Primal Masculinity vs Modernity's Feminzation

Everything serves the existing power structure. Feminization is highly productive in capitalist society; consisting of win-win interactions. Submissive conformity is the basis of civilization, it provides internal stability. I admire both master manipulators of modernity and valorous men of pre-modernity. Recognize the game that is being played and try to excel at it.

The Mongol and Roman empire's both began as Hyper-Dominant expansionary warring tribes. In order to sustain them selves resorted to bottom-up economies -- which eventually turned the aristocratic top-down culture into a reverse proletariat/plebs dominated culture. Money starts dominating politics, war, and castes. Feminine traits flourish while masculine traits become suppressed through spectacles (gladiator games, etc, etc.), the elite become sophists and brew massive corruption. All the characteristics that made the empire disappear; civilization is defeated by it's own victory. In those days masculine pagan Germanic tribes and barbaric Muslims conquered and replaced the declining empires.
We see this today with suicidal western birth rates and massive third world immigration.

I think a post scarcity world would pretty much resemble A Brave New World. All the trends seem to be pointing the other way tho. Infinite growth system clashing with finite resources. We are at peak everything. Nations within nations are starting to form; no more monolithic culture to unite everyone. A Neo-liberal global hegemony is starting to look like a pipe dream; most notably Russian allegiance to traditionalism and resistance to American influence. Take a look at western sexual strategies; r-type is prevalent with omega males dominating, responsible alpha males out of the picture and beta males totally ignored. The number of single mothers are at an all time high; usually only the case under times of great war. This gives signals to the children's biological chemistry for times of high scarcity and conflict. The initial conditions that created and sustained feminization are destroyed. Feminism is defeated by it's own victory.

I find modern society highly interesting even fulfilling. Everything is intellectualized, everyone is for sale, nothing is real. A sea of depravity. Yet there remains a certain aesthetic value in the nihilism.  

These exemplify it:

PR; is you're attraction to the heroic just not another form of death denial? Similar to consumerism and fundmentalism in today's society.

Here's some on that:





You should learn the philosophy of stoicism. Start here:

A nihilist to me is an ex-theist.

From the conception that reality has an inherent meaning imposed by a divine agent, they subtract the divine agent and find a reality devoid of any inherent meaning. They then lament the pointlessness of existence and search for reasons to escape or end it.

This shows their effeminate slavishness; meaning must originate from without, from the other or reality itself and be imposed upon the self. No surprise that these dilapidated fucks would then invert reality with such conceptions as an apathetic, pessimistic, paralyzed, impotent "Genuine Hero" who practices "grateful indifference", an implicit admission of utter inadequacy and failure characterized by his ability to endure life rather than enjoy it.

Meaning is an invention of mankind created to serve his own needs and desires.
It is a personal, conceptual or social phenomena which has no bearing on objective reality.

An ubermensch can say Yes to the eternal recurrence and has overcome his resentment towards his own temporality, his finite existence. He has accepted that all he does will crumble and still finds value and meaning in doing it nonetheless.
He loves his life because it is his. It is precious because it is finite.

There Will be Blood, I wouldn't say that my desire for heroism is based in death denial. I acknowledge the inevitability of death/oblivion, and try to accept it like a man hence my signature quote. I would say that my desire for heroism and a warrior ethos is based in the fact that I didn't have a father as child nor any strong male role model figure. As a result, I ended up kind of effeminate and timid ( afraid of the big bad world ). I think that my idealization of the warrior archetype is a striving for a return to equilibrium - to the way I'm, biologically, supposed to be: masculine. I want to make up for my past life of cowardice and effeminacy. I want that which I lacked, i.e., brotherhood and bravery. I would also say that my desire for a glorious death in battle is more a case of egoism or honor.

My thoughts on Nil-ism.

A nihilist is someone who surrenders to no-thing-ness. This is not an action but an in-action. The meaningfulness of a life can't be stockpiled indefinitely, it erodes away. It is an enduring search, an effort. The nihilist surrenders and so decay of meaning ensues.

But, it's not just the surrender - nothing is perfectly focused all the time. The nihilist finds distractions to comfort him-/herself in times of decay. Hedonism being one of these comforting distractions.

And it's even more than that. No-thing-ness becomes the new covert ideal, hiding behind the facade of some absolute-thing ideal.

My take:

If we posit reality, the world, as the positive, the 1, no matter how much of it we can perceive, then the rejection and/or the denial of this positive is its nullification, the nil, the negative, the 0.

