Becoming a Whore?

[hug-a-tree]

The feminine in males has been really, really victimised. But if you think the female in itself has been meted out the same treatment you are not totally correct. Women, received several important powers in the patriachal society --- that more than compensate for everything they lost.

Also, masculinity itself has received a pretty shabby treatment by the civilised society. Indeed, the civilised society had no place for natural masculinity since the beginning and saw it as a threat. Unless and until it imprisioned natural masculinlity of men, they could never have been imprisioned in the patriarchical/ marriage institution. So the civilised society practically banned natural positive masculinity from its spaces.

Of course it did not just disappear. It survived in negative and mutilated forms. And this is how it got a bad name. Masculinity is seen as something negative, destructive and exploitative. But it is not the real, positive form of it.

Also, the society kept using superficial and often negative images of masculinity as ideals for men --- in order to keep them clamouring for social masculinity, the society's only means of controlling men. In the absence of their natural masculinity men too became heavily dependant on 'social masculinity'.

So you see, females or femininity in males have not been the only sufferers. Someone's suffering has been recognised and someone's hasn't been. It's the latter who has paid the worst price.

So everyones bi, but we don't know it?

 

[Buddha1]

you tend toreveal to me Buddha1, in this thread and in others, that you are not so au fe with mythology

Although in the past I'd leave the discussion with you when it got to this part (about nature, mythology, femininity and patriarchy), because, yes I do not have enough knowledge about mythology --- and its totally difficult for me to understand your concepts.....but I can definitely see that you're barking up the wrong tree.

.....one thread i thought was gonna be good u started youseemed to just forget about

Maybe I did, but then I asked you a question about......what was that, ecclestial something.....you've never replied to that.

but thepoint. yu dont dig that the concept of the Earth being feminine, hence 'Mother Earth' is w idely spread/global anceint one.....Obviously the association is that Earth is home, it nurtures, and is reponsible for the birth of all forms of life

Yes, earth is seen as feminine because it gives birth and sustains, but then nature is not only this earth. There is also the sky which is seen as masculine. And so many other symbols of nature. I think you've built on a theory on the heterosexual stereotypes of men being heteroseuxal, masculine and bad.

so the patriarchal mindset, which includes monotheism and mystical schools, andEastern metaphysics, desigen their doctrines to denigrate BOTH woman AND Nature. if you dont get ths crucial cue, then your shit's bound to be limited in scope of insight, in my opinion

The patriarchal mindset is nothing but a cliche, and a superficial one at that, which seeks to judge men from what feminists see on the outside, compeletely ignoring the pain and suffereing that men go through on the inside. Men and masculinity are as much a part of nature as women and femininity. Men love nature as well as women do!

women hafve NOT had any good deal out of the patriarchy. ae you mad?? they have been demonized. not solong ago the Curch theologians eve wondeed wheter women had SOULS. compare wit Rene Descartes' same absurd idea that animals are mere machines

a.) the ancient mythology and the church are far removed from each other and no comparison is valid. What church did cannot be blamed on men or masculinity.

b.) Sure women have received a lot from patriarchy. We can discuss this again. Soon.

Also with Nayture. we are living in the lEGACY OF cARTESIAN DUALISM, IN THat materialistic science has the idea that Nature is dead/insentient

I see logic in this.....

do you see a pattern here? I do. it is that when a power decides to degrade another, first it must 'dehumanize' it/...and/or dis-spirit it, in order to feel superior towards it and then have power-over

If you mean that men and masculinity have dehumanised women and femininity, then I don't agree. AT least not completely. For me men are as much victims as women and two-spirited people.

so we have Woman, Nature, Gays, peoples of a darker skin tone.......all degraded by silly beliefs from a male mindset

Males are just as fond of nature as anybody else. Even to think otherwise is being biased.

why should it have come from males?

a good plausiable reason is that unlike woman who isfeeling-connecxted with Earth process due to her periods, conception, childbirth and nurturing, usually males haf not felt so, and so certain of them have ganged togther and deliberately decided to take power-over. and to eventually escape what they haveunderstood to be a Feminine trap. for when you look at th etymology of the Eastern concept of 'Maya' you see it drives from feminine associations, ie MA-meter, measure, and Mama

Tooooooooooo far fetched and based on stereotypes.

let me qicikly add. this mindset is not ALL males. it is eliyes whove split their beings in two. mind/'logic' versus body/emotions. the latter always, in patriarchal myth etc., with femininity and the former with masculinity

By 'elites' if you mean 'heterosexual', then let me remind you that till as late as the Greeks men considered those who loved women or were promiscuous with women to be effeminate --- and thus 'unmanly'. Femininity in males had become denigrated even in the times of the Greeks which celebrated love between men as masculine.

The heterosexuals became Elites much later --- gradually as Christianity took hold. Actually heterosexuals did not become elites till the onset of the 20th century. Today, they rule the roost. That doesn't mean you can view the past just by extrapolating 'today'.

You haven't yet answered to the account of denigration of femininity that I have enumerated in the thread "men and masculinity". Perhaps you haven't considered it because it doesn't fit in your concept of things or ideology. But unless you do, we can't get ahead.

 

[Buddha1]

So everyones bi, but we don't know it?

that's more or less the moral of the story!

 

[Buddha1]

But we can't say that we don't know it! Most people are aware of it (although many others are confused because of the way they are brainwashed!), but our society (and its culture, institutions and spaces) don't allow us to express it openly. Most people express their same-sex needs secretly without surpassing the limits of 'heterosexuality'.

 

[Buddha1]

So everyones bi, but we don't know it?

Once we understand this --- everything that was unexplainable earlier, starts falling into line.

 

[Tnerb]

Buddha1, you're awesome, but I am not going to be sexually active with a male ever. I was far too humiliated at how un - loving it was the last time I was brainwashed into it.

I have told a secret, so keep it!

 

[Neildo]

The problem isn't with women who like to sleep around as much as men, the problem is when the girl finds the term "slut" offensive, when she shouldn't. Hell, you can call me a slut, manwhore, or whatever you want and I'll thank you for the compliment.

- N
”

ask yourself WHY you'd feel so smug.
isn't it cause being seen to be sexually promiscuous as a male is more accepted by patriarchal culture?

No, I'm smug because there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why should I not feel confident to say something that is absolutely not wrong? Why should I feel ashamed?

I'd say and do the exact same thing about telling everyone that I occassionally scratch my ass-cheeks when they itch because there's nothing wrong with that either. Oh yeah, and I look at internet porn too!



- N

 

[Buddha1]

Buddha1, you're awesome, but I am not going to be sexually active with a male ever. I was far too humiliated at how un - loving it was the last time I was brainwashed into it.

I have told a secret, so keep it!

I will keep it a secret. But you should also ask the rest of the 15431 members and thousands of guests who browse through these pages everyday to keep it a secret!!!

 

[Dreama]

Buddha1 - are you so insecure in your sexuality that you have to think that everyone must be bi or homosexual? why isn't it ok to just let everybody be whoever they are? I don't understand why you keep insisting that everyone who is heterosexual is just suppressing their 'bi' natures.

 

[Buddha1]

Buddha1 - are you so insecure in your sexuality that you have to think that everyone must be bi or homosexual? why isn't it ok to just let everybody be whoever they are? I don't understand why you keep insisting that everyone who is heterosexual is just suppressing their 'bi' natures.

I can't start the whole discussion from the scratch! You have to go and read my threads and then comment!

In short, its not about me, its what I've found out after 10 years of extensive work with men, including studying history, biology (including wildlife), society, cultures and religion for 3 years.

(If you're a woman then you'd have difficulty understanding this!)

 

[QuarkMoon]

In other words, Buddha, you're gay and you're trying to reconcile it by claiming everyone has a little "gay" inside of them. Sorry, I feel no attraction toward the male ass. Therefore, I have just proven you wrong.

 

[Buddha1]

In other words, Buddha, you're gay and you're trying to reconcile it by claiming everyone has a little "gay" inside of them. Sorry, I feel no attraction toward the male ass. Therefore, I have just proven you wrong.

No you haven't. First you've proven yourself to be a complete ass!

Of course, there are always exceptions --- in nature as well as in humans. If heterosexuals are an exception in the nature, there is no reason why they can't be amongst humans too! We have dealth with the subject before!

Please refer to the thred "heterosexuality is unnatural".

 

[Buddha1]

Also, my experience has told me how to distinguish a true heterosexual from someone who is just pretending. I just need to know some of their views/ attitudes that is all.

 

[QuarkMoon]

Yeah, right. I'll say this, if it's found that women are really bisexual, threesomes will be mandatory from now on! :m:

 

[Dreama]

Buddha1- I have, indeed, read not only this entire thread, but several other in which your defend your homosexuality. And just what is it about homosexuality that you don't think a WOMAN might understand? Though I would find it easy to believe that your experience is only with men. Further, I have worked for many years in wildlife biology, and hetersexuality is the norm.

 

[Buddha1]

Buddha1- I have, indeed, read not only this entire thread, but several other in which your defend your homosexuality.

That you're not being objective or honest is clear from this line. I've never defended my homosexuality. I've always denied I'm a homosexual.

And just what is it about homosexuality that you don't think a WOMAN might understand?

Women understand homosexuality alright. And they get along with homosexuals very well. It is 'straight' men that they don't understand! They believe their masks of heterosexuality.

Though I would find it easy to believe that your experience is only with men.

Unfortunately, I've not had a single sexual experience with another man. I guess it is because, there are enough socio-psychological barriers in my mind --- given by my society of course. I can only deal with the issue on a 'scholarly'/ intellectual level. I think the society has been structured so that two straight men will find it extremely difficult to relate to each other on a sexual level, even with a strong inner desire. And I don't care much for the homosexuals space. They have their own world and world view which I just don't understand, even though I accept.

Further, I have worked for many years in wildlife biology, and hetersexuality is the norm.

The entire scientific community did not know about same-sex activities in the wild life in the 200 or so years that science has been around.

I think you can't get the truth unless you go with an unbaised mind.

By the way if you saw any incident of heterosexuality in the wild, you should report it in the section 'heterosexuality is unnatural' which has proved that there is no evidence for heterosexuality in nature --- that after about 20 or so pages of intense and often heated discussion.

 

[Dreama]

OH!... I understand now. You don't know which word belongs with which activities. Heterosexuality means male and female sex.... which virtually all animals subscribe to. Homosexuality means same sex sex. You know, like you are talking about 'two straight men' 'relating on a sexual level'. Straight people don't HAVE sexual levels with people of their own gender.

 

[Buddha1]

OH!... I understand now. You don't know which word belongs with which activities. Heterosexuality means male and female sex.... which virtually all animals subscribe to. Homosexuality means same sex sex. You know, like you are talking about 'two straight men' 'relating on a sexual level'. Straight people don't HAVE sexual levels with people of their own gender.

Missy, you don't want me to start all over again from the a.b.c. of it! I don't have the energy, neither does sciforums the space.

We've already rejected (at least partly) the western concepts and definitions, and we are not blindly following them, unless they can be proved.

And we have already shown how sex between male and female for reproduction purposes is not 'heterosexualtiy' even if the dictionary says so. We're trying to get at the truth, if you haven't notices.....and the first step is to clear the cobwebs of confusion created by the English language.

Straight people don't HAVE sexual levels with people of their own gender.

To that I can only say, "welcome to the world of men!"

 

[Buddha1]

Oh! and I'm sorry if it shatters your image of 'men' or 'real men'!

 

[Dreama]

Well, certainly I missed the part where you had rewritten the dictionary. Have you been off your meds long?