The Feminization of Man

[Xev]

Like.

What does that have to do with the status of psychology as a science?

How your adolescent experimentations and your attempt to live on the fringe will work out we shall see.

Ahhh, so now accepting society's mores is the correct thing to do, the strong thing?
Funny, I thought that was all "feminized."

All sexual drives and desires which are not strictly interested in reproduction expose the individual's inner turmoil or anxieties.

Some people enjoy the physical act of love. Imagine that!

A man wanting another to shove his penis up his ass, and calls this love, is also a symptom.

Oh, and now we get to the good stuff! Whose penis do you want shoved up your ass?

That sex in more sophisticated organism takes on added roles as a social lubricant or a psychological pressure release is evidence of the repression all social interactions cause in individual organisms that must compromises and control certain drives and expressions of self so as to remain acceptable and welcomed.

That explains bonobos.

The relevance is that you are a symptom of decadence and an environment where sex is trivial and only a pastime or a form of escapism.

Oh, having a man who makes you come hard enough to make your eyes roll back is hardly trivial. Actually, cultures have recognized the spiritual potential of sex since, well, Babylonian times.

The decline of the western traditional family is another symptom.

The "traditional western family" is an invention of the past 150 or so years.

I'm enjoying what these symptoms lead to and working to make that "decline" useful. You're hunting down women desperate enough to make a family.

And yet it underlies many 'progressive' ideologies, as a given.

That's very nice, but besides the point: few of those are hot issues in academic philosophy.

In racial matters, for example, color is deemed irrelevant and skin-deep, just as beauty is to comfort the less than beautiful.
And yet we use color to determine quality in every other area.

This would be a good argument from analogy if people were peaches.

Your feminine weakness?
There's little about you that fits this label, unless you force it or play that part to find solace in being accepted and in finding a boyfriend.

Thanks! And I'm doubting the latter: he's teaching me fencing in the near future.

Who the fuck are you talking to here?

Anticipating your insults. I do a good Satyr-impression.

"Your anticipating my insults reveals your typically feminine mind, which sees openness and vulnerability as states worthy of respect, because you are STUPID, STUPID, STUPID!"

Having mentors or minds you share opinions with is, for you, something shameful?

Nope. But you pass cheap-o Nietzsche off as if it's your own ideas, you don't credit your mentors, and you lied to make it sound as if I was the one so fixated.

How [insult deleted] are you?
A small town doesn't exist on tis own. It is a small town in a large nation. It isn't independent from it.

I'm well, thank you.
And, that is true, but nothing is independant from everything else. So really, you have no point.

 

[Satyr]

We're men, we're men in tights
We roam around the forest looking for fights
We're men, We're men in tights
We rob from the rich and give to the poor, that's right
We may look like sissies
But watch what you say, or else we'll put out your lights
We're men, we're men in tights
Always on guard defending the people's rights

La la la la la la la la la, la la la la la la la la la...
lalalalalalala.

La la la la la la la la la, la la la la la la la la la...
lalalalalalala.

We're men, manly men, we're men in tights Yeah!
We roam around the forest looking for fights
We're men, we're men in tights
We rob from the rich and give to the poor, that's right
We may look like pansies
But don't get us wrong, or else we'll put out your lights
We're men, we're men in tights, tight tights
Always on guard defending the people's rights
When you're in a fix, call for the men in tights

We're Butch!!

Ballsy, you ignorant [insult deleted], your little song only shows how pathetically out of it you are.

did you get from everything I've said that the term masculine refers to some berserker, Neanderthal, drinking, and fighting and farting and destroying indiscriminately?

Brown Cow....it's a way of looking at and facing the world.
A spirit of Becoming.

 

[draqon]

Hey I copied what Satyr wrote for reference, here (before it was arrogantly edited by Bells)

"Ballsy, you ignorant slut, your little song only sows how pathetically out of it you are.

did you get from everything I've said that the term masculine refers to some berserker, Neanderthal, drinking, and fighting and farting and destroying indiscriminately?

Brown Cow....it's a way of looking at and facing the world.
A spirit of Becoming."

 

[Xev]

Was it this dull back in the Glory Days too?

No. Now we just poke at Satyr for old-time's sake.
You simplistic half-wit.

 

[redarmy11]

No. Now we just poke at Satyr for old-time's sake.

Fun but too easy. Is all that humourless severity an act?

 

[Xev]

Fun but too easy. Is all that humourless severity an act?

You'd know the answer if you weren't a feminized man-child!

 

[draqon]

Fun but too easy. Is all that humourless severity an act?

they are treating Satyr with more evil than Satyr is, while mocking and laughing along the way.

