Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Some partial backups of posts from the past (Feb, 2004)

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby Dan Rowden » Wed Jan 22, 2003 5:36 am

As far as I know it's the full thing. David Quinn (the author) would have to confirm that however.


Dan Rowden
User avatar
Dan Rowden
 
Posts: 5463
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby David Quinn » Wed Jan 22, 2003 5:46 am

It's the full version.
User avatar
David Quinn
 
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby EzyHH » Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:22 am

--
It's the full version.
--

I found the link again, and it was:
<a href="http://www.ihatewomen.com/holywomandocument.cfm">www.ihatewomen.com/holywomandocument.cfm</a>
(Ctrl+F "exposition")
Is that a fake or an earlier version?
EzyHH
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 5:32 am

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby David Quinn » Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:42 am

It's an earlier version (written in 1990). The one here is a revised version written in 1993.
User avatar
David Quinn
 
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby avidaloca » Wed Jan 22, 2003 7:53 am

That piece of work is incredible. It's possibly the best thing ever written.
avidaloca
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby littleingie » Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:35 pm

While I agree with your assessment on how men and women are conditioned on their behavior, the rest of your essay is absurd!

Women are philososphers, they just learn to keep it bottled because:
1. It's not accepted by either gender.
2. Their ideas will be belittled, then stolen.

While at a meeting, I'd present an idea to have it rejected. A month later, a male associate would come up with the same idea and everyone thinks it's brilliant!
I stopped giving out ideas just to have an idiot advance because he's male.





littleingie
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:35 pm

robbed ideas

Postby Lbartoli » Tue Mar 04, 2003 7:03 pm



Men have been the victims of this kind of
under-handedness since meetings were invented, (often-times on account of the thiefs girlfriends' greed).

Do you suppose professional women ought to be immune?

Leo
Lbartoli
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:49 am

Re: robbed ideas

Postby David Quinn » Thu Mar 06, 2003 7:38 am

I think littleingie makes a valid point. Men tend to dismiss women's ideas simply because they come from a woman. It is a reflection of the general misogyny that most men possess. Most men think that, mentally, women have very little worth.

But it is also a dilemma that women create for themselves. Women suffer from a credibility problem because they dress and behave like clowns. It is impossible to take anyone seriously who wears lipstick, earings and perfume, and who constantly retreats into feminine irrationality at the drop of a hat. It would be like trying to have a rational conversation with Mickey Mouse.
User avatar
David Quinn
 
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia

Re: robbed ideas

Postby birdofhermes » Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm

Quote:
Quote:<hr>It is impossible to take anyone seriously who wears lipstick, earings and perfume, and who constantly retreats into feminine irrationality at the drop of a hat.<hr>


I think perhaps the problem is a little deeper. Do women who live in societies without those accoutrements fare better? It seems to me the problem is one of sexual attraction. The more a woman is sexually attractive, the less a man can engage with her mind and take her mind seriously. The make-up may add to the problem, but it is a matter of what one is used to. 100 years ago, if the wind whipped a dress up over a woman's ankle, it was cause for excitement. Now women walk around pretty much naked, not that men don't notice, but the man of 100 years ago would probably have have stopped functioning.

I get the impression that men (or some men) are essentially angry that women excite them, and thus often go in for various forms of control, with the most extreme being complete veiling and seclusion. In a society like that, the very idea of seeing a woman's face who is not your close relative, is quite compelling. So I say, let's desensitize ourselves and be like the tribes in the Amazon who walk around completely naked. It shouldn't make much difference to the men, once they get used to it.

Seriously, if you would, examine this problem of irreconcilability between sexual attraction and taking her seriously. As usual, you are blaming the women entirely. My take is a little different. I see that old problem of separation and compartmentalization that men have. Even a man and his own dick have a relationship like two friends. No woman calls her genital "she."

I see the differences between men and women as gifts, but also obstacles. Man's ability to compartmentalize and focus is a source of his accomplishments and deserves honor. Woman's gift must be that she can live comfortably in the void and in the world. Man the do-er and woman the be-er. This is the ideal of course. Woman's obstacle is to become aware of it all. Women must become wise. A woman who isn't wise is a chaotic creature. A thing women primarily need, especially in modern society, is to relax. To relax, they need to feel safe. But there is safety only in enlightenment. Enlightenment is the only way out of the human dilemma, not democracy, not communism.

