The Feminization Of Man

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by WANDERER, Oct 20, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spookz Banned Banned

    last night was a revelation. i sliced my penis off
    the freedom is intoxicating

    tomorrow i stab inward
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. RebelWithoutACow Registered Senior Member

    I have man boobs, does that count as a feminine side?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    No, that just means you need the Bro (the man bra

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) Although I do know of one guy who has man boobs and also buffs his nails to the point that it blindingly reflects light... LOL ...

    Errrm also Mooboy, if you have manboobs, that'd mean you have Udders and just think... you'd never run out of milk for your coffee

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Xevious Truth Beyond Logic Registered Senior Member

    I've dated dykes... does that count?
  8. and2000x Guest

    Very good points Wanderer and I agree for the most part.

    Judeo-Christian mentallity (and liberal feminist democracy) demonizes pagan Indo-European virtues as sin. With this comes the attack against the masculine aspects of man. Ideas such as WAR, HONOR, REVENGE, DOMINATION, HEROISM are considered evil concepts that must be supressed and removed to make men weaklings. I recall that during the middle ages the Vikings wrote about plunder and murder as heroic things that benefitted the people and affirmed their power and wealth. The church didn't exactly see it that way though, since they were on the business end of the sword. Now the Vikings are seen as mindless murders and some would even attempt to recast their gods as some fruity feminine hippie deities.

    In the east, especially in Japanese society, upholding the family honor was done through sword, not through word. If someone fell in battle it was sad, but considered a great deed, and the enemies would honor their enemies all of the same.

    The only real traces we have of masculinity in the USA today is Gangsta rap and football. The first is nihilistic and pointless, comprising no vision or ideal other than hedonism. The middle class white kids aspire to be these women abusing 'pimps' (the women seem to enjoy this manly sadism) because it represents an outlet for the frustrations of their feminine and pacifistic society.
  9. Xev Registered Senior Member

    More in depth, we are not becoming levelled so much as turning into a giant shitpot of whatever superficial cultural traditions sell best.

    Not really. It's rather apparent to any thinking person.

    Why troubled? Want to be a saviour?

    The herd will thrive, the weak will perish, the strong will survive. Trying to awaken others is a weak power trip that ultimately leads to coddling the weak.

    Try deviating from the script.

    Yet you'd support the return to a "macho" ideal, which is inherently consumerist and anti-intellectual.

    Yes yes, uniqueness, uniqueness, uniqueness. Not that I disagree with assessment, but I'm tired of listening to the constant yammering about "uniqueness". Aestetics are more important.

    You could try deviating from the script too. We've heard about the Vikings, the Nazis and the need for heroic ideals. Say something new, because I'm bored.

    What I don't understand is how the two of you can be reasonably smart, reasonably able to see through social bullshit, yet completely unable to see through your own.
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2003
  10. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Xevious, Bells, Rebel -

    Please. Do the gene pool a favour:

    Kill yourself, kill yourself
    Why don't you kill yourself
    Don't rely on no one else
    End it all just kill yourself
    Life is just a one way ticket
    Everyone must go around
    Here's a bucket go and kick it
    Slit your wrists without a sound
    When you fo don't make a big deal
    No dramatics, don't overplay
    Cause don't you know that we'll all feel
    Better once you've gone away

  11. and2000x Guest


    Read the article again Xev.
    You neglect the creative aspect of man that thrives for new ideas and innovations. Man is far from 'anti-intellectual', he simply doesn't value the same things women do. Look at the ratio of male to female philoshers, leaders, and scientists.
    As he points out in the article: women are experts at critiquing small social events and appearences that are either of accumulative value or no importance (like OMFG, Joey is going out with Kelly.)
    Men aren't necessarily as concerned with these small incidents. They are looking at the big picture.
    I would agree that the majority of non-feminized men are very brutish and abnoxious in the face of women, which makes them appear unintellectual. These are lower forms of men anyway, similair to make-up drenched American Eagle-wearing women.
  12. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Syncophant. S.R Prozak uses the word to describe those who take a position simular to mine, so you use it. It does not matter to you whether the word accurately describes my position, only that you feel the group warmth involved in referencing someone else's ideas.

    But to address the accusation, yes and no. I am a fatalist in that I've come to reject the doctrine that people are going to become equal if they are properly taught.

    Oh! But you say that this is not at all what you meant (Wanderer knows this. I am his gadfly, when I'm bored and can't find things to read or get high off of). You say that you simply wish to help those who are worthy, to surpass themselves.

    But the weak must perish. I am a less social creature than you, thus more willing to accept the coldness that this principle requires. I am an elitist - this applies to those of my blood as well as every Cosmo-gal.

    Try substantiating your cheap shots.

    How do I, in praising intellect, neglect creativity? You fool, the praise of one necessarily implies praising the other.

