Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
AuthorMessage
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:45 pm

Quote :
"The puer aeternus very often has this mature, detached attitude toward life, which is normal for old people but which he acquires prematurely—the idea that life is not everything, that the other side is valid too, that life is only part of the whole of existence. Here the death-temptation prevents the little prince from going right into the earth. Before he has even touched it the snake comes in and says, "If you don't like it, you know a way out." So before he has gone
down to earth, he has already had the offer of death. I have met many people with a similar difficult constellation who do that: they live only "on condition," which means that secretly they constantly flirt with the idea of suicide.

At every step of their lives they think they will try something or other and that if it does not work they will kill themselves. The puer aeternus always keeps his revolver in his pocket and constantly plays with the idea of getting out of life if things get too hard.
The disadvantage of this is that he is never quite committed to the situation as a whole human being; there is a constant Jesuitical mental reservation: "I will go into this, but I reserve my right as a human being to kill myself if I can't stand it any more. I shall not go through the whole experience to the bitter end if it becomes too insufferable, for if it does I shall walk out of it." And therefore the person does not become whole. If one cuts off the wholeness of the experience, one cuts oneself into bits and remains split because transformation can only take place if one gives oneself completely to the situation.

If you ask yourself whether you are doing something because you have to or because you want to, you will never find out. You can always say that you feel as though you wanted
it, but perhaps it is only an unconscious complex which makes you feel like that. So how can you ever say which it is? It is a subjective feeling, but it is tremendously important for the ego to feel free to a certain extent. It is a feeling problem about the mood in which one finds oneself. If you cannot believe in a certain amount of free will and therefore free initiative of the ego, you are completely lamed because then you have to go into all your motives.

You can go into the past and look into the unconscious more and more deeply, but you will never get out of it. And that is the spider's trick of the mother complex. That is how she tries to catch the hero. She wants him to sit and ask himself whether he really wanted it or not: whether it is really a question of opposing his father?—if he does this, is he really just falling for his father's suggestion, or is he simply showing off? You can be sure that he will sit there
forever and the witch will have him in her pocket. That is the great mother-complex trick.

Some pueri aeterni escape from the mother by means of actual airplanes; they fly away from mother-earth and from reality. Many others do the same thing in "thought airplanes"—going off into the air with some kind of philosophical theory or intellectual system. I have not given much thought to it, but it has struck me that especially among the Latins the mother complex is combined with a strange kind of strong but sterile intellectualism, a tendency to discuss heaven and earth and God-knows-what in a kind of sharp intellectual way and with complete uncreativeness. It is probably a last attempt on the part of the men to save their masculinity.

That simply means that certain young men who are overpowered by their mothers escape into the realm of the intellect because there the mother, especially if she is the earth type and a stupid animus kind of woman, is not up to it. They can slip out from under her skirts into
the realm of the intellect, where she cannot follow. Therefore, since it is an initial attempt to escape the mother's power and the animus pressure by getting into the realm of books and philosophical discussion, which they can think mother does not understand, it is not altogether destructive. Such a man has then a little world of his own—he discusses things with other men and can have the agreeable feeling that it is something which women do not understand. In this
way he gets away from the feminine, but he loses and leaves his earthly masculinity in the mother's grip. He saves his mental masculinity but sacrifices his phallus—his earthly masculinity and his creativity. The vitality of action, that masculinity which molds the clay, which seizes and molds reality, he leaves behind, for that is too difficult; he escapes into the realm of philosophy.

Such people prefer philosophy, pedagogy, metaphysics and theology, and it is a completely unvital bloodless business. There is no real question behind such philosophy. Such people have no genuine questions. For them it is a kind of play with words and concepts and is entirely
lacking in any convincing quality. One could not convince a butterfly with such "philosophical" stuff. Nobody would listen to it. The pseudo-philosophical intellectualism is ambiguous because, as I said before, it is a way by which to make a partial escape from the dominant grip of the mother figure, but is done only with the intellect, and only the intellect is saved. That is really what one sees in the tragedy of the Oedipus myth, where Oedipus commits the mistake of entering into the question instead of saying to the Sphinx that she has no right to put such questions and that he will knock her down if she asks such a thing again. Instead, he gives a very good intellectual answer. The play continues very cleverly with the sphinx apparently committing suicide. Oedipus pats himself on the back and steps right into the middle of his mother complex, into destruction and tragedy, just because he complimented himself on having got out of that difficulty by answering the question!

To my mind, the way Freudian psychology has taken this myth and generalized it is quite wrong, for the Oedipus myth cannot be understood without the background of Greek civilization and what happened to it as a whole. If you think of Socrates and the Platonists, you see that they discovered the realm of philosophy and pure mind in its masculine mental operations. But when you know what happened to Plato when he tried to put his ideas into reality, then you see that they had escaped reality and had not found a philosophy with which they could form it. It was a complete failure. They discovered pure philosophy but not the philosophy which can be put to the test in reality. In the same way they were the founders of basic physical and chemical concepts, but the Egyptians and the Romans had to change these concepts later into
experimental science, for the Greeks could not put their ideas to the test in chemical experiments. Their science remained purely speculative, even in its most beautiful forms, and with it came the endless split of the little Greek towns and the tragic decay of Greek civilization. As soon as they were up against a nation with masculine and military self-discipline—the Romans—the Greeks were at a loss.

Therefore, although they were the great philosophical fertilizers of the Mediterranean world, they themselves could not follow up their own attempts in a creative way because they never understood the riddle of the Sphinx. They thought that the intellectual answer was the solution—an illusion for which they paid. The Oedipus myth is actually the myth of this stage of cultural development. At the same time it is the myth of all those young men who have this same
problem. That is why it is also a general myth.

The puer aeternus shadow often does the same thing if no mother or analyst plays that role; every time he wants to go into action he will argue that he should not act until he has thought it over very carefully. One could call it neurotic philosophizing, philosophy at the wrong moment just when action is needed. That is the trick behind the myth of the riddle of the Sphinx and the devilish question of the Baba Yaga in the fairy tale. It is the mother-anima who says, "Oh, yes, you may go, but I must just ask a few questions!" And whether he answers the questions or not, he is tortured.

After the puer loses the ecstatic, romantic élan of youth, there is danger of an enantiodromia into a completely cynical attitude toward women, life, work in general, and money. Many men suddenly fall into an attitude of disappointed cynicism. They lose all their ideals and
romantic impulses and also, naturally, their creativeness, writing it all off as the fantasies of youth. They then become petty, earth-bound, small-minded people who just want to have a family, money and a career. Everything else is regarded as romantic nonsense—what one
wanted and did when one was young, which now must be written off. It is as though Icarus had fallen into the mud and life had stopped.

This is due to a weak consciousness, which cannot conceive of the possibility of enduring the difficulties of reality and not sacrificing one's ideals but instead testing them on the touchstone
of reality. Such men take the easy way and say that ideals merely complicate life and must therefore be written off. This is a great danger." [von. Franz, Puer Aeternus]


_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*


Last edited by Lyssa on Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:48 pm

Anfang wrote:
Satyr wrote:
A man of taste may be aware of subtleties but is not dependent on their presence.

Actions do speak louder than words - Some time ago I was confronted with the argument that it's not all about actions. At the time my knee jerk reaction was to assume an attempt at rationalizing bad behavior but a part of me did see something beyond that.