I was thinking the other day about how it could make sense to love everything equally. I was watching a flowing brook, wondering at how it is so comforting, so lovely and so endlessly fascinating to watch it and to be near it. Lao Tzu compared Tao to water, and I can' think of a better substance for the analogy. Water is needed for life and is applicable everywhere; it gives and gives, with no discernment. It is pure and accepts everything. The fact is, all things are manifestations of god, all things give to 100% of their ability as a substance and are being that substance 100%. A rock is perfect because it is being a perfect rock. The problem is not the categorization and labelling of things so much as judging their value as less than. Rocks are great, we need rocks. Unless rocks are exactly rocks, we cannot have them. All things are perfect manifestations of bountiful god. The secret of their perfection, especially of "inanimate" things, is nonresistance.

When you learn to love women and dogs, your enlightenment will flower.
birdofhermes
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm

Re: robbed ideas

Postby David Quinn » Fri Mar 07, 2003 1:07 pm

Bird wrote:

Quote:
Quote:<hr> I think perhaps the problem is a little deeper. Do women who live in societies without those accoutrements fare better? It seems to me the problem is one of sexual attraction. The more a woman is sexually attractive, the less a man can engage with her mind and take her mind seriously. <hr>
That's true to a certain extent. But nevertheless if a man wore lipstick and perfume and, say, an orange wig, I would find it hard to take him seriously, even though I wouldn't be sexually attracted to him.

Women need to assume responsibility for the way they present themselves. If they choose to dress as clowns, then it is only natural that people will treat them with contempt. By saying that it is "sexual attractiveness" which creates the contempt, you only exonerate women from taking responsibility for their own decisions.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> I get the impression that men (or some men) are essentially angry that women excite them, and thus often go in for various forms of control, with the most extreme being complete veiling and seclusion. <hr>
I don't wish to defend the Islamic practice of hiding women away, for I consider Islamic men to be crude and deluded and not worthy of respect, but I can understand why they do it. It's not really because they are angry that women excite them. It goes a lot deeper than that. It is their way of trying to control the uncontrollable - namely, feminine irrationality.

Indeed, the whole system of patriarchy, in which men visibly make the rules and seek to keep women in check, is motivated by this. It is men's attempt to redress the power balance. They have to forcibly contain the tide of feminine irrationality (which exists in its most concentrated form in women, but also in their own minds) from completely swamping them. At bottom, they see it as a stark choice between masculine order and uncontrollable chaos.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> In a society like that, the very idea of seeing a woman's face who is not your close relative, is quite compelling. So I say, let's desensitize ourselves and be like the tribes in the Amazon who walk around completely naked. It shouldn't make much difference to the men, once they get used to it. <hr>
I can see why you say this. The human race might well be helped in a spiritual sense if women did walk around completely naked. It would eliminate most of the feminine mystique and make women far less alluring.

On the other hand, clothing is symbolic of higher thought and masculine order. It underpins the structure of civilization in the sense that it helps maintain the existence of pair-bond (and therefore the family unit), and stops people from developing an overly-crude mindset. Since it is an expression of masculine compartmentalization, we need to think very carefully before abandoning it. Without clothing, we would be one step closer to animal existence and unstructured consciousness.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> Seriously, if you would, examine this problem of irreconcilability between sexual attraction and taking her seriously. As usual, you are blaming the women entirely. My take is a little different. I see that old problem of separation and compartmentalization that men have. Even a man and his own dick have a relationship like two friends. No woman calls her genital "she." <hr>
Good point.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> I see the differences between men and women as gifts, but also obstacles. Man's ability to compartmentalize and focus is a source of his accomplishments and deserves honor. Woman's gift must be that she can live comfortably in the void and in the world. Man the do-er and woman the be-er. This is the ideal of course. Woman's obstacle is to become aware of it all. Women must become wise. <hr>
And she can only do that by becoming a do-er.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> A woman who isn't wise is a chaotic creature. A thing women primarily need, especially in modern society, is to relax. To relax, they need to feel safe. But there is safety only in enlightenment. <hr>
You've touched on a feminine dilemma here. You're right in saying that women need to relax or else they won't achieve anything in the spiritual realm. And yet the very process of questioning all human values creates stress. For a person who is already very anxious to begin with, this extra stress can make the process of thinking clearly with objectivity and insight very difficult.

