent and yet so very odd. Sparks of light. I would not know how to deconstruct you - I don't have the will to do so, any longer. Once you interested me, not now. Did you wait for me to reply, in the other thread? I couldn't be bothered. Other things were occupying my mind. I had that reply all planned too. I'm not female, Wanderer. Therefore, any discussion I had with you would have to be either from a deferential perspective, or it would be a waste of time. You know that. Btw - I noticed the edit.
Fenris Wolf That's right I hoped, go with that. What I Know and don't know, is for me to know and for you to guess at. Are we to assume you are one of those with a brain? You display it so rarely and only when protecting the herd like a good sheep-dog. I know who your intended recipient is but you had to let me know you were there, watching. It was a message meant for more than one. But I interjected anyways just to annoy you. Interesting and odd, indeed, we will see where it will go. But here you are, despite it. Now why aren’t you more honest with me? You and I know it was a calculated symbolic departure meant to portray superiority and indifference. In fact you bring it up here because I did not mention it myself, and as a reminder that you shunned me and that it was supposed to sting and insult me. I suspect you will not reply to this also. It’s how you pretend you are above it all without having to prove it. Curious how out of all your few posts here in this forum the majority of them have been directed at me and in my threads. I know you will now jump on that as evidence of my NEED to be noticed and you will use your psychoanalysis of me to get at me. How? By becoming indifferent and by ignoring me. Let’s see how much it’ll bother me. Proceed. I simply enjoy evaluating you and reading you. It’s how I hone my innate talents of perception. You’re just a convenient target. True your supposed maleness makes you less interesting to me but your original obsession of cutting me down to size was interesting. Too bad you couldn’t keep to the subject, as you can’t here, and you choose to focus on me directly. I am not making me the subject, you are. I’m content talking about monogamy. But here we have another wanting to make me his center of attention. You love this. But I cannot lie, humans are my interest. I love dissecting them. Off topic So, have you asked for a personal meeting yet? Have you invited her over? Has your ‘relationship’ gone beyond the pen-pal stage where you send personal Private Messages, e-mails and/or exchange Forum gossip and harbor secret lusts? Have you told her how much you want to have a more…intimate relationship with her yet or do you still play at the friend part fearing rejection? You know she dislikes weakness. She is wonderful and fascinating and, from what she says, she sounds pretty, as well. What man would not desire such a wild, beautiful, challenging partner? Many on this very forum desire her. But you know this already. But a woman like that is tired of worship and fawning, she needs a challenge, an equal, an appropriate male by her side that will not flatter and become her rug. She’s a wild one she is, full of primitive values and primordial principles. Few ‘modern’ men can measure up. Can you, with your love for the herd and your need to defend it? You know she dislikes that about you the most. Your desire to protect what she despises so much. This is turning into a nice little soap opera, full of intrigue, secret loves, secret desires and confrontations and all that sexy stuff that make human interactions fascinating. I mean to suck it all in. It was meant to be noticed. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! An edit for an edit Your return to add to your response below speaks to the accuracy of my original ‘off topic’ comments above. You must have been fuming all day. But why so insulted, why so hurt? What was ignoble about my comments to you? Were they insulting or degrading? I don't think so. Not the 'Off Topic' ones at least. You are a man, I think, she is a woman, so it is natural for some attraction to take place from either side. If you are lucky both sides will feel it. Was it that they revealed a ‘truth’ in public or that you were exposed so openly to the one you desire so secretly? But you’ve always been attracted to this type of woman, you just have a problem with becoming more sexually aggressive and you spend all this time feigning and pretending and remaining respectful and subtle. She must like subtle but she loves directness, trust me. Speak your mind before she starts thinking of you as a ....friend. Was it because you were trying to play it smooth, aloof and discreet and I ruined it for you? Were you working on her with nuance and linguistic poetry? Did it bother you that she spent so much time on me, of all people, that she admitted some interest, that we found common ground somewhere in there beneath all the ambiguity? Did you warn her about my hypocrisy, did you urge her to ignore me, did you tell her I was a fraud and not worth her time? Did you "discuss" me with her wolfy? I did not mean to step on your ...‘turf’, sheepdog. That is why I pulled out in the other thread. All these back-room politics are amazing. All one needs to do is sit and observe and the inter-personal dynamics become apparent. If you have the right 'hypersensitivity' that is. But she has enough male admirers hanging from her words, are you just another one? She'll lose respect for you if you are. That's why you walk this dangerous road; trying to show interest but not deference. How will you distinguish yourself from the crowd and make yourself stand out in her eyes? All she wants is for someone to "push the gates open" and she'll open right up; all she wants is honesty and directness and she'll reciprocate; all she wants is quality and strength and she'll reveal her insecurity and vulnerability. Did you not read? You and I must have different ideas about what 'nobility' is. I find it interesting that someone that introduced himself to me with a personal off-subject attack in the 'What about Bob?" thread, now wants me to show humility, respect and compassion towards him. :bugeye:
As always. Coward. You may assume anything you please - in fact, you hardly need my permission to do so, you've been doing it since the beginning. The herd is not my concern. You know that, as well. You truly do not understand why your "kind" dislike you, do you - you'd rather tell yourself their motives are less pure. Actually, I was completely drunk and I do have a habit of commenting on strange things at such times. That you seized on it as a calculated response to get your attention speaks more of you than it does of me. Ask yourself why anyone would be, with you. Wrong again. As I said, I had a reply all planned - I was enjoying myself. Then something else came up, and you were forgotten. That you were ignored was purely coincidental... and you don't like it. Those innate talents of yours do need honing, then. So far you've demonstrated only an ability to make those wild swings you speak so disparagingly of. Your sword is dull. Obsession? You have spent far more words on me than I have on you. What does that tell you? Interesting view. I typed one line, to another poster, and you replied. "Off Topic", no less. Incorrect. You have begun this. If you wish to speak of monogamy, then do so, rather than typing half page responses to a one line interjection. As for the "off topic" - Absolutely contemptible. I would not discuss anything like that with you, laddie, or speak of it in such a manner. You speak of nobility? The closest you'll ever come to it is when it steps in you, pausing only to wipe off the mud afterwards. Every time that word "nobility" comes up in one of your posts, I will be reminded of this - the final confirmation. You will backpedal, of course. You will tell me and those who observe it was only an experiment, to see how I might react. You will tell yourself that you were hoping for a response, so that you might study me. And what you will not see is that even if so, the act itself was nothing but filth. Your justification for it, to yourself or to anyone else, means nothing. Yes, you have finally managed to anger me - and it took this. This is a source of your pride? Lord of the Flies, indeed. Another edit for an edit and then again : Were you watching all day then, Wanderer? Waiting for me to respond? Why hide behind an edit? You have not insulted me personally, and you certainly have not hurt me. I doubt you're capable. Your comments were not insulting or degrading to me, but apparently you fail to see how they may be for another. I am angry because you were low enough to involve something which should have remained private in a public conversation. A sniggering little schoolgirl, speaking of things not his to speak of behind the school bike shed. Have you so little respect for the feelings of another that you might wish to drag this out in public? Why not a pm? Unless, of course... you intended for another to see it. Ah, yes. There is your motive. Who is it that you really want to see this conversation? Perhaps there is more than one? Who are the important observers, Wanderer? And why? Don't preach your idea of nobility to me. In many ways, we would agree. In the manner of your approach to this, we would not, ever. Don't expect me to respond to your questions as to my intentions, actions or motives. I do not expect your humility, I don't need your respect, and the idea of your compassion sickens me. Next time, coward, speak to me personally if you have something to say to me. Not to your audience. You are earning nothing other than my contempt.
How is it possible for a debate to continue when the participants seem to be either asserting that they know the other better than the other knows themselves, or are denying that assertion? I wouldnt call it a debate, more a pointless attempt at one upmanship.
Okay guys, let me know the wedding date so I can rescue that Vera Wang from the closet! An.droid: (smiles) Darling a woman knows to exit the field when the men begin to tossle.
Perhaps Xev but this android has an interest in human sexual relations and seems to partake in them himself; why else would he respond to a monogamy thread? Quote:this is more "Pericles vs. The Android" than a battle That's why I edited my post.
*giggles* Remember a while back when some female member began a thread revealing she was masturbating to and had 'fallen in love' with her mechanical android toy? There is so much testosterone dripping from this thread that all I can do is sit back with my needle-point and wait till the wrestling is over!
Lucysnow: Were they monogamous? (Last attempt to be on topic) Or did she cheat on it with her hand? I don't think they're wrestling so much as whacking each other with thesaurus. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It actually reminds me of something --> http://www.beyond-the-pale.co.uk/nicemen.htm Scroll down about halfway to "Suicide of an Alien"