And now I am reminded of what it is. It's also about the individual who is judging the actions of others. How good is he at perceiving the subtleties and how well can he estimate that other persons state of mind, his motivations,....

In case of the Don Juan type (I have read, somewhere, some time ago) it's more about the conquest to receive adoration. Valuation from the outside, it becomes the central theme, hunger for that person.

Mirror, mirror on the wall,
Who's the fairest one of all?

fairest, most successful, rich,...

Something similar could be the case with many metro-sexuals and homosexuals.


Yes, they don't feel unique enough, to stand up for themselves and need external validation/recognition;

"The inner battle between the feeling of uniqueness and statistical thinking is generally a battle between intellectualism and allowing feeling its own place in life, because feeling evaluates what is important to me, and my own importance is the counterbalance. If you have real feeling you can say certainly that this is an ordinary woman (for if you see her walking along the street she is not very different from any other), but to me she is of the highest value.
That would mean the ego makes up its mind to defend and stand up for its own feeling without denying the other aspect:
"Yes, that may be so from the statistical point of view, but in my life there are certain values, and to me this woman has this value." For that an act of loyalty is required toward one's own feeling. Otherwise one is split off from it by statistical thinking, which is why intellectual people tend toward Communism and such ways of thought. They cut themselves off from the feeling function. The feeling function makes your life and your relationships and deeds feel unique and gives them a definite value.

When the statistical way of thinking gets people, it means they have no feeling, or weak feeling, or that they tend to betray their own feeling. You can say that the man who does not stand for his feelings is weak on the eros side, for he cannot take his own feelings and stand by them: "That is how I intend to live, for that is the way I feel."
Admittedly, that is more difficult for a man than for a woman, which is expressed when we say that the man is weak on the eros side.
For example, if you say to a mother that her children are not unique, that there are such brats all over the place, she will reply that to her they are unique, for they are her children. A woman is more likely to have a personal attitude.
The man has to think impersonally and objectively and, if he is a modern type, also statistically, and then it turns like a poison against him." [von. Franz, Puer Aeternus]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*


Last edited by Lyssa on Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:00 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:53 pm

perpetualburn wrote:

Why do the very good looking, "manly" men who could have any woman, decide to only be with men? I believe it's dissatisfaction with women on an physically aesthetic level. These men may or may not find women spiritually inspiring(as muses).

That is one view on the ancient Greek 'homosexuality':

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:21 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :
A team of international researchers has completed a study that suggests we will probably never find a ‘gay gene.' Sexual orientation is not about genetics, say the researchers, it's about epigenetics. This is the process where DNA expression is influenced by any number of external factors in the environment. And in the case of homosexuality, the researchers argue, the environment is the womb itself.

The Epigenetic Key

Writing in The Quarterly Review of Biology, researchers William Rice, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and Urban Friberg, a professor at Uppsala University in Sweden, believe that homosexuality can be explained by the presence of epi-marks — temporary switches that control how our genes are expressed during gestation and after we're born.

Specifically, the researchers discovered sex-specific epi-marks which, unlike most genetic switches, get passed down from father to daughter or mother to son. Most epi-marks don't normally pass between generations and are essentially "erased." Rice and Friberg say this explains why homosexuality appears to run in families, yet has no real genetic underpinning.

Epigenetic mechanisms can be seen as an added layer of information that clings to our DNA. Epi-marks regulate the expression of genes according to the strength of external cues. Genes are basically the instruction book, while epi-marks direct how those instructions get carried out. For example, they can determine when, where, and how much of a gene gets expressed.

Moreover, epi-marks are usually produced from scratch with each generation — but new evidence is showing that they can sometimes carryover from parent to child. It's this phenomenon that gives the impression of having shared genes with relatives.

Masculinization and Feminization

To reach this conclusion, Rice and Friberg created a biological and mathematical model that charted the role of epigenetics in homosexuality. They did so by applying evolutionary theory to recent advances in the molecular regulation of gene expression and androgen-dependent sexual development.


This data was integrated with recent findings from the epigenetic control of gene expression, especially in embryonic stem cells. This allowed the researchers to develop and empirically support a mathematical model of epigenetic-based canalization of sexual development, or the tendency of heredity to restrict the development of some characteristics to just one or a few traits. Their model successfully predicted the evolution of homosexuality in both sexes when canalizing epi-marks carry over across generations with nonzero probability.

In their study, the team writes that they "tracked changes in chromatin structure that influence the transcription rate of genes (coding and noncoding, such as miRNAs), including nucleosome repositioning, DNA methylation, and/or modification of histone tails, but not including changes in DNA sequence."

The resulting model predicted that homosexuality can be produced by transgenerational epigenetic inheritance.

Normally, sex-specific marks that are triggered during early fetal development work to protect boys and girls in the womb from undergoing too much natural variation in testosterone, which should normally happen later in a pregnancy. Epigenetic processes prevent female fetuses from becoming masculinized when testosterone exposure gets too high, and vice versa for males.

Moreover, epi-marks also protect different sex-specific traits from swinging in the opposite direction; some affect the genitals, and others may affect sexual orientation. These epi-marks can be transmitted across generations from fathers to daughters, or mothers to sons.

Essentially, Rice and Friberg believe they have discovered the presence of "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks — which sometimes carry over to the next generation and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring.

And importantly — in order to satisfy the rules of Darwinian selection — the researchers noted through their mathematical modeling that these epigenetic characteristics can easily proliferate in the population because they increase the fitness of the parent; these epi-marks normally protect parents from natural variation in sex hormone levels during fetal development. They only rarely reduce the fitness of offspring.

The entire study is online at The Quarterly Review of Biology: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:17 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Sep 17, 2013 7:25 pm

Lyssa wrote:
perpetualburn wrote:

Why do the very good looking, "manly" men who could have any woman, decide to only be with men?  I believe it's dissatisfaction with women on an physically aesthetic level.  These men may or may not find women spiritually inspiring(as muses).
That is one view on the ancient Greek 'homosexuality':

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Also: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
(Haven't read that.)

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*


Last edited by Lyssa on Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:55 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:19 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:29 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


Review:

Quote :
"James O'Meara is an essayist and social critic from the Mid-West and in this book he argues that the political right always loses because they have ignored the creative impulse and civilization sustaining drives of homosexual men. Now, before this idea gets further explored the following needs to be mentioned. The "right" that James O'Meara is supporting is not the "right" of the tax-cuts for the rich, Corporate Welfare supporting Republican Party or Evangelical Protestant groups such as Focus on the Family. His "right" is more akin to traditional Indo-European ideas, beauty, nobility, high traditionalist art such as the Renaissance painters.

Because the right has lost the homosexuals, O'Meara argues that their creative drive has moved on to support the political left, the right thus has taken the "Negro" as their lodestar for behavior. O'Meara describes this "Negro" ideal as something like Sean Hannity's dubious intellectual rants and general tuggishness and Glen Beck's girlish crush on Martin Luther King. This "Negro" ideal turns out to turn off large segments of society.