Of course, in this case the singular one is meant as a representation of the real which is neither one nor nil, but a fluctuation in the in-between, a towards.
In this case positive, or one, indicates what is present and perceived, rather than what is imagined and hypothesized and theoretical.
I say one tree, but the tree is never stable, and never the same one every time I use the symbol the verbal term, to refer to it.

Up to now a reversal has been in play, a false reality has been presented as the "positive".
For example, where there is change, normally occurring, a static thing, has been presented as the positive. The 1, in this case being mistaken as the abstraction of reality, and taken literally as a singularity.
Where there is imperfection, imprecision, degrees, a certainty, a gnosis, an absolute has been put in its place.
Even in the sciences this search for the elusive absolute state: particle, absolute zero temperature, absolute point of departure, as in Big Bang, absolute morals, has been taken for granted.
Man's simplifications, abstractions, and the symbols words he invented to express and share them, are now the "positive".

And, naturally, what stands as the negative, in relation to that would be the real: absence of an absolute, of meaning, of purpose, a teleos, the perfect, the final, the singular the beginning/end, the good/bad.  
This is why in the Bible the "word" comes first, and the "word" is not "bird", but God.
The concept makes sense only if you take the term, the symbol, literally, as a static, beginning/end, an anthropomorphic representation of what is absent in reality: the absolute.

This is why we live in an age of nihilism and within false dichotomies, and within erroneous premises.
It takes a particularly sophisticated brain to begin to think outside these on/off binary mechanisms. This is why nihilism comes easy to the dull and the dim, and why it is so pervasive and popular and dominating.

In our time of reversals, all is turned on its head.
The concept of nihilism is now associated with the denial that there is an absolute, meaning, purpose, morality, and so on. In other words, the real is now made into the nil, and the denial of the real is the new "positive".
This is so natural, because reproduction has permitted inferior brains to multiply (Dysgenics), and so pervasive, that it now infects every aspect of human thinking.


The real as a state of Flux, fluidity, constant (inter)activity, has now been replaced by the methods the brain evolved to conceptualize this Flux into things, into positions in space/time, into ideas, into absolutes, by simplifying and generalizing fluidity into a four dimensional representation which can go by many names: thing, object, here, now, self, being, God and so on.
This is because the human mind is still in its infancy, and most brains, having been born within an environment of sheltering, where any Tom, Dick, and Harry has been given a "right", and has been protected from his own stupidity, an reproduce his inferior brain, with another retard, who cannot tell the difference between superior and inferior or has been infected with the cultural norm where such value judgments are considered sinful.  
The human fabrications of morality and monogamy, as they've been applied so far, also contribute to this propagation of lower level brains.
Females, who were meant to be a natural filtering mechanism, have now been directed to serve as social filtering mechanisms, choosing memetically whatever the man-made system trains them, from birth, to consider preferably.

It is easy to understand why the method has been misconstrued for the actual fact, when one takes into account the previously mentioned social and cultural circumstances.
Along with them we should also keep in mind that such brains, so dependent on sheltering to come about and to persevere, and to remain valuable, would also show an inclination towards despising anything and anyone who exposes them to a truth they cannot fully understand nor accept, without putting their own existence into question.

What is ironic is that the very brains so dependent on superficial appearances can then also be trained and convinced, because this also sheltered them form the reality of the world, that appearances do not matter.
You have a double, self-delusion, coming into play here. first the brain mistaken its own representations, his ideas, and ideals for the real, the noumenon for the phenomenon, the word for the action, but then it also must soften the awareness further by detaching it from the apparent.
Sp, the world becomes twice removed.
First, it is mistaken for the mental representation of it, and then this representation is denied relevance, turning the real into some fantastic, ambiguity, that can be anything; and because it can be anything it most likely will be what is preferred by the majority.  

Community is important here, much more than it was in primal states, because now the individual's entire self-worth, his/her entire perception of reality is dependent on the support and validation of a majority who also believe in the exact same mythologies, and who in conjunction maintain the cocooning, solipsism, of modern institutional living.
Because the senses have lost all relevance, except for directing the will in accordance to prescribed behaviors within a fabricated environment, emotion is proposed as the alternative sensation.
emotion because after the initial sensual stimulation, the automated response, which is what emotion is, takes over to direct the individual's thinking, and behaving.
It is because this traumatic response can be easily directed and recalibrate that it must be preserved as the preferred first response, the first impression, usurping reason or afterthought, or hindsight, or forethought.
The individual must be trained to become an animal, in his/her conceptualizations, and judgments, living in the moment, as it were, finding meaning and purpose in the immediate, the materialistic the hedonistic, what comes easy and requires no thinking.
This automatization is easy to submit to and to train/educate into the individual brain, when you use its natural predispositions, such as fear, hunger, sexual desire, or any emotion or sensation already present in the organism because of evolution.


