Digital Narratives

But since you asked:

The primary theme of your thought (or is it the only one) is this feminization of man. Now you actually make a lot of good points, and I tend to agree with you. In fact, there has been recent research in which pictures of different types of men were presented to women in different western industrialized nations. What they found out was that women in every other civilized nation but America (in other words: every nation that had a strong social safety net) tended to prefer more effeminate intellectual types. In fact, given the type of men you tend to see in popular media, I would say the same phenomenon is taking root in America as well. So you are right, the feminization of man is happening.

Where we part company is your insistence that it’s some kind of bad thing. You act as if evolution had some kind of Neitzchian teleology that should have led to something more brutish than brutish. I, however, see the emergence of a higher form of human being that is better able to utilize the technology we have managed to develop, one based on a Marxist cynicism about the competitive nature of Capitalism. But in order to get the implications, first you would have to get, in to your narrow glass-half-empty mind, that the general consensus among social biologists today is that nature is both competitive and cooperative.

Now there would seem to be, given the Capitalism we’re faced with now, a circumstance that creates a kind of genetic filter that would favor sociopathy. The problem is that unlike the circumstances and genetic filters our ancestors had to deal with, this is a human construct and, by virtue of that, can be changed before the sociopaths get too much of a hold.

Now as far as this chat thing, I’m game. But let’s pick the right time so we’re both at our best game. I would say tomorrow night, but I’m going to eat before I start on what is my Saturday. And I prefer to be light on my feet for something like that. And I assume you work as well, so Thursday afternoon won’t work either. So how about Saturday at about 12:00 noon Midwest time. You won’t have to drink. I prefer to drink alone anyway.

But before we do this, you’ll have to explain to me how to get on the chat.

d63tark wrote:

But since you asked:

The primary theme of your thought (or is it the only one) is this feminization of man.

Is it, boy, or is it the one that gets the most attention?
The primary theme, boy, is [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] but it is too abstract to be "sexy" enough for your ilk.

You see, boy, your kind was attracted to that essay because of the sexual overtones and its more direct language. They see it happening, even if they cannot comprehend it or they use excuses to dismiss it.
That this essay got me the most internet notoriety was a surprise to me, girl. Most of the attention, as you can imagine, has been negative...as in personal assaults, sarcasm, innuendos etc. The usual girlish games and liberal "open minded" tactics.

d63tark wrote:

Now you actually make a lot of good points, and I tend to agree with you. In fact, there has been recent research in which pictures of different types of men were presented to women in different western industrialized nations. What they found out was that women in every other civilized nation but America (in other words: every nation that had a strong social safety net) tended to prefer more effeminate intellectual types. In fact, given the type of men you tend to see in popular media, I would say the same phenomenon is taking root in America as well. So you are right, the feminization of man is happening.

Why would the validation of a moron matter to me, boy?

You came here to "put me in my place"...you announced it. Once more you disappoint.

d63tark wrote:

Where we part company is your insistence that it’s some kind of bad thing. You act as if evolution had some kind of Neitzchian teleology that should have led to something more brutish than brutish.

And so the distinction between your kind and my kind is resolved. You want to be feminized...and I already knew that, boy(?)...oh I forgot...girl.

Have you even considered what "feminine" means, or do you automatically assume the physical only?
For example, boy, the spirit of challenging authority is behind the human drive towards science and philosophy, as both disciplines challenge nature...and even your feminism is a masculine tool, my little girl. It is meant to cultivate the feminine traits which make females socially harmonious.

d63tark wrote:

I, however, see the emergence of a higher form of human being that is better able to utilize the technology we have managed to develop, one based on a Marxist cynicism about the competitive nature of Capitalism. But in order to get the implications, first you would have to get, in to your narrow glass-half-empty mind, is that the general consensus among social biologists today is that nature is both competitive and cooperative.

In others words, little girl, you differ from Hitler only in the ideal you which to produce and the eugenic methods you wish to employ.