Key to "the right" getting society back on track is for the right to embrace the Männerbund. This is a group of single men who live outside the norms of family society and carry out great feats. The Männerbund will contain men who are drawn to homosexuality and this should be embraced. A good example of a Männerbund is the Spartans. Other somewhat homosexual types who have advanced society using a Männerbund type of organization is Robert Baden-Powell, the founder of the Boy Scouts.

O'Meara advances repeats his ideas several times and in different ways through a series of chapter-length essays in this book. Unfortunately, he refers to blog postings and bloggists too often. Bloggists are in fact great idea makers, but they are akin to Enlightenment coffee shop broadsides. For his ideas to make a longer impact, O'Meara should have explained the blog post and blogger in terms that can be understood by other generations rather than contemporary internet readers. O'Meara also ignores the fundamental fact that gay men don't breed and therefore are unable advance civilization through the propagation of the people that make the civilization. In other words, gays aren't supporting dad. To make matters worse, O'Meara doesn't take gays to task for aligning themselves with the "Negro," the Third World Immigrant, or those who are fundamentally hostile to Western Civilization.

Despite these flaws, this book is an eye-opening thesis that takes a critical look at society and sexuality."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
apaosha
Daeva
avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 1785
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 32
Location : Ireland

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Tue Sep 17, 2013 10:58 pm

Quote :
Because the right has lost the homosexuals, O'Meara argues that their creative drive has moved on to support the political left, the right thus has taken the "Negro" as their lodestar for behavior.
Either of these types are not what the "right" should be striving towards, but rather the white heterosexual male, who finds in these two a degeneration of his own type on one hand and a more primal, sub-human throw-back in the other.
The advancement of either as the face of the "right" would turn more away then it would attract.

A male, the european one in particular, is defined by his need to compete for access to females. All his creativity, his restlessness, his lusts originate from this basic need. His woman is his muse. His woman is the impetus and the cause for every feat he achieves and every conquest he makes. His woman is the only way in which a man can recreate himself, the ultimate declaration of self-love and Yes to life, the eternal recurrence.

A homosexual is a failed attempt at a man. A negro is not even an attempt at one.

Quote :
Key to "the right" getting society back on track is for the right to embrace the Männerbund. This is a group of single men who live outside the norms of family society and carry out great feats. The Männerbund will contain men who are drawn to homosexuality and this should be embraced.
It sounds like a way to integrate and make use of un-marriageable unfit males which a society would normally have no use for, rather than casting them out. Similar to betas in a wolf pack.

I don't see how homosexuals in particular are advantageous to the right, though. Their inclination towards feminization, promiscuity, hedonism, vanity, lack of aggression and materialism suits the left more. They are also useful as a tool in dismantling traditionalist notions of the family and of marriage as being a man and woman's bond for the sake of procreation.
Plus, in the socialist/capitalist paradigm, particulars like race, sexuality, gender are not relevant as long as a populace is large and produces/consumes at a high enough rate and at a low enough wage. So in effect advertising for the unfit to invest in this system simply appeals to a lower common denominator in the hope of expanding the human herd that is being developed to as broad a base as possible.

If the right is to be seen as advocating social darwinism, eugenics and such as opposed to tolerant inclusiveness in the name of breeding a docile, domesticated future humanity of sheeple like in Huxley's vision, then the elimination of such unfitness should be put forward as an eventual if not immediate goal. As before; Shockley for example advised that negroes below a certain IQ level ought to be sterilized for the sake of the future population.
If the left appeals to universality then it is natural that it's opposition should appeal to particularity. If egalitarianism, then elitism. If stupidity, then intelligence. If weakness, strength. If universal love, then particularized hate.

The right should not be democratic. It should not seek to appeal to as many as possible in order to gain popular support. The right's dominance should be an imposed dominance, power, or will to power, of the elite upon the common rabble.
The other way is the other side's way. The left is ruled by a committee, the right a king.

_________________
"I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://knowthyself.forumotion.net
apaosha
Daeva
avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 1785
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 32
Location : Ireland

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Wed Sep 18, 2013 9:20 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Summary: Recent studies show homosexuals have a substantially greater risk of suffering from a psychiatric problems than do heterosexuals. We see higher rates of suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse. This paper highlights some new and significant considerations that reflect on the question of those mental illnesses and on their possible sources.

Abused "More Likely to Be Gay"
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Bug Chasing: Why Some Men Want to Become HIV Positive
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Drug Use "Seven Times Higher" Among Homosexuals
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Folsom Street Fair 2007
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

HIV Among Homosexual and Bisexual Men
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Homosexual Men Have Fifty Times Higher Rate of AIDS
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went Away
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Child Molestation and Homosexuality
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
"I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://knowthyself.forumotion.net
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:34 pm

apaosha wrote:
Quote :
Because the right has lost the homosexuals, O'Meara argues that their creative drive has moved on to support the political left, the right thus has taken the "Negro" as their lodestar for behavior.
Either of these types are not what the "right" should be striving towards, but rather the white heterosexual male, who finds in these two a degeneration of his own type on one hand and a more primal, sub-human throw-back in the other.
The advancement of either as the face of the "right" would turn more away then it would attract.

A male, the european one in particular, is defined by his need to compete for access to females. All his creativity, his restlessness, his lusts originate from this basic need. His woman is his muse. His woman is the impetus and the cause for every feat he achieves and every conquest he makes. His woman is the only way in which a man can recreate himself, the ultimate declaration of self-love and Yes to life, the eternal recurrence.

A homosexual is a failed attempt at a man. A negro is not even an attempt at one.
I am reading a book called 'Straight Science' by Jim McKnight where he simply places the arguments for a genetic and environmental basis side by side; reading books like this help you anticipate arguments for its evolutionary advantage.

The popular one supposedly is "flexibility":

Quote :
Further, there is much confusion in the literature between sexual orientation and sexual preference. How we choose to express ourselves sexually may be quite different from the way nature has made us. A sorry history of gay men passing as straight men is indicative that one’s preference or even how one wishes to be is often not how one is. From a biological perspective a genetic predisposition to homosexuality would be just that, a precursor, or orientation, and no more. Sexual preference on the other hand may well be learned or a matter of personal choice and may even go against one’s nature. While a predisposition does not determine one’s sexual preference it does affect it and when aggregated across a culture will show its influence. Yet for any number of reasons an individual may choose a sexual expression that is at odds with their heredity. In cultures where homosexuality is frowned upon, a homosexual may choose heterosexuality. Such plasticity is not strong evidence for either nature or nurture accounts of homosexuality, merely indicative of human behavioural flexibility. Unfortunately, one’s culture and life experiences are obvious and immediate shapers of sexual expression and it is often easier to give proximate reasons for one’s sexuality than to look for more fundamental reasons. It is part of our purpose here to redress this tendency.

The important point here is that this confusion is more than theoretical. It serves ideological ends. To show that one chooses one’s sexual expression is not necessarily a sufficient explanation of one’s sexuality. A substantial agenda has emerged that equates preference and orientation. This is often deliberate and only points to the shallowness of much theorising about homosexuality. The literature is full of accounts of men who have reluctantly abandoned fulfilling lives as fathers and husbands to acknowledge a driven need to express an orientation which is often confusing and sometimes repugnant to them (Ross, 1983; Malcolm, 1997). More importantly, the variability of sexual behaviour has always been seen as intuitive evidence for a constructivist view of sexuality but it may be argued that it reflects evolution just as well. If we have an innate predisposition to adopt a greater range of sexual expressions then it is relatively easy to argue several ways in which this flexibility is adaptive. Evidence for this view is only indicative at this stage and those in support of a biosocial perspective would not wish to argue nature provides more than a predisposition towards one’s final preference. If it is the case that behavioural plasticity is both innate and adaptive, homosexuality can hardly be considered futile sex.

