For a woman mind and body are one, and she experiences the balances as a presence. for men the body and mind can be detached, making men more objective,
I disagree that a splintered mind/body makes one [either male or female] objective.
Objectivity as near-zero noise can be achieved as the nihilistic Schopenhauerian detachment of mind from body, or as the affirmative Nietzschean resolution of mind and body sync that therefore causes the least disturbance, allowing for heightened perception.
Detaching mind, awareness, from body, internal stimuli, needs, clarifies the perceived - detaching the individual form his own desires/needs: to see world, other, with few, or no, personal corrupting prejudices.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37196 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
The individual's love of self, his/her pride, affirmation of self, and his/her self-knowledge, determines what attributes, in the other, will be considered attractive, desirable, wanted, idealized.
If the individual likes, affirms, self, (s)he will affirm the attributes (s)he identifies as self in other. If the individual does not like, does not affirm, self, (s)he will seek in other the traits, and the degree these traits are developed, that (s)he wishes to compensate for.
The psychology is a towards object/objective to accentuate self, and object/objective to compensate for self. Therefore an individual raised to despise his/her heritage, self, past, or raised with no sense of past/nature, no sense of self, will be attracted to the one who is like them, if they are satisfied with this, or seek in the other what accentuates this self-hatred, or compensates for it.
Sexual hunger/disgust relate to this, just as disgust/hunger relate to our choice of nutrition.
We are disgusted by what we wish to keep outside our becoming - we evaluate it as toxic, waste. We hunger for what adds to what we identify with; accentuates it, or compensates, in degree, for what we lack in relation to it.
The importance of the identifier is evident, and this is why Modernity is about identity, and redefining self. How much we know self, and what identifier is the primary one, determined by organ hierarchies nurtured or left to atrophy, produces the attraction to a particular other; knowing self also determining how well we know other.
I'm wondering what would you guys choose? Let's say between
(1) a girl who is more intellectual (but not that great, still caught in status quo modern illusion) who is a moral relativist and more sexualized. (2) a girl who is more plain in thinking, more into the spiritual/emotional thinking of the classical female type and with a strong moral backbone and who is a prude.
Specimen (1) has a background with lots of bad relationships and is a sexual masochist Specimen (2) had only one previous relationship and is, as I've stated, prudish.
My predicament is that I like both. Still thinking which should I go for. Right now I am favoring number 2. Would make a great long term relationship in my opinion. You guys have more experience, maybe you can give me some pointers.
Specimen 1, of course. Specimen 2 sounds boring to be around. Specimen 1, if is more intellectual, should make your babies have better genes. If she is a moral relativist it should take less than a year to infect her with your memes, ridding her of her status quo thought patterns. However, keep in mind, Einstein married a physicist yet still had retard babies.
The Negro female lacks in elegance, sophistication and passivity but makes up for it with raw sexuality. She is the primal female before sexual specialization took over to create the more adolescent looking Caucasian and the even more so Oriental, inspiring in the male the protective instincts.
As such the Oriental female comes across as infantile, immature, in form and mind, whereas the Negro comes across as aggressive, primal and difficult to mange. The former has an almost prepubescent look, and the latter a more masculine one.
Put a black bitch on a tight leash.
OhFortunae
Gender : Posts : 2311 Join date : 2013-10-26 Age : 30 Location : Land of Dance and Song
I have read some time ago, that the preferance for women in order to obtain an orgasm, goes for thickness rather than length. But orgasms aside, they like to be filled.
_________________ 1. "Youth, oh, youth! | of whom then, youth, art thou born? Say whose son thou art, Who in Fafnir's blood | thy bright blade reddened, And struck thy sword to my heart."
2. "The Noble Hart | my name, and I go A motherless man abroad; Father I had not, | as others have, And lonely ever I live."
Hrodeberto
Gender : Posts : 1318 Join date : 2014-07-14 Age : 37 Location : Spaces
All of the world consists of one gigantic zoo, called "human civilization". Thus it stands that every society, country, and nation have abstractions of a collective "alpha male", otherwise known as the Church or State power. I personally consider the Church to be the alpha male abstraction and State to be the alpha female abstraction. But nevermind that distinction, consider either institution as the "alpha male".