An image comes to mind: Satyr working in a field as a slave and two daughters of Satyr's master come along and start teasing him, than spit on him, curse at him, while throwing sand into his eyes...while he is working in the sun.

 

[Satyr]

What does that have to do with the status of psychology as a science?

Originally Posted by Xev
I said "science." That excludes Freud and Jung.
”
Like.

What is this one of your usual evasive tactics?

Ahhh, so now accepting society's mores is the correct thing to do, the strong thing?
Funny, I thought that was all "feminized."

Oh Jeez, the princess is scrambling again.
Are you following the reasoning?
If there were a way around it I wouldn't be here talking to you nor would I give a shit about what these imbeciles in this forum thought or said.
As things stand this is the environment I must adapt in or perish. These imbeciles are my bread and butter.

Have I told you how much they like me at my new job? All you got to do is allow morons, like you, believe that they are in control or better than you.
Not so easy when there's ego involved and the other is just too pathetic to warrant any act.

If living in some self-exiled fringe works for you, for now, then good for you.
Get back to me when the cuteness of you being a 20-something year old expressing her rebelliousness wears out and you become some worn-out old hag whithering and full of vitriol agaisnt those that didn't live up to her naive expectations and girlish fantasies.

You have a thing for purity. That's your weakness.

Some people enjoy the physical act of love. Imagine that!

Yes.
And why is that?

Oh, and now we get to the good stuff! Whose penis do you want shoved up your ass?

Why yours my precious. I thought you already knew that.
Didn't i give you enough hints?

This is where your adolescent mind finds a distraction to run to.
You belong here, you know. These are your kind.
Despite that act you put on a few years ago, these are your kind and that's why you despised them so, back then.
Now you are coming to terms with it and you are looking for a compromise to both retain your sense of superiority and belong at the same time.

How do you do this?
You convince yourself that the act is your pure self and that all those repressed parts of you drugs and alcohol help you express are the real you.
The real you you were denying all tis time but that now you've found and you want to explore.

That explains bonobos.

Indeed it does.
It also explains why certain individuals need sex to feel good about themselves or to define themselves.

Oh, having a man who makes you come hard enough to make your eyes roll back is hardly trivial. Actually, cultures have recognized the spiritual potential of sex since, well, Babylonian times.

Yes.
And so is popping pills or drinking vodka or doing drugs.

The "traditional western family" is an invention of the past 150 or so years.

A cultural one.
And.

I'm enjoying what these symptoms lead to and working to make that "decline" useful. You're hunting down women desperate enough to make a family.

I knew this would turn personal once you found your own stupidity being forced upwards into consciuosness.

I wonder what this boyfriend of yours is, particularly after crying over why males are interested in materialism and money.
Why do you think that is, sweetheart?

But when someone like you can't find an answer to a challenge they cast aspersions to slither away into insinuation. Like that octopus and its ink.

You know it suits you this 'feminine' part you never were and this doping yourself up enough to become tolerant of those imbeciles you call friends.
How embarrassed you once were of them.

And, of course, your relationship with them must be one of equals and of purity and of symbiosis.
Your naive ideals will have it no other way.

How many drinks does it take you to convince yourself of that one?
Babycakes your mind is a male one. The other parts have atrophied into oblivion and yet they provide the bedrock of your nature.
A cotnradiction, you say?
Hardly.

It takes great effort for you to get in touch with that repressed little girl mommy pushed into the corner and circumstances didn't allow to venture forth. You have to inebriate yourself to feel anything or to allow yourself the vulnerability to feel openly, when other do so not to feel.
Your missing...what did you call it?....A piece of software, a module.

You need books to teach you what the hell is going on around you. You are lost without them. The inebriation helps because you just don't give a damn then and others find you fun and funny and more plain and easy.
You make yourself approachable when you want to run into the fields like a feral child, occupying yourself with spiders and ants and bugs.

That's very nice, but besides the point: few of those are hot issues in academic philosophy.

That's right, precious.

This would be a good argument from analogy if people were peaches.

And what are they, these humans?

Thanks! And I'm doubting the latter: he's teaching me fencing in the near future.

Good for you.
Have fun.
And what is this supposed to be evidence of?

Nope. But you pass cheap-o Nietzsche off as if it's your own ideas, you don't credit your mentors, and you lied to make it sound as if I was the one so fixated.

I haven't read him in years. Weren't you the one carrying him around under your arm like some kind of Bible, once upon a time?

But you did enjoy the more ambiguous Thus Spake Zarathustra.
The rest of his stuff was just too direct and insulting to you, wasn't it?

I was always more keen on Schopenhauer, anyways.

Did you expect some Unabomber shack in the middle of nowhere, where your inadequacies would not be as apparent and the seclusion would be enough?
Princess, a hunter needs game.