Other excerpts from the book:

Quote :
If we assume that homosexuality is adaptive and has a gene, what purpose does it serve? It may well be a mistake to assume that all homosexuals breed less than their heterosexual counterparts, but homosexuality still has curious purposes within evolution. Why do we need homosexual behaviour? This is a fascinating question of itself and of considerable interest to those who have an open mind as to the ultimate nature of human sexual orientation. It also poses a big problem for the biosocial perspective if gay men do breed less. Those who would argue that human social behaviour is lawful, and may be viewed as an expression of evolution at work, are seemingly confounded by a behaviour that is at odds with their theory. To assume that homosexuality should breed itself from the gene pool presupposes that it is maladaptive but we have already argued that it may well be adaptive. Where do we go from here?

The central thrust of this book is that exclusive male homosexuality is an evolutionary byproduct of an adaptive advantage which keeps it balanced in the gene pool against its diminished reproduction. As such, the homosexuality gene is part of our beneficial genetic variability. The synthetic theory of evolution which combines genetics and Darwinism argues that the greater the variation within a population the greater the opportunity for a species to evolve. The British geneticist R.A.Fisher noted in 1930 that ‘the rate of increase in fitness of any organism at any time is equal to its genetic variance of fitness at that time’ (Fisher, 1930). Fisher’s theorem raises interesting questions for homosexuality and species adaptation. The basis of his theorem is the notion that the greater the range of genetic variability, the greater the flexibility of a species to adapt to its environment and to new challenges. If homosexuality is genetic then the incorporation of homosexual genes with the wider heterosexual gene pool may notionally increase an individual’s adaptability if they carry both heterosexual and homosexual genes. This of course presupposes both that the gene is not deleterious and that there is some isomorphism between homosexual behaviour and its gene. We should also note that Fisher’s theorem was ultimately aimed at explaining the rate of evolutionary change within populations. Increased genetic variability provides a greater range of responses to evolutionary crises than is possible for those species with a more limited message. While there is little evidence to show that homosexuality is the leading edge of human evolution, such genetic variability may be leading to greater plasticity in human sexual orientation. If this is the case, it raises interesting possibilities. These are both hotly debated issues and will be explored at length in Chapter 3.

It is interesting to see where we might go if we grant these assumptions. There are two main super-theories within the sociobiology of homosexuality which try to answer why the gene survives against its diminished reproduction. We will briefly introduce them here as stalking horses before considering them at length in later chapters.

Kin selection

Some theorists argue that homosexuals disqualify themselves from direct reproduction to assist kin who have closely related genes. The kin selection theory has two variants. One argues that a person in some way recognises they are going to be poor reproducers and withdraws from the game and sublimates their heterosexuality into same-sex contacts. The other variant takes a more positive view and argues that the homosexual-to-be has either superior opportunities or superior abilities to gather resources and that this capacity is enhanced if they withdraw from the reproductive stakes. Both variants assume that the homosexual altruistically passes on help and/or resources to near relatives who are reproductive, and as they share common genes, by that means maintain their genes within the population. Michael Ruse (1988), in his thorough-going review, notes that the first variant may well be true in tribal societies but hardly likely in developed nations where affluence ensures equal health for both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

So while it may well be adaptive for the diseased to abandon heterosexuality and to give whatever aid they can to close relatives, it is hardly likely to be an effective strategy in all cultures. Moreover, it assumes that the illness is a consequence of homosexuality, that there is a pool of individuals who are either genetically or otherwise predisposed to ill-health by being homosexual. The kin selection theory argues that homosexuality is:

"an adaptive manoeuvre to help a person become a better reproducer than he/she would otherwise be. The homosexuality stops the person vainly or inefficiently following heterosexual pursuits, and thus frees him/her to concentrate on aiding the reproduction of close relatives." (Ruse, 1988:229)

As Ruse points out, the difficulty with this view is to see a nexus between the unhealthy individual and a homosexuality gene. If the homosexual gene was disabling it should gradually be eliminated from the gene pool, so homosexuality seems an after-the-fact recognition of some other disabling force, genetic or otherwise. Given this view it is hard to see homosexuality as a genetic process in its own right, as adaptive as it otherwise may be. Homosexuality is then simply a consequence, unless of course we all have a homosexual gene which acts as an antibody, springing to our reproductive defence if ill-health intervenes. Nor does this theory argue any compelling necessity to be homosexual. Why isn’t the person simply neuter? This variant assumes that homosexuality is a consequence or byproduct of an adaptive process and implicitly that failed straight men sublimate their heterosexual drives into homosexual forms.

The second variant assumes a superior ability to aid reproduction of one’s kin. Immediately a question arises. Why don’t they reproduce themselves? After all, in most cultures superior abilities equal greater resources and an enhanced ability to reproduce. If homosexuality is genetic then the answer must be that it is reproductively disabling and that homosexuality and kin selection are social adaptations to a debilitating genetic condition. If the homosexuality gene is not disabling then some environmental constraint must limit one’s breeding potential.

While kin selection theory is one of the strongest models in evolutionary psychology, it has the problem that reproductive fitness is a stronger one (Ruse, 1988). Whatever the merits of kin selection theory, it is easily demonstrable mathematically that direct reproduction is a superior method of ensuring reproductive fitness.

- - -


Quote :
Since ancient times views of homosexuality have swung from condemning it as a perversion, to seeing it as faulty libidinal development. Biological research into the causes of homosexuality started with the German jurist Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, who between 1864 and 1879 published instalments of his monumental Researches on the Riddle of Love Between Men (Ulrichs, 1975). Ulrichs was impressed by reports of the undifferentiated state of embryonic sex organs in early stages of development. He felt their plasticity suggested we might develop into either sex, or perhaps gain a sexual orientation not tied to one’s genetic sex (Kennedy, 1980/81). His theory of a third sex, ‘a female soul trapped within a male body’, set the tone of research for the next century, where homosexuality came to be seen as a sexual inversion caused by hormonal imbalance (Wingfield, 1995).

This point was not lost on Baron Richard von Kraft-Ebbing (1886), who, building on Ulrichs’ work and his own clinical investigations, rejected a growing view that learning was a plausible explanation of homosexuality and insisted that it must be innate. Both theorists, and those first researchers who followed in the early 20th century (Ellis, 1915; Hirschfeld, 1920; Forel, 1924), saw homosexuality as an inversion of normal heterosexuality, unless it was mere ‘perverted experimentation’. Unlike Freud and other psychosocial theorists, they argued that homosexuality must have an innate trigger because homosexual socialisation was not demonstrably different from that of heterosexuals (Ellis and Ames, 1987). Further support for an innate sexual inversion theory came from their observations that homosexual orientation came early in life, seemed to parody heterosexual lifestyles, and was unusually resistant to therapy. From the 1920s researchers started to use newly identified hormonal differences between the sexes as a model for homosexual orientation (Hirschfeld, 1920; Forel, 1924). They argued that: ‘certain unspecified imbalances could result in a homosexual orientation’ (Ellis and Ames, 1987). Such suppositions went nowhere given the limited molecular biology of the day and in the absence of any definitive hormonal difference investigators turned their attention to rare genetic inversions to model homosexuality.