Your "world-view" is a "corrective" one....ergo you are world-denouncing and self-hating as you propose a "better" man. Though you cry about eugenics you simply wish to use more subtle methods of engineering your "ideal" man. You wish to exploit fear and human weakness.
You wish to use emotion.

d63tark wrote:

Now there would seem to be, given the Capitalism we’re faced with now, a circumstance that creates a kind of genetic filter that would favor sociopathy. The problem is that unlike the circumstances and genetic filters our ancestors had to deal with, this is a human construct and, by virtue of that, can be changed before the sociopaths get too much of a hold.

True enough because all social systems impose a certain pressure to conform. The bigger the system, the more inclusive and world-dominating it wishes to be, as in Nazism, the more its pressures are brutal and its morals are unforgiving.
All you propose, girl, is a eugenics downward; rather than one professing to upgrade the species you propose to downgrade it so that all are included or with finesse made to pay.
In this, princess, you are even worse than the Nazis or the capitalists, because they, at least, utilize natural processes, tweaking them at their convenience to bring about a desirable outcome, whereas you and your ilk propose an ideal that goes against natural processes...and so you enjoy the ideal of a world with no divisions based on nature.
Yours is a world-denouncing idealism and so it is nihilistic. A secular form of Judeo-Christianity.

d63tark wrote:

Now as far as this chat thing, I’m game. But let’s pick the right time so we’re both at our best game.

I'll make sure to handicap myself beforehand, girl.

d63tark wrote:

I would say tomorrow night, but I’m going to eat before I start on what is my Saturday. And I prefer to be light on my feet for something like that. And I assume you work as well, so Thursday afternoon won’t work either. So how about Saturday at about 12:00 noon Midwest time. You won’t have to drink. I prefer to drink alone anyway.

I work on the weekends, little girl.
How about tomorrow?

d63tark wrote:

But before we do this, you’ll have to explain to me how to get on the chat.

I'm sure a smart girl, like you can figure out how to click on "log in" at the bottom.

Log in to what, bitch?

d63tark wrote:

Log in to what, bitch?

Little girl can you find your lcit in the dark?

On the main page, princess, at the bottom there's a Login button...click it, like you do your teeth when a handsome man catches your eye.

YOu know what, Satyr, you sound like some nerdy little kid standing by his teacher trying to sound bad. Once again,you sound like a little bitch.

Now you asked me to me respond to your ideas. You apparently didn't like that very much did you.

But let's get to the meat of what you're saying here.

Quote :

Is it, boy, or is it the one that gets the most attention?

It gets the most attention because it’s the only one I’ve gotten out of you so far.

Little girl, I love that you think so.
Already I know this is going to be fun. I already know what you think or what you think I think.

If facing me real-time get's your asshole puckered up, let's play here where you can gather your pretty little thoughts, and take time to consider them before posting them.

I think real-time you'll get wet.

d63tark wrote:

Quote :

Is it, boy, or is it the one that gets the most attention?

It gets the most attention because it’s the only one I’ve gotten out of you so far.

Princess I love the language "I got out of you" it makes it sound like my internet performances were all your doing.

Princess, do you know what year I published the first draft of that essay and in what forum I did so?

satyr wrote:

You see, boy, your kind was attracted to that essay because of the sexual overtones and its more direct language. They see it happening, even if they cannot comprehend it or they use excuses to dismiss it.
That this essay got me the most internet notoriety was a surprise to me, girl. Most of the attention, as you can imagine, has been negative...as in personal assaults, sarcasm, innuendos etc. The usual girlish games and liberal "open minded" tactics.

First of all, what do you mean by direct language? That endless Germanic crunch you confuse for emotional and ideological impact? And what exactly do I see happening? Sounds to me like you’re engaged in a kind Cassandra Complex: you’re so fixed on the fantasy that you know how the world is working that anyone who doesn’t buy into it is only a confirmation of of your conclusions. Paranoids basically suffer from the same dynamic.

And as they teach us in writing class: show; don’t just tell. What exactly are these ” usual girlish games and liberal "open minded" tactics”?