    I've not made any such argument about "man" or Wanderer, and anyone with an I.Q above that of a tapeworm would notice this.

    However, what we see as "macho" as a society is a valuation of athleticism over intelligence, monetary power over creativity and artistry, and above all the ability to physically intimidate those around us. Put simply, bullying.

    What Wanderer is striving for (it seems to me) is a return to the heroic Greek ideal of masculinity. Odyssus contra the quarterback. Put simply, Tyler Durden.

    But this refutes this:
    What's your point?
    These people keep our streets clean.

    "To be a public utility, a wheel, a function, for that one must be destined by nature: it is not society, it is the only kind of happiness of which the great majority are capable that makes intelligent machines of them. For the mediocre, to be mediocre is their happiness; mastery of one thing, specialization—a natural instinct. It would be completely unworthy of a more profound spirit to consider mediocrity as such an objection"
    -F.W Nietzsche, Der Antichrist

    And this is where you fail. For all your preaching about elitism, you at heart treasure the egalitarian ideal of having every man, woman and child being an elite. You can go on and on about the need for injustice, for a struggle for life, but when push comes to shove you cannot accept that the "feminized man" is happy in his mediocrity.
  13. and2000x Guest

    This has nothing to do with Prozak. I've used that word since 6th grade before I even heard of him.

    I see your position is established, so I won't bother debating it.
  14. Xev Registered Senior Member

    *Rolls eyes*
    Your application of the label does. Lay off the cheap shots if you wish (as you seem to) to be respected.
  15. WANDERER Banned Banned

    Reply 3

    >"More in depth, we are not becoming leveled so much as turning into a giant shit pot of whatever superficial cultural traditions sell best."

    The current war in Iraq and this whole, “NEW WORLD ORDER” the US is spewing about, can be seen from the perspective of a drive to eliminate all culture and to level mankind into a mass of consuming automatons with no personality or background.
    Look at the US, a culture based on non-culture, and individuality based on non-identity.

    >"Why troubled? Want to be a savior?

    The herd will thrive, the weak will perish, the strong will survive. Trying to awaken others is a weak power trip that ultimately leads to coddling the weak."

    I admit there are still remnants of my past idealistic naiveté, in me. They are difficult to get rid of. BUT
    I also see it as my duty as a sentient, mortal being to spread my opinions and influence the few that may be able to comprehend and utilize these views for their own benefit.

    >“Yet you'd support the return to a "macho" ideal, which is inherently consumerist and anti-intellectual.”

    My dear Xev, after all that I’ve written you still think macho means masculine and ,masculine means consumerism and anti-intellectualism?
    A jock, isn’t what I’ve described as the masculine archetype, although physical fitness and aesthetic physical beauty is the natural consequence of a healthy intellectual mind.
    The Greeks thought a healthy mind can only exist in a healthy body, yet a healthy body didn’t guarantee a healthy mind.
    Don’t take machismo for what I describe as masculinity.
    Masculinity is a state of mind not a display or a hypocritical exhibition.

    >"Yes yes, uniqueness, uniqueness, uniqueness. Not that I disagree with assessment, but I'm tired of listening to the constant yammering about "uniqueness". Aestetics are more important."

    I don't know what you intended to write here: Ascetics or aesthetics so I can’t reply accurately.
    Yet uniqueness is the manifestation of all I’ve proposed.
    Perhaps here a better explanation is needed.
    I don’t mean by uniqueness to imply that everyone should do something different and if he/she does something that has been already done or is being done by another that they are not unique. Uniqueness, for me, is doing the same thing is a different way, or coming to the same conclusion from a different perspective; but more than this uniqueness is being true to yourself and thinking and acting according to your inner character and nature and not just mimicking others and accepting external ideals for your own.
    To be true to yourself, you must of course first get to know yourself fully and completely and accept yourself with all your flaws and perfections.
    Once you really know who and what you are then how can you not be unique?
    Very few people actually get to know themselves before they die; most die in total ignorance or full of exaggerated self-hatred or self-love.

    It is true that automatons and imbeciles are necessary. It is not for them that I speak out or raise my voice into the night. It is for the few, the worthy, the aware that I howl into the night, sharing with them my love of nature, of myself and alleviating, even if for an instant, the loneliness and fatigue of being surrounded by so many sheep.
    Sometimes in the night, through the distance, it is heartening to raise ones voice into the darkness and share with others of ones own kind, the rapture and hope, the horror and pain of existence.
  16. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Aren't they? I'll confess, I used to be one of those over-sympathetic fucks who wanted to save everyone and couldn't understand how the rest of the world could be so callous. I've let myself become obsessed with cruelty, threw myself into the works of the Marquis of Sade and the Comte de Lautréamont and into the most violent musical forms I could find, but still there remains the gentleness and empathy of my over-tender heart.

