The Feminization Of Man

[Jan Ardena]

WANDERER,

Jan Ardena asks AGAIN!:

I deduce that the universe is imperfect from the fact that it is not constant and un-altering.
Why it is so is beyond my ability to explain.
DO YOU U-N-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D?!!!!!!!

Oh! So its not that you "don't know" why the universe is imperfect, but it is only beyond you ability to explain the FACT that you think the universe is imperfect.
I U-N-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D.

What is in flux is imperfect or it wouldn’t be in flux if it were.

No i disagree.

What would perfection change to? Imperfection?

Have you any experience of perfection?

Why do I bother?! Now that’s the question.

Stop trying to save face. The truth is, you cannot answer my questions, because you haven't serioiusly thought about your concept. And your over-inflated false-ego cannot handle the fact that you are not as glorius as you seem to think you are.

Just like I figured, another Christian trying to rescue their delusions from the pits of hell.

LOL!!!!
You're talking nonsense, you have no idea where i'm coming from.
And believe me when i tell you, i'm not surprised.

My genes, my experiences, chance, all of the above?
Take your pick.

.....your seriously overgrown head.

Nice?! NICE?!
You think we are here to be nice?

You think we are here to nasty?!

Can you understand how ignorance can be frustrating?

Sometimes, but in this case talking to you has been fun.

Try explaining things to a child.

Not a problem to one who has developed patience. In fact you can learn alot from children.

Jan Ardena.

 

[BigBlueHead]

Ah! Eventually by arguing we hope to learn... Wanderer's already admitted that, even if only in a limited way. Head-butting is only the most basic aspect of argument.

 

[Xev]

No Blue, you don't get it. You're trying to prove your fighting prowess to any available females. You're literally butting heads with the other guy, only - you use the contents of your cranium and not the thick skull.
Whether you're doing this on a conscious level or not is hardly the issue.

And I'm following with interest because...well obviously, because I find this intellectually edifying.
*Chuckles*

 

[WANDERER]

Jan Ardena

Oh! So its not that you "don't know" why the universe is imperfect, but it is only beyond you ability to explain the FACT that you think the universe is imperfect.
I U-N-D-E-R-S-T-A-N-D.

Jesus girl you are the densest head I’ve met thus far.
I repeat, I seethe universe as imperfect, admittedly merely my perspective as all opinions are perspectives, what I can’t explain is the WHY!!!!!! it is so.
One more time:
I can explain to a halfwit why I believe the universe is imperfect but not WHY?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is this way.
ONE MORE TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think the universe is imperfect because it is in flux, because it alters, because it is flowing, because it may self-destruct.
What I cannot do is explain why it is imperfect.
How many fucking times must I say the same god-damn thing before that skull of yours absorbs it?

No i disagree.

Can your pathetically simplistic mind come up with reasonable arguments to support your view or should that statement cover you?
I explained why I think the universe is imperfect why don’t you take your own advice, you twit, and display the quality of your mind by actually saying something besides “I don’t think so” or “I disagree”?

Have you any experience of perfection?

No have you?
Did I not say perfection is impossible?
Earth to Jan, can you read me dear? Are you out there?
Since you beleive that you exist in a perfect universe I assume you have experienced perfection.
How was it? Cold, hot, mild?

Stop trying to save face. The truth is, you cannot answer my questions, because you haven't serioiusly thought about your concept. And your over-inflated false-ego cannot handle the fact that you are not as glorius as you seem to think you are.

I'm obviously not as "glorious" as you think I think I am but damn if i'm not more glorious than you.
Save face to you Jan? You are assuming you are worth the trouble.

Actually I'm trying to entertain myselfbut you can't even offerme that.
You are so thick that it takes too much effort to even mock you.

.....your seriously overgrown head.

Thanks that's where I keep my brain.
I bet your head is tiny and thick.

You think we are here to nasty?!

To do the nasty or to be nasty?
Your rambling is unreadable.