How what am I?
And, that is true, but nothing is independant from everything else. So really, you have no point.

What are you using artificial absolutes to formulate a response now?

You used the example of a small town to try to challenge my assertion than smaller groups are more tolerant of diversity and then, having no actual response to what I said, you evoke some transcendental Oneness to find a way out of your own stupidity.

 

[Satyr]

they are treating Satyr with more evil than Satyr is, while mocking and laughing along the way.

An image comes to mind: Satyr working in a field as a slave and two daughters of Satyr's master come along and start teasing him, than spit on him, curse at him, while throwing sand into his eyes...while he is working in the sun.

Don't you get it?

The weakling, once it has failed to confront that which it finds threatening and disturbing pretends it was playing all the while and that its ineffectiveness and weakness was more pretended and an act.
That it was in control all along.
It's a defensive mechanism bolstered when the experience is shared by more than one. then they group together, supporting one another in their attempt to escape the implantations, by laughing and back-slapping.

It's very telling.
It's a similar mechanism that makes someone laugh at a joke he doesn't get. He laughs just so that he doesn't look like an idiot for having not gotten the punch-line.
If in a group where more than one didn't get it then the laughter becomes contagious; the focus turns on the laughing itself and away from the joke that went over their heads.

It's like a fool pretending he's a conman so as to insinuate that he is not a fool.
What conman would actually reveal he is tricking the other and what playa would brag about playing?

Either a foolish one or a failed one. A braggart wanting to save face to himself.

Watch the fool try to redirect:

I'm enjoying what these symptoms lead to and working to make that "decline" useful. You're hunting down women desperate enough to make a family.

Very little to do with the topic but a direct assault on the producer of what frightens or causes discomfort.

Here the insinuation being that she, unlike most women, chooses to not have one because she is not desperate enough or she is free of such bourgeois attitudes.
Also insinuating that her boyfriend, unlike the norm, is not desperate at all but is with her because she is so powerful or unique or valuable...not as a family making possibility but as a pure character and intellect - her genuine character.

A genuine character contradicted by her behaviors and desires.

Poor thing avoids the hard truth that all relationships are based on need.

If she didn't know better her assault would be one directed at sexual potential.
She would use the caricature of the misogynist nerd, living in daddy's basement and that has never kissed a girl.
But she can't use that one so she scrambles for another sexual innuendo as do all weaklings and women wanting to find a man's weak spot.

Of course she neglects the past and her own weaknesses. She explains them as the consequence of her youth and inexperience and not of this desperation or need, idolizing and seeking fulfillment.
Different to her present condition only in cautiousness and subdued romanticism.

 

[Xev]

What the fuck?
Satyr dear, you are the one who took an exchange between me and Mikenostic out of context, harped on my personal life, have been apparently scouring the forums for whatever threads I start that pertain to males, and now you are dishonest enough to accuse me of attacking you personally?

Of course she neglects the past and her own weaknesses. She explains them as the consequence of her youth and inexperience and not of this desperation or need, idolizing and seeking fulfillment.

Is this thread about me? I am somehow remiss in talking about my past which is - germane to any of these topics? And my past as, what, regards here? God, in that case I feel sorry for you, it implies that your persona here is the same as the way you live in the real world.

If there were a way around it I wouldn't be here talking to you nor would I give a shit about what these imbeciles in this forum thought or said.
As things stand this is the environment I must adapt in or perish.

This still all amounts to "I have found the way, o brothers!" People live in the world as they wish to. If you wish to avoid the "imbeciles," why don't you stay off forums, not watch t.v or movies, go out as little as possible and so on. Instead you seek out such contacts, at least on the internet.

And, culture forces you to post on Sciforums? Really?

Originally Posted by Xev
I said "science." That excludes Freud and Jung.

Like.

That's your entire response, the word "like" followed by a period. Now, either you're on crack or "Like." is a legitimate answer to that question.

Yes.
And why is that?

It brings a legitimate good into the world. We're biologically prone to it. It helps us feel closer.

Indeed it does.
It also explains why certain individuals need sex to feel good about themselves.

Bonobos are a prey to modern neurosis? Really?

A cultural one.
And.

Culture changes. Holding on to an outmoded and useless concept does no good.

Yes.
And so is taking pills or drinking vodka or doing drugs.

When not bastardized by consumerism or trivialized as a way of escapism (your word).

You know it suits you this 'feminine' side you never were or doping yourself up enough to become tolerant of those imbeciles you call friends.

I never was a feminine side? Oh darn, I want to be a feminine side.
Your essay, if I may call it that, elevates the "masculine," your other essays assail (cute!) "feminine" ideals like openness, sympathy, vulnerability, love. You claim these as symptoms of a decaying culture. I agree that the prevalence of some things - like the way we expect people to express approved emotion at all times - is not a pretty thing.
This is the topic up for debate: whether these things are actually helpful, whether they are natural, whether encouraging them is a good thing.

