Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
So because I am biologically female, my responding to Dan's comment that females are universally full of hot air makes you feel like you are taking shit - and you especially won't take a female pointing out that both genders have faults to overcome. If that is the case, it is yet another example of just how guys value words that they perceive as coming out of a male mouth more than the same words coming out of a female mouth.
1. You're assuming a lot, once more. No, it's not the case.
2. It was your 5th post (page one) that lead me into this thread, had nothing to do with "hot air," even though I agree with his comment; in my expereince, it's true; though I've met some males who are full of hot air, too.
3. "Woman" has nothing to do with biological gender. (For the record) I despise the feminine in males far more than I despise it in females.
(4. Whenever I say "females," I mean "biological females"---humans born with cunts. When I say "males," I mean "biological males"---humans born with cocks. "Masculine-Feminine" has very little, as far as I'm concerned, to do with physical or biological gender. Hence this is not some 'gender issue.' When I'm talking about overwhelmingly female behaviour, I'll rarely state or even allude to "all woman absolutely everywhere." I'll usually say "most women" or just "those women I've known." I do strive to be as fair, accurate, and non-biased as I can be. (Just for future consideration.))
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
The same could twice as easily apply to you, as I was responding to Dan's generalizations about females with some generalizations about males. Furthermore, my focus was on that it is all base behavior that must be overcome, whereas Dan's focus was on how superior males are to females even when they are wallowing in base behavior. I was promoting objectivity. So why do you feel the urge to "rush in" and defend the supposed superiority of your gender?
I don't typically view much in terms of 'superior/inferior.' I feel no need to "defend" my gender. I don't even maintain that the feminine is inferior or "wrong" or "evil" or any other thing like that---it's simply, blatantly, grossly disproportionate to the masculine in terms of the "human organism."
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
The same could be said of females. All the defensive attitudes, blaming, fault-finding, and general abhorrence of the opposite gender that promotions of stereotypes engenders are the reasons that stereotypes are considered bad things. The admins of this site disagree and believe that stereotypes should be held as valid generalizations, and are good tools for helping people overcome negative behavior. I think it is generally sufficient to point out what is base behavior and what is wise behavior because that does not insulate a group from thinking they might be acting like a base behavior commonly attributed to another group. When dealing with people so ensconced in this mindset though, the more effective way of waking the person up is to take the opposing stance.
Well, to a certain extent, I do think generalizations *can* serve a purpose. If you consider the behaviour of any animal species, it is the "most common" behaviours that are documented, exceptions are rarely noted or given much thought; in psychology, as you know, not everyone is different---there are glaring, sweeping generalizations made in the exact same context as here or in biological classification, anthropology, et cetera.
Political Correctness puts up a lace curtain regarding gender, however, so it's discouraged to talk about differences between genders---or mass female tendencies (but not mass male tendencies), evidenced even here ("OMG misogynist! burn him! burn him!" attitudes, typically way off base, a shame/silencing tactic, or it's taken out of context).
Generally, I think one can speak his mind and say whatever he wishes---someone responding to
"You're such a fuckin twat!" has many options, one of which is not even dignify that with a response at all. Again, we're talking about who has to adapt to whom; we're talking about taking personal responsibility for our emotions, feelings, owning our own shit.
If most women I've known yack twice or more often than all the men I've ever known, that's not a generalization; there's something to it. I don't 'blame' them next; I look at why that is (left-brain-dominance, the facts and reason point to), therefore I do not "fault" anyone for such things. I don't fault dogs for having tails or cats for scratching sofas, either. That's what they do.
But, as I already admitted, though, when it's some
fucking bullshit that I've heard a million times and have grown so bloody weary of seeing people mindlessly parrot, I sometimes push my own buttons and take the gloves off (and sometimes for reasons that have nothing to do with the obvious). I'm not about to explain why I do everything I do, but keep in mind that not everything is at it seems.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
I have heard far more often that the parents wanted a boy but got stuck with a girl than that they wanted a girl and got a boy. Historically, males have always been more valuable than females - to the point that fathers had to provide a dowry to bribe some guy to take their daughters off their hands.