A return to reality would be a return to the understanding that language is symbolic, an art-form, representing the real, not being it.
Reality is fluid, yet language uses static forms, and representations, as any art does.
A return to the admission that man may not know all, the absolute some-thing, but neither does he know nothing, the absolute no-thing, and that what he does know is always changing so it requires constant reaffirmation.

Self-awareness which is not based on the thinking....

Someone can observe him-/herself while the thinking-process takes place. Self-awareness, self-consciousness.
That part, which observes the thinking process, makes it possible to recognize and experience that disconnect between what is out there and the thinking which is done within. To realize this abstraction which is taking place while doing the thinking. To realize this disconnect, not as an idea but as an experience.

I think this requires a strong connection between the more primal, sensory parts of the brain and its thinking domain.

What you are looking for because it's missing - that's what you think and talk a lot about.

Right, comfort is as much a problem, if not more so, than lack of comfort.

It's hyper-masculine over-compensation. Muscles are a symbol of masculinity that can be purchased in the gym in exchange for devotion to the economic system. The symbol serves to distract the individual from the reminders of his extreme emasculation.
Bodybuilding is quite an effeminate activity as the same vanity surrounds it as does female preoccupations with fashion and make-up. Visual appeal, the art of attracting interest with a pretty body and so forth.
Intellect, the Will, the actual masculine element, diminishes.

apaosha wrote:

It's hyper-masculine over-compensation. Muscles are a symbol of masculinity that can be purchased in the gym in exchange for devotion to the economic system. The symbol serves to distract the individual from the reminders of his extreme emasculation.
Bodybuilding is quite an effeminate activity as the same vanity surrounds it as does female preoccupations with fashion and make-up. Visual appeal, the art of attracting interest with a pretty body and so forth.
Intellect, the Will, the actual masculine element, diminishes.

The pursuit of symmetry isn't effeminate. Muscle's can't be "purchased." They are hard won. The symbol isn't a distraction but can, in fact, be a reflection of internal harmony. No will/intellect is diminished with lifting, but the will/intellect/spirit can certainly be stimulated. The actual will is the body, so why let one's health slowly deteriorate in service to the "intellect" if lifting is beneficial to one's health? Why is hiking(Nietzsche) OK for exercise but somehow doing a hard workout in the gym is suddenly effeminate? Something having visual appeal is no argument against it. The fashion/make-up connection is weak because bodybuilding speaks to the pride of the unadorned body.

On the other hand, the disdain of the body in pure favor of the intellect can be a sign of emasculation.

However, if you're speaking toward a certain "trend" within bodybuilding/lifting culture that would be something different (most gyms cater to a very toned down sense of fitness). And, of course, the "fight" extends outside the gym.

Genuine symmetry/health is acquired through reciprocity. For example, if someone pushes me I would be forced to push him back -- this is reciprocity. I am not pushing him simply because I enjoy pushing him, I am pushing him because he is pushing me, because I predicted he will push me. If this pushing becomes a trend, then I would eventually become strong (if I remain alive, of course), and not because I wanted to be strong, not because I chose to be strong, but because I was forced to become strong. In weightlifting (and all other kinds of training) there is no longer any reciprocity, in fact, the opposite of it is being promoted. The poor barbells are passive, they represent no threat to you and actually demand from you to be just as calm as they are, and so when you pick them up and use them to build your muscles you are in a very real sense abusing them. And you are no longer reacting to the present moment, you are now reacting to your past and/or to your imagined future ("confusing memory traces for external stimuli" as Deleuze says.)

Training is self-referential. One does not train because external circumstances force him to do so, one trains because one is scared of future. By training one reacts to mental chaos, but training is inappropriate reaction to mental chaos (the appropriate way to react to mental chaos is, well, through mind.) Of course, people are imperfect, and so this splintering off must be tolerated, but one should not be confused about the direction one's life should be taking.

Today, it's not even fear which motivates people to train, but vanity as apaosha says.

perpetualburn wrote:

The pursuit of symmetry isn't effeminate. Muscle's can't be "purchased." They are hard won. The symbol isn't a distraction but can, in fact, be a reflection of internal harmony. No will/intellect is diminished with lifting, but the will/intellect/spirit can certainly be stimulated. The actual will is the body, so why let one's health slowly deteriorate in service to the "intellect" if lifting is beneficial to one's health? Why is hiking(Nietzsche) OK for exercise but somehow doing a hard workout in the gym is suddenly effeminate? Something having visual appeal is no argument against it. The fashion/make-up connection is weak because bodybuilding speaks to the pride of the unadorned body.