    In this, I agree. But I wonder for myself how much of this is simply the desire to suceed socially - albeit in a group of people I respect.
    Lowest impulses and highest desires exist side by side.

    No, I don't. But I want you to be clear - especially when speaking to someone like Tablaridden who may not understand well. For they will seize upon you as either a demon to mock and demonstrate their wonderful tolerence in hopes of winning the affections of whatever internet wench takes issue to you, or they will seize upon you to distort your words and revel in their resentment.

    Nietzsche. Orwell. Schopenhaur.
    I'll grant that Nietzsche was an incredibly beautiful man, but an incredibly sick one.
    Perhaps I misunderstand you on the nature of "health", but healthy body is by no means inseperable from a healthy mind.

    I wouldn't - I consider the two to be rather opposed.

    Heartening, yes. But I envy you if your calling is based only on desire and not on the filth of need.
    Wolves howl as a pack, and in solitude to communicate with other wolves. They and we feel that need for warmth for sound evolutionary reasons - an animal alone is much more vulnerable than one in a pack. But that shared warmth becomes a shared validation, a need to look into others who mirror you. And I cannot help but regard this as weak.

    But I'm off your topic. Macho-ness versus masculinity - I feel awfully silly discussing boys - but on this we'll agree. The difference is so easily summed up as defining yourself as "one who is able to intimidate women" and defining yourself one one's own terms. But this leads back to whether one can completely divorce oneself from human validation.

    As Aristotle pointed out, one who lives alone is either a beast or a God.

    As to the meterosexuals, as a woman I find such a man to be somewhat disturbing. One feels contempt for weakness, yet one also realizes that such a person would be the first to become violent and revengeful should their precious "feelings" be hurt. None of us want to be held by someone who cries if they are not held. It shall be interesting to see how long pop-culture keeps this one up.

    But I must not care! "Compassion is the vice of kings" says Sodom.
  17. WANDERER Banned Banned


    Your ‘Amazonian’ persona is intriguing and I can only guess at what circumstances and experiences could have resulted in a female vulnerability being turned into so much masculine cold-hearted indifference.
    Sometimes we hate that which has lead to our suffering and a kind heart, if taken advantage of by others can quickly turn into a cruel stone that bleeds not.

    How can I escape my nature? I submit to it and to nothing else.
    If I am forced to be a slave, then let it be to that which birthed me and not to some human creation or mutation.
    This does not mean that I do not seek to control my nature or to discipline it to my mind, but that, in the end and even when I attempt to overcome my very self, I admit that I am limited by the forces that built me.
    Through my struggle and suffering I fulfil my mission of being the primitive apostle of the superior ones that will hopefully come.

    None of what you mention concerns me.
    In fact, I enjoy the tussle and the insults; they reveal so much about the quality of the one throwing them.
    Why would I care about the thoughts and misunderstandings of lesser beings?
    Should I care when a dog growls at me?
    I may understand why, by previous analysis on its nature and biology and I may even be weary of its sharp teeth, but I am indifferent to its opinion of me.

    But all life is need.
    Living is the act of needing.
    The question is of what quality your needs are.
    Are they simple and shallow or deep and complicated?
    There is no shame in need, but there is shame in not knowing why and what you need and being controled by it.
    Freedom is about choice not about the absence of need.
    The absence of need is death or hypocritical Buddhist distance.
    You deny your need you deny yourself.
    The method of 'supposed indifference' is often used to create the illusion of distance or superiority by those that have suffered by their need in the past.
    To be in control of self, does not suggest to want nothing or to be affected by nothing, it means to be able to choose the things you will aspire to and the means by which to attain them.

    Yes, but how can you or I be anything but weak?
    My writings have been focused in distinguishing grades of weakness not absolutes.
    There’s no such thing as an absolute weak state or an absolute strong state; all is in relation to another. There are only degrees of both.
    I may be strong when compared to person ‘A’ but weak when compared to person ‘B’.
    A qualitative difference only makes sense in relation to something else.

    I can understand your displeasure with your own nature.
    Why, for instance, are we forced to need others at all and be social?
    It’s all based on our biology and instinct.
    Why are we forced to require nourishment and water to remain alive?
    Because of what we are.
    I now do not deny my own nature, even if I know that it limits me and dictates many of my concerns and needs. Now I’m more interested in making qualitative distinctions between needs and wants and discerning which are valuable or noble needs and which are degrading or insignificant.
    I am also making distinctions between degrees of desire.
    We all need the same things, being participants in life and sharing similar biology’s, but some of us are slaves to our desires while others simple enjoyers; some of us are addicted and dependant while others are controlled choice makers.
    To need validation from others is shameful depending on the quality of people you need validation from.
    If I need validation, for example, from morons or from everyone in general, then I am a moron or a helpless shell of a man that is dependant on others to find inner value.
    If, on the other hand, I need validation from more noble sources then I become noble in the process and in turn I validate them.
    This does not mean I am dependant on them, since nothing noble would tolerate an association of equals with a dependant, but that I share my nature with those that can only understand it and comfort me with their presence.
    When I am validated by my kind I in turn validate them.