There are clear cases of human developmental inversion and they are often used to demonstrate brain-based effects, although the link to homosexuality is often less demonstrable. Before we consider the pros and cons of sex hormones in sexual inversions we need to understand normal development. The basics are as follows.

We, like most mammalian species, are female in design. At conception we are all female but by the end of the first trimester of pregnancy those of us who have a male genetic message are exposed to small doses of two triggering hormones, chorionic gonadotropin and luteinising hormone (LH). These are secreted by our mother’s pituitary gland and enter her bloodstream, cross the placenta and start the differentiation of the gonads into testes. The rapidly developing testes then take over the job of continuing male differentiation and secrete male sex hormones (androgens) which regulate the growth of male characteristics.

These hormones have two jobs—controlling our sexual development and differentiation, and regulating their function. These so-called organisational and activational hypotheses (Arnold, 1980) are linked in hormonal theorising about homosexuality. From an evolutionary perspective, differentiation of the genitals and secondary sex characteristics is less interesting than changes in brain mechanisms controlling sexual behaviour. It is assumed that a demonstrable inversion in one’s sexual development means corresponding changes in its neural function and control:

"Normal differentiation of genital morphology entails a dimorphic sex difference in the arrangement of peripheral nerves of sex which, in turn, entails some degree of dimorphism in the representation of the periphery at the centrum of the central nervous system, that is to say, in the structures and pathways of the brain."
(Money and Ehrhardt, 1972: 8 )

The brain is a sexual organ and part of the differentiation into maleness is an appropriate androgenisation of the brain. Yet unlike other gross sexual characteristics, androgenisation of the brain does not require defeminisation of the basic female pathways. Whereas the undifferentiated gonad becomes either a testis or an ovary, in the brain differentiation seems to lay down independent pathways towards maleness and femaleness. Thus, acquiring masculine brain characteristics, and the loss of feminine brain characteristics, are separate processes occurring at different times (Goy and McEwen, 1980) and involve quite ‘different neural substrates as well as different hormonal metabolites’ (Byne and Parsons, 1993). Homosexuality is seen as an interruption of this process, an altering of the relative balance between the two systems, leading to a change in sexual orientation which is at odds with one’s genetic predisposition.

This theory hypothesises a diverse sexual orientation. The quantity and types of hormones one’s brain is exposed to in the prenatal period determine your sexual orientation. ‘Male heterosexuality and female homosexuality result from prenatal exposure to high levels of testicular hormones, while homosexual males and heterosexual females are exposed to lower levels and thus retain a female pattern of brain organization’ (Byne and Parsons, 1993). In practice, two models of hormonal irregularity are proposed to account for these changes: the first suggests a genetic predisposition most clearly demonstrated by relatively rare instances of pseudohermaphroditism; the second suggests environmental causes..."




Quote :

Quote :
Key to "the right" getting society back on track is for the right to embrace the Männerbund. This is a group of single men who live outside the norms of family society and carry out great feats. The Männerbund will contain men who are drawn to homosexuality and this should be embraced.
It sounds like a way to integrate and make use of un-marriageable unfit males which a society would normally have no use for, rather than casting them out. Similar to betas in a wolf pack.

I don't see how homosexuals in particular are advantageous to the right, though. Their inclination towards feminization, promiscuity, hedonism, vanity, lack of aggression and materialism suits the left more. They are also useful as a tool in dismantling traditionalist notions of the family and of marriage as being a man and woman's bond for the sake of procreation.
Plus, in the socialist/capitalist paradigm, particulars like race, sexuality, gender are not relevant as long as a populace is large and produces/consumes at a high enough rate and at a low enough wage. So in effect advertising for the unfit to invest in this system simply appeals to a lower common denominator in the hope of expanding the human herd that is being developed to as broad a base as possible.

If the right is to be seen as advocating social darwinism, eugenics and such as opposed to tolerant inclusiveness in the name of breeding a docile, domesticated future humanity of sheeple like in Huxley's vision, then the elimination of such unfitness should be put forward as an eventual if not immediate goal. As before; Shockley for example advised that negroes below a certain IQ level ought to be sterilized for the sake of the future population.
If the left appeals to universality then it is natural that it's opposition should appeal to particularity. If egalitarianism, then elitism. If stupidity, then intelligence. If weakness, strength. If universal love, then particularized hate.

The right should not be democratic. It should not seek to appeal to as many as possible in order to gain popular support. The right's dominance should be an imposed dominance, power, or will to power, of the elite upon the common rabble.
The other way is the other side's way. The left is ruled by a committee, the right a king.

On ILP, there are two positions that interested me between eyes and mo/von rivers on one hand, and kriswest on the other.

The former believe sexuality should be legislated as a private issue - what people do in their homes should be nobody's business.

To Kriswest, defence against a pathology is always better when it shows in the surface and out in the open than having it repressed and go underground...

They are both valid in their own way.
I can only say, if there is no Norm to begin with, a natural Norm, then even deviations trying to get normalized 'against' a norm cannot be defined. In the end cultural relativism is utter chaos.

If there is no distinct norm, a sufficient distance and hierarchy between health and pathology, then its just the culture of no-culture.

Sorry, I haven't really thought out deeply into this matter or sociology in general, more.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:29 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks Heathen;

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 17851
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:51 pm

It was only a matter of time, after homosexuality began going mainstream, for a new social cause to arise, further blurring the lines between nature and human idealism.

They use consent to defend their positions, further contradicting their principles which are about perspectivism and equal rights.
Ageism is the new homophobia, preventing consensual "beings" from sharing "love"; pure, selfless, love, according to these naive romantics.
Suddenly love ceases being spiritual, wonderful, void of aggression and selfishness, and acquires a sinister nature...again, contradicting the liberal "logic".

The 'thuo shalt' draws a new line of excuses in the sand: age.

Let's take these liberal positions as our own:

Imagine jailing a person who seduced you into giving you, for free, the most "wonderful", "selfless" thing imaginable.
What child could bear the liberal sacred purity they sell, when it is given to them?
Would not a paedophile argue in this way?
In fact, did not one actually do so here, a while ago?

It's this sanctification, this elaborate purification of what the liberal modern holds dear, which inevitably leads him to a contradiction.

If all "have a right", "deserve" love, then why deny it to a child?
Now love is not as selfless, pure, sacred, as these hypocrites pretend it is.
Now children must be protected from the price of love, finding its connection to lust/hunger.
Because if love were so pure then who would deny a child this gift?

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
apaosha
Daeva
avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 1785
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 32
Location : Ireland

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:01 pm

When it comes to acquiring Victim status in this culture children have priority over adults, because they are weaker and more vulnerable. Therefore the liberal will instinctively support them over the pedophile.

The liberal's preference naturally gravitates to the weakest party as he best identifies with weakness.

They will still call it a lifestyle choice however and proclaim their tolerance for the individual as long as he does not "practice" his sociopathy.