Tap on those keys, my little monkey, keep tapping!!!!!!!!!!!!

Satyr wrote:

d63tark wrote:

Quote :

Is it, boy, or is it the one that gets the most attention?

It gets the most attention because it’s the only one I’ve gotten out of you so far.

Princess I love the language "I got out of you" it makes it sound like my internet performances were all your doing.

Princess, do you know what year I published the first draft of that essay and in what forum I did so?

What, bitch? And why would it matter to me given that had you published anywhere substantial, you wouldn't be here playing around with amatuers?

I mean I don't see Rorty here, or Searle, or anyone else who has had any real success.

So what forum did you publish that essay?

satyr wrote:

Little girl, I love that you think so.
Already I know this is going to be fun. I already know what you think or what you think I think.

If facing me real-time get's your asshole puckered up, let's play here where you can gather your pretty little thoughts, and take time to consider them before posting them.

I think real-time you'll get wet.

I get the tactical delay of trash talk until you can come up with something substantial to say, Satyr.

But when do you actually say something substantial?

I’m waiting, Bitch!



But while your fucking around, I'll be picking through your posts.

satyr wrote:

Little girl can you find your lcit in the dark?

On the main page, princess, at the bottom there's a Login button...click it, like you do your teeth when a handsome man catches your eye.

Not sure what page you’re on, but I don’t see anything.

And call me “princess” all you want. It can only confirm my theory that homophobes are usually men who are so busy trying to convince everyone else they’re not gay that you’re never quite sure they’ve totally convinced themselves.

d63tark wrote:

First of all, what do you mean by direct language?

I mean that you and your kind are hypocrites...and most of you have no clue.

You say progress" when you are proposing a regress. You say "positive" when you propose a nihilism.

d63tark wrote:

That endless Germanic crunch you confuse for emotional and ideological impact?

Woman, you are proposing the elimination of sex with the usage of human intervention....now where is this not eugenics?

d63tark wrote:

And what exactly do I see happening? Sounds to me like you’re engaged in a kind Cassandra Complex: you’re so fixed on the fantasy that you know how the world is working that anyone who doesn’t buy into it is only a confirmation of of your conclusions. Paranoids basically suffer from the same dynamic.

Woman, you've found a few ideas and you repeat them endlessly.

Woman, are we not here to share our ideas about how the world works?
Woman, if you wish to "correct" the world how do you propose to do it without first "knowing how it works"?

d63tark wrote:

And as they teach us in writing class: show; don’t just tell. What exactly are these ” usual girlish games and liberal "open minded" tactics”?

Girl, you are woman, through and through.
Your tactics I've already explained many times...but here and now I want you to employ them because they make the case for me.
Your psychology is feminine, as you admit that the idea of masculinity vanishing does not trouble you.


Now, princess, what do you think I mean by masculine and feminine?
I've written no it extensively, but you seem t be too thick to understand.

Homophobe....misogynist..all said already, princess. These are insinuations with no real argument.

Retard...all human activities are based no anxiety. Your presence here is due to an anxiety in relation to my kind.
Necessity is the mother of all invention.

I've gotta jump in here.

So Satyr's not a communist, a capitalist, nor a fascist.

What is he then?

A physiocrat?

A Stirnerite egoist?

Satyr, if I were to murder 15 prostitutes tonight, what do you think should be done with me?

What did you mean when you said to me that Ron Paul and Mussolini were both examples of the same masculine energy?

Those descriptions of "gayness" are pretty uh.... how should I put it? Vivid?

Satyr wrote:

d63tark wrote:

First of all, what do you mean by direct language?

I mean that you and your kind are hypocrites...and most of you have no clue.

You say progress" when you are proposing a regress. You say "positive" when you propose a nihilism.

d63tark wrote:

That endless Germanic crunch you confuse for emotional and ideological impact?