However, my defense of such things has nothing to do with my femininity or lack thereof. We have established that I am a butch-dyke nympho wearing combat boots and spikes, can we move on?

I haven't read him in years. weren't you the one carrying him around under her arm like some kind of Bible?

Yes. Also, I have pretty much everything Nietzsche ever wrote, and a good quarter of it in German.

I will reiterate:

Nope. But you pass cheap-o Nietzsche off as if it's your own ideas, you don't credit your mentors, and you lied to make it sound as if I was the one so fixated.

In that specific case, where I was criticizing your inability to accept your influences, you lied.

You used the example of a small town to try to challenge my assertion than smaller groups are more tolerant of diversity and then, having no actual response to what I said, you evoke some transcendental Oneness to find a way out of your own stupidity.

Your response had no meaning - everything is interconnected, cities and towns and, it follows, groups. Subcultures are just as fixed in the meta-culture, therefore anything that disqualifies small towns for being interconnected with the larger culture, also disqualifies sub-cultures, groups of friends, bands, zombie fighting militias and so on.

Your only other example could be a group that existed before culture existed, and neither of us can do more than speculate about that.

But then, that's all you do. Speculate about why people are the way they are, speculate as to their weaknesses and inequalities and desire to hurt you, and when all that fails, speculate about their personal life. Although I am amused that you call Bells, a family-oriented lawyer, a slut.

 

[Satyr]

What the fuck?
Satyr dear, you are the one who took an exchange between me and Mikenostic out of context, harped on my personal life, have been apparently scouring the forums for whatever threads I start that pertain to males, and now you are dishonest enough to accuse me of attacking you personally?

Ha!
"Scoured the internet"?
It's all here, Princess of the Dark...What's there to scour?

Don't flatter yourself so desperately. What is really going on here only you, perhaps, and I know and who scours the internet is already known. you leave a trail, Princess...Didn't you know that?

Are these games indicative of this style you were once so proud of?

Is this thread about me? I am somehow remiss in talking about my past which is - germane to any of these topics? And my past as, what, regards here? God, in that case I feel sorry for you, it implies that your persona here is the same as the way you live in the real world.

Yes.
That's it.
Turn the tables, Princess.
I love watching you squirm.

This still all amounts to "I have found the way, o brothers!" People live in the world as they wish to.

Which paragraph states this?

I'm describing a phenomenon.
All other assumptions are those of insecure, fearful [insult removed] like you are.

That's your entire response, the word "like" followed by a period. Now, either you're on crack or "Like." is a legitimate answer to that question.

Like...Give me an example, [Insult deleted]!
Or do you enjoy talking out of your ass?

It brings a legitimate good into the world. We're biologically prone to it. It helps us feel closer.

And this is reason enough to make it more than what it is?
I don't know about you, Princess, but I try to separate my head from my ass when I think.
Try it.

Bonobos are a prey to modern neurosis? Really?

Nice spin. Now try again by actually reading what I've said and interpreting it honestly.
Is this selective interpretation also part of your mystifying style?

Culture changes. Holding on to an outmoded and useless concept does no good.

So, the overcoming of gender roles is a cultural product and not the other way around as many feminist would have us believe?

Be careful what you wish for, Princess.
This world you find hard to fit into is a product of this not holding onto "outmoded" and "useless" concepts.

When not bastardized by consumerism or trivialized as a way of escapism (your word).

I forgot your motives are more pure than that.

Connecting to the transcendent, is more likely why you do it.

I never was a feminine side?
Your essay, if I may call it that, elevates the "masculine," your other essays assail (cute!) "feminine" ideals like openness, sympathy, vulnerability, love. You claim these as symptoms of a decaying culture. I agree that the prevalence of some things - like the way we expect people to express approved emotion at all times - is not a pretty thing.
However, my defense of such things has nothing to do with my femininity or lack thereof.

And what does it have to do with?

Yes. I have pretty much everything Nietzsche ever wrote, and a good quarter of it in German.

Sarcasm...nice.
Another evasive tactic.

I will reiterate:

Nope. But you pass cheap-o Nietzsche off as if it's your own ideas, you don't credit your mentors, and you lied to make it sound as if I was the one so fixated.

In that specific case, where I was criticizing your inability to accept your influences, you lied.

In which specific page have I denied my influences?
Nietzsche is but one of them. His influence is more on style.
I enjoyed Schopenhauer more and found Sartre and Heidegger more lucid and direct; none of those word games Franky liked to play.