This is where the male capacity to compartmentalize and suppress becomes very handy. The male can suppress his anxiety and stress and thus create the mental space needed to continue thinking clearly.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> I was thinking the other day about how it could make sense to love everything equally. I was watching a flowing brook, wondering at how it is so comforting, so lovely and so endlessly fascinating to watch it and to be near it. Lao Tzu compared Tao to water, and I can' think of a better substance for the analogy. Water is needed for life and is applicable everywhere; it gives and gives, with no discernment. It is pure and accepts everything. The fact is, all things are manifestations of god, all things give to 100% of their ability as a substance and are being that substance 100%. A rock is perfect because it is being a perfect rock. The problem is not the categorization and labelling of things so much as judging their value as less than. Rocks are great, we need rocks. Unless rocks are exactly rocks, we cannot have them. All things are perfect manifestations of bountiful god. The secret of their perfection, especially of "inanimate" things, is nonresistance.

When you learn to love women and dogs, your enlightenment will flower. <hr>
I do love women and dogs, but that doesn't change my desire to eliminate them (or eliminate women at least). I also love cancer and the ebola virus and I recognize them to be manifestations of God, but that doesn't mean that I want to keep them in existence.
User avatar
David Quinn
 
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia

Re: robbed ideas

Postby Dave Toast » Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

Quote:
Quote:<hr>DQ: But it is also a dilemma that women create for themselves. Women suffer from a credibility problem because they dress and behave like clowns. It is impossible to take anyone seriously who wears lipstick, earings and perfume, and who constantly retreats into feminine irrationality at the drop of a hat. It would be like trying to have a rational conversation with Mickey Mouse.<hr>


Isn't that a rather broad stroke?

What of the woman who does not subscribe to the stereotype?

How does she create the dilemma for herself?

And what of the clown like behaviour of most males, does that not create the very same credibility deficit?

Aren't you simply talking about mankind?


Quote:
Quote:<hr>DQ: Without clothing, we would be one step closer to animal existence and unstructured consciousness.<hr>


Or hypothermia or sunstroke. Edited by: Dave Toast at: 3/7/03 12:31:41 am
User avatar
Dave Toast
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

On Sexual allurity

Postby Lbartoli » Fri Mar 07, 2003 9:02 pm


It's true that men, in this context, are less likely to take a woman seriously if she is beautiful, the more attractive she is the greater the scepticizm. But this isn't, in my judgement, altogether unreasonable.

The reason is the worth of a person's thought, of his or her ideas, is to a large extent determined by the labor that went into creating them. By that i mean if a person has faced- and overcome- significant challenges in life, has had to think in order to maintain her place in the world or to better her situation, and has known from an early age that her course in life will not be terribly easy, no easier than the next guy, then we can expect a richer thought life and better ideas.

On the other hand, if a person has known from the beginning that she is beautiful, that the world is, or will be, her oyster, that all will come easy to her, that men will be tripping over each other to serve her, then she has little motivation to excell in much of anything else, and even if the motivation exists so many doors will nevertheless automatically open for her that would otherwise not open had she been plain (she won't even know [and doesn't even want to know] this is happening in many instances) that again she simply would never come close to encountering and learning from the challenges most other folk experience and grow from.

Add to this the smiling and approving faces of daddy, relatives and friends- and later boys and men- that forever greet the beautiful person, a dependency which effectively weakens the individual by way of causing
self-doubt when withdrawn in a professional climate.

In short, in this day and age the beautiful female has a very difficult time becoming a person of great ideas, so not to take her seriously (until proven otherwise), not to expect much from her isn't, in the end, a bad... idea.

Leo
















Lbartoli
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:49 am

Re: robbed ideas

Postby avidaloca » Fri Mar 07, 2003 9:15 pm

Quote:
Quote:<hr>Even a man and his own dick have a relationship like two friends. No woman calls her genital "she."<hr>


Reminds me of what Weininger says about the sexual organ in man emerging regionally against the asexual surrounding it and how this unevenness is also expressed in his behaviour at different times towards sex ("Wie die Sexualität des Mannes örtlich gegen Asexuelles in ihm hervortritt, so findet sich dieselbe Ungleichheit auch in seinem Verhalten zu verschiedenen Zeiten ausgeprägt.") He then goes on to say that women are continually sexual, but man only intermittently ("Das Weib ist fortwährend, der Mann nur intermittierend sexuell.")

Martin Dudaniec
avidaloca
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm

Re: robbed ideas

Postby birdofhermes » Fri Mar 07, 2003 10:18 pm

Quote:
Quote:<hr>That's true to a certain extent. But nevertheless if a man wore lipstick and perfume and, say, an orange wig, I would find it hard to take him seriously, even though I wouldn't be sexually attracted to him.

Women need to assume responsibility for the way they present themselves. If they choose to dress as clowns, then it is only natural that people will treat them with contempt. By saying that it is "sexual attractiveness" which creates the contempt, you only exonerate women from taking responsibility for their own decisions.<hr>
What I'm saying is, I think the problem is in that "true to an extent" that you admit. So many women don't dress that way, and most women in history have not. By focusing on it, you are not looking at what it really is in men that causes them to not take women seriously. What is it?

Quote:
Quote:<hr>It's not really because they are angry that women excite them. It goes a lot deeper than that. It is their way of trying to control the uncontrollable - namely, feminine irrationality.<hr>
With all due respect, I don't think so. I think it is control, pure and simple. You might call men's tendency to dominate the "uncontrollable."

Quote:
Quote:<hr>Indeed, the whole system of patriarchy, in which men visibly make the rules and seek to keep women in check, is motivated by this. It is men's attempt to redress the power balance. They have to forcibly contain the tide of feminine irrationality (which exists in its most concentrated form in women, but also in their own minds) from completely swamping them. At bottom, they see it as a stark choice between masculine order and uncontrollable chaos.<hr>
So they are abusing women rather than look at themselves. It is a major crime and a deep fault within men's nature. I like the way the book of Genesis hints at so many truths. When God asks Adam and Eve what they have done, Eve says, The serpent tempted me, and I ate. But Adam says, the woman that you gave me,...i.e., he blames God for making a lousy creature. Somehow, he is to be pitied because he loves his wife. A helpless weakling. The theologians speak thus. They exonerate Adam and say it was her fault because she is a temptress. But her adversary and tempter was greater than any human, according to the story. If you read it objectively, you will see that her difficulty was greater, and that Adam sinned more.

There really is no power imbalance. It's a false perception, and a tragically false solution. Blaming women for your own weaknesses is pathetic. This fear of chaos is largely phantom. Men can go right ahead and be rational and figure out solutions to everything all they like.

The rational male mind, without wisdom, emotional balance, deep respect for life, etc., has brought the world to the brink of destruction. Obviously there is something wrong in the psychic balance of our civilization. Pure rational logic brings us the atom bomb, poisonous chemicals, and ugly architecture. Logic is no answer by itself. How can you even speak with a clear conscience about women's ability to swamp society in chaos, when the male usurpation of power has brought us to such danger and madness? From Adam until now, man has not changed his dishonesty!

Years ago, a friend of mine was beside herself because her husband was still in school amd they had two tots in a tiny apartment. She wanted to move, but he wouldn't discuss it. It was his refusal to discuss that drove her to the edge, because she thought he didn't care. She was beginning to hate him. But I knew him to be a good egg. So I said to her, "Look, he won't discuss it because he doesn't think he can do anything about it right now. He knows how unhappy you are, and this makes him too overwhelmed to talk about it. Not having a solution bothers him that much that he can't talk about it." She immediately stopped crying, looked up and said, "You really think so?" She came back to me a few days later and said, "you were right." Neither of these two were being rational. She misread his silence completely. He might have considered her irrational for needing to discuss the obvious. I would say that he lacked courage and she lacked wisdom. The Sim solution would be for him to say "Silence!" and hit her, comfortable in the knowledge that he was right, because male. Unjust domination kills love.

Quote:
Quote:<hr>On the other hand, clothing is symbolic of higher thought and masculine order. It underpins the structure of civilization in the sense that it helps maintain the existence of pair-bond (and therefore the family unit), and stops people from developing an overly-crude mindset.<hr>
Mightn't clothing be symbolic of something else, liking hiding from reality? Does it help the pair bond? Are you assuming that the unclothed tribes have more infidelity? Isn't it in the more female-oppressed societies, which are always the most clothed, that we get "concubines without number" and death or ruin only for women who have the least descent from virginity, while men can rape their slaves?

Quote:
Quote:<hr>And she can only do that by becoming a do-er.<hr>
How so?

Quote:
Quote:<hr>You've touched on a feminine dilemma here. You're right in saying that women need to relax or else they won't achieve anything in the spiritual realm. And yet the very process of questioning all human values creates stress. For a person who is already very anxious to begin with, this extra stress can make the process of thinking clearly with objectivity and insight very difficult.

This is where the male capacity to compartmentalize and suppress becomes very handy. The male can suppress his anxiety and stress and thus create the mental space needed to continue thinking clearly. <hr>


The act of questioning may create more stress in men. Lots of things are stressful for men that are not particularly important for women. The answer is not for women to first become men. The answer is to understand the obstacles and how to overcome them. I don't believe that suppression of fear is the key to enlightenment. Women should work with their strengths and men with theirs. I do believe fear is probably the core human problem.

Tell me more about what you see as obstacles, the source or resistance in people. None of the things you've written about women being more threatened by reality seem true to me. It doesn't make sense to say that men have a more developed individuality and for Weininger to say women don't crave immortality, and then also say that women are more threatened by the loss of "self" inherent in your philosophy. Also, the unity of all things should appeal to women.




birdofhermes
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm

Re: robbed ideas

Postby David Quinn » Sat Mar 08, 2003 1:33 am

Dave Toast wrote:

Quote:
Quote:<hr> DQ: But it is also a dilemma that women create for themselves. Women suffer from a credibility problem because they dress and behave like clowns. It is impossible to take anyone seriously who wears lipstick, earings and perfume, and who constantly retreats into feminine irrationality at the drop of a hat. It would be like trying to have a rational conversation with Mickey Mouse.

DT: Isn't that a rather broad stroke? <hr>
Yes, it is a generalization. Exceptions are possible.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> What of the woman who does not subscribe to the stereotype? <hr>
Then my analysis doesn't apply to her.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> How does she create the dilemma for herself? <hr>
To the degree that she is not making use of deception via feminine charm, and to the degree that she is striving to be a conscious, consistent human being, she is not creating the dilemma for herself.



Quote:
Quote:<hr> And what of the clown like behaviour of most males, does that not create the very same credibility deficit? <hr>
It does. I find it difficult to take seriously any man who wears a suit, for example. The suit alone is proof that the man is pussy-whipped and dominated by shallow, feminine-orientated concerns.


Quote:
Quote:<hr> Aren't you simply talking about mankind? <hr>
To some degree, yes. But we all know that women are the decorative sex and that they acquire most of what they want from life by charming others. And we all know that men are simpler, more straightforward, problem-solving machines. I don't see any point in pretending this isn't so.

Of course, it isn't really as cut and dried as this. There is a degree of overlap in between. Some women are (relatively) more straightforward and rational in their behaviour, and a lot of men are very unconscious and deceitful. Nevertheless, the creation of these polar generalizations about men and women is useful because it highlights the stark differences between masculine and feminine psychology

User avatar
David Quinn
 
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia

Re: robbed ideas

Postby Dave Toast » Sat Mar 08, 2003 4:17 am

Quote:
Quote:<hr>To some degree, yes. But we all know that women are the decorative sex and that they acquire most of what they want from life by charming others. And we all know that men are simpler, more straightforward, problem-solving machines. I don't see any point in pretending this isn't so.<hr>


Fair doos.

If you want to generalise and especially with regard to adornment and beautification, it seems to me that the advance of the western male towards such 'feminine' values contines unabated. It's even gathering pace at a frightening rate.

You have much work to do :)
User avatar
Dave Toast
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

Re: robbed ideas

Postby birdofhermes » Sat Mar 08, 2003 5:25 am

Quote:
Quote:<hr>If you want to generalise and especially with regard to adornment and beautification, it seems to me that the advance of the western male towards such 'feminine' values contines unabated. It's even gathering pace at a frightening rate.<hr>
Well, I dunno. They happened to have a photo in the paper of the statue of Sir Walter Raleigh at the state capitol, and my, my, is his get-up a laugh. He wears these puffy panty things around his - well, his lower front and back. tights. Thigh high boots, buckles everywhere. Ruffles at the throat. You get the idea.

birdofhermes
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm

Re: On Sexual allurity

Postby birdofhermes » Sat Mar 08, 2003 6:20 am

Leo - I myself have always been a little suspicious of beautiful people, probably too much so. There are many ways in which a person can grow up knowing the world is their oyster. Societies other than ours, such as the Islamic people, and Chinese people, often have an overt preference for boys such that they are in the position of the beautiful little girl you mention. Many little girls grow up watching their brothers get extreme deferential treatment and indulgence compared to herself, and it is because he is a boy and she is a girl. I bet you hadn't thought of that.