The alpha male (abstraction) steps into everybody's lives, especially males, and dictates who can or cannot breed, and the manners by which they are allowed to reproduce. Hence, ideas like marriage, rape, and age-consent laws. These are all socially regulated. You are allowed, or many males disallowed, to mate with specific individuals and women. The best and most sexually attractive females of civilization are the most regulated, the toughest to compete for and gain access too. Thus the alpha male abstraction will stand in, and prevent the vast majority of males from entering (having sex with) the highest quality, or even average women.
Why do the best philosophers throughout history usually not reproduce? Why are they white, european males? Why do they usually not marry?
Because philosophy is an act of rebellion and defiance. By "doing" philosophy, a male essentially crosses the line of the alpha male abstraction. It is the ultimate evil, ultimate taboo, ultimate worst idea, for a man. And this also explains the absolute, complete lack of females within the realm of philosophy (as an anti-social action and thought).
Instead all males must become emasculated and beta. A construction worker, an engineer, a teacher, a politician, a police officer, a soldier, a lawyer, whatever. These are all beta male positions of society and civilization. They demonstrate the loyalty of any individual male, to the system, as "buying in". Males are disallowed to deviate from society and civilization, disallowed to "go against humanity". The more successful a man is, as a beta male, as a rich lawyer for example, the more quality females he has access to, but will always remain limited, by the alpha male abstraction. The alpha male abstraction dictates the rules as to which females "open" to the public, and which females shall remain private.
The idea of "choice" within civilization is purely female and feminine. Females "choose" the alpha male. Females are ultimately most loyal to the alpha male abstraction. Females will only accept lesser (beta) males upon the condition that they must "settle for second best". And most women will do this.
More later.....
Impulso Oscuro
Gender : Posts : 796 Join date : 2013-12-10 Age : 33 Location : Praxis
All females on the planet already choose the alpha male abstraction as their ideal mate and highest sexual attraction.
The vast majority of males never can nor will live up to average women's standards of what a man "should be", according to her, along with her demands. And what does the average woman want? What is a female's definition of a "real man"? Most of the time, she says she wants a "nice guy". She claims to hate "racists, sexists, and chauvinists". She says one thing, but her body and actions do something completely opposite. She keeps getting fucked by the "bad boys". She loses her virginity to him, to the alpha male. She keeps coming back, to him, even after she is slapped around a little bit. She "settles" for a nice, beta male relationship, her second choice, or last choice. She enjoys the security and comfort. She's not really or truly attracted to her beta male, submissive, weak boyfriend. The sex is "boring". But she does it anyway.
Average males are confused by this behavior, of women saying one thing, but doing the opposite. Instead, look at the larger picture. Females only desire sexual intimacy with the alpha male abstraction. Understand that 99% of males are only beta males, subservient to society, state, or church. How many males, ever, truly resist the whole of humanity, and all social institutions? How many males are truly independent, individualistic, or non reliant upon social conveniences? Are any, at all?
No, going against society, state, or church, will earn you a series of identities.
The first is the title of "Stranger", a social deviant, untrustworthy. The second is the title of "Criminal", a danger to society, one who disobeys. The third is the title of "Terrorist", a most dangerous threat of all, and most feared.
The average male, man, and father of humanity is not an alpha male, but instead, a beta male. He was "allowed" to reproduce, by the wife. He is her cuckold. She controls him. And she obeys the alpha male abstraction. Males only retain roles of subservience and slavery within the confines of society. A "Master" within society, still serves higher powers (up to "God" in the church-state). It's only outside all societies, civilization, and humanity that gender roles can be reversed.
Because there is no such thing as "Rape" in nature, in the wild, outside the walls of civilization. There is only power, to control women directly, or the violence required to defend women as personal property.
As humanity "Progresses" deeper and deeper into a future of global human civilization, the past becomes more and more forgotten, harder to remember and recall. Eventually, someday in the distant future, new generations of humanity will know nothing of all about "nature", "the wild", "rape", etc. These will all be done away with. They will be long-distant memories of a forgotten time. Because all will be regulated, carefully monitored, restricted.
To understand the future of humanity, look at the Old World. Look at Saudi Arabia. Look at the abrahamic religion. Look at the religious wars. Look at their rules and laws. Look at china and its homogeneity. These are the eventual futures for New World nations. The past, almost always, indicates the immediate future. Because gravity never changes. It remains constant. It doesn't change. It's not random. It is consistent. So too are the most dominant and common patterns of human behaviors.