    Not unless you propose to make yourself into an ‘overman’ during your lifetime.
    We are human beings, and as such, we are needful of human companionship and relationships.
    We are conscious beings, and as such, we are needful of other conscious beings to share our consciousness with.
    It isn’t human validation we must divorce ourselves from but harmful or inferior human validation or validation from just anybody independant of their quality.
    I may not give a shit about my neighbors opinion of me but if I know someone that I respect and consider a thoughtful and wise individual, then seeking some level of validation from him/her is not a sign of weakness but an aspiration to greatness. By placing an ideal you want to reach before you and striving to equal it and then surpass it you become worthy of attaining it.

    Well since I don't believe in gods and I strive not to be a beast, I suppose man should be in the middle.
    To want to be ‘God’ may be sublime but that all depends on the qualities you deem godlike.
    If your definition of 'God' is perfection, then 'God' is truly non-existent and only a creation of the human mind seeking a way out of an imperfect universe.

    Solitude, as Schopenhauer pointed out, is the curse of the thinking man.
    The deeper you are the more alone you become, the shallower you are the more you find others of your own quality and the better you can relate to them.
    But I think, in general, solitude is the curse of all consciousness. No man is completely intimate with any other and we all live and die as single entities, that may share their existence to a degree with others, but never utterly or completely.
    In many cases some never become intimate with themselves, let alone others.

    Compassion, like everything else, is a vice only when it becomes a habit.
    I have no problem with compassion but only in how it is dealt out to everything and everyone until it loses all value.
    What’s the value of something when it is owned by everyone?
    What’s the value of a reward or an honor that is given out to anyone?
    What is the value of love that everyone supposedly deserves?
    What is the value of compassion when everyone has aright to it and everyone must exhibit it?

    But nothing, NOTHING, must come before the love and compassion one feels towards himself/herself.
    Compassion dealt out to others with no loss of self-worth, dignity or self-love is noble; what is not is compassion dealt out to others at a cost of self. That is intolerable and sick.
    Says Wanderer.
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2003
  18. Mucker Great View! Registered Senior Member

    Very good post(s) Wanderer! In the Western world there is a lack of, and an effort to prevent, explicit male authorities. It's true that in some cases authorities will be attacked, but a lack of authority only agitates the population more, and overall I think a dominant authority would be better for all.

    The fe male does have merits of it's own, but these are different to the merits of the male, who must have the fear of God put into them by the castrated society. The yin and the yang must work together.

    Imagine the heartache of the fe male, who has had it's penis stolen, and imagine the fear of the male who will have theirs taken if they do not conform.

    Therefore the fe male is merely a male missing a penis. Thus 'God' (the spirit in it's original form) must be male, because as it's been written, the fe male is only a secondary male!

    But as I have written, there are the two halves each with their own merits, and the two must work together.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Last edited: Oct 27, 2003
  19. Xev Registered Senior Member

    "Persona" is entirely the right word. I'll say, that I am not the insane dominatrix that I seem to be percieved as.

    I despise vulnerability, not so much in others as in myself. Hmm yes, and my sex is rather vulnerable. I find this curious.

    Is this why we are so disliked? I do not mean to accuse you of "simply hating girls" - but you are one of the few who is honest about the matter. Vulnerability in another reminds us of our own vulnerability. We easily come to hate the other.

    I believe you have hit the mark precisely. We may overcome ourselves, but trying to completely destroy everything we dislike about ourselves is not only futile but makes us vulnerable to the attempts of others to mold us to their own desires.

    It is best to be a sort of artist of one's soul.

    Because they rule the world?
    I find myself plauged by "caring" about these thoughts and misunderstandings. Partially because I still allow their opinions to affect me, partially because I find it difficult to let go of my old idealism.
    The "letting go" feels more like submission than release.

    Yes, which is why self knowledge is so important.

    Yes. This is where I disagree with Schopenhaur.
    Seeking the complete absence of pain seems to me quite sickly. To live may be to suffer - but how does suffering itself negate the joy in life?

    Pleasure itself is an illusion. It is merely a name we give to the sensations that we like, that breed contentment. I eat a good meal, I nap after a good fuck, I curl up with a well written but unchallanging book. These things can be commonly defined as pleasurable.

    However, I am also greatly devoted to various forms of self-torture. Not in a sexual way, but there is a certain joy in being able to walk for a mile in the dead of a Michigan winter wearing simply a t-shirt and jeans. There is great joy in the senses, in the exoticism of feeling, in suprasensuality - and I cannot help but see the relentless avoidence of pain as a sign of slavishness.