What about the woman who isn't very attractive at all. They are not rare. They grow up knowing that they will be lucky to get a man at all, that no doors will ever open for them, they are rarely smiled at, but yet they lack the freedom of the male.

You think suffering causes flowering of thought. I am not sure. Sometimes it must, but many of the great thinkers and inventers had a better advantage than suffering - they were upper class, had parents who could educate them, and leisure time.

You have an outlandish opinion of the ease of women's lives. I just don't know where you've been. Must be another planet.
birdofhermes
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm

Re: robbed ideas

Postby Dave Toast » Sat Mar 08, 2003 6:22 am

Quote:
Quote:<hr>Well, I dunno. They happened to have a photo in the paper of the statue of Sir Walter Raleigh at the state capitol, and my, my, is his get-up a laugh. He wears these puffy panty things around his - well, his lower front and back. tights. Thigh high boots, buckles everywhere. Ruffles at the throat. You get the idea.<hr>


Codpieces are coming back. Edited by: Dave Toast at: 3/7/03 12:23:28 pm
User avatar
Dave Toast
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

Re: robbed ideas

Postby birdofhermes » Sat Mar 08, 2003 6:51 am

Quote:
Quote:<hr>Codpieces are coming back.<hr>

Where? Gosh, it's difficult enough without that!
birdofhermes
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm

robbed ideas

Postby Lbartoli » Sat Mar 08, 2003 7:59 am

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bird wrote:

Leo - I myself have always been a little suspicious of beautiful people, probably too much so. There are many ways in which a person can grow up knowing the world is their oyster. Societies other than ours, such as the Islamic people, and Chinese people, often have an overt preference for boys such that they are in the position of the beautiful little girl you mention.

LB: Not exactly, the beautiful girl gets the message her looks alone are important, the boys on the other hand realize it's their gender. The boys are also given the message they must acheive, whereas the beautiful girl quickly learns easy-street is an option, one they almost never pass up.

Bird:
Many little girls grow up watching their brothers get extreme deferential treatment and indulgence compared to herself, and it is because he is a boy and she is a girl. I bet you hadn't thought of that.

LB: No, i hadn't.

B:
What about the woman who isn't very attractive at all. They are not rare.

LB: Please don't remind me!

B:
They grow up knowing that they will be lucky to get a man at all, that no doors will ever open for them, they are rarely smiled at, but yet they lack the freedom of the male.

LB: Yeah, these girls think...."Shit, although i'm lucky to have been born a female in this disposable-male-world, sure would have been easier and nicer if i were cute. Now i am somewhat closer to a man in value (ie. lower) and will have to put up with a small percentage of the difficulties that face your average guy. Oh well, i can always break down and cry when i need assistance or sympathy, or share myself with many horny, frustrated men and make a bundle of money, then head off to Thailand for cosmetic surgery, so much to fall back on really. God, we sure pity the guys, but better not let on or our many advantages as women may be lost."

B:
You think suffering causes flowering of thought. I am not sure.

LB:Did I say suffering? I thought i said challenges.

B:
Sometimes it must, but many of the great thinkers and inventers had a better advantage than suffering - they were upper class, had parents who could educate them, and leisure time.

LB: Sure, if you have the equipment for great thought then leisure time can come in handy. However it hasn't been shown that females are so equipped.

B:
You have an outlandish opinion of the ease of women's lives.

LB: From you unconscious perspective this is only reasonable.

B:
I just don't know where you've been. Must be another planet.

LB: Don't i wish...

Leo
Lbartoli
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:49 am

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby Kevin Solway » Sat Mar 08, 2003 11:39 am

Here is the text of two different emails I received from people recently. I thought they were an amusing read:

Quote:
Quote:<hr>I still think your site is a bit too harsh, because you are stereotyping ALL women out there, but I can agree with you on some points. I agree with you, first of all, that many women have that notion of love (and life) being "fuzzy" and dreamlike. I've often noticed, for example, that many of my favourite male songwriters and musicians who wer once very intense and serious, become very "feminised" once they hook up with a female singing partner or marry one of their female bandmates. It is as if the female drains them of their own identity.