Woman, you are proposing the elimination of sex with the usage of human intervention....now where is this not eugenics?

d63tark wrote:

And what exactly do I see happening? Sounds to me like you’re engaged in a kind Cassandra Complex: you’re so fixed on the fantasy that you know how the world is working that anyone who doesn’t buy into it is only a confirmation of of your conclusions. Paranoids basically suffer from the same dynamic.

Woman, you've found a few ideas and you repeat them endlessly.

Woman, are we not here to share our ideas about how the world works?
Woman, if you wish to "correct" the world how do you propose to do it without first "knowing how it works"?

d63tark wrote:

And as they teach us in writing class: show; don’t just tell. What exactly are these ” usual girlish games and liberal "open minded" tactics”?

Girl, you are woman, through and through.
Your tactics I've already explained many times...but here and now I want you to employ them because they make the case for me.
Your psychology is feminine, as you admit that the idea of masculinity vanishing does not trouble you.


Now, princess, what do you think I mean by masculine and feminine?
I've written no it extensively, but you seem t be too thick to understand.

Homophobe....misogynist..all said already, princess. These are insinuations with no real argument.

Retard...all human activities are based no anxiety. Your presence here is due to an anxiety in relation to my kind.
Necessity is the mother of all invention.

Now we get the poet that muddies a shallow pool and calls it "deep".

eyesinthedark wrote:

I've gotta jump in here.

So Satyr's not a communist, a capitalist, nor a fascist.

What is he then?

A physiocrat?

A Stirnerite egoist?

Satyr, if I were to murder 15 prostitutes tonight, what do you think should be done with me?

What did you mean when you said to me that Ron Paul and Mussolini were both examples of the same masculine energy?

The masculine is a reaction to reality based no a sexual role. The role here is antagonist, or usurper of authority.

When nature is presented as a determining authority the masculine is the drive which wishes to dominate this....funny how nature is presented as a feminine entity.

Ask Abstract...he had a pretty good encapsulation of my positions. Ask him or do a search on his user-name.

d63tark wrote:

Now we get the poet that muddies a shallow pool and calls it "deep".

I sense anxiety in you, girl.
Now all you have to say is innuendo based.

Where the fuck is my thrashing? I was promised that you would make an example of me.

I'm waiting.

Since you're both here... why not a quick preliminary in the chatbox - now?

So isn't eugenics a form of dominating nature? Isn't high civilization, transhumanism, computers, robots, a form of dominating nature?

Is not big government a form of dominating nature, and tampering with food and water, and morality, and cell phones and microwaves?

satyr wrote:

Retard...all human activities are based no anxiety. Your presence here is due to an anxiety in relation to my kind.
Necessity is the mother of all invention.

Oh no!!!!!!! No, it comes out of a confidence that your kind needs to be beaten down….. eliminated as it were… that is if there is to be a world in which everyone has the opportunity to justify their point A to point B.

You keep pointing to me as if I’m just another religion. But you better turn that mirror towards yourself. You had better look at who is truly trying to be the guru here. You had better look at who is arguing for the higher principle.

OK thanks, I'll go look for abstract.

My only agenda is taking a man who thought he was a guru and making him my bitch.

I'm there...the girl need a chaperon.

OK D63, why don't you take one of Satyr's positions, and challenge it. If I am not mistaken, Satyr is against socialism, why don't you try and prove to him that a socialist society will be a healthier one, one more capable of sustaining itself, and promoting happiness, health and the survival of our species.

The National Socialist German Workers' Party - Nazis

Princess has a preconceived notion of what I'm all about. She comes here with a playbook. She's confident,a s her thread on ILP indicates.

Let's play.

eyesinthedark wrote:

Is not big government a form of dominating nature, and tampering with food and water, and morality, and cell phones and microwaves?

Be that as it may, eyes, at what point did everything actually go from being natural to being un-natural? How do you distinguish the 2? Now Satyr is my punching bag here, so I'm not being hostile. I'm just asking: at what point did evolution go "off path"? And at what point in your understanding of the world did evolution suddenly become teological? At what point did it have some kind of fixed purpose?

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

Click on "log-in".