Your response had no meaning - everything is interconnected, cities and towns and, it follows, groups. Subcultures are just as fixed in the meta-culture, therefore anything that disqualifies small towns for being interconnected with the larger culture, also disqualifies sub-cultures, groups of friends, bands, zombie fighting militias and so on.

[Insult deleted]...when a small town belongs to a larger cultural entity with open borders and interrelationships then the small town is not separate from the larger entity.

When I used 'smaller groups, I meant them as independent, self-sufficient unities reliant only on nature directly for all their needs.
Like a tribe or a pack.

Your only other example could be a group that existed before culture existed, and neither of us can do more than speculate about that.

Really?
And other social animals provide no examples?
Is this topic only focused on man since the dawn of history or the written word or culture or man as a natural Becoming?

But then, that's all you do. Speculate about why people are the way they are, speculate as to their weaknesses and inequalities and desire to hurt you, and when all that fails, speculate about their personal life.

How typical, the one that is guilty casts the first insinuation to escape its own culpability.

There's a written record of who did what first.
Reread the thread and gt back to me.

Here, hypocrite is what you said when I had said nothing about your personal life:

Oh, and now we get to the good stuff! Whose penis do you want shoved up your ass?

I'm enjoying what these symptoms lead to and working to make that "decline" useful. You're hunting down women desperate enough to make a family.

You're just lucky I'm pulling my punches....for old times sake, Princess.

 

[Bells]

Although I am amused that you call Bells, a family-oriented lawyer, a slut.

Don't you know? All women are sluts who corrupt the sanctity and purity of mankind with our wombs.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to finish decorating my son's birthday cake and find my fish net stockings and pink wig for my evening stroll down the main street.

 

[Satyr]

Don't you know? All women are sluts who corrupt the sanctity and purity of mankind with our wombs.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to finish decorating my son's birthday cake and find my fish net stockings and pink wig for my evening stroll down the main street.

Once more Ballsy you fail in your interpretations of what is actually being said.

I would suggest some reading practice but given your intelligence I don't think it would have much effect.

And you are a moderator, along with James?!!!
No wonder Ballsy.

You're like George W.: You represent the average intellect of those you lead.

Good luck Brown Cow.
Save me a corner piece, will'ya?

 

[Xev]

Don't flatter yourself so desperately. What is really going on here only you, perhaps, and I know and who scours the internet is already known. you leave a trail, Princess...Didn't you know that?

What?

Yes.
That's it.
Turn the tables, Princess.
I love watching you squirm.

No, it's a simple fact: you replied to something, out of context, to prove that I was - hitting on Mikenostic? And then you harped on my percieved insecurities for two pages. I then referred to your behavior, well documented here of seeking out women to "date" via these forums.
You know, Gendanken sent me an old sheaf of the private messages you wrote her.

Which paragraph states this?
I'm describing a phenomenon.
All other assumptions are those of insecure, fearful [insult removed] like you are.

You are implicitly prescribing a non-"feminized" way of life. How am I insecure to note this?

Like...Give me an example, [Insult deleted]!
Or do you enjoy talking out of your ass?

Be more clear then. I don't need to give you an example: Freudian psychology is based on the interpretation of dreams and memories. It offers no way of falsifying its claims, of demonstrating them against experiment, therefore it does not follow scientific methodology.

And this is reason enough to make it more than what it is?
I don't know about you, Princess, but I try to separate my head from my ass when I think.
Try it.

"What it is" lies in the mind. Sex and love have whatever relevance that a person decides to give them.

Nice spin. Now try again by actually reading what I've said and interpreting it honestly.
Is this selective interpretation also part of your mystifying style?

I asked you if bonobos, who seem to enjoy sex as a communal act, are prey to the neurosis of human culture.
You may re-answer the question if you wish to sound less retarded.

So, the overcoming of gender roles is a cultural product and not the other way around as many feminist would have us believe?

What feminist theory are you referring to? Because that which I've read holds gender roles as a primarily cultural phenomenon. If they are a cultural product, their overcoming can be a cultural change. If they are biologically rooted, change can come with the advent of new technologies. We're fond of mentioning the Pill.

Be careful what you wish for, Princess.
This world you find hard to fit into is a product of this not holding onto "outmoded" and "useless" concepts.

And if you fit it so well, how come you disagree with the approach?

I forgot your motives are more pure than that.
Connecting to the transcendent, is more likely why you do it.

No, I like to have a good time just as much as anyone else. But I think that the entheogenic properties of certain drugs are sadly neglected.

And what does it have to do with?

You're the one who brought up my "feminine side" in response to my mocking your bellicose chattering about "the herd."

Yes. I have pretty much everything Nietzsche ever wrote, and a good quarter of it in German.

Sarcasm...nice.
Another evasive tactic.