True---and I understand why. (Had females been raised more like boys used to be, and not in terms of school/class instruction, indeed they would be more masculine (in my defintion or the popular one around here) and by defintion, more 'valuable,' whatever that means anyway. What exactly is the very feminine female but a painted-up sacred cow? No, really, what is it that a Pamela Anderson contributes to society or Nature or humanity or any realm of this planet, really, other than revenue for Hollywood whores and distractions?
Forgive me for being blunt, but I think you despise people (not necessarily "biological females") like her, or, more accurately, her character, how she behaves, et cetera, for the same reasons I do, and like others with any sense whatsoever do; also, I think you resent her---for getting so much attention, being indulged and coddled, and for being rewarded for this absurd behaviour---because I sense that you want to be acknowledged for your personal intelligence (as a "biological female") and people like her make it more difficult for people like you (those who are trying to be more than vile, appearance-oriented, superficial; inane and ridiculous---tit-sticks) to be taken seriously, and-or detracts from the attention you yourself seek...here is where I see many women flop back on their asses regarding their egos, and tend to get very bitter and defensive. (This ego is so bloody tricky this way...)
It's all understandable, too, so don't take this the wrong way. The bimbos give women as a gender a "bad rep" and always have---those who don't use their brains---as do, now, anal-retentive PC and frothing-at-the-mouth radical feminists. (Honestly, I thought it was "way cool" to discover "biological females" posting on this board when I first arrived here---wasn't what I expected---and having intelligent opinions and a desire for knowledge---I genuinely respect that, so it seems that I am on "your side" here, no?)
It taxes you to try doubly hard---which seems unfair---but, paradoxically, it's actually a blessing in disguise: you are forced to try harder, to strive, and here's where potential begins to blossom...here's where the intellect can be tempered, like steel, and sharpened.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Of course females would rabidly deny any faults, because that would make us damaged merchandise - and that is all we are considered is merchandise.
To a point, that's somewhat the case today among certain cultures, and it was mostly factual long ago---but remember, that "women-as-property" had more rights than the men who "owned" that property; land and women were both protected feverishly, in essence, and were by default respected in ways that men never were, not even in ancient Greece; remember also that any crimes committed by women, men had to answer for. I'm not saying this was right---it was all fucking retarded, for both genders---but I will not subscribe to the propaganda that only women "had it rough" because it's a lie or at best a twisting of facts (or omitting of others). Feminist cornflakes.
I've closely examined both sides (men and women in history) and know both sides----can you say the same?
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
If you want to urinate on your couch in your house, and you won't be complaining to whoever you live with about the smell afterwards, that is then your business.
You betcha.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
Yes, a lot of guys here have been treated pretty badly by stupid women. Many females have been treated pretty badly by men and women, boys and girls - I know I have. Being treated badly is no excuse for closing one's eyes and adopting prejudice - which is what all this stereotyping promotes.
No, I can't argue that.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
So you think that no mother has a sense of responsibility or sacrifices any of herself for her family?
Nope; the feminine does what it does, always, for other reasons---deceptions are so much the rule that I don't even think feminine women know when they're lying or telling the truth anymore. I never take a word as the truth from them---my experiences are so vast and deep that this has become a new instinct.
1. I've never encountered a feminine person who accepted responsibility for her actions. Ever. (A few instances, I have seen responsibility employed by
women, but even these are exceptions. I'm not talking about fucking something up and saying "I'm sorry;" I'm talking about not saying that and simply admitting the fuck-up and refraining from doing it again.)
2. I have never seen a feminine (adult) person "go without" or sacrifice or give anything without expecting a reward later. Not once.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
No wife sacrifices her career because her husband needed to move for his? And usually, when either her parents or her husband's parents need elder-care, it is the female that takes the brunt of responsibility for that as well.
I've seen plenty of women do things that certainly appeared altruistic and kind and caring---but, always, it was either conditional or expectant of either rewards or praise (like Christians "giving" to charity; they're not giving---they're investing in an eternal reward, making a deposit in their "heaven bank"---it's selfish, ultimately, and ugly.) Or for some other reason. Determining feminine motives has been a long interest of mine, and at times a fulltime job.
I was once given a flower, completely out of the blue, from a five-year-old girl I'd had the opportunity to babysit years ago while sharing an apartment with my ex-girlfriend's sister. This has to be the single exception of "giving without expecting something in return," not a
trade. Tiffany never asked for anything fom me after that, never hinted or indicated any other motive than simply to give me something (and I never asked her why---I smiled in return and that was the end of it). I might even be wrong---but it doesn't feel so.