Not a problem to one who has developed patience. In fact you can learn alot from children.

Things I've learned from Jan Arden:
1- Never involve yourself in a conversation with a halfwit.
2- Children and idiots frustrate me.
3- Once you are forced to repeat yourself to another, move on.
4- Philosophy isn’t for everyone.

 

[Jan Ardena]

I repeat, I seethe universe as imperfect,

Well in future say so instead of throwing it around fact.

admittedly merely my perspective

"Merely" is a good word.

what I can’t explain is the WHY!!!!!! it is so.

So far you've explained nothing.

I think the universe is imperfect because it is in flux, because it alters, because it is flowing, because it may self-destruct.
What I cannot do is explain why it is imperfect.

Flux; 2 : a continuous moving on or passing by (as of a stream)
3 : a continued flow :

You cannot explain your beliefs because nothing in them suggest imperfection.

Can your pathetically simplistic mind come up with reasonable arguments to support your view or should that statement cover you?

Easily. The word "flux" describes and action not a quality, so it would be pathetically simplistic of me to jump to the conclusion that it somehow means (imperfection), only a fool would attempt such a thing.

No have you?

As far as i can see and understand, the universe is a flawless machine. If and when i see imperfection, then i will consider changing my mind.

Did I not say perfection is impossible?

If perfection is impossible, then imperfection is also impossible. You can't have it both ways.

Earth to Jan, can you read me dear? Are you out there?

Don't do that.
Thank you.

Since you beleive that you exist in a perfect universe I assume you have experienced perfection. l

Yes, a perfect universe.

How was it? Cold, hot, mild?

It consists of of all the above.

I'm obviously not as "glorious" as you think I think I am but damn if i'm not more glorious than you.

You foolish man, can't you see that this type of bravado, has been, is and will be the downfall of man. Try and use your intelligence for once, glory cannot be self-proclaimed, to do that is to take up residence on a fools paradise.
1 a : praise, honor, or distinction extended by common consent :

Save face to you Jan? You are assuming you are worth the trouble.

It has nothing to do with me, you're the one who is digging a grave for himself. Take my advice and either quit now, or try and be less egotistical and more courtious. I personally won't think any less of you.

Actually I'm trying to entertain myselfbut you can't even offerme that.
You are so thick that it takes too much effort to even mock you.

"Trying"..."too much effort", these sound like the words of a dying man. The rest sounds like a blind and foolish man who cannot see that he is about to be slayed.
"Comical Ali" springs to mind.

To do the nasty or to be nasty?
Your rambling is unreadable.

You seem to have read it. This sums up your philosophy; the universe is imperfect and I don't know why.

Things I've learned from Jan Arden:
1- Never involve yourself in a conversation with a halfwit.
2- Children and idiots frustrate me.
3- Once you are forced to repeat yourself to another, move on.
4- Philosophy isn’t for everyone.

Not what i hoped for, but it's a start.

Jan Ardena.

 

[WANDERER]

There's a saying that goes like this:
"Idiots will pull you down to their level and then defeat you with their experience there."

You win.

If the concept of how change indicates imperfection baffles you, then so be it.
If you can’t imagine what a state of perfection would be like and why, then so be it.
You indicate a supposed perfection of mechanisms but why these mechanisms would even be necessary in a perfect universe doesn’t seem to disturb you, so be it.
If decay, destruction, creation, asymmetry fail to indicate imperfection in you mind, then so be it.
If the possibility that the universe will either fall upon itself or grow into a state of cold, dark oblivion doesn’t indicate imperfection to you, then so be it.
If your own imperfection does not make you wonder about how something imperfect can exist within something perfect or be a product and a particle of something perfect doesn’t raise a red flag to you, then so be it.
If you so desperately need to rescue the idea of perfection so as to justify the idea of a perfect God, then so be it.
If you need to pacify your fears that your existence may be meaningless so as to give your pain and suffering purpose, so be it.

