Critique of Satyr's The Feminization of Man:

Satyr, where could one get a hold of your essays, sir?

phoneutria wrote:

Where is without-music, I love that boy.

Yes, "boy" is an appropriate descritive for a mentally immature >50 year old.

Sisyphus wrote:

How could man not become more feminine when removed from nature? The leveling effect of global finance was fought against by the axis powers. Why do you think they removed the divinity of the emperor from the Japanese people, the father figure? Look at the world right now, and you will see that ISIS and countries in the middle east that refuse to bow down to the moneychangers are fighting that same leveling effect. Islam subjugates femininity to masculinity and preserves families and blood ties, this cannot be accepted by the leveling effect.

Perhaps an anti-christ figure will arise like another Hitler.

Out of the Muslim world?

Not out of the Muslim world, though they will play a large role.

The ones who have been predicted are indeed real, except they are one man. If you look at Nazi mysticism you will see that Hitler indeed believed in an eternal creator. His sacrifice set up conditions for what is about to take place in the next 20 years. With Palestine being recognized, and the mass emigration out of Israel because of international pressure you will see Jews flock to Europe where they will be persecuted again. Except, the man predicted is unlikely to be out of the Muslim world or Europe. However, Vladimir Putin is likely to turn anti-Semitic, as are the Germans and the Greeks.

The Zionist project is failing and the caliphate has been restored.

Sisyphus wrote:

Not out of the Muslim world, though they will play a large role.

The ones who have been predicted are indeed real, except they are one man. If you look at Nazi mysticism you will see that Hitler indeed believed in an eternal creator. His sacrifice set up conditions for what is about to take place in the next 20 years. With Palestine being recognized, and the mass emigration out of Israel because of international pressure you will see Jews flock to Europe where they will be persecuted again. Except, the man predicted is unlikely to be out of the Muslim world or Europe. However, Vladimir Putin is likely to turn anti-Semitic, as are the Germans and the Greeks.

The Zionist project is failing and the caliphate has been restored.

I'm neither interested in mysticism, nor Nazi Occultism as it were.
A. Hitler's NS, was pagan, even to the point of over-masculinity (hence contentions of homosexuality, hyper-masculinity/machismo, being the nature of the Third Reich), in the sense that it sought congruity with ordering out of Nature, driving principles, through its own form or expression.

Putin has publicly admitted to aligning with the New World Order; besides, Russia is a multinational/multiracial nation, with a propensity to forming alliances with East Asia.

I'd take it that you like being penetrated, subjugated, powerless; a blissful, hopeful, follower of some unforeseen savior.
Nothing worse, ignoble, than the willful acceptance of and conditioning for submission, nonresistance.

The universe exists, therefore it in itself is a creative force. If it is not a creative force, then it would only be a destructive force.  Great human beings have driven world history. I take it you are a materialist, and thus a sick in the head pseudo-Jew if you do not agree with that statement.

Powerless? Human beings changing world history aren't unforeseen saviors. However, it's you that doesn't seem to pay attention to the world around you. I'm simply speculating, using ancient words and applying them to what is currently going on. Perhaps you are the powerless one, who refuses to observe the world before him and partake in the world he is living in.

Submission? The acceptance of a creative force implies no submission. Submission or defiance, for the wise, is a conscious choice and and exercise of the willpower for the latter. Even if I accepted that I was nothing next to the power of the universe to destroy me, this doesn't mean I submit to the universe I live in or my inability to prevent it from destroying me. Destroy me it could, as could the rest of nature.

Sisyphus wrote:

The universe exists, therefore it in itself is a creative force. If it is not a creative force, then it would only be a destructive force.  Great human beings have driven world history. I take it you are a materialist, and thus a sick in the head pseudo-Jew if you do not agree with that statement.

Powerless? Human beings changing world history aren't unforeseen saviors. However, it's you that doesn't seem to pay attention to the world around you. I'm simply speculating, using ancient words and applying them to what is currently going on. Perhaps you are the powerless one, who refuses to observe the world before him and partake in the world he is living in.

Submission? The acceptance of a creative force implies no submission. Submission or defiance, for the wise, is a conscious choice and and exercise of the willpower for the latter. Even if I accepted that I was nothing next to the power of the universe to destroy me, this doesn't mean I submit to the universe I live in or my inability to prevent it from destroying me. Destroy me it could, as could the rest of nature.

Okay.

I liked those videos.

Having cunts for family, I learnt from a young age that both males and females can be really shitty people.

But I suppose the world doesn't need more people to point out the flaws of men, but there is a distinct lack of open criticism against women.

I approve.

(My ex-sister in law was a feminist. She used to say shit about how women are more intelligent than men. I called her out on her shit, and she eventually broke down and said how inferior she felt as a female - that she thought she was part of a lesser sex)

Hrodebert wrote:

Satyr, where could one get a hold of your essays, sir?

jstor
you can get a link to his profile in the facebook about page

phoneutria wrote:

Hrodebert wrote:

Satyr, where could one get a hold of your essays, sir?

jstor
you can get a link to his profile in the facebook about page

Nay, the Aryan Hyperborean Heritage page has either been taken down or banned.