But she wasn't a woman, feminine or otherwise; maybe female altruism does exist, but that's my only experience with it---without strings attached = other motives.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
And you think the male mind is an example of consistent truthfulness?
The masculine is a beacon of truth---there is no guile or pretense. The feminine is
deception incarnate---the make-up, the illusions and facades and games and winks and tests and playing about and so on and so forth---nothing is truthful about the feminine, it's never what it seems, like a shape-shifter. Surely you must know this...unless you wear make-up and disguises, and are about to get defensive, but frankly you don't seem the type. You seem above such rubbish.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:What is the stereotypical used car salesman? Politician? Husband?
A mangina.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
Do you want to seek the truth, or do you just want to hurl insults? Or do you just think you'll feel better about yourself if you know that there is some female out there that feels worthless or got what you think all women have coming to them?
1. I'm extremely interested in and dedicated to "the truth."
2. I use insults for various purposes, not to "feel better about myself." But...
3. It wasn't an insult---it was an over-the-top challenge---and it worked. (Was I rather sneaky there? Yep, I was.)
4. What women or men feel is their own affair and has nothing to do with me. (Personal responsibility once more---the
"I'm in control of my emotions and no one pulls my strings." It's the species of independence that women---and men---scarsely consider.)
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
Fine, especially since this "pampered class" stuff seems to be directed at me personally, perhaps this will make you feel better. The only thing that could console my mother when she found out she was pregnant with me was the belief that she would finally get the boy she always wanted. I was raised to truly believe that men were the only people with any worth. I used to parrot that stuff off as bad as Sue Hindmarsh. One time when a guy announced that his wife had the baby, and it was a girl, I actually told him that I was sorry to hear that.
Here we go---good stuff. So, it seems here again you are confusing physical "female" with "femininity"---why is that? I don't get that. Can you describe what "feminine" and "masculine" mean to you? (If you have some extra, extra time---it's admittedly quite long and too wordy---check out that "nudes"
threadand my last post, where I get into my conception of both and see what you think. I'd like your opinion on that.) I'd think we'd be on the same page here more often if we both knew exactly where one another was coming from regarding these concepts...
As to what you just wrote, I don't see Sue as you do---from what I've seen, she seems to have an open mind, intelligence, isn't shy about speaking out (has balls), and generally has a good deal of potential in my humble estimation (for one thing, she has no blind loyalty to "her gender" but instead to a higher purpose---I see nothing wrong with that).
Finally, as I constantly maintain, a girl has
every bit the possibilities for intellectual development as boys do---gender does figure into it; at birth and in infancy brain size is exactly the same. As they both develop and grow, here's where it starts differing; it's about how they're raised.
(Anyhow, put simply: more males are commonly desired, I think, only in that they are more productive for society---make better slaves, drones, corporate whores, what have you. I think your view of this is personally distorted based in some bitterness growing up. I can assure you (and prove) boys/males are not treated better than girls---another paradox: more suffering leads to higher mental taxation---Nietzsche had this right on the button.
I think you'd be wise for some introspection into why---really why---certain things tend to get under your skin.)
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
I gave up my 20's to take care of my father, despite how abusive he had been to me.
Why duty?
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
When I was young, I wanted children (actually, I wanted 5 boys), but I was told that due to a variance in my reproductive system, if I wanted children, I had to have them soon. I gave up that chance out of my sense of duty to my father. I spent the decade that most people get their own lives in order, taking care of an abusive old man who preferred to let the snot drip out of his nose and onto the carpet than to wipe his own nose. I even tried wiping it for him, but he thought I wiped too hard - so he'd complain about the mess on the carpet as much as he'd complain about the smell in his bathroom. I hardly consider that "pampered."
Nor would I. And yet you got through it---and are here, trying to expand your mind and "consciousness" and overall phrenic being, seemingly in relatively good order as a human being, all due to
all your experiences, especially those really shitty ones. I wonder if you can search yourself and find that which this suffering and loss has given you---yes, I see the bitterness, and it's understandable, since I have some of that, too; but ignore some "negative" side-effects and look for constructive things...