You've accused me of holding "Nietzsche like a Bible." I agreed. How is that sarcastic?

In which specific page have I denied my influences?
Nietzsche is but one of them. His influence is more on style.
I enjoyed Schopenhauer more and found Sartre and Heidegger more lucid and direct; none of those word games Franky liked to play.

Sartre, who wrote of the "secret blackness of milk," doesn't speak metaphorically?

[Insult deleted]...when a small town belongs to a larger cultural entity with open borders and interrelationships then the small town is not separate from the larger entity.
When I used 'smaller groups, I meant them as independent, self-sufficient unities reliant only on nature directly for all their needs.
Like a tribe or a pack.

I see. And when did you observe these?

Really?
And other social animals provide no examples?
Is this topic only focused on man since the dawn of history or the written word or culture or man as a natural Becoming?

Other social animals have their own social networks. And how is it that you observe "diversity" in a tribe of chimpanzees? What, do some of them have mohawks?

There's a written record of who did what first.
Here, hypocrite is what you said when I had said nothing about your personal life:

False.

Aye, my boyfriend and I went to a "feed the caimans" event at the zoo the other weekend. Those mothers are primitive, and it's really fracking cool to watch them leap for food.[/quote

you must be aching to mention the fact, or the illusion, that you now have a boyfriend...oops there it is...

How does this have nothing to do with my personal life?
Oh and yes, I did write that screed about materialism in part about him. I am insecure and dating a man who is considerably more wealthy than I am is difficult.
Is this where you belittle me for being a broke student?

 

[Xev]

Don't you know? All women are sluts who corrupt the sanctity and purity of mankind with our wombs.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to finish decorating my son's birthday cake and find my fish net stockings and pink wig for my evening stroll down the main street.

Apparently a lot less whorish than being a bisexual goth chick. :/

 

[Satyr]

What?

Where? Who? Why?

No, it's a simple fact: you replied to something, out of context, to prove that I was - hitting on Mikenostic?

I did?
Hitting on Mikenostic?!
Paranoia self-destroya...
Were you?

Tell me more about what I thought.

And then you harped on my percieved insecurities for two pages. I then referred to your behavior, well documented here of seeking out women to "date" via these forums.
You know, Gendanken sent me an old sheaf of the private messages you wrote her.

Ouch!!!
Really?
Well it must be something embarrassing.
Interesting how you bring the fallen Queen into this.
Do you seek vulnerability there?
Poor pathetic little manish girl.

You and her always shared that paltry feminine practice of amassing information to be used in case of attack.
'Break glass, in case of fire and aim below the belt.'
That pretense of aloofness was striking when it hid such care.

And such back room politics...*tsk*...*tsk*...*tsk*.
:bravo:
I always knew they were occurring and wanted to be a fly on a wall to observe this sciforums practice.
A little microcosm of human groupings.
Such back-biting and grooming and lip-smacking.

Women to date?!
Oh Jeez.
Did I ever give you the impression that I gave a damn about such things?

Is that what you were doing, Princess, looking for boys?

Who e-mails the other and initiates contact, I wonder?
Did you ask her who initiated contact?

You're like a salmon leaping up-river to spawn and when falling into a Grizzly Bear's jaw you cry out:

"How dare you eat me, while I was minding my own business. You salmon eater you!"

Women to date...sheesh.
Are there any women here?
Little girls, a few cows and bitches,yes...but women?
Give me a break.

At the time I hadn't realized how adolescent this forum was or what was its underlying character.
I know better now.

You are implicitly prescribing a non-"feminized" way of life. How am I insecure to note this?

What?

Be more clear then. I don't need to give you an example: Freudian psychology is based on the interpretation of dreams and memories. It offers no way of falsifying its claims, of demonstrating them against experiment, therefore it does not follow scientific methodology.

Then which branch of science did you have in mind to explain human behavior?
Astrology?

"What it is" lies in the mind. Sex and love have whatever relevance that a person decides to give them.

Interesting, Perspectivism again.
Yes dear, there is no shared reality only perspectives that somehow coincide and do not affect reality but only the awareness of it.
There must not be any objective understanding of 'love' and 'sex' because this might destroy our ability to enjoy both as if they were magical.

Tell me what 'Love' and 'Sex' mean to you, Princess.

Always a Princess, never a Queen.
Her advantage, that raises her into ruling royalty, was that beautifully faked indifference and maintenance of distances you cannot quite master.
She just waited there, as if uncaring, and let idiots approach her offering their services which she then begrudgingly accepted.
She had that arrogant presence and behind the scenes manipulations that made men-children swoon.

I asked you if bonobos, who seem to enjoy sex as a communal act, are prey to the neurosis of human culture.
You may re-answer the question if you wish to sound less retarded.