In the same way, the Left in America turned on the modern empowered woman embodied by Hillary Clinton in preference for the nigger, Barack Obama, as his Victim status superceded hers.

The order could be something like this: child>jew>nigger>homosexual>woman.... with adjustments made for how white the individual is, or whether they are male.

For example a jew could be the Victim of black males regardless of any factor and enjoy a liberals full support, but it would take a few more checkboxes to be ticked in order for a non-jew to be the victim in this case.
One would have to be female and homosexual perhaps.

In the tiers of non-victimhood, a white heterosexual male is at the top and so enjoys the unenviable position of embodying the full length and breadth of a liberal's existential angst. The oppressor, the bully, the exploiter, the wife-beater, the homophobe, the racist, the misogynist and what have you.

Anti-Victim status.

_________________
"I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://knowthyself.forumotion.net
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:12 pm

From the 'virtuous pedophile' website:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
reasonvemotion

avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 639
Join date : 2013-01-09
Location : The Female Spirit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:38 pm

I deleted my previous post.  Too emotional.  

I struggle with this and as we live in dangerous times, I will practice some restraint.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 17851
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:26 pm

Remember...They once called homosexuals disgusting, until the "enlightened" ones made anal penetration another choice, and sexual mutations one more thing to accept in a world of unrestricted reproduction and sheltering against natural culling.
For decades homosexuals lived "in the closet" never daring to come out, living double-lives, pretending to be heterosexuals.
Today paedophiles live in the shadows, some married with children, craving children.
Is that the end?
No.
What about necrophiliacs, where consent can be given before death?

As sex becomes instilled as another lifestyle, all mutations can demand social acceptance.
For paedophiles ageism is the new racism/sexism.
The liberal mindset can either contradict itself, or follow through with its own logic.

Particularly when sex has nothing to do with copulation and reproduction, like some of those morons say.  
But there is no consistency in any modern, nihilistic, thinking.
They are those who reverse reality...they are the anti-realists. In their world anything goes, if one of them does not get hurt.
Compartmentalization comes in handy, and when something is judged by its emotional appeal, or condemned using feelings, then there is nothing which is unreasonable.  

The only line modern nihilists have is an emotional one.
If nobody gets hurt, particularly them, then it's okay. If it benefits them or makes them feel good, then it is more than okay.
There is no standard besides this one.

When emotion is the standard, then mass emotion is the tool for manipulating the masses.
Reason is turned inward: a tool to direct, glorify, control, fabricate, emotion.
They see emotion everywhere...this is why anyone who says anything honest about race, sex, homosexuality, or any sexual mutation, must have an emotional motive that dominates him.
Many years ago I predicted that if things continue as they are, paedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality, will all become increasingly socially acceptable.
I don't think marriage will enter the picture because that institution is already dying, but hedonism will be the binding factor.
Copulation will become a part of a pleasure-centred feminized culture.
It's already happening.
Children are still protected, as the system protects all its resources (not buying into the lies it sells internally), because the technologies to gestate and mass-produce babies from small amounts of DNA is still not feasible, and mortality is still an issue.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
reasonvemotion

avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 639
Join date : 2013-01-09
Location : The Female Spirit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:32 pm



A brilliant and evaluative analysis.




Back to top Go down
View user profile
OhFortunae

avatar

Gender : Male Scorpio Posts : 2479
Join date : 2013-10-26
Age : 25
Location : Land of Dance and Song

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:55 am

Does homosexuality truly exists within the animal-kingdom of Nature?

Animals merely are impulsive. When there are no females to mate with belonging to the same specie as the male, or the alpha male takes them all, they simply follow their sexual impulses.

Just like many low-impulse control prisoners who have ''sexual intercourse'' with other men (or rape), but will abandon such depraved behavior once free and can have sexual intercourse with women, again.

A dog humping your leg does not mean he has sexual lust for your legs, or likes you; it means he follows his sexual impulses.
Back to top Go down
View user profile https://plus.google.com/u/0/109705167311303906720/posts
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:24 pm

Vattuone tries to situate the origins of modern pedophilia in the west's glorification of the child, and the lowering of age from its obsession for infantilism; naturally Vattuone's book 'The Monster and the Sage' is not found on amazon, or anywhere on the internet, in english anyway.

Quote :
"The Italian classicist R. Vattuone published in 2004 a major study of Greek pederasty in which he argued that the Greek example shows that erotic attraction and sexual relationships of this type are not necessarily injurious to the younger person. The greatly intensified reprobation over the past few decades of what is now almost invariably called pedophilia—the word underlining the supposed child-status of the younger person—is blamed by him on a concatenation of social transformations in the Western world since the 1960’s and 1970’s, especially radical feminism and its call for a strict egalitarianism between the sexes and in sexual relationships, and the steep decline in the educative and mentoring role played by the older generation towards the young. This demonization is vividly reflected in the title of his work, in English translation, “The Monster and the Sage: Studies in Greek Erotic Life”—“the Monster” being today’s reviled pedophile as contrasted with the esteemed pederast-philosopher of Greek antiquity. Vattuone’s book, hailed as “courageous” by a solitary American reviewer (Montiglio, 2007), was met by an almost universal silence, almost certainly because of its provocative diagnosis of the child-abuse problem."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Quote :
"So, how did things change so drastically that present day westernconcepts seem to be radically opposed to the ancient sexual practice? By the very nature of their scholarship, few classicists have ventured to question or analyze contemporary concepts by compar-ing them with ancient history. In his provocative article in RivistaStorica dell' Antichità in 1999 as well as in his important book Il mostro e il sapiente. Studi sull' erotica greca, published in 2004, the Italian scholar Vattuone has chastised western society which,by not being capable of coping with vital issues such as authority,intergenerational friendship and responsibility, has to be held re-sponsible for creating the image of the monstrous pedophile. Tohim, the pedophile as a perverted monster is an invention of thetwentieth century. In "Eros senza volto", the last chapter of hisbook, Vattuone frankly searches for changes in modern westernsociety of the last decades of the twentieth century, which havecaused the dramatic shift in our thinking about erotic affectivity onthe part of adults towards children.

First of all, feminism is toblame: in their efforts to defend women's rights, feminists have de-nounced every sort of relationship in which they saw an inequalitybetween partners. Anti-paternalistic thinking brought about disap-proval of unions in which a senior partner teaches the art of loveand social skills to his junior fellow. The sexual revolution claimedthe right for every age-class to their own sexual experiment: noadult involvement was desirable in youthful sexual experiences.Vattuone denounces the americanized western society with its obsessions about corporal integrity and prolonged childhood, a society which patronizes children and youngsters and denies theirrights to their own decisions for a long period of time. Psycho-analysis is to blame, as well as Puritan Protestant thinking and concepts of symmetry in economics and human relationships. As forthe pedophile becoming an odd outsider, Vattuone mentions theincreasing loneliness in modern society, as well as the excrescenceof pornography, the more easily accessible by the internet. It shouldbe clear that in no way does Vattuone want to defend today's childmolesters. We should not return to pedophilia simply because ithappened in the past. Above all, this would be inopportune becausea social dimension for intergenerational sexual relationships islacking nowadays.
However, there is no need to interpret ancientsexual custom in an anachronistic way: hence, the practice of boylove did not necessarily imply psychological trauma for peoplefrom the past, neither is it essential for historians to search for anetiology for a practice and a complex of feelings which have existed throughout the whole of human history."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:32 pm

The 2012 film 'The Hunt' is an excellent showcasing of the present situation, where any child mindlessly pointing out at a man saying 'he's bad' sets off a pedophile tag marking an innocent man for life, the repercussions that follow; and how dangerous its become to be friendly with good-intent towards children today.
The Hannibal serial's actor Mikkelsen stars in this. The subject is handled with maturity.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 17851
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 6:07 pm

OhFortunae wrote:
Does homosexuality truly exists within the animal-kingdom of Nature?