On the other hand, the disdain of the body in pure favor of the intellect can be a sign of emasculation.

However, if you're speaking toward a certain "trend" within bodybuilding/lifting culture that would be something different (most gyms cater to a very toned down sense of fitness). And, of course, the "fight" extends outside the gym.

Physical fitness is a consequence of the intellect; the mind drives the body relentlessly to submit to it's ambitions, achieving strength through struggle. You see this in soldiers, martial artists, agricultural and construction workers.
Physical fitness is generally taken as evidence of an active intellect, an active Will which regularly imposes itself upon the world around it through the body. Because of this it becomes a symbol of masculinity and an indicator of male sexual fitness.
With bodybuilders the mind is neglected, as the objective is to attract sexual interest by acquiring the symbol of masculinity that muscles represent; hyper-masculinity.

This is, yes, purchased at a gym by paying a membership or a personal trainer or taking steroids or whatever.

It can be about acquiring a symbol of masculinity and it's often the case.

However, a healthy mind needs a healthy body because developing and maintaining this healthy mind requires that the interactions with the environment are happening in a healthy body.
Let's assume the case that the body is very asymmetrical and the mind is very symmetrical - unlikely but not unheard of, because if one of the two is asymmetrical then it's rather unlikely that the other is not similar in its degree of symmetry.
In this case the asymmetrical body will inhibit the mind from engaging with the environment in a healthy manner, which it wouldn't if it were within a rather symmetrical body. Being impaired in physical activities, social activities, sexual activities and so on... This would inevitably affect the mind in its development.

It's best to find a way to train body and mind in ways which result in a wholesome training of both and involving the natural interests as well.... if possible.
Playfulness goes a long way.

The difference is focus, motive, object/objective.

The healthy body, above all else, is functional.
It becomes fit, and acquires symmetry/beauty, when it engages reality, the world, and its beauty is a side-effect of this engagement with the world, and so it takes on the form which is most efficient.

The emasculated male who is desperate to enhance the masculine markers because he is being emasculated, is concerned only with form, and not with functionality.
He cultivates the body by exaggerating the markers, as the goal, the object/objective, and so he becomes a walking hyperbole, bordering on a caricature of what the human form would be if it were cultivated for functionality, and efficiency.
In his desperation he may succumb to the temptation of using technologies/techniques to accentuate further than he is able to go, so as to attain that hyperbolic form that is supposed to impress and not to be useful.

The only alternative is to use techniques/technologies to imitate the most efficient form, but then the object/objective is, again, the form, the appearance, and not engaging reality through which the body would acquire the most efficient form, as this is determined by the past/nature, inherited by the individual.
Again, the motive exposes the essence of the man.

It's different to acquire a form which is the most efficient by engaging the world, than it is to acquire this form intentionally, as a goal which imitates the form without the engagement with reality, without utility.
Although discipline, through askesis, is important, the fact that the object/objective is to imitate a desirable form, using techniques/technologies, training methods being a technique, this motive reflects the individual's spirit: vanity, superficiality, and so on.
To wish to appear as if you were a warrior, let's say, is not the same as being one.
The warrior does not train to appear to be effective in fighting, he trains to be effective in fighting, and his body reflects this.
The one who trains to appear to be effective will always expose this motive by exaggerating the parts he feels most insecure about (asymmetry), or by cultivating a form which is less effective in fighting by this exaggeration - like the peacocks tail - or his body will display a form which is meant for display which may not be accompanied with a mind, a psychology, necessary to take advantage of it.

To use another context...the male who acquires a look because he wishes to create music, to express his spirit musically, is different form the male who wishes to be seen, to get woman to notice him, by learning to play music, and to appear as if he were an artist, a creative spirit.
The contradiction between appearance, cultivated to imitate, and the appearance meant to convince with its imitation, will always expose the individual despite his intentions.
Because the individual who simply imitates, or cultivates to appears as something he is not, is not truly what he is attempting to appear as, he will never know the path taken, but only imitate the destination attained.

A simple example:
The truly strong, warrior, is kind, and gentle, because he knows what pain is, and what causing pain to another entails.
He fights with a purpose, not simply to fight, to display, to appear, and to impress.
His physique is not his object/objective. It is the byproduct of pursuing his object/objective.


He does not fight simply to fight, or to be appreciate and admired.
He fight for a reason beyond himself.  


The fake will only imitate the fierceness, the appearance, the, for him, viciousness of the fighter and can never know what it means to fight, or to risk life and limb, and so this fact alone will expose him as what he is to whomever can appreciate, and understand, appearance.

The intent exposes the need; the need exposes the weakness.

If the intent is to simply appear to be strong, then this immediately explores the opposite: a weakness.
In my experience the strongest men were always gentle, because they did not have to impose, and pretend, and display. they were strong and everyone knew it.
Those who had to display their hypothetical strength were always the one who felt the most insecure, and uncertain in relation to it, and those who only wanted to appear to be strong, without wanting to actually be so, were the most pathetic of all.

Same goes for intelligence, masculinity, or any idealized trait which has become a popular object/objective.

Look at how women pay huge amounts of money to appear to be beautiful, when most are not, and can never be so.
The truly beautiful woman need not try, and so she does not occupy herself with this object/objective - she just is beautiful.
The ones who try the hardest are the noes who are the most desperate, because they can never be beautiful and so they want to simply appear to be so.
Techniques/Technologies offer the possibility of buying beauty...but it is always obvious, and in time it is exposed as fake.
Wake up next to a woman who went to great lengths to beatify herself the night before.
Spend some time with a woman who has made it her lifelong obsession to be as beautiful as possible.

People forget that appearance refers to an (inter)activity.
Existence is (inter)activity, and what appear sis always dynamic.
A very macho looking man, in a static photo, may expose a feminine trait in action.

Therefore, when I use the term "appearance" I do not mean a static image, but an (inter)activity, which also includes thinking, and the expression of thinking which is behavior.
Others simplify appearance down to one traits, or a few traits, because they wish to ridicule it.

Appearance is not one trait, since the phenomenon is experienced and interpreted using multiple sense organs, each with its own method.
The organism engages the phenomenon via its senses, and a intervening phenomenon, and the number of senses and their acuity determined how it interprets it.
Using your eyes, which utilizes light as its medium, is different to suing your ears, using atmosphere as the medium.
The phenomenon is interpreted according to the sense organ's evolved methodology, and then processed in the brain, combining it with other sensual stimuli to construct an abstraction.
Therefore, the grayness of a phenomenon, although almost exactly the same as the grayness of another phenomenon, cannot be separated form all the other traits, to ridicule grayness as an important interpretation of the phenomenon.
The brain is limited in how it can interpret a phenomenon's (inter)activity and so it often interprets different phenomenon using the same, or almost the same, abstraction.
It is in combination with all the other interpreted traits, of the phenomenon, where the brain distinguishes one gray elephant, for example, from another, or from a gray bird, or the gray of a cloud.

The other is not judged on one, two, or even three traits, but by using the totality accessible to the judging, mind, to the best of its inherited abilities.
It abilities in sensual acuity, and analytic ability, are inherited, and though they can be enhanced, cultivated, they cannot exceed the limit imposed by this inheritance - this past/nature.
When we say conscious we mean to discriminate.
We become conscious of a difference in gray hues when we can discriminate one from the other.
So, to be precise in judging other you must perceive detail, subtle divergence, which may escape the consciousness of the other.
Because it exceeds the other's ability to perceive, to discriminate, the other has a disadvantage, and, more importantly, the other cannot imitate successfully what he is not, but desperately wishes to be perceived as.
This is how the fake is exposed, despite wanting to hide beneath his/her pretenses.

To make beauty the goal rather than the byproduct of engaging reality in the most efficient/effect way is vanity.
To make pleasure the goal rather than the indication that a goal has been approached is hedonism
To make of eating the goal rather than the emans towards self-preservation is gluttony.
To make of sex the end rather than the emans towards a more timeless goal is decadence.
To make money, resources, the end, rather than the means, is greed.


Relating to the topic...

We are children of the sun.
Our energies are processed solar energy.
The earth is the passive, nurturing, element, which the sun's energy sparks into life.

The sun becomes the symbol of godliness, of masculine creativity.
The earth becomes the symbol of the feminine; the means through which solar creative energies manifest as life.
For the primitive man the sun must have been a Divine, eternal, force.
The earth's bounty is overflowing because of the sun's constant energizing.
But the sun is not eternal, and dark space dominates existence, not stars.
The masculine sun sparked in the feminine earth the processes that become life, and then shines upon it offering it huge amounts of energies to absorb and live.
Apollo's grace.