I got hold of some, which are on ILP, through another fellow.

I looked it up for you. It was scribd I was thinking about after all.

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

phoneutria wrote:

I looked it up for you. It was scribd I was thinking about after all.

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

I appreciate it, ma'am. How sweet of you.

I used to have that site, but I had a recent hard drive death in which I lost a couple weeks of work.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
This retard is 20 years en-retard...
Twenty years from now he'll tell us about the US collapsing, paedophilia being normalized and nihilism....

I saw that too.

He sounds like a naive little girl, asking her mother "mommy, why do boys fight? It's so mean." And im sure it has something to do with conservatives.

He's their other resident village idiot, who thinks he's "doing philosophy". Another one, placing everything into a political framework because he cannot think outside his sheltered indoctrinations. Meanwhile, the demented subjectivist is beginning to isolate everyone on the forum, and still they accept him as an equal, unchecked tolerance. This is exactly how diseases spread.

Yes...
He understands masculinity like someone who never grew up and never had a real male role model.
Like many Americans.
It's like watching an ape imitate human behaviour....or a boy pretending to be his dad...or a woman pretending to be like a man.

You can, almost, hear a Walsh echo:
"What is a man?"
He don't know.
A man is as baffling to him as a woman is - he can't define either.
He says he's a man....and so he's a man.
But he doesn't know what that is.

Know Thyself...
These people have never thought of anything beyond the ideological.
Man, for them...is just an idea. Like woman.
An idea that can easily be replaced by another idea....linguistically.

Everything you need to know about American politics, summarized one study. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Laocoon of Troy (@LaocoonofTroy) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Guest wrote:
Take, for instance, a sitcom like Will and Grace. On one hand, the producers are trying to make homosexuality acceptible: a good thing as far as I'm concerned. I mean the argument for gay rights is, ultimately, about the right to express ourselves sexually with one, two, three, whatever floats your boat, other consenting adults. It is about our sexual autonomy........




One of today's most intense controversies rages around the issue of "normalizing homosexuality".
For example, from what you write Will and Grace apparently sell this 'normalizing' very successfully.
The success of the effort to neutralize the APA's disapproval gave the homosexual movement just the weapon they needed for the campaign we see today to specifically discredit, intimidate, and silence opponents.
"The Resolution on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, Parents and Their Children replaces a 2004 resolution to include data on transgender parents and include more recent research on gay fathers and bisexual parents"
Homosexuality is relativizing morality to the lowest level.
The issue is power.
Redefine Abnormal as Normal.

Propaganda is subtle.
It doesn't hit you over the head with loud preaching, it tickles your funny bone, associating an idea with mirth, with love, with pelasure...so that when you hear the term, associated with the idea, it triggers these emotions.
Pavlovian associations.
We see this in how the mediocre are triggered by certain ideas and react with the accusation of 'Nazi' or 'misogynist' or 'homophobe' or 'racist'....
All a consequence of indoctrination and social engineering. Reactive...no reasoning required - automated.
The portrayal of homosexuals over decades of television programming and movies, like Will & Grace - which was funny - was of a kind of innocuous yuppy, urban, New Yorker type. , loud but harmless, with a kind heart and good intentions.

First they successfully normalized homosexuality, promoting it as the ideal urban lifestyle, the perfect cosmopolitan citizen; then they began normalizing transsexuality, using the exact same methods; then what?
I predicted paedophilia, and already we see how the process begins - with "experts" popping-up in support of what was once "unthinkable", then a character in a sit-com is introduced, portrayed to be funny, none threatening at all, kind with children, like a big brother; a well-meaning soul that only has good intensions....and is another "victim of misunderstanding"...

Brainwashing has progressed since Bernays saved his uncle from the Nazis and applied his uncle Freud's insights into human sexuality, inventing modern day marketing and politics...
His first "accomplishment"?
Marketing smoking to women, by associating it with a metaphor for the phallus - exploiting 'penis envy syndrome' which nobody ever talks about because its not politically-correct, and only males suffer psychological complexes and syndromes.

reasonvemotion wrote:

Homosexuality is relativizing morality to the lowest level.
The issue is power.
Redefine Abnormal as Normal.

People are just trying to live their lives whilst others - usually borne out of envy or resentment - attempt to thwart them. Greater social freedoms over the post-war era have materialized into greater opportunities for self-expression and self-realization allowing people to live happier more fulfilled lives than ever before. Alas, for those who have missed out when they were young this can work in reverse and serve to deepen the pain and bitterness they feel as they watch other people progress. Some of these unfortunate damaged souls end up taking drugs or alcohol to stymie the pain and cope with life, others seek revenge against society by adopting or creating world hating ideologies. A more stoic approach to life may help.