In nature homosexual behaviour occurs for two reasons:

1- Male dominance. Display of superiority.
The beta-male takes on a feminine attitude, or suffers the consequences. We also see this in human prisons.
In modern systems the institution takes on the dominant male role, forcing all biological males to think and act more like females.
Large brained social animals where males are integrated rather than pushed out of social groups display this behaviour.

2- A shortage of females or mates of the opposite sex. The individuals are forced to display their sexuality towards what is available during the mating season.
See penguins.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Anfang

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 2886
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 35
Location : CET

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 6:25 pm

In a less civilized environment a father might want his legacy to not become the plaything for an older man but to keep the torch lit. In a civilization, especially one which has distanced itself from such basic considerations, that could be different. It would be interesting to know when things like homosexuality and pedophilia became a normalized practice in ancient rome and greece - I think those things are usually happening in the decline, the end phase of a civilization.

If children are not sons and daughters of individuals but rather only members of a collective group which even prefers a feminized type then it wouldn't surprise me to see that on the rise in the 'near' future.

"It's not about sex, it's about freedom, experience, exchange..."


Last edited by Anfang on Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anfang

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 2886
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 35
Location : CET

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 6:43 pm

Satyr wrote:
OhFortunae wrote:
Does homosexuality truly exists within the animal-kingdom of Nature?


In nature homosexual behaviour occurs for two reasons:

1- Male dominance. Display of superiority.
The beta-male takes on a feminine attitude, or suffers the consequences. We also see this in human prisons.
In modern systems the institution takes on the dominant male role, forcing all biological males to think and act more like females.
Large brained social animals where males are integrated rather than pushed out of social groups display this behaviour.

2- A shortage of females or mates of the opposite sex. The individuals are forced to display their sexuality towards what is available during the mating season.
See penguins.  

Yes but, additionally, why should there be no "true"-homosexual animals when there are "true"-homosexual humans? The ratio of masculinity/femininity varies within individuals and so, especially, among social animals where feminine traits in males have a higher rate of survivability, compared to non-or-less-social animals, why shouldn't there be some homosexual animal mutations too?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 17851
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:21 pm

Anfang wrote:

Yes but, additionally, why should there be no "true"-homosexual animals when there are "true"-homosexual humans?
Because homosexuality is a genetic dead-end, and, in humans, the result of uncontrolled reproduction.
Bisexuality, in humans becomes an ideal type, as the feminine is more manageable, more easy to control and integrate into whatever is dominant and popular.
homosexuality is best in technological environments where reproduction can find a mechanical outlet, turning sex into a pastime, a hedonistic escape, psychological crutch feeding off of natural sexual drives.

Homosexuality is a parasitical mutation, as are all sexual practices, behaviours, inclinations which do not result in reproduction, but stop at the pleasure reward.
It is akin to feeding on food lacking nutrition because they taste good...oh, wait, that another aspect of modernity.

Anfang wrote:
The ratio of masculinity/femininity varies within individuals and so, especially, among social animals where feminine traits in males have a higher rate of survivability, compared to non-or-less-social animals, why shouldn't there be some homosexual animal mutations too?
The successful reproduction rates in humans, exceed those of any other species.
We protect deformities, unfit mutations, weaknesses.

Mutations must come about just as often in other social species as they do in human, but in humans the survival potential is higher, and mutations are protected from their own weakness.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Anfang

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 2886
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 35
Location : CET

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:06 am

Satyr wrote:
Because homosexuality is a genetic dead-end, and, in humans, the result of uncontrolled reproduction.
Bisexuality, in humans becomes an ideal type, as the feminine is more manageable, more easy to control and integrate into whatever is dominant and popular.
homosexuality is best in technological environments where reproduction can find a mechanical outlet, turning sex into a pastime, a hedonistic escape, psychological crutch feeding off of natural sexual drives.

Yes, this environment fosters homosexuality. Also, probably, the Don Juan type is more likely to produce homosexual offspring.

But if 'true'-homosexuality (being exclusively homosexual even if the environment were to push against it) does occur in humans as an unfit mutation, which I think it does at a small rate, then that would probably also occur in animal-kingdom.

Yes, it's unfit and our society selects for it at the moment with all that feminization being the preferred type but that doesn't mean that those genetic factors will become extinct, as long as we have some form of social behaviour, which comes along with some degree of feminization.
The Social animal brings about genetic factors which can also produce homosexual individuals.

If feminization is to be controlled, if males, or a society wants to control its own feminine aspects then homosexuality needs to be controlled, to be put in its place.

But the answer to OhFortunae's question, "Does homosexuality truly exist in animal kingdom?" I think is - Yes. But the degree of it is depending on how much it is fostered within a society. I suspect Bonobos to have a higher rate than chimps or gorillas.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:43 am

Homosexuality cannot be 'true' because such a thing does not offer any reproductive advantage and therefore cannot be said to have any evolutionary basis. In nature certain circumstances can lead to an influx of homosexual acts but the idea of a homosexual 'drive' or 'lifestyle' is folly - as noted by LeVay, who is nevertheless quoted by pro-gay activists for his observation of such acts. These include:

- Lack of females
- Establishing hierarchy
- Diffusing violence and aggression in the name of social cohesion
- Misidentification of scents and calls leading to indiscriminate humping

Humans, being the most complex mammals (which are the most complex form of earthly life) have another reason still. The human brain is far more intricate than that of even our closest animal relatives (generally speaking of course). 20% of human bodily energy is used directly by the brain. Taking this and the need to form strong social bonds into account, human sex takes on a deeper psychological element which can be potent enough to produce the (hetero)sexual instincts/reactions in a situation where they are not warranted. This psychological element is also responsible for things like 'performance anxiety' which displays the mind's ability to overwhelm/supersede natural instinctive responses.

The few links to a biological or genetic basis that have been scientifically established (exposure to female hormones in the womb, reduced/inhibited hypothalamus output) merely point to an unfit male mutation rather than a male with female drives. Such males, as I believe Satyr suggests, are proof of genetic stunting and retardation and would have nothing to offer healthy (alpha and cunning-beta) males in a less artificial environment and so likely would be celibate outcasts rather than homosexual. Technology, sheltering and genetic retardation are the causes of the modern movement to 'liberate' gratuitous expenditure of libidinal energies in biologically fruitless activities. It is basically masturbation with drugs, lube and other people. If and when society develops a sense of intellectual honesty the term homosexual will probably refer only to isolated acts.