This consistent bountiful energizing must have seemed like a godly gift; an endless, unquenchable supply for an organism who's lifespan could only relate to the sun's lifespan as a worshiper would relate to a god.
The early pagans squandered as a display of their power.
For them squandering resources was wealth, and not, as today, collecting and hoarding them.
Potlatch...
The strong, wealthy man gave back of his excess, until, in the end, he returned himself back to the earth's bounty.

Today we live in an age of the miser - the Judeo-Christian - where weakness collects, appropriates, owns, hoards.
The miserly psychology.
The sun's energies are denied relevance, or considered not enough for the miser who fears death, and sees in the darkness the void inside of himself.
In the sun's mortality he sees his own, and is afraid.
He wishes to live forever, so vain he has become, because his life is not a means but an end in itself.

apaosha wrote:

perpetualburn wrote:

The pursuit of symmetry isn't effeminate.  Muscle's can't be "purchased."  They are hard won.  The symbol isn't a distraction but can, in fact, be a reflection of internal harmony.  No will/intellect is diminished with lifting, but the will/intellect/spirit can certainly be stimulated.  The actual will is the body, so why let one's health slowly deteriorate in service to the "intellect" if lifting is beneficial to one's health?  Why is hiking(Nietzsche) OK for exercise but somehow doing a hard workout in the gym is suddenly effeminate?   Something having visual appeal is no argument against it.  The fashion/make-up connection is weak because bodybuilding speaks to the pride of the unadorned body.

On the other hand, the disdain of the body in pure favor of the intellect can be a sign of emasculation.

However, if you're speaking toward a certain "trend" within bodybuilding/lifting culture that would be something different (most gyms cater to a very toned down sense of fitness).  And, of course, the "fight" extends outside the gym.

Physical fitness is a consequence of the intellect; the mind drives the body relentlessly to submit to it's ambitions, achieving strength through struggle. You see this in soldiers, martial artists, agricultural and construction workers.
Physical fitness is generally taken as evidence of an active intellect, an active Will which regularly imposes itself upon the world around it through the body. Because of this it becomes a symbol of masculinity and an indicator of male sexual fitness.
With bodybuilders the mind is neglected, as the objective is to attract sexual interest by acquiring the symbol of masculinity that muscles represent; hyper-masculinity.

This is, yes, purchased at a gym by paying a membership or a personal trainer or taking steroids or whatever.

In some bodybuilders the mind is neglected. If someone pays for a book and then gains important insight about oneself, is that all negated because he "purchased" the book? The symbol(the healthy body) can be cultivated in the gym among many other "places". It's not as if you can just pay for a membership or a personal trainer and you miraculously get a strong body. People can pay for great books but have no way(don't have the instincts) to utilize the information. That a bodybuilding physique is used by the media to promote certain ideals doesn't necessarily mean that those that lift do so to mirror that ideal. The object of lifting isn't simply to acquire sexual interest (For one, most women could care less about the difference between a man with say a lean soccer physique and a man with bodybuilding physique as long as he has a handsome face. Two, bodybuilding requires a great investment of time and effort and female affection alone isn't enough to motivate one day in and out, especially considering point one)...
Nevertheless, bodybuilding is a sport and like all sports can become just another religion...

perpetualburn wrote:

No will/intellect is diminished with lifting, but the will/intellect/spirit can certainly be stimulated.  The actual will is the body, so why let one's health slowly deteriorate in service to the "intellect" if lifting is beneficial to one's health?

The actual will is the entire world, not only the body. In other words, your will is not separate from the external (the world) just as it is not separate from the internal (the body.) The will is supposed to mediate between the two, the internal and the external, to move towards the center, and as soon as it starts moving away from this center and towards the internal or towards the external, it becomes nihilistic. Weightlifting, for example, is too masculine/introverted/selfish, too much in the head and very little in the actual reality.

Weightlifting creates symmetrical body, but the process itself moves in the direction of asymmetry, since the relation between the weightlifter and his barbells is asymmetrical. This increase in the asymmetry of interaction (which in actuality is a temporally separated symmetry, typical for the debtor mentality) is what we call cowardice (Satyr mentioned snipers elsewhere, sniping being a pretty good example of asymmetrical/cowardly interaction.) The actual weightlifting has little impact on the external world, but the impact it has on the mind of the weightlifter is considerable since it promotes asymmetrical action/thinking, which is to say, it weakens the will (the individual becomes chaotic, ordered only in his appearance.)