    In any case, this leads to this:

    Truth, but is it because I aspire to be better than what I am or is it because what I am hurts me?

    Hmm. I am not sure whether I disagree or not. To me, this seems to be simply a much more refined way of being a pack animal.

    And this is what I fear I am. I need validation, critique, affection, conflict and love (love being at heart conflict) from those equal or superiour to me. This I do not despise. But the idea that I am simply a more evolved sort of animal does very much get to me.

    They are mirrors.
    Those worthy of love are those who give a clean reflection. Yet in most one feels as if one as at a carnival, looking through the distorted mirrors that make you look taller or fatter or uglier than you truely are.
    One feels parodied.

    In this case, the problem is simply to seperate the wheat from the chaff. I know only one person I consider wheat.
    You have made me wonder if my contempt for my need is merely an aversion to the pain caused by not having it well fulfilled. I thank you for this.

    Nay. It is only a vice when it controls you.
    I find it difficult to overcome my overly compassionate self. For there are many who deserve to perish, yet to see their suffering causes me to instinctively wish to alleviate it.

    Anything, extended to everyone, is meaningless.
  20. WANDERER Banned Banned


    The interesting thing about that statement is that I am mostly attracted to the more vulnerable and fancy myself as a kind of protector.
    I may dislike female hypocrisy and manipulation but I do not hate women any more than I hate men.
    I believe I’ve already stated that I am a misanthropist.
    What I dislike most about humanity is all the posturing and lies they tell others but that they mostly tell themselves to tolerate existence and their own nature.
    I have no problem with admitted vulnerability, because we are all vulnerable to a degree, but I despise vulnerability masking or pretending it is what it is not.
    The ‘persona’ we adopt is mostly in self-defence.
    What does not know us cannot harm us and sometimes the inability to be totally intimate with another, because we fear human nature and how it may take advantage of us makes us angry and aggressive towards others.

    And here lies the source of my greatest bitterness.
    How can I put-up with stupidity and inferiority just because it has some social status, due to its very weakness and inability TO RESIST and due to past fortunate circumstances; how can I tolerate morons who have been given a title and authority and are bolstered and defended by institutions and laws and have become convinced, because of this, of their own superiority when they are nothing but bugs?
    One more reason not to give a shit anymore and to seek out higher minds to associate with.

    My friends are always astounded by my desire to place myself in physical discomfort and to bear with the elements.
    I regularly walk to my friend’s house, when I’m invited, in the dead of winter and leave my car behind. He can’t understand why I don’t take my car.

    I torture myself weekly by going through an exercise regime that leaves me drained, but surprisingly euphoric and calm.
    There’s nothing like sweating to get rid of excess energy and to cleans the system from free-radicals and unwanted chemicals.
    I believed I’ve covered the topic in ‘Asceticism’.
    The exhilaration of pushing your body to the limit of its tolerance is one I am aware of in myself.
    I actually want to write something about this, as it has been inspired by watching an Olympic marathon athlete- I think she was from some Nordic country- that entered the last lap totally exhausted and she crawled across the finish line while coaches and observers urged her on from the side-lines.
    I still get a chill down my spine thinking about it.
    What a wonderful display of the human spirit and a symbolic act depicting the plight of all mankind.

    Here is where acceptance of self becomes the necessary next step to self knowledge.
    Knowing what your limits are with no exaggerations, either way and accepting it as fact is the hardest thing to do.
    Friedrich submitted to it by dreaming of a future better man, his ‘overman’.
    In the end isn’t love, even self-love, about acceptance?
    The letting go of the ego that binds us to self and makes us resist all external phenomena is why man fails to connect to the larger picture.
    When one accepts himself/herself totally, tries to better the things that are alterable and submits to the ones that are not, then no insult, no threat can really touch him/her unless he/she allows it to.
    You can even hope, and pursue goals without being overly affected by failure.

    The first step to not be an animal, is to realize that you are one.

    There is never a clear reflection, it is always distorted by the mirrors own imperfections.
    For me it’s about not taking the reflection at heart, whether flattering or insulting.
    When you know who and what you are, nobody’s reflection of you, even a loved ones, is overly affecting.

    Yes dissapointment in the food may make one question his/her hunger and hate himself/herself for needing food at all.
    A man dying of thirst will curse his own need for water and damn the forcesthat created him that way.

    I am now compassionate only to the ones that in my mind deserve my compassion.
    To the rest I am indifferent.
    I play with them like bugs and watch them squirm under my manipulations.
    It’s fun.