And keep in mind that you decided to do that---"give up" your 20s. I pretty much did the same thing---as well as all hope for kids, which I really wanted for a long time. I did it---no one held a gun to my head. My choices. I'm responsible for getting into every stupid situation. But now I'm okay with it, no regrets. I know how much I've gained through loss, giving things away or up.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:
My ex went to great lengths to make sure that I heard how weak-minded women are, and how women will just let anyone take advantage of them, reminding me of various ways that men had taken advantage of me (and of course saying he would make sure that didn't happen again so long as I asked his permission before doing anything) - all the while, unbeknownst to me, he had only planned a temporary marriage for us while he took whatever he could. I have seen the cunning of employers who knew how to get around laws to take advantage of me and get away with it, and I recognize from various experiences that I am ill-equipped to defend myself against the physical strength and mental cunning of the male world that just wants to have sex with my body, take my money and possessions, and enslave me if they can. Maybe there is a biological component that makes females feel as if we must be of worth to others to be of worth at all, and we are too stupid to see that guys actually despise us and only consider us disposable creatures meant to be mugged and raped - or we are too stupid to care. We're worthless to ourselves, and we become worthless if we give ourselves to someone else. Either way you're right; ultimately I'm worthless.
Ultimately, we all are worthless---dirt to be. Maggot Chow. So? I see nothing wrong with that. "Life has no meaning!" If so, so what? Was it supposed to? Is that a bad thing? Fine: no meaning---I'll use my creativity and conscience and invent one for myself. We're all the walking dead here, so I'll figure out something constructive to do while I am here, push it to the limit, and if I explode and go bonkers, so be it. It's gonna happen eventually anyway, senility as some toothless old prune, 70ish; I tried burning out by late 20-something, but for some reason I survived, so I'm tenatively opting for 50, maybe 55. That gives me another twenty years to do something; that's a lifetime.
You have got to stop seeking approval, Elizabeth, seriously---prove "it" to yourself, to see if you can, for the hell of it, for a challenge---for its own sake, or for no reason whatsoever. Something better to do? Watch TV? Come on! You're here because you're interested in being more than you are, even if you don't buy everything commonly brought up, even if you're not quite certain exactly why you're doing it. Ultimately, no-fucking-body can give you whatever it is you think you want or need---but you.
Fuck your money and possessions---leave it all in your house and
burn it all to the ground. Say goodbye to everyone you know in the real world and hit the road for a while. Roam, explore, experience things not as a tourist. What have you to lose except absolutely everything
aside from whoever you are?
Why? So you can be more like me?---not at all: so you can find yourself, because I don't think you're there yet, and my nasty poking and proding in this thread has brought out some issues here hinting to that; think I extract twisted pleasure out of this? I'm not here to "make you" feel anything or whatever you must be thinking---I'm trying, for one thing, to point out that you, and only you, are in charge of everything you feel, over your entire mind and essence as a person---and I think you have potential and would like to see you develop it.
If you would rather wallow in self-pity, hey, you can do that too; or, perhaps, you might look at yourself a little differently, not in terms of others (or your perception of what others think of you) but in terms of former versions of yourself. Perhaps don't view yourself in terms of "worth;" or simply redefine this for yourself. What I do is not look at thing in terms of "good;" once you've established that everyone and everything (for me, meaning civilized things) is utter fecal matter, "bad," it's then only a matter of deeming things in degrees as "not as shitty" as the rest, or "slightly less shitty." No expectations; no ego-feeding, no "worth." I'm never disappointed. I'm no fucking grand master of anything and am no student of anything, really---I just know what works for me, trust my instincts, and I haven't felt real sadness or unhappiness for over a year now; after a decade of non-stop depression, it's been four years of its absence. I've given away material crap and never had interests in wealth anyway, so that part was easy; I don't seek fun or laugh, but I experience them when they come and then return to what I was doing. I miss nothing at all and regret nothing---because I am quite satisfied with my progress as a person, as a man, and I realize that everything I've gone through (with women and others, and whatever situations) has all been a crucial part of bringing me to this point in time, in this state; all of it made me as much as I made myself. Of course I'd never claim enlightenment or perfection---I have faults, and a couple vices that need some serious work, like smoking, but I'll get to them when I get to them.
Oh well. Enough of my blather---just some things to think about. If you find it sound, consider it; if not, think of something better---nothing, and nobody, is stopping you.
Later.