We live in the age of asymmetry which is symmetrical only in its appearances (we can call this "hyper-symmetry" or "hyper-order", or "hyper-reality" as Baudrillard called it.) There is so much emphasis on order/symmetry precisely in order to hide the fact that there is none. Perfectionism, pedantry, medicine/health/fitness obsession, law and punishment, oversocialization, etc, they all betray underlying hatred of chaos, which is what nihilism is. Using asymmetry to create symmetry which cannot sustain itself and must be rescued with further asymmetry . . . Symmetry something static and not something dynamic, not a becoming, not a gradual movement from asymmetry towards symmetry.

Muscles are not healthy if they are acquired through asymmetrical interaction. They may APPEAR to be healthy in their symptoms (medicine being all about symptoms), the individual may feel happy, but happiness itself means nothing. If one's appearance of health is earned through asymmetrical interaction, it is not health, but sickness. Similarly, if one's appearance of sickness is earned through symmetrical interaction, it is not sickness, but health. Medicine is too obsessed with symptoms . . .

Magnus Anderson wrote:

perpetualburn wrote:

No will/intellect is diminished with lifting, but the will/intellect/spirit can certainly be stimulated.  The actual will is the body, so why let one's health slowly deteriorate in service to the "intellect" if lifting is beneficial to one's health?

The actual will is the entire world, not only the body. In other words, your will is not separate from the external (the world) just as it is not separate from the internal (the body.) The will is supposed to mediate between the two, the internal and the external, to move towards the center, and as soon as it starts moving away from this center and towards the internal or towards the external, it becomes nihilistic. Weightlifting, for example, is too masculine/introverted/selfish, too much in the head and very little in the actual reality.

Weightlifting creates symmetrical body, but the process itself moves in the direction of asymmetry, since the relation between the weightlifter and his barbells is asymmetrical. This increase in the asymmetry of interaction (which in actuality is a temporally separated symmetry, typical for the debtor mentality) is what we call cowardice (Satyr mentioned snipers elsewhere, sniping being a pretty good example of asymmetrical/cowardly interaction.) The actual weightlifting has little impact on the external world, but the impact it has on the mind of the weightlifter is considerable since it promotes asymmetrical action/thinking, which is to say, it weakens the will (the individual becomes chaotic, ordered only in his appearance.)

We live in the age of asymmetry which is symmetrical only in its appearances (we can call this "hyper-symmetry" or "hyper-order", or "hyper-reality" as Baudrillard called it.) There is so much emphasis on order/symmetry precisely in order to hide the fact that there is none. Perfectionism, pedantry, medicine/health/fitness obsession, law and punishment, oversocialization, etc, they all betray underlying hatred of chaos, which is what nihilism is. Using asymmetry to create symmetry which cannot sustain itself and must be rescued with further asymmetry . . . Symmetry something static and not something dynamic, not a becoming, not a gradual movement from asymmetry towards symmetry.

Muscles are not healthy if they are acquired through asymmetrical interaction. They may APPEAR to be healthy in their symptoms (medicine being all about symptoms), the individual may feel happy, but happiness itself means nothing. If one's appearance of health is earned through asymmetrical interaction, it is not health, but sickness. Similarly, if one's appearance of sickness is earned through symmetrical interaction, it is not sickness, but health. Medicine is too obsessed with symptoms . . .

I don't follow how the relation between the weightlifter and his barbells his asymmetrical. Why does it have little impact on the external world? You think the weightlifter is over-compensating?(ordered only in appearance), but wouldn't that be a quick conclusion on your part? What is a "healthy" body then(how is it acquired(literally)? What is fitness then? The "fruits" of working out extend beyond just getting stronger for another day in the gym.

Quote :

I don't follow how the relation between the weightlifter and his barbells his asymmetrical.

Symmetry: two men pushing each other. Reactions are equal (or move towards equality) both qualitatively (same type of force) and quantitatively (same intensity of force.)

Asymmetry: a man pushing someone standing in place. Reactions are unequal (or move towards inequality) both qualitatively (different type of force) and quantitatively (different intensity of force.) Bullying is another word for it.

(Of course, the universe being fundamentally asymmetrical means that we all act asymmetrically, but different people resist/control this movement with different intensity and consistency.)

Weightlifting is a reaction to thoughts and feelings making it qualitatively distinct to its opposing force. Thoughts and feelings are responded to with thoughts and feelings, not with weightlifting. For weightlifting to be natural, which is to say, an adequate reaction, its opposing force must be something resembling barbells but that acts on its own initiative (chaos.) Otherwise it is a simulation, promoting asymmetrical interaction, and so it has to be resisted.