    I think it’s because, like me, you feel constrained and limited by it and you feel that others may take advantage of your true nature if they became aware of it.
    I mean why should I want certain things and feel pain and suffering when not having them, when I myself never chose to want them in the first place?
    It’s your own vulnerability you despise and then deny to others and to yourself that it exists.
    I accept my own but only challenge others to prove that my vulnerability is greater than theirs. My goal is to become superior as a human being not to become some perfect ‘god’ and if I fail then I will find contentment and honor in the attempt.
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2003
  21. Xev Registered Senior Member

    You know, I shall be a complete hypocrite and say that I find this worthy. Few understand the demands of being protective.

    Same here, but mine is more likely based on resentment - I am candid to a fault, and I find it difficult to care about "socializing" enough to play with people. I am not much of a sucess, and to a degree I resent the sucess of others.

    The world likewise demands hypocrisy and manipulation. I am bad at it - are you? It seems that you could really fuck with people if you wanted to.

    I don't completely mind the posturing. Masking my inner nature has saved my ass a few times, and to an extent it is inevitable in human relationships - at least casual ones. Personality is so multi-faceted that an acquaintance easily seizes upon one facet of the personality and builds their perception around it.
    What I dislike is those (most) who are unable to see posturing for what it is. These people seem to be a sucession of masks, with nothing truely interesting underneath.
    More frightening are those who have nothing under the mask.

    True, but this is also inevitable. The vulgar reason being that to reveal vulnerality - full vulnerability - would be to invite exploitation.
    But my real feeling is that vulnerability is something almost sacred, filthy to be sure but there isn't always such a great distinction between the two. It is something that should be shown only to close friends.

    Mostly. I've adopted personas for sheer entertainment.

    My point is that they are not so despicable. Necessary, even.

    But there's a certain feeling of union when you no longer fight nature but you don't submit to it either. You just feel it. You're part of it.

    Yes. And you're so much more aware of yourself. Instead of simply sitting on a comfy chair and eating whenever you are hungry, you know how it is to be uncomfortable and hungry. You begin to learn your body's strengths and weaknesses so much more intimately than you would have if you'd just taken a quick jog.

    This is beautiful.

    Yes, but active rather than passive acceptance. Nurturing in the fullest sense of the word - of helping to grow.

    I think that this is a big part of it. People become so much less sensitive to things.
    Once or twice in my life I have felt this. Not the death of ego, but more a complete connection to my surroundings. It was as if a million subtleties had opened their eyes.

    This is where most hedonists fail. They concentrate on the intense pleasures like gluttony and sex while failing to see how intensely good the most insignificant things like the weave of cotten sheets feel.

    I'm not sure if I'm explaining this well.

    This is true.
    When one is young and not sure what one is, the way one is reflected drives one insane. I look pathetic! Is that really me?
    Most spend their lives fighting and preening in mirrors. A few are tenacious enough to learn to live with themselves and know themselves.
    This is the height I aspire to. I am tired of lacerating myself.

    Were you always thus or did you grow into the feeling?

    Ah. I know they will. What I seek is to be powerful enough to accept that they will, and no longer be afraid of it.

    Only to others. No, I know my vulnerability.
    I do not, however, know precisely what to do with it. Part of me feels that my candor and gentleness is something noble, another part of me feels that to accept it would be simply so that I could feel like a victim.

    This is so elegently rational. Rationally elegent?
    I love this about logic - the austere purity that it imposes. You fetter an idea this way, but it becomes so much more subtle and profound.
    This is one of the things I like most about your mind. You have a very subtle self-discipline that precludes some of the more dramatic moods but for this reason allows you to flower in a much more profound way.
  22. WANDERER Banned Banned

    and XEV....once again.

    This discussion is veering off the subject, somewhat, and taking on a distinctly personal direction.
    I don’t know to what extent you would want to continue this in a public forum where prying eyes and demented minds can read it, but I will continue.

    I appreciate your candour. It takes courage to admit that other peoples successes makes us miserable, and yet most pretend they are indifferent or, when the bullshit really flies, that they are happy for others.
    The thing about hypocrisy and manipulation is that it demands a loss of pride and a cold heartedness that I cannot offer for long periods of time.
    I know what buttons to push, I have even tried them with success, but after a while I start feeling kind-hearted towards the other or I fail to be able to swallow my pride sufficiently so as to make my game successful [Most of the time manipulation requires ego-stroking which necessitates playing the part of an inferior. This is why women are so good at it.].
    The only way I can talk myself into screwing with peoples minds or manipulating their sensibilities is if I really despise them for what they are or for what they do and then only for a little while before I lose interest or I fail to contain my arrogance.
    When I was a teenager I wanted to become a 'grifter', when I realized how pathetic people were and that even the smartest had weaknesses or illusions that could be used. Later on I became aware that I did not have the psychology necessary to take advantage of others in this way.
    I was too empathic and I had too much pride.