I also have come to dislike some of my own female "masculine" friends (one of them is a Gothic musician and songwriter). She was a very inspirational person until the day she met a guy ten years her junior and "fell in love". Many women, I think, become overly satisfied with life once they "settle down" and I do not think most women (or men) even know what true love is anyway. They only settle down for the most part, out of convenience or the fear of being alone.

I also think that most women are afraid of people who want to break convention. I've experienced a lot of hatred from women all my life, since I was a child until now. As a consequence I have usually had male (or other "masculine" women) as friends since an early age, especially in college.

So I can see how women have left this negative impression on you. I think part of the problem may be solved in how women are socialised, but that will take a long time to happen. Many women are also brought up to value only their beauty and attractiveness, and you can see that in the magazines and movies. But other than that, you are correct in assessing that if women REALLY, as a whole, were intelligent creatures, most of them WOULD "wake up" and snap out of their complacent selves.

I would also note that you are correct in assessing that there are also very few men who like to think. This is a problem which affects both sexes, but I can see, yes, your concern that women are making men even more "feminine" as a whole.

The whole concept of masculine and feminine bothers me though. I always thought of "male" characterisics as characteristics which any human being can have and/or acquire, regardless of sex. The problem is, most women only see themselves as women and nothing more. They do not know how to break out of their boundaries and probably are not interested in doing so.

I guess I can't change your mind, because I've never really met more than one other true "masculine" woman in my own lifetime, but I can still assure you that there are at least a few out there. They're very rare though.

Suspiriorum<hr>


and the other one:

Quote:
Quote:<hr>A view on women:

They are creatures that like to travel in groups of three.
There enjoyment come from sitting in malls, smoking
cigarretes endlessly, eating sweets and chocolates and
chattering innane, nonsense for hours.There, is not a lower
form of life in nature, apart from the reproductive function
and cleanning the home what other use do they fullfill
They are like a rose, which blossoms for a short time
and shortly you are left with a withered flower and thorns,
this is what many a wife becomes.
If they use their mind it is for mischief, as most study law
to deprive their love one of his earnings, oh and how stupid
the fools who fall in the trap. As, an acquantaince once com-
mented if you want to get married, find a bitch you hate and
give her a house.
They worry about aging and they all soak up sunlight and
smoke cigarettes.They worry about being fat and they eat
everything that is fattening.
They all want to be skinny,blond and have a fool to take care
of there bills.And, motherhood that sacred notion,any sow
or bovine creature fullfills that function just as well.

HH<hr>






User avatar
Kevin Solway
 
Posts: 2578
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby Dave Toast » Sat Mar 08, 2003 4:48 pm

Yep, the second one is hilarious in it's subjective lopsidedness and it's ignorance.

The first is amusing too. It is interesting that this person sees their male friends that have hooked up with a woman as drained of their own identity yet this person sees their female friends that have gone through the very same process with a male as now lacking inspirational qualities due to being overly satisfied.

It's also amusing that this person sees only that the socialisation of women needs fixing and makes no allusion to the socialisation of men needing the very same overhaul, as if males are this 100% actualised and enlightened people as opposed to merely showing a greater percentage (which is miniscule in both cases) of such qualities in comparison to females.

This person says that "Many women are also brought up to value only their beauty and attractiveness, and you can see that in the magazines and movies.", that is amusing, not that this is wrong but the fact that this person does not see the very same thing happening to the modern western male. Seems lopsidedness is almost inherent in people expressing such views. This is also evidenced in the view that "if women REALLY, as a whole, were intelligent creatures, most of them WOULD "wake up" and snap out of their complacent selves." whilst mention of the same malaise suffered by males is merely a caveat. What are the figures then? Shall we say 99% of females are asleep but only 97% of males are. Statistically significant but hardly truly significant. Like you say, it's amusing.

Here again, "The problem is, most women only see themselves as women and nothing more.", oh LOL, or perhaps COL.

Monomania in itself is amusing :)
User avatar
Dave Toast
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby David Quinn » Sun Mar 09, 2003 1:15 am

I think you should cut these blokes a bit of slack, Dave. After all, they are trying to grapple with the dominant cultural mindset which demands that we all bow down towards women with blind adoration and worship. No one is pretending that men are perfect. We all know they have their faults. That is obvious. What is not so obvious is that it is almost completely taboo to analyze and critize women as a group, even though women are constantly worshipped to the heavens by our society and exert such a tremendous pull on the male mind.