Now go off and play with the other retards in the ‘Free Thought’ or ‘Religion’ or ‘Paranormal’ boards.

 

[Jan Ardena]

WANDERER,

You win.

And I thank-a-you.

Jan Ardena.

 

[Hastein]

Man is nature. Man is nature looking at itself.

Good point I failed to realize. Man is conscious of the universe, thus he is the universe conscious of itself. I guess I got caught up in a J-C mode of thinking. (Hits self in head)

 

[WANDERER]

Good point I failed to realize. Man is conscious of the universe, thus he is the universe conscious of itself. I guess I got caught up in a J-C mode of thinking. (Hits self in head)

Man IS the universe, he is a piece of it, therefore when he looks outward he is really looking inward.
Just like a brain is part of the human being and when it looks at the body it is looking at itself.
NO?!
As a brain cell is to the body so is man to the universe.
So when we say man is imperfect we are saying the universe is thusly.

 

[Buddha1]

It is, in my view, evident that the slow degradation of man has reached an all new high in western societies where the leveling of man has demonized the male type and slowly impoverished the male archetype.
In a world where female demureness, willing subjugation and acceptance of authority is preferable to the more rebellious non-conforming male character the trend towards male redefinition and eradication persists.
We can see evidence of it in pop-culture, in how gender roles have mingled and blurred and in how recent homosexual acceptance has destroyed any gender differences and imposed an anxious unnatural loss of identity and purpose.

Disciplining myself to the rules of this Forum I will not post the entire essay of my thoughts on the matter at hand but only urge any that are interested to visit my web-page and read the entire 14 pages before they comment.

http://hometown.aol.ca/c66c/myhomepage/philosophiespolitics.html
Click on 'The Feminization of Man' and enjoy.

I agree that forced feminisation of men is directly related to the final subjugation of men (natural femininity is great though!)--- the pathetic position we find him in the west.

But the actual culprit is the forced heterosexualisation of man. Of cutting him off from other men, isolating him -- breaking him from other men and taking away his power to bond with other men --- the basic target being the man's power to sexually bond with other men, which is the source of his natural masculinity.

Man has been forced to 'bond' with women. How else do you think this can be achieved if not by feminising the man and masculinsing the woman?

How do you expect a boy who grows up with women to be masculine? And I'm not talking about the negative masculinity as depicted by western 'macho' image.

Homosexuality (i.e. marginalised and feminised male-male sexual bonds) is a direct result of the forced heterosexualisation of man.

For more information and evidences on all of the above visit the post Heterosexuality is unnatural (earlier it was more specific like "Heterosexuality is queer", but thanks to the moderator you have now to wade through pages and pages of junk to find out the necessary posts!)

 

[Satyr]

I agree that forced feminisation of men is directly related to the final subjugation of men (natural femininity is great though!)--- the pathetic position we find him in the west.

But the actual culprit is the forced heterosexualisation of man. Of cutting him off from other men, isolating him -- breaking him from other men and taking away his power to bond with other men --- the basic target being the man's power to sexually bond with other men, which is the source of his natural masculinity.

Man has been forced to 'bond' with women. How else do you think this can be achieved if not by feminising the man and masculinsing the woman?

How do you expect a boy who grows up with women to be masculine? And I'm not talking about the negative masculinity as depicted by western 'macho' image.

Homosexuality (i.e. marginalised and feminised male-male sexual bonds) is a direct result of the forced heterosexualisation of man.

For more information and evidences on all of the above visit the post Heterosexuality is unnatural (earlier it was more specific like "Heterosexuality is queer", but thanks to the moderator you have now to wade through pages and pages of junk to find out the necessary posts!)

Jeez, you’re not taking this Wanderer idiot seriously, are you?

Can’t you see how he’s compensating for his inability to get laid or how he’s using his maleness to excuse his many other deficiencies?
He's a walking soar.
Everyone already knows this Wanderer moron, from his earlier attempts to justify himself to the world.
Do some research!!!!