Such amateurish psychoanalyzing.
Ha!!
Your contempt exposes your own issues....and you project your own psychosis as an insinuating accusation.

Is this the only reason you can fantasize over?
Have you even attempted to become objective and see the issue despite your personal desires and hang-ups?
I doubt it.
Your demeanor screams defensive, passive-aggressive, resentment.

The worship of change, for its own sake, is also a symptom of dissatisfaction.
Change happens, no matter what.
The true rebel is the conservative....trying to stop the tides of change....and the cycles of civilizational collapse.

Stoicism is stepping aside and letting fools do what fools do.
Describing the flood is not participating in it.

Satyr wrote:

Such amateurish psychoanalyzing.
Ha!!
Your contempt exposes your own issues....and you project your own psychosis as an insinuating accusation.

Is this the only reason you can fantasize over?
Have you even attempted to become objective and see the issue despite your personal desires and hang-ups?
I doubt it.
Your demeanor screams defensive, passive-aggressive, resentment.

Protecting the flock?

Ha!!
So predictable.
It's like you've never found a different strategy and return to the same....

Trying to project what you think you know about my motives.
It exposes you....

You're right. I should become more objective, more dispassionate. This is the first step to dehumanizing the other.

No, it's the first step towards seeing the world as it is, and not as you want it to be.
Moron....asceticism is not an end, but a means.....and so is objectivity.

To see people as they are... objects. To be used as pawns in your ideal world, your Timocratic utopia? No thanks. Philosophy was born as a past time of the aristocratic class, unburdened by having to deal with the hard ships of daily life by oppressing an economic underclass. This is why so much of it is tedious navel gazing, unconnected to the real. This is also why philosophy presents an opportunity (in some cases) to those who are prone - from some psychological need - to look down on others/separate themselves from others. Real objectivity (and freedom) is attained through empirical science as it is not liable to be infected with subjective (class) bias.

Objectivity does not mean objects.
Objectivity, simpleton, means from a third-person perspective of relative indifference.
To perceive an-other AND your-self, from a third-person perspective, i.e., as a stranger would.

You are an emotional wreck.
Subjectivity is your fanaticism. Imprisoned in your self-serving, egotistical, emotionally driven drivel.....seeing anyone who is not emotionally driven as a "cold hearted inhuman demon"....
Ha!!
Feminine to the core.

Someone who admits - and is proud - of being subjective can't comprehend objectivity. They always use themselves as an example, so they always assume the other has subjective motives for what he says....
More precisely, the other always has emotional, self-serving, bases motives....other than seeing the world as it is and not as he would like it to be.
They cannot comprehend how anyone would not be emotional and accept truth as being entirely self-comforting, self-beenfiting...so they project.

Watch her project with every critique.
She's telling us how she emotes, how she builds her opinions...revealing, for us all to see, how she comes to hold an opinion.
Her "sympathy" - altruism, humanism - is self-serving....and she is correct.
She assumes that everyone's opinion is about what they wants and desires and needs.
She makes the error that everyone is like her...and to the exact same degree.
No nuance. No true empathy.
She is engulfed by sympathy/antipathy...and she demands you reciprocate because she needs sympathy to help her cope with life.
Unable to comprehend what is above her mind's ability, she builds a fantasy on her repressed self-awarness. The parts she will never acknowledge and admit.
Those she projects upon others, as an accusation. When she speaks of this other she is really speaking about herself.

A subjective emoter because they are incapable of objective thought can only subjectivize what remains incomprehensible.
They always assume that the other is, just like them expressing how they prefer the world to be, or like the world to be...because they form opinions in this way.

Like a canine, or any animal, it can be known more than it can ever know itself, because it has minimal self-awarness, and so assumes man are like themselves - strange kinds of canines.
The incomprehensible must always draw from the comprehensible, and so the subjective emotional mind draws from itself, what it knows of itself - and may refuse to acknowledge it - to fabricate a mental model of someone it finds incomprehensible.
The idea that someone can build an opinion on what is brutal, threatening, disturbing, not in their interests, not part of their preference, is beyond them. They must bring the other down to a level they can comprehend, using themselves as a model - or what they know, understand and consciously acknowledge about themselves.
The rest they use as projections.
The other becomes an effigy representing the worse aspects of themselves, which they burn to absolve themselves from them - they hope.
It's a kind of self-cleansing, expressing a deep anxiety towards existence.....and so anyone that reminds them of existence becomes a representation they can assault and accuse, because they can't really attack and accuse existence.
A catharsis.
Like a weekly visit to church and confession.
Vengeance against the world as it is. Redirected disapproval of oneself as it is - as it has been determined to be before their birth.
It's a kind of attack on their ancestry, recognizing that they could not have been other than what they are - a range of inherited potentials that enslaves them. unable to break free from their body, i.e., their determined immutable past (nature).
Used as an excuse for their determining present - expressed through judgments and choices.

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