    Well put. This is what I intended to say.
    I am often tempted to put empty husks, that are prancing about like golden idols, into their place and to place my mirror in front of their faces so that they can see who and what they are.
    When garbage pretends to be gold, it either frustrates me or it tickles me, depending on the kind of day I’m having.
    You don’t want to know how many jobs I’ve lost and how many bosses I’ve told-off in the past.
    Now, being older and more disciplined, I try to use their own selfishness and ego to my advantage or to my entertainment.

    Sometimes not even to friends.
    I now reveal myself only to ones that have made the first move of self-exposure towards me.
    It’s my defence strategy.
    In the end there’s nobody that could take full exposure. There would be a loss of respect.
    All of us keep many secrets and only reveal the parts of us we think the other can be trusted with or is able to comprehend.
    It is unfortunate that consciousness is a solitary phenomenon and we all live and die alone, with only, if we’re lucky, a degree of intimacy that alleviates the sense of isolation somewhat and unburdens our soul by sharing parts of our mind’s weight with others.
    Here is where a man needs a female in a purely non-sexual way.
    She becomes his ‘intimate companion’ onto whom he unburdens his soul so that he can protect the little boy within him.
    Ironically this may also lead to a females loss of respect for a male because she is only attracted to strength and full dislocure uncoveres weakness.
    This is why men rarely speak openly to women as they do to other men and why men and women do not really communicate in any deep way.
    You saw how, in the previous Forum, I was attacked and banned because I said things most denied or were not able to accept concerning male-female relationships.
    Living in ignorance and delusion is preferable, to most, to honesty.

    Whenever I leave my home and travel I like to put on a different persona and spend my vacation playing a part.
    It’s escapism pushed to the limit.
    It is also interesting to see how different people react differently towards me only because I change my social background a little.
    A different job or a different history shapes others perceptions because most only perceive exteriors and facades and never delve into the underground.
    For most people a person’s job, his social status, his economic status and his external image is all they need, to ‘know’ them. They judge others by appearances and prejudices.

    It’s a from of ecstasy.
    I once hugged a tree.

    Yes, I also starve myself every so often.
    I go through a day or two of drinking only water and eating only fruit, to cleanse my body and my soul of excesses.
    At the end of the experience I feel wonderful and healthy, for some reason.
    This is why I just can’t understand overweight people and their constant desire to eat.
    I find hunger energizing, my senses become pronounced, my self-awareness increases, my lucidity multiplies.
    I actually feel better when hungry, more alive.
    I can only explain it as a natural reaction of a hunter/foraging species that needs nourishment and so prepares physically for the required hunt.
    I use this technique, not only for health reasons and the benefits I mentioned, but mostly as an exercise for my will.
    The body needs training but so does the mind.
    This ascetic practice creates self-discipline, mental efficiency, intellectual order, self-reliance, and liberty from need.
    Reversely when I eat, especially when I eat too much, I become lazy, lethargic and complacent.
    I also find that through hunger, food becomes more enjoyable, more flavourful and more profound.
    How can anyone appreciate something he has never gone without?
    Can a rich man that has inherited money appreciate his good fortune to its full extent?
    Can a man that has never known enslavement completely appreciate freedom?
    Can a man that has never suffered from illness appreciate health?
    Can a man that has never really suffered appreciate comfort?

    Here is where human superficiality shows its full breadth.
    Most of humanity finds self-worth in acquisitions, in the quality of food, in the size of homes or the image of automobiles; most men find manhood in how many women they’ve fucked, in the size of their penis or the size of their muscles or in money.
    In the process they fail to perceive or appreciate themselves and others fully and they waste a precious opportunity.
    For instance how many men have made love to a woman and not just fucked them?
    How many have experienced the act of intercourse on a spiritual level where two human beings become one, where complete exposure and a deeper level of intimacy is sought after, where it isn't just body on body but soul on soul as well?
    I’m not saying a good, animalistic fuck isn’t enjoyable but that it is better appreciated when something deeper is experienced also.

    I grew into it.
    I was once a bleeding heart idealist.
    I believed that justice and change was a matter of education and awareness and that most men were good but misguided or ignorant.
    Now I know, that it isn’t this or that political or economic system that is at fault, all systems are good on paper, but man himself who takes any construct and finds ways to mutilate it.
    I once wanted to make a difference in the world by saving all of it.
    Now, I only hope to save myself and, if I’m lucky, to offer inspiration towards the very few who will also save themselves.
    When another liberates you, you become his dependant; when you mange to liberate yourself you gain pride and honor. You earn liberty, it should not be given by another.
    I guess my disillusionment with mankind started when I realized mans true nature and humanity's real quality.
    When I saw the stupidity in most people’s minds I questioned my original aspiration and wondered if such creatures deserved enlightenment or salvation. This is why I find Christians, and most religious thinkers, pathetic. [also communists]
    Imagine believing that you deserve eternity and paradise, no less, or believing that you matter in an indifferent universe.