What was the sentence preceding your trite posting of

That explains bonobos.

I'm not going to keep repeating myself.
Here let me do the work for you one more time.

That sex in more sophisticated organism takes on added roles as a social lubricant or a psychological pressure release is evidence of the repression all social interactions cause in individual organisms that must compromises and control certain drives and expressions of self so as to remain acceptable and welcomed.

Or did you think Bonobos exist in a state of blissful contentment with no stresses or conflicts or threats?
Did you think when I mention social unities I only have human ones in mind?
Do bonobos congregate in groups?
Therefore some repression occurs and this essay applies.

I also find it amusing when minds, like yours, use the one exception to attempt to disprove a rule. They don't try to analyze why the exception occurs but they focus on it as proof that the rule they dislike must be false.

I don't know, I can say all men have penises but then there might be that one mutation that will become, for you, evidence enough that this is not so.
Princess all concepts are generalizations.
Even your preferred mathematical ones.

What feminist theory are you referring to? Because that which I've read holds gender roles as a primarily cultural phenomenon.

Yes, "cultural phenomenon", not natural.

If they are a cultural product, their overcoming can be a cultural change. If they are biologically rooted, change can come with the advent of new technologies. We're fond of mentioning the Pill.

Then the eradication of gender roles is a cultural phenomenon and not their natural occurrence as many feminists would have us believe.
Paternalism didn't invent gender roles, they simply took preexisting sexual and reproductive roles and gave them symbolism and parameters of expression.
They harnessed them.

And if you fit it so well, how come you disagree with the approach?

Who's disagreeing with anything?
I'm describing a phenomenon.
Being male I have a natural affinity to maleness and so I lament its end.

Not a certain end since environments have a tenancy of changing unexpectedly, particularly when they are based on bullshit and tenuous ideas.

I expect the inevitable accessibility of new frontiers will make male attributes, in both men and women, essential again, and so desirable again or perhaps this will happen through a natural implosion and fragmentation.
But in the first case if we factor in possible technological effects then we can assume that sex will become entirely irrelevant - the advent of the hermaphrodite man or the a-sexual man.

No, I like to have a good time just as much as anyone else. But I think that the entheogenic properties of certain drugs are sadly neglected.

Indeed.

You're the one who brought up my "feminine side" in response to my mocking your bellicose chattering about "the herd."

Where, in this thread was a 'herd' mentioned?

Don't be insulted now that you want to belong to it, precious.

You've accused me of holding "Nietzsche like a Bible." I agreed. How is that sarcastic?

Whatever.
Thanks for mentioning how you read all of his works, by the way.
Not very obvious and obsessive.
As if what?

And did Nietzsche just invent his views?
Were they uniquely his, you pompous little girl?
Where does the notion of a Will come from?
What about this Perspectivism, imbeciles use to escape the rigors of having to actually defend and argue their views, comparing them to a perceived world or with those of another?

Sartre, who wrote of the "secret blackness of milk," doesn't speak metaphorically?

How would you know?
What are you attempting to do now, level everything so that your own ignorance becomes normal?

I see. And when did you observe these?

Why do you ask?
Here again you are seeking a way around....

What do you know about what I have or have not observed?

Other social animals have their own social networks. And how is it that you observe "diversity" in a tribe of chimpanzees? What, do some of them have mohawks?

No, personalities.
You know, the thing you are most deficient in, and compensate with style for.

Aye, my boyfriend and I went to a "feed the caimans" event at the zoo the other weekend. Those mothers are primitive, and it's really fracking cool to watch them leap for food.

How does this have nothing to do with my personal life?

I like the constant re-editing.

It doesn't. It's an assessment of your motives after you, yourself, brought in your personal life, as if accidentally.
Did this information have any relevance to the topic? No.
But you deemed it necessary, for some reason, to include it there.
And it's not the first time either, is it dear? You drop little tid-bits of insecure, pretentiousness, feigning unmotivated indifference and then you hide it behind plausible-deniability.

You bring into it your personal life, making one wonder why (Oh I can tell you why, Princess), and then when the motive is hinted at you attack the other personally by making broad insinuations using what information was given to you in trust, as if they were precise or they mattered, to make the audience woop and cheer, like good monkeys.
Then you proceed, like a little monkey, to verbally high-five those you resemble the most in intellect, finding solace in the community of retardation.

Nice little spinning there, Princess.
I wonder what degree of intimacy you deserve, Princess.
You are a vindictive whirlpool of inanity, sucking existence into your own cesspool of gurgling manure.
Then you bitch and cry at the state of the world.
Heal thyself, Princess.

Oh and yes, I did write that screed about materialism in part about him. I am insecure and dating a man who is considerably more wealthy than I am is difficult.

Nice...tell me more.
This is fuckin' fascinating.
You are a text book case.

Tell me about this 'difficulty'.

Is this where you belittle me for being a broke student?

No, but I enjoy the pretentious, info-droppings, with that venomous intent.

You know book-smarts is often confused for intellect, by those that lack both.
And that's where those, like you, reign supreme.

You raise information-peddling to the heights of wisdom, because you have a deficiency in interactive adaptation, choosing to slowly chew over experiences and compare them with literature.
Your entire understanding is determined by what books you have filtered your perceptions through and then you assume that this is true of all.

You need to be told.

 

[Xev]

I did?
Hitting on Mikenostic?!
Paranoia self-destroya...
Were you?

He is a sexy, sexy man. We will run away to the mystical land of Oingo-Boingo together.
Point is, I didn't bring up sheeeit.

You bring into it your personal life, making one wonder why (Oh I can tell you why, Princess), and then when the motive is hinted at you attack the other personally by making broad insinuations using what information was given to you in trust, as if they were precise or they mattered, to make the audience woop and cheer, like good monkeys.

Roffle. We corresponded. You've repeatedly attacked me using the things I've mentioned about my life. I said only that you have a fixation with the ladies here, you assumed that it was a slur on your personal life.
Not my problem if you're a bit tender there.

However, if anyone wants to ask me about what it is like being a little girl, a weird man-woman, a retarded imbecile, a puerile half-wit or a space moth, I leave the floor open.

 

[Satyr]

Xev

He is a sexy, sexy man. We will run away to the mystical land of Oingo-Boingo together.

I have no doubt.
You sound happy and purely so.
Well on the one hand you urge me to remain uncertain but I must be certain that what you say must be "fact".

Point is, I didn't bring up sheeeit.

And the...

I then referred to your behavior, well documented here

...proves it.
You didn't mention shit, I get it. It's the revised edition of reality you consistently use to reinterpret "facts' so that you do not get blamed or embarrassed.

I believe you, even though my senses tell me otherwise.

Roffle. We corresponded. You've repeatedly attacked me using the things I've mentioned about my life. I said only that you have a fixation with the ladies here, you assumed that it was a slur on your personal life.

Is that what happened?
Thanks for clarifying it for me. I wasn't sure, in accordance with my newly found open-minded skepticism.

I do have a fixation wit da ladies here. I admit it!!!
I love sciforums chicks.
Worship me, biatches!!!

Their retardation is fucking hot!!!!
But you know I only have eyes for you, babe.

Remember how, way back, I started flirting with you via PM messaging?

I thought about it for a long while before I initiated contact, fearing that menacing style of yours and that deep, deep intellect that can cut men to pieces, but I bit my lip and swallowed hard and sent it anyway.
How I was hurt when you rejected me so viciously.
Remember?
:bawl:
All I have are the memories now.
And you now betrothed and so happy with another richer, better, more beautiful than I...it...it just makes me want to die!!!!

However, if anyone wants to ask me about what it is like being a little girl, a weird man-woman, a retarded imbecile, a puerile half-wit or a space moth, I leave the floor open.

Do you know what's irritating about you, babes?
You ask for it, you beg for it, you get moist over it, and then you bitch about it.
You are FUCKED!!!
Thank god you rejected my flirtations back then and yo were never taken by my bullshit. It saved me a lot of time.

 

[Klippymitch]

He is a sexy, sexy man. We will run away to the mystical land of Oingo-Boingo together.
Point is, I didn't bring up sheeeit.



Roffle. We corresponded. You've repeatedly attacked me using the things I've mentioned about my life. I said only that you have a fixation with the ladies here, you assumed that it was a slur on your personal life.
Not my problem if you're a bit tender there.

However, if anyone wants to ask me about what it is like being a little girl, a weird man-woman, a retarded imbecile, a puerile half-wit or a space moth, I leave the floor open.

You haven't posted a serious post for the last past 5 posts of yours in this thread.

How can I trust someone who doesn't even know himself/herself? And what he/she is doing or have done.

 

[Satyr]

You haven't posted a serious post for the last past 5 posts of yours in this thread.

How can I trust someone who doesn't even know himself/herself? And what he/she is doing or have done.

Don't mind her she's just out to vindicate herself.

It's part of her nature to want to erase the errors of her past and make herself a victim where she was responsible.

Then she comes to on-line forums to carefully test her excuses, hoping nobody will challenge them in a way that her style could not cover up or redirect.
If she's successful she goes to bed fully relieved that her past errors in judgment have been excused and she is now clear to make new ones.

You see all this has to do with a failure on her part.
A failure she wants to bury underneath spinning and reinterpreting as well as drinking and drugs.

The femininity of this thread has a direct implication on hers.