The only good and healthy perspectives are those which bring people together and those that make us feel good and happy and secure in our identity.
No psychological undercurrents there.

In fact the wisest course of action is to not say anything at all or simply to repeat what other people have said, so as to avoid the discomforts of exposing yourself publicly.

 

[Xerxes]

*Ahem* Some of us are quite comfortable exposing ourselves publicly.

 

[Satyr]

Yes, and how clearly you do so through your – how did Heidegger put it? – “idle talk”.

 

[Xerxes]

Actually, it's more of a joke.

 

[Satyr]

And that’s why Satyr plays.

 

[Buddha1]

Jeez, you’re not taking this Wanderer idiot seriously, are you?

Satyr is one possible way to dismiss someone or to prove one wrong (if used properly i.e., and preferably not exclusively). Another strategy is to take him seriously but turn his thesis on him.

I see nothing wrong with the fact that man is oppressed and feminised in the west. The other part of his analysis I don't agree with.

 

[Buddha1]

Satyr is ......

Look at me, I'm using your misspelling.....the post should read......

Satire is one possible way to dismiss someone or to prove one wrong (if used properly i.e., and preferably not exclusively). Another strategy is to take him seriously but turn his thesis on him.

I see nothing wrong with the fact that man is oppressed and feminised in the west. The other part of his analysis I don't agree with.

 

[Satyr]

Look at me, I'm using your misspelling.....the post should read......

Misspelling?
My we are dense.

Satire is one possible way to dismiss someone or to prove one wrong (if used properly i.e., and preferably not exclusively). Another strategy is to take him seriously but turn his thesis on him.

Or as a way to have some fun at the expense of another whose opinion is so stupid, only satire - did I spell that right?- can be used to make him interesting.
My only other option is dismissing you totally.

I see nothing wrong with the fact that man is oppressed and feminised in the west.

And this fact is what makes you so, wonderfully, you and exposes your motives and psychological needs.

It’s not oppression and feminization that bothers you. You actually like it.

What bothers you is that this feminization is not happening fast enough to satisfy your immediate psychological needs, due to resistant instinctive remnants from an environmental past you would like to believe were all artificial, and you wish for a future where humanity is a hermaphroditic species and where sex is simply a recreation and a way of "bonding" and finding belonging and safety.

In other words: You’re [deleted].
Unable to live up to some primitive notion of maleness you attempt to reinterpret it by claiming it’s a social invention and thusly easily reversible.

Thing is homosexuality, in mammals, is mostly used as a method for establishing social harmony, where the independence and natural dominance of maleness is usurped by making him take on a more feminine social psychology, or it is used as a symbolic display of dominance, where the penetrator establishes authority over the penetrated, reminiscent of more natural sexual roles.

Proof, once more that the feminine type is more conducive to social groups and so all characteristics of femininity are nurtured and become communally desirable.
Maleness, as it participates in the psychology of both males (mostly but not always) and females (to a lesser extent) is a genetic mutation that has run its course and is quickly becoming obsolete.
Even in past environments, maleness is often excluded or minimized in its participation. A far too volatile element to be controlled and made productive to the whole.

The other part of his analysis I don't agree with.

What part?

 

[Walker]

Ah, how I've missed reading the threads of hostile and defensive moral fundamentalists, their posts bristling with the quotes of those who surround them, and in turn, the anxious, overintellectualized retorts, like spikey defenses raised high from the precarious shelter of an...

...Orc...burrow...

...nvm, back to playing WoW. Have fun kids.

 

[Xerxes]

Maleness, as it participates in the psychology of both males (mostly but not always) and females (to a lesser extent) is a genetic mutation that has run its course and is quickly becoming obsolete.

'Maleness' is not a genetic mutation by definition. Sex is controlled by the whole chromosome, not individual genes.