The slave populations of humanity are predictable, not chaotic. They are pre-ordered. Pre-programmed. Pre-determined.
And the nature of this slavery, is humanity's relationship with the alpha male abstraction. Using christian terms, this is reinterpreted as, subservience to "God". Western liberals rename god as "Nature". And instead say subservience to "Nature", thereby inverting the terms and their concepts. Like exchanging male for female, playing with the concepts. But, objectively, this does nothing. It does not change, nor affect reality.
A rose by another name, still smells as sweet, A god by another name, still smells as rotten.
Because the rebellious nature of males can be, and is predicted, men all around the world can be enslaved by simple means. Make a huge maze, filled with lies, for average humans to navigate through. This is society and civilization. It is a huge maze, for males to get lost in. The average human male thinks he is being rebellious by attacking demons, fantasies, invisible monsters, dragons, and terrorists. Instead, he is shooting and striking at phantoms, that don't exist outside his mind.
Cripple the mind of a child and you enslave him or her forever.
This is how the alpha male abstraction works. It begins with infants and children at the earliest age.
In fact, it occurs *BEFORE* the children are even born. It begins when women open and close their legs, to some males, who gain their (socially sanctioned) "approval", and others had not. This is the key to understanding the relationship between genetics and society.
The closer a male is to sexual access to the most beautiful types of women in the world, the closer he also comes to the alpha male abstraction. Beauty is hoarded, like gold and material wealth, by the most ardent defenders (betas) of all systems. The closer you come to god, the more beta males and beautiful females will resist the incursion of foreign and rebellious males. Because the alpha male abstract suffers no challenges, and will destroy all those imposing disputes. The alpha male abstraction is not up for debate. It cannot be reasoned with, beyond a certain level. Challenging the alpha male abstraction, leads to war, murder, and death.
It can lead to, and has led to, world war.
Beautiful women are the most obvious indications of the alpha male abstraction. They will, absolutely refuse to grant sexual access to "socially deviant" males. Outsiders are not welcome. And women represent the first wall of any "Society".
This dynamic causes the male-female disparity and true "gender difference". Male violence, in particular, is first held at distance from the interior of societies.
Why else would spree-shooters and moslem suicide bombers, both be considered 'terrorists' of the highest magnitude? Because their crimes are most severe. They are guilty of bringing violence back within the interior of society. They will be most rejected and shunned by females. There is a direct causal link between female sexual rejection, terrorism, spree-shooters, and suicide bombers. Males who are so desperate, and hopeless, without faith or culture, innately know that their lives will be empty, nothings, and slavish. They are slaves, and in seeing their future, choose to "go out with a bang" rather than drudge on to a foreseen end.
At the very least, they are honest and see truth. The average male, also despicable like the terrorist, is less intelligent. If average males were as capable as 'terrorists' to foresee the nature of their slavery, and the restriction of their masculinity (emasculation), then they would as well commit terrorizing actions, or also, go to war.
The soldier, however, is also low intelligence, and is rather tricked into going into war, not of his own true volition nor willpower.
The warrior archetype, is more aware of natural conditions, and welcomes war. This distinction sets apart "soldiers" (slaves) from warriors, who consciously know, choose, and favor war. A man's life left upon the battlefield is far more pleasing for the warrior, than a lifetime inside civilization's walls, which he intuitively knows, is a prison.
The human zoo.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37196 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
You, are a typical r-selected type. Whores are what you know, and what you deserve. The moment you open your mind, the advanced female closes hers, and with it her legs.
The remarkable part is not the tactic itself, a smaller male camouflaging as a female to get the job done, but the success of this tactic is what is amazing. The theory is that the female samples different genes, to deal with changing environmental conditions, and what the lower genes lack in quality they make up with quantities. The female mate with the dominant male, with high quality genes, but she mates MORE with low quality males, compensating for their low quality with numbers.
We can now understand human female sexual choices. She will sample a variety of genes, only in environments with low risks, and resource abundance, compensating for the low quality with quantities. In high risk, low resource environments, natural ones for carnivores and omnivores, the strategy is one of focused investment. The female cannot risk multiple investments with untested genes, and her dependence on her mate for safety and food, forces her to curb her natural promiscuity.