Quote :

Why does it have little impact on the external world?

The barbells remain mostly unchaged, that's what I meant. What changes is one's brain, by training it to see asymmetry as something that shouldn't be resisted.

Quote :

What is a "healthy" body then(how is it acquired(literally)?

There are two conceptions of health, the introverted/active conception and the extroverted/reactive/symptomatic conception (the popular one.)

According to the introverted conception, which I consider to be the real one, health is the capacity to absorb chaos. Healthy individual is an "agent of order" who absorbs all of the chaos around him and who either orders it or implodes/perishes from it. Symptomatically, such a health can manifest itself positively, as health, but also negatively, as sickness. There is no guarantee that an "agent of order" will survive chaos/sickness and make it to the stage of apparent health. His sole goal is order/neutrality/indifference, everything else being a symptom/consequence (including pleasure/happiness, apparent health and survival/longevity.) Sickness, from this point of view, is inability to absorb chaos, which manifests itself as extroversion of chaos, as "vomiting" so to speak. Symptomatically, such a sickness can manifest negatively, as sickness, but it can also manifest positively, as health.

That would be the answer to your question: symptomatic health is a consequence of ordering that has survived for long enough. It is not chosen, it is given. The meaning of the word "natural".

The end is feelings of virtual omnipotence, a desire initially formed by sensation of a lack of control.  Case and point>

With deficit quenched; actualization in all the other spheres of life, a golden mean. All beyond the limit accomplishment necessarily founded on this formula in one sense or the other. Child abuse is....

Quote :

Healthy individual is an "agent of order"

Thats a Persian importation. Contrary to Ancient Christian Pantheon Abraxas; a state of mind exists beyond false dichotomies.

Hmm, upon watching the videos I posted, it did cross my mind that this man is a homosexual, couldn't really pin point it but it was there as a passing thought, something to do with his way of expression, but anyways upon further research turns out he is actually a homosexual. He wrote a book called "Androphilia"

Quote :

Donovan advocates “androphilia,” by which he means love or sex between masculine men. He doesn’t call himself gay, rejects gay culture as effeminate, and justifies homophobia as a defense of masculinity rooted in the male gang’s collective survival needs. This might sound like self-hatred, but Donovan isn’t hiding or apologizing for his own sexuality; he’s defining it in a way that’s radically at odds with prevailing LGBT politics. His version of homosexuality is a consummation of the priority that men in his ideal gang place on each other. As he has commented, “When you get right down to it, when it comes to sex, homos are just men without women getting in the way.”

Not that any of this negates what he is saying, just found that little fact to be surprisingly bizarre, haven't really seen this kind of approach to homosexuality before.

Quote :

homos are just men without women getting in the way

A healthy tree needs soil even if it does get in the way of its ascent upwards.

For every masculine mutation there has to be a feminine mutation there to satisfy it, perhaps this is an incentive to produce further feminization?

Indeed, in his case, I think there are multiple things such as shame, guilt, social rejection etc that has largely contributed to the mutation, that with such a circumstance and modern technology it has allowed for a type of hyper masculinity, which would be worse than just the typical hyper masculine, but a new homosexual version and because of its sexual perversion it enters into a primal carnal justification.

The mutation within him resides in a DNA disposition that naturally gravitates towards the masculine violence, his overall condition is like a collateral effect of a virus meeting the host kind of thing. The modern environment, because of its feminization and exclusive acceptance of the feminine. he's forced out as any natural masculine dominant man would be, this is what creates the social aspect of his position.

The reason why he resides in the extreme and presents a larger threat is because he bypasses the calming taming effect that women offer due to his homosexual nature and the social environmental acceptance of the sexual aspect of his mutation permits him access, which he willingly engages in as a type of "top" dominant sport of mounting males (probably of straight feminine men too), reinforcing his sexuality, dominance, hyper masculinity and confidence which all said things largely contribute to his social revenge, which is largely an expression of his natural incompleteness mixed with rejected masculinity in society, and the fact that he is a Caucasian doesn't help the circumstances either.

The final result, a savage homosexual berserker who dreams of creating a homosexual utopia using his Caucasian racial historical background as a pathway to realizing such desires, redefining what is means to be a "man" relative to his position which isn't, ironically, that far away from the modern redefinition, it is this compatibility that makes him so dangerous. His type wouldn't really have a problem with the modern society had it not been for the fact that he has a more masculine aggressive nature combined with that sexual mutation, which forces him to lean towards all things manly.