Most of what is happening here is young men trying to free themselves, at least to a certain extent, from the oppression exerted by women. If you can't see this, if the only thing you can possibly think to do in these circumstances is become chivalrous and ride to the defence of women at all costs, then I'm afraid that you're not cut out to be a spiritual philosopher.

You have to make a choice. Are you defender and nurturer of masculine potential? Or just another deadbeat male protecting women?
User avatar
David Quinn
 
Posts: 5331
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia

Re: Woman: An Exposition for the Advanced Mind

Postby Dave Toast » Sun Mar 09, 2003 7:14 am

Quote:
Quote:<hr>I think you should cut these blokes a bit of slack, Dave.<hr>


Come on now David, I see no evidence in the text that either of these individuals is a genetic male. If these people were women, and that was why it is amusing, then i would be smelling an ill-concieved trap right here. :)


Quote:
Quote:<hr>After all, they are trying to grapple with the dominant cultural mindset which demands that we all bow down towards women with blind adoration and worship.<hr>


Sorry but, at this present moment in time, I don't agree with this assertion and I've got to at least try to be true to myself concerning such earthbound matters.

Quote:
Quote:<hr>What is not so obvious is that it is almost completely taboo to analyze and critize women as a group, even though women are constantly worshipped to the heavens by our society and exert such a tremendous pull on the male mind.<hr>


I would have thought that if such analysis and criticism of women as a group were completely taboo, it would be completely obvious to even the most short-sighted observer. There's another myth BTW, a lot of women love being analyzed, within a healthy relationship of course. :)

You talk of worship, seems to me that the present object of worship in the west is the Almighty Dollar and the men who control it, with their monolithic, phallic Cathederals that penetrate the skies, where men testify and suck Satan's cock till they gag on the proceeds. Why are you not as vociferously active on that front? Imagine all the lost potential.

I can see this pull on the male mind thing but only in the context of it's effects being detrimental to the time available for working on personal advancement. And you could say exactly the same thing of the male pull on females. I see no reason as to why a healthy yet imperfect Yin and the corresponding Yang should not hold hands on their journey, no matter what the distance. In fact it could be argued from a scientific viewpoint that the results will be more objective and rounded.


Quote:
Quote:<hr>Most of what is happening here is young men trying to free themselves, at least to a certain extent, from the oppression exerted by women. If you can't see this, if the only thing you can possibly think to do in these circumstances is become chivalrous and ride to the defence of women at all costs, then I'm afraid that you're not cut out to be a spiritual philosopher.<hr>


No value judgements please. That is a bit of a poor thing to say, that because I am a male and my thoughts oppose such views, by arguing against them I am merely being chivalrous and blind to boot. I would have thought that that was below you, it would be just as easy and misguided for me to say that you must be gay for holding such views. I am saying these things coz it's what I can see and it's what I believe. I had resolved to just stay well away from all this stuff but there has to be balance, it's like watching CNN or something.

If these people need to free themselves from said oppression then more power to their elbow for trying to do so, I'm not sure if they are heading in the right direction with such views though. How about if someone is feeling the oppression of the western world and bumps into a website which promotes the destruction of what the western world is all about. This person then reads all the anti-west literature and finds justification and an outlet for their anger at their percieved oppression, they resolve to write to the webmaster and are hooked into a terrorist network. Should we condone the actions of the people who run the website? Might these people, from a certain perspective, be viewed as vultures or drug pushers, pouncing upon the weakness of their prospective pupils?


Quote:
Quote:<hr>You have to make a choice. Are you defender and nurturer of masculine potential? Or just another deadbeat male protecting women?<hr>


I don't see why I can't be both or niether, but that's beside the point. I would perhaps like to think of myself as a defender and nurturer of all potential, that is, all potential in the context of your male potential, where I assume the negative is ignored. Whether I am or not is another thing. If I am just another male protecting women, I am not doing it for the deadbeat reasons or from the deadbeat perspective that your description summarily applies to my action, least I don't think I am and that's all I can place my trust in at this juncture.


You going to give me the benefit of your wisdom on the fervent questions posed in the 'Case against' topic or do I have to subscribe to this dogma first? :)

If you are saving it for a later date, just give us a yay or nay. Edited by: Dave Toast at: 3/8/03 1:23:53 pm
User avatar
Dave Toast
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

cron