In high resource available environments with chaotic circumstances (low order, more possibilities), promiscuity is a hedging of one's genetic bets. This is our Modern world. In these artificially produced and maintained circumstances a high investment is a waste. The female will opt for low quality high quantity, hoping one, or more, will survive the chaos. In this environment a specimen like Aeon has a chance, if he does not display obvious markers of being totally unfit, unable to perform a simple ritual of seduction, but uses an aggressive " you want to fuck me, do not deny it!!", threats, blackmail method(very noble and masculine, by the way). A more subtle Zoot alluring methoid will increase the probability of a mating occurring.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37196 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
With very discriminating females, such as human ones, where the time/space considerations go beyond the immediate, such as pleasure and short-term perceptual-event-horizon projections, the superior/inferior shifts upward, in relation to the female's quality.
An superior male, for a lower female, will be inferior for this higher female.
The female gauges quality using the male's performance. If the quality of his mind is in question, as it is for females over the average, then his ability to seduce her, his talent with words, his mind's flexibility, displayed in his ability to understand and produce patterns (ideas) is evaluated. The brutish method will not work, because it exposes a rigid, dull mind, unable to adapt to the female's subtle cues.
Average women are not difficult for me. And the "higher quality" women don't exist, to me. I know because I've looked. What I consider higher quality is determined by her mind and intelligence, and if it is in some way linked or similar with genius. But a woman's mentality and brain is not a man's. And her intelligence (Quality) manifests in different ways and methods than men's.
Beauty is enough, even if she's stupid. Females do not rely on intelligence or strength, but instead beauty. This fact is the missing puzzle piece. If women are, necessarily as shallow as their looks, then speaking of "higher and lower quality" females is only a matter of superficial beauty, not a strength of mind. And even the more intelligent women of the world not have a "strength of mind" comparable to men.
A third factor, other than beauty and intelligence, is courage and cowardice. Like all traits, great beauty, great intelligence, great strength....great courage is another rarity. What is considered "high quality and abundant" traits of women, with the exception of beauty, is not comparable to men.
A female's beauty is her trump card, her ace up the sleeve, her consolation, her backup. She can always rely on herself as merely a body, a vessel, an empty soul, for men.
Thus the genders will never match the same needs, leading to the difference of species by gender.
Satyr, you have a lot to learn yet, fool.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37196 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Here is the fact glossed over continuously for years.
All the talk is about female mate selection, never male selection. Choice is regarded as feminine, sexually. Only females "Choose" mates. And while this is true to the degree of progeny and raising children, it is less true with the sexual selection process. Males must also Choose. Males must also make Choices.
Once this factor is considered, then a more complete vision of humanity and sexual relationships will be seen.
All Satyr does is obsess about the female half of the equation, but not the male half. He doesn't investigate the discrimination process of males, about the laws and regulations of systems, of state or church, and how females are (always) "owned" beforehand, a priori. Females are property, except from the perspective of women and feminists, who retort against this with accusations of "oppressive objectification".
As if males were not objects, too? As if being an object is evil, or good?
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. There are no "higher quality" women because they aren't choosing him as a mate.
You are what you eat.
You are simple-minded and stupid, of course.
I don't necessarily consider myself a high quality male or mate. Maybe yes, maybe not.
A basic ability of philosophy is to suspend all premises and produce thought-experiments. Even if I were a low-quality mate, then so what? That doesn't make me wrong.
Try again, princess.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37196 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
It merely exposés your incapacity to recognize and value higher quality.
_________________ 1. "Youth, oh, youth! | of whom then, youth, art thou born? Say whose son thou art, Who in Fafnir's blood | thy bright blade reddened, And struck thy sword to my heart."
2. "The Noble Hart | my name, and I go A motherless man abroad; Father I had not, | as others have, And lonely ever I live."
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Adam seduction techniques include insulting females until they surrender, telling them they want him, even though they've shown no interest, pretending to not be interested in their looks after he's demanded they expose themselves to him...and so on.
He's...complex. Only someone a higher female can truly appreciate....alas, nobody has, ergo no such female exists.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Last edited by Satyr on Wed Oct 14, 2015 12:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
There is no monopoly on the concept of "Choice". Humans, men and women, either have it or they do not. They are either capable of moral responsibility (Authority), or they are not. Would choice be a matter of luck? A mere illusion? A pathological delusion? A perception of power? Who is capable of choice and to what degrees, by which factors?
Choice is linked with higher intelligence, greater amounts of possibilities.