    A victim is only one that does not expect an attack.
    When you expect it and accept it as normal or predictable then you choose it and decide to submit to it, if you so desire for your own personal reasons.
    Then you are no longer a victim. You are in control, even of your own mishaps.

    I leave my dramatic moods for personal interactions and for effect.
    The price of awareness is that it sometimes plunges you into depths of depression and condemns you to solitude, even within large groups.
    Seeing more forces you to enjoy less but to appreciate what you enjoy more. It focuses your desires and makes you more efficient.
    It is obvious that the less you are aware of the more you are content. Animals need so little to be happy.
    My self-discipline is the thing I am most proud of and the thing my friends admire about me the most.
  23. Xev Registered Senior Member

    I know. Deep down I care for people - even those I do not respect. I have sometimes wished to be a sort of Lady Macbeth, but could I be that ruthless and supple? I do not think I'd like to be.
    One also does not want to be dependant on other people for one's power.

    Aye. And requires sustained interest. I cannot sustain such interest.
    I am cursed with the ability to see through people fairly well. Not that I am some master psychologist, but I see what they want to be - how they'd like to be seen, and how this reveals what they are and what they'd like me to be and act like.
    I've experimented with using it, but those experiments just make one feel dishonest. I am not entirely sure what I am to begin with and projecting an "image" just makes things worse.
    Although it can be fun.

    There is a point at which it is like - you cannot fault ants for not inventing calculus. Let them be happy - if they try to fuck you, show no mercy, but otherwise just let it be.
    And some days you are right, it is frustrating and you want to hurt things, to tear off their masks and laugh at their stunned reactions. It is worse when one feels powerless. I do not know your situation economically (I'm not asking) but I am to a great extent at their mercy. I have to feign a lot, and I do not like it.

    Powerlessness makes one so vicious. I think this is why slave revolts are traditionally so much more savage than normal wars or battles.

    But even then, only parts.

    Yes, and this is what makes relationships difficult - how much to reveal? Will this person respect me, see that I am not wholly weak?
    Yet their reaction to our weaknesses often says more about them than it does about us.

    Unfortunate? I am not sure if the alternative would be so wonderful. We'd really have nothing but a hive mind - I doubt there would be any music, science or art.

    Now, this is interesting. I've been told once or twice the opposite - that men do not speak to each other on intimate level because of the fear of competition. That if so and so revealed his argument with his girlfriend to another man, that man would be trying to "steal" her instead of just listening. That if he allowed himself to be vulnerable to another man, then he'd be knocked down. One's vulnerability as the weaker sex makes one a "safe" person to talk to.
    Yet men are rarely truely honest with women. There is always the desire to fuck us- and thus to seduce us - in the way.

    As for communication I do not know if you mean in a romantic way or in the way you feel with your friends. I have little experience with the former so perhaps I only instinctively disagree, but I feel that communication is possible in the latter.

    You were banned because you didn't make them feel good when you said it. Baron Max can use the word "nigger" and offend everyone - but they like feeling rightous indignation at his uncouthness. A clown says the most hurtful things and is kept on a stipend - because those things do not hurt when he is a clown.

    A full vacation indeed!

    Oh yes. I had a conversation with a friend about this a few days ago. He was an honor student in high school - exceptionally good grades. He also was ostracised and dressed in a way that revealed his contempt for the whole affair - ripped jeans, a faded shirt with a band logo, etc.
    One day he goes in to school in a suit. The principal takes him aside and compliments him on having "finally decided to take his studies seriously".

    One can be a different person to them depending on what one wears. It's amazing.

    Starvation makes one feel so much purer. I do understand anorexics. Ones senses just howl in lucidity.

    Attunement. Appreciation instead of complacency.

    Wow. I could have said something very near this.
    I used to be a very ardent democrat, a philanthropist and very, very sincere about my dreams. But the more I saw of humans, the more I realized that one cannot save them. Most don't even see what is wrong, and would prefer feel-good charities to actually doing things that made a difference. I haven't become bitter - but I am becoming more indifferent.

    Yes. But I'd very much like to be the honey in the wilderness. I do not seek dependants or slaves - but I feel a certain fertility, a desire to give and to nurture those who are strong enough not to need it.

    Passive. I was once close to a communist - I believed that some people should take power and make everything better. To run a good government, I thought, simply required educating people and lifting them up out of their misery.
    But...well I'll not lie. It was partly the knowledge that I wasn't going to lead such a group of people, but also the knowledge of what people are like. They want to be saved and protected. I do not wholly despise this - I know the desire to be protected - but I dislike their passivity, and above all their apathy.

    Which I wish for.

    Especially within large groups. Crowds can be an agony.

    Yes, but we also say this to console ourselves.
    Or - I say it to console myself. Is it a feeling of superiourity? I envy those who don't see through themselves, who are content with the way things are and only wish to preform a few philanthropic or destructive acts.

    It is very, very elegent.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page