This theory only applies to males (Y chromosome) as it is well known that most lesbians engage in periodic heterosexual activity and that heterosexual women sometimes engage in lesbian foreplay etc (this too is noticeably increasing in our time).
Back to top Go down
Anfang

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 2886
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 35
Location : CET

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sun Jan 05, 2014 7:16 am

Strongarm88 wrote:
Homosexuality cannot be 'true' because such a thing does not offer any reproductive advantage and therefore cannot be said to have any evolutionary basis. In nature certain circumstances can lead to an influx of homosexual acts but the idea of a homosexual 'drive' or 'lifestyle' is folly - as noted by LeVay, who is nevertheless quoted by pro-gay activists for his observation of such acts.

I don't think that psychological phenomena are completely distinct from the body or stay distinct for that matter. Behaviours, even if they were to start out as artificial pressure from the outside, over generations, will produce its effect through selection on the genetics. In other words, the mind isn't distinct from the body, there is a connection, even if the connection is very weak at the beginning it will strengthen through environmental pressure over generations of breeding.

Let's take sickle cell anemia where people's blood has a reduced capacity to transport oxygen. In its heterozygote variation the effects on oxygen transportation are less severe compared to the homozygote version which can lead to life-threatening situations. Why did this genetic trait survive on Cyprus for quite some time? Well, it also is a trait which produces significant resistance to malaria.

That's why the sickle cell anemia, at the time when malaria was a problem on Cyprus, was not such a bad trait after all. But the point is, although the homozygote version, the full blown version is a negative trait, the heterozygote version can be beneficial.

Similar, being faggish' in demeanor and psychology can be and has been an advantage in our times (think Don Juan type), while the full blown version is unfit for life.

With 'true' I mean a genetic disposition which makes the individual to be a homosexual. If this society wants to reduce the numbers of homosexuals then it will also have to lower the status of the males with "faggish' " behaviour so they aren't reproducing as much. As long as beta compliance is a bonus and as long as that is rewarded I don't see any decline in homosexuality.
Additionally, the immediate psychological imprinting (non-genetic) would also reduce the amount of homosexuals. (This would influence those who are on the fence).

Bottomline. In a society of full blown feminized beta males, homosexuality is also genetically on the rise.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sun Jan 05, 2014 9:35 am

I wrote pretty long reply which vanished… Very annoying!
Anfang wrote:
I don't think that psychological phenomena are completely distinct from the body or stay distinct for that matter. Behaviours, even if they were to start out as artificial pressure from the outside, over generations, will produce its effect through selection on the genetics. In other words, the mind isn't distinct from the body, there is a connection, even if the connection is very weak at the beginning it will strengthen through environmental pressure over generations of breeding.

Let's take sickle cell anemia where people's blood has a reduced capacity to transport oxygen. In its heterozygote variation the effects on oxygen transportation are less severe compared to the homozygote version which can lead to life-threatening situations. Why did this genetic trait survive on Cyprus for quite some time? Well, it also is a trait which produces significant resistance to malaria.

That's why the sickle cell anemia, at the time when malaria was a problem on Cyprus, was not such a bad trait after all. But the point is, although the homozygote version, the full blown version is a negative trait, the heterozygote version can be beneficial.

I disagree in that sex is the only means of reproduction and reproduction is the basis of existence. In this way it is a) impossible that even an increase in feminine traits could create an actual genetic basis for homosexuality in any individual organism and b) that sex is a much more refined and evolved process than a cellular defence against certain ailments i.e. the entire nature of man is essentially sexual and his organs and psychology develop only in relation to that fact, never in actual contradiction of it. The quality of the organism will produce greater/lesser ability to achieve genetically healthy behaviours. I never implied that the psychology was distinct from the body, merely that in humans it plays a more significant role in sex (less instinctual) which can hinder sex or inspire sexual responses void of the relevant stimuli<-- especially in a hypersexualized modernity.

Anfang wrote:
Similar, being faggish' in demeanor and psychology can be and has been an advantage in our times (think Don Juan type), while the full blown version is unfit for life.

With 'true' I mean a genetic disposition which makes the individual to be a homosexual. If this society wants to reduce the numbers of homosexuals then it will also have to lower the status of the males with "faggish' " behaviour so they aren't reproducing as much. As long as beta compliance is a bonus and as long as that is rewarded I don't see any decline in homosexuality.
Additionally, the immediate psychological imprinting (non-genetic) would also reduce the amount of homosexuals. (This would influence those who are on the fence).

Bottomline. In a society of full blown feminized beta males, homosexuality is also genetically on the rise.

Remember, Beta males are the opportunists. If the culture was more inclined towards masculine paternalistic traits then beta's would mimics those. I don't believe that faggy traits are particularly inherent n them, they just go with the flow...

I agree that a more feminized culture is the one in which homosexual behaviour could become more tolerable but I believe this departs from the genetic/heritable argument which can only ever be based on the individual and his traits. Think about Christian monogamy. It feminized the gene pool with a flooding of beta male genes and yet a homosexual lifestyle was demonized even until its descent into mediocrity last century. An increasingly feminized population will be more docile, less intelligent, more uniform, less attractive etc. but still no genetic basis for homosexual drives will arise. Consider that even in a scenario where genetic alphas are the only breeders that unfit males will exist, they just wouldn’t have a market for homosexual release. Lesser males would not have access to females and would be physically separated from them causing a more obvious challenge to arise. They would not experience the stimuli such as pheromones and mating calls to cause a sexual arousal if they were unable to corner a female and were only surrounded by other lowly males.

Here we must mention the changes to female nature caused by technologies such as refined abortive techniques and the contraceptive pill. Suspension from sexual consequences causes a number of mutations to sexual sociality:

- Sex becomes ubiquitous but sterile inherently making sexual mutations more socially worthwhile and less worthy of stigma
- The more sexual nature of females results in males being able to attain sex but not actually reproduce causing sexual disorientation (stunting maturity and reducing general consequences)
- Females are becoming more psychologically damaged in a system which provides them with harmful memes and role models leading to a decrease in male willingness to pursue them causing males to find other outlets of release

As far as I can see, the current evidence does not support a genetically induced homosexuality in individuals although certain cultures can evolve which are more permissive or even encouraging of this behaviour. I would expect some Liberal retard to trumpet such a finding from the mountain-tops if it were established…
Back to top Go down
Anfang

avatar

Gender : Male Virgo Posts : 2886
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 35
Location : CET

PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:25 am

Strongarm88 wrote:
I disagree in that sex is the only means of reproduction and reproduction is the basis of existence.

That doesn't mean that homosexuality can't be tied to genetics. If psychological phenomena are tied to genetics to some degree then homosexuality, will also be tied to some degree to genetics.
If I take two individuals and raise them exactly the same way then both don't have to end up with the same disposition.

If homosexuality is statistically tied to a heightened risk for psychological issues then I'd say chances are that both are genetically influenced. Why and how else would they be connected.

The modern liberal would probably use the genetic argument and point out that the homosexual person is so by nature. Which to some degree I agree with. I think it's usually both, a genetic pre-disposition to some degree and mimetic training.

But the modern liberal would conclude that thus there is nothing wrong with homosexuality or that it's even a good thing, which I definitely don't agree with.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile

Back to top Go down
 
Dissecting the homosexual and the pedophile
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 8Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Dissecting Feminism in a nut-shell

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA-
Jump to: