The following are some rants by a feminist against the stomach-predator, the Xt. patriarchal male, but from the pov. of the nature that is feminine, within man himself, I thought her rants are beautiful in the context of Feminization.
The taming of the Feminine within Man... the Beast caged...suppressed, repressed, oppressed...
Quote :
"The Hunt
She has captured his heart. She has overcome him. He cannot tear his eyes away. He is burning with passion. He cannot live without her. He pursues her. She makes him pursue her. The faster she runs, the stronger his desire. He will overtake her. He will make her his own. He will have her. (The boy chases the doe and her yearling for nearly two hours. She keeps running despite her wounds. He pursues her through pastures, over fences, groves of trees, crossing the road, up hills, volleys of rifle shots sounding, until perhaps twenty bullets are embedded in her body.) She has no mercy. She has dressed to excite his desire. She has no scruples. She has painted herself for him. She makes supple movements to entice him. She is without a soul. Beneath her painted face is flesh, are bones. She reveals only part of herself to him. She is wild. She flees whenever he approaches. She is teasing him. (Finally, she is defeated and falls and he sees that half of her head has been blown off, that one leg is gone, her abdomen split from her tail to her head, and her organs hang outside her body. Then four men encircle the fawn and harvest her too.) He is an easy target, he says. He says he is pierced. Love has shot him through, he says. He is familiar mark. Riddled. Stripped to the bone. Conquered, he says. (The boys, fond of hunting hare, search in particular for pregnant females.) He is fighting for his life. He faces annihilation in her, he says. He is losing himself to her, he says. Now, he must conquer her wildness, he says, he must tame her before she drives him wild, he says. (Once catching their prey, they step on her back, breaking it, and they call this "dancing on the hare.") Thus he goes on his knees to her. Thus he wins her over, he tells her he wants her.
He makes her his own. He encloses her. He encircles her. He puts her under lock and key. He protects her. (Approaching the great mammals, the hunters make little sounds which they know will make the elephants form a defensive circle.) And once she is his, he prizes his delight. He feasts his eyes on her. He adorns her luxuriantly. He gives her ivory. He gives her perfume. (The older matriarchs stand to the outside of the circle to protect the calves and younger mothers.) He covers her with the skins of mink, beaver, muskrat, seal, raccoon, otter, ermine, fox, the feathers of ostriches, osprey, egret, ibis. (The hunters then encircle that circle and fire arst into the bodies of the matriarchs. When these older elephants fall, the younger panic, yet unwilling to leave the bodies of their dead mothers, they make easy targets.) And thus he makes her soft. He makes her calm. He makes her grateful to him. He has tamed her, he says. She is content to be his, he says. (In the winter, if a single wolf has leaped over the walls of the city and terrorized the streets, the hunters go out in a band to rid the forest of the whole pack.)
Her voice is now soothing to him. Her eyes no longer blaze, but look on him serenely. When he calls to her, she- gives herself to him. Her ferocity lies under him. (The body of the great whale is strapped with explosives.) Now nothing of the old beast remains in her. (Eastern Bison, extinct 1825; Spectacled Cormorant, extinct 1852; Cape Lion, extinct 1865; Bonin Night Heron, extinct 1889; Barbary Lion, extinct 1922; Great Auk, extinct 1944.) And he can trust her wholly with himself. So he is blazing when he enters her, and she is consumed. (FlOrida Key Deer, vanishing; Wild Indian Buffalo, vanishing; Great Sable Antelope, vanishing.) Because she is his, she offers no resistance. She is a place of rest for him. A place of his making. And when his flesh begins to yield and his skin melts into her, he becomes soft, and he is without fear; he does not lose himself; though something in him gives way, he is not lost in her, because she is his now: he has captured her." [Susan Griffin, Woman and Nature]
Quote :
"In the cage is the lion. She paces with her memories. Her body is a record of her past. As she moves back and forth, one may see it all: the lean frame, the muscular legs, the paw enclosing long sharp claws, the astonishing speed of her response. She was born in this garden. She has never in her life stretched those legs. Never darted farther than twenty yards at a time.
Only once did she use her claws. Only once did she feel them sink inte, Rosh. And it was her keeper's Resh. Her keeper whom she loves, who feeds her, who would never dream of harming her, who protects her. Who in his mercy forgave her mad attack, saying this was in her nature, to be cruel at a whim, to try to kill what she loves. He had come into her cage as he usually did early in the morning to change her water, always at the same time of day, in the same manner, speaking softly to her, careful to make no sudden movement, keeping his distance, when suddenly she sank down, deep down into herself, the way wild animals do before they spring, and then she had risen on all.her strong legs, and swiped him in one long, powerful, graceful movement across the arm.
How lucky for her he survived the blow. The keeper and his friends shot her with a gun to make her sleep. Through her half-open lids she knew they made movements around her. They fed her with tubes. They observed her. They wrote comments in notebooks. And finally they rendered a judgment. She was normal. She was a normal wild beast, whose power is dangerous, whose anger can kill, they had said. Be more careful of her, they advised. Allow her less excitement.
Perhaps let her exercise more. She understood none of this. She understood only the look of fear in her keeper's eyes. And now she paces. Paces as ifshe were angry, as ifshe were on the edge offrenzy. The spectators imagine she is going through the movements of the hunt, or that she is readying her body for survival. But she knows no life outside the garden. She has no notion of anger over what she could have been, or might be. No idea of rebellion.
It is only her body that knows of these things, moving her, daily, hourly, back and forth, back and forth, before the bars of her cage." [Susan Griffin, Woman and Nature]
"The race-car driver is fearless. He speeds past death. In his speed is endless virility. As a lover he amazes 6esh. Women fall. He is like lightning in his gestures. His will pervades all matter. He sees no bound aries. He tolerates no entanglements. Nothing must slow him down. Slowness is his enemy. If he engenders children, he does not remember them. Memory is his enemy. He does not stay in one place. He never spends time. Time is his executor. In his quest for greater and greater speed, he. casts away whatever gives him weight. Weight is his enemy. He seeks weightlessness. He casts away excess. He does not tolerate the superfluous. He wants only the essential. His life is reduced to the essential. At the speed of light, which he longs for, ,he would shed even his body. But still he would have weight, still gravity would deter mine his path, still he would curve toward the earth. He glides as quickly as he can over surfaces. He does not want to touch the earth. Friction is his enemy. The smell of friction is the smell of burning is the smell of death. He cannot afford to think of death. Death is the commander of his enemies. He sheds his knowledge of death; he cannot afford to fear. The air is filled with anxiety. Space is filled with longing. He must traverse space instantly. (He must not give in to longing.) He must take the air by surprise. (He must not give in to terror.)
As his speed increases, so does his power. H e takes everything. Everything yields to him. He never waits. His hands move with infinite speed. What he steals vanishes. He keeps no records. He has no time. No memory. Removes. Motion is all he knows. He does not .know what he moves through. The world is a blur to him. We are·a blur to him.
To the world he says that clear outlines and separate existences are illusion. Only I·exist, he says. The sides of your bodies, he states, wash into nothingness. Every irrelevant detail disappears .from his sight. The line of his movement alone is clear. He worships the straight
line. He abhors change of direction. Change of direction is his enemy. Curves are his enemy. He wants to be more than light, more than an electromagnetic wave, which has weight, which curves. He wants to be pure number, proceeding without the passage of time infinitely forward. This is his dream. Nothing will distract him. He will dream only of the future. He will escape graVity. He will escape his enemies.
In his solitary world of speed nothing enters to disturb this dream.
He is like a sleeper rapidly vanishing. We cannot imagine his destiny. His destiny terrifies us." [Susan Griffin, Woman and Nature]
Reification and the sundering of Mythos from Logos...
Quote :
"He says that through numbers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 we find the ultimate reality of things 8 9 10 11 He says 12 13 14 that quantities are the most rigorous test of things 12 13 He says God created numbers and our minds to understand numbers 14 15 16 He says the final proof 16 17 is always a sum 18 19 20 (Counting. She is counting. The number of seconds in a minute, the number of minutes in an hour, the number of hours) He measures the distance from his land to his neighbor's land. He measures his wealth. He numbers his wives. He numbers his children 21 22 23 24 25 26 He weighs what will be traded (1 Faning Mill $17.25, 1 red-faced cow $13.25, 1 yearling calf $4.25) He calculates the worth of what he has (1 plow $1.60, 1 Wench and child $156.00, 8 fancy chairs $9.25) He assesses the value of what is his. (He measures the gallons of milk she produces. He measures the board feet they yield. He measures the hours she works~ the value of her labor.)
He tells us how hig he is. He measures his height. He demonstrates his strength. He measures what he can lift, what he can conquer. He calculates his feelings. He numbers his armies. He measures our virtue.
He counts the reasons why we fell. (570 through poverty, he says, 647 through loss of their parents or their homes, 29 orphaned with elder brothers and sisters to care for.) He counts the reasons why we fell from grace. (23 widowed women with small children, 123 servant girls seduced and discharged by their masters.) He tells us how strong he is. He counts the sperm in his seminal fluid. He numbers his genes. . . . (She numbers the seconds. She numbers the hours. She numbers
the days.) 27 28 29 30 31
Counting.
46 47 48 He says that through quantities we find ultimate reality. (She is counting the number of days in a week. The number of months in a year.)
He tells us how rich he is. He is counting his possessions and all he might possess. He measures his intelligence. He measures the coal . in the ground. He calculates his life expectancy. He estimates the oil in the sea. He adds up the value of his life. He measures productive acres. He calculates the value of his existence. 49 50 51 52 53
He tells us how long he will live. He measures his neighbor's land. He numbers their children, the bellies of their cows, the sp~s of their horses, the numbers of their bridges, their cities, their hospitals, their armies. He counts their de~d. He counts his dead. He calculates. He calculates the sum. He gives us the final proof
He is counting how much. He is counting how much tragedy is acceptable.
Counting. He counts 153 154 155 156 157" [Griffin, Woman and Nature]
Quote :
"Barely seen, soundlessly surrounding him, with hardly a breath of evidence, all he has burned, all he has mined from the ground, all he cast into the waters, all he has torn apart, comes back to him. He is haunted. Carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, beryllium, arsenic, per oxyacetylnitrate, formaldehyde, do not desert him. Dioxin, DDT, will not let him forget. Lead, mercury, live in his dreams. Strontium sticks in his bones. The equation for oxygen stays in his mind but he cannot breathe what he used to call air. The equation for water stays in his mind, but there is nothing he can drink that will not poison him. What the cells of his own blood should be he has recorded in his books, yet these cells begin to fight among themselves, some cells multiplying, and he is weakened by his own blood.
Who speaks to us in our dreams. Sings in our blood and will not be still there. Every attempt he makes to order this world decreases his space. The dimen sions of his life are filled with ghosts Making us grieve for no apparent .reason. Making us rage for no visible reason. filled with shadows, with tiny reminiscences. Nothing he has ever set his hand upon has forgotten that weight. This fury in us that will not die, who has captured our bodies, who 'claims to have been with us for years. Who is making us see what we have not seen before. He is haunted: all his victims speak in his body. He cannot escape pollution, there is no way for him to be free of these ghosts." [Griffin, Woman and Nature]
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Modern feminism is the backlash of J.-Xt. patriarchy and looking at the body/matter/women as a source of sin and pollution.
Pagan patriarchy was regulation of the feminine, not its shaming.
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Modern feminism is the backlash of J.-Xt. patriarchy and looking at the body/matter/women as a source of sin and pollution.
Pagan patriarchy was regulation of the feminine, not its shaming.
I support something like a radical Islamic patriarchy.
As much as I hate religion I have to tip my hat off to the radical Muslims on one thing.
When their women get out of line they either stone them to death or give their faces an acid bath.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Modern feminism is the backlash of J.-Xt. patriarchy and looking at the body/matter/women as a source of sin and pollution.
Pagan patriarchy was regulation of the feminine, not its shaming.
I support something like a radical Islamic patriarchy.
As much as I hate religion I have to tip my hat off to the radical Muslims on one thing.
When their women get out of line they either stone them to death or give their faces an acid bath.
It is only a facade in public for general morale.
Having lived there I can tell you, the norm is, men are wimps at home, and inside, the woman rules.
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Modern feminism is the backlash of J.-Xt. patriarchy and looking at the body/matter/women as a source of sin and pollution.
Pagan patriarchy was regulation of the feminine, not its shaming.
I support something like a radical Islamic patriarchy.
As much as I hate religion I have to tip my hat off to the radical Muslims on one thing.
When their women get out of line they either stone them to death or give their faces an acid bath.
It is only a facade in public for general morale.
Having lived there I can tell you, the norm is, men are wimps at home, and inside, the woman rules.
Not under my roof. I keep the leather whip in the bedroom closet.
Have to keep the bitches in line.....
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Modern feminism is the backlash of J.-Xt. patriarchy and looking at the body/matter/women as a source of sin and pollution.
Pagan patriarchy was regulation of the feminine, not its shaming.
I support something like a radical Islamic patriarchy.
As much as I hate religion I have to tip my hat off to the radical Muslims on one thing.
When their women get out of line they either stone them to death or give their faces an acid bath.
It is only a facade in public for general morale.
Having lived there I can tell you, the norm is, men are wimps at home, and inside, the woman rules.
Not under my roof. I keep the leather whip in the bedroom closet.
Have to keep the bitches in line.....
Because you can't win them with being who you are,
and you can't because you have no self-trust with who you are.
Appreciation of beauty is supposedly depreciating them, and their value. What are these creatures going to take away when they die?
A momentary pleasure one graced another with?
Someone smiled?
Someone felt life is colourful?
Taking this away made them feel sovereign?
Pathetic.
What is that life anyway when you do not Want to make another happy... So weary... they are as good as dead. And they can stuff their Independence in their coffins.
What we need is the reintroduction of patriarchy.
Women need to know where their place is and if they can't learn where that place is men should enforce them into that position.
Women's place is in the submission to men concerning society as a whole.
If men have to collectively I suggest utilizing fear, intimidation, and physical beatings to get all of this started.
If all else fails public executions of women for display to set the precedent in example.
Modern feminism is the backlash of J.-Xt. patriarchy and looking at the body/matter/women as a source of sin and pollution.
Pagan patriarchy was regulation of the feminine, not its shaming.
I support something like a radical Islamic patriarchy.
As much as I hate religion I have to tip my hat off to the radical Muslims on one thing.
When their women get out of line they either stone them to death or give their faces an acid bath.
It is only a facade in public for general morale.
Having lived there I can tell you, the norm is, men are wimps at home, and inside, the woman rules.
Not under my roof. I keep the leather whip in the bedroom closet.
Have to keep the bitches in line.....
Because you can't win them with being who you are,
and you can't because you have no self-trust with who you are.
This is the age of pretenses and false appearances.
Don't pretend that you and Satyr are immune.
I see right through you both.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37265 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Let's begin by you explaining how you will not get raped - keeping to the thread's topic, which you shit all over, like turd desperate for attention - in your New age scenario.
Let's begin by you explaining how you will not get raped - keeping to the thread's topic, which you shit all over, like turd desperate for attention - in your New age scenario.
Easy, I kill anybody or anything that opposes me.
You're either with me or against me.
Your turn now.
Tell me how the noble elites are going to ascend civilization.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Come with a pain on your shoulders, come with a hundred pain in your hair, come with a thousand pain between your breasts and your feet, come like a river full of drowned pain which flows down to the wild sea, to the eternal surf, to Time!
Bring them all to where I am waiting for you; we shall always be alone, we shall always be you and I alone on earth, to start our life!" [Paraphrasing Neruda]
That is A kind of loving...
It is Fierce, to me.
The malaise of "improvement" is part of the feature of a stomach-predator of either gender.
The insistence reflected in the hedonistic mentality of a "In matters where she is superior, it would be foolish of him to not listen." is an extension of that same old Xt. pettiness of "salvation" capital. The weary, spiritually impoverished mind technopolized is enslaved to quantity-thinking in terms of maximizing pleasure and doing away with pain, with suffering, with errors, with innocence, with the freedom to COMMIT THEIR OWN MISTAKES, - all of which could prove to be as fatal as they are fruitful. The Xt. lowlife and the miserable hedonist would surrender to mathematics than majesty of a spirit, as long as the logic of a 'no pain, no gain' can be trumped with over-adaptation as an ends in itself. The safety of carefulness, surviving at any costs without suffering danger, disadvantage, costly mistakes and losses is the celebrated ideal of the spineless Xt.
Quote :
"Compassion is the most agreeable feeling for those who have little pride and no prospect of great conquests; for them, easy prey - and that is what those who suffer are - is something enchanting. Compassion is praised as the virtue of prostitutes." [N., JW, 13]
Quote :
"Whenever we are noticed to be suffering, our suffering is superficially construed; it is the essence of the feeling of compassion that it strips the suffering of what is truly personal: our 'benefactors' diminish our worth and our will more than our enemies do. In most cases of beneficence toward those in distress there is something offensive in the intellectual frivolity with which the one who feels compassion plays the role of fate: he knows nothing of the whole inner sequence and interconnection that spells misfortune for me or for you! The entire economy of my soul and the balance effected by 'misfortune' , the breaking open of new springs and needs, the healing of old wounds, the shedding of entire periods of the past - all such things that can be involved in misfortune do not concern the dear compassionate one: they want to help and have no thought that there is a personal necessity of misfortune; that terrors, deprivations, impoverishments, midnight, adventures, risks, and blunders are as necessary for me and you as their opposites; indeed, to express myself mystically, that the path to one's own heaven always leads through the voluptuousness of one's own hell. No, they know nothing of that: the 'religion of compassion' (or 'the heart') commands them to help, and they believe they have helped best when they have helped most quickly! Should you adherents to this religion really have the same attitude towards yourselves that you havetowards your fellow men; should you refuse to let your suffering lie on you even for an hour and instead constantly prevent all possible misfortune ahead of time; should you experience suffering and displeasure as evil, hateful, deserving of annihilation, as a defect of existence, then you have besides your religion of pity also another religion in your hearts; and the latter is perhaps the mother of the former - the religion of snug cosiness. Oh, how little do you know of the happiness of man, you comfortable and good-natured ones! For happiness and misfortune (Gluck und Ungluck) are two siblings and twins who either grow up together or - as with you - remain small together!" [N., JW, 338]
Quote :
"As regards the distress of the soul, however, I look at each person today to see whether he knows it through experience or description; whether he still considers it necessary to fake this knowledge, say, as a sign of refined cultivation, or whether at the bottom of his soul he no longer believes in great pains of the soul and reacts to its mention in much the same way as to the mention of great bodily sufferings, which make him think of his toothaches and stomachaches. But that is how most people seem to me to be these days. The general inexperience with both sorts of pain and the relative rarity of the sight of suffering individuals have an important consequence: pain is hated much more now than formerly; one speaks much worse of it; indeed, one can hardly endure the presence of pain as a thought and makes it a matter of conscience and a reproach against the whole of existence. The emergence of pessimistic philosophers is in no way the sign of great, terrible states of distress; rather, these question marks about the value of all life are made in times when the refinement and ease of existence make even the inevitable mosquito bites of the soul and the body seem much too bloody and malicious, and the poverty of real experiences of pain makes one tend to consider painful general ideas as already suffering of the highest rank." [N., JW, 48]
Quote :
"If one considers how an overall philosophical justification of one's way of living and thinking affects each individual namely, like a sun, warming, blessing, impregnating, shining especially for him; how it makes him independent of praise and blame, selfsufficient, rich, generous with happiness and good will; how it incessantly turns evil into good, brings all forces to bloom and ripen and keeps the petty, great weed of melancholy and moroseness from coming up at all - one exclaims longingly, in the end: Oh, how I wish that many such new suns would yet be created! Even the evil man, the unhappy man, and the exceptional man should have their philosophy, their good right, their sunshine! Pity for them is not what is needed! We have to unlearn this arrogant notion, however long humanity has spent learning and practising it - we do not need to present them with confessors, conjurers of souls, and forgivers of sins; rather, a new justice is needed! And a new motto! And new philosophers! The moral earth, too, is round! The moral earth, too, has its antipodes! The antipodes, too, have their right to exist!" [N., JW, 289]
The Arrogance of the "Improvers of Mankind" always presents its stomach-predation as grass-roots 'humility', of being 'close to the earth', 'mutual respect', while it robs the others and of life in general of its innocence-of-becoming.
From here on, its the same logic that spills out in social and evolutionary issues.
From the arrogant mentality which sounds humble in its "everyone has some good qualities in them and some bad" - the sheer Violence of this "pleasantness" translates into forced civility and "respect", and the levelling of all racial achievements in base relativism it calls 'objectvity' and 'fairness'.
The inability to affirm something as a Whole, makes it Split the other first into good parts and bad parts and then the utilitarianism condescends to relativize the bad for the Pleasure and Usefulness the good parts provide.
In other words, every race is respectable. Every race has it usefulness. Every usefulness must be adapted to Survive-At-All-Costs. Liveliness is substituted for Eternal Life.
The reification of life like an egyptian mummy - existing itself becoming the sole ends in itself, displaces all majesty of liveliness, all fruitful living that bring with them the most painful states of living, displaces all Wholesomely-objective rank-values of superior/inferior in utilitarian terms of prosaic good and bad parts.
As I've already pointed this out somewhere else, slave morality is not mal-adaptive, but even extra-adaptive. Slave-morality means, "here I do not have to fight"; it is quick to dissimulate, approximate, and identify with what comes easy; it is passive reactive. Its an immorality of comfort, and utility. Its so well-adapted, that survival itself becomes the ends, managing to thrive "anywhere" "anyhow". Its extra-adaptive instinct makes it accuse the world, to redeem it, and redeems it to justify the world... meaning rather than rise up, compete, where ranks will fall into place, it creates opposites and divorces of things and makes extreme absolutes, so that it can remain beyond any comparison, without falling into any rank relation. It refuses to meet on an even plain, for then, its self will stick out and show for what and where it is.
What I consider slavish is extra-adaptability, in the sense, it wants to be at home anywhere and everywhere. Hence the preaching of love, co-operation, nurture, respect, civility.
To be at-home Everywhere is what is regarded by it as freedom. The slave type is averse to change; so it is averse to form, to structure, to boundaries. It is over-adaptive from the effacement of its ego as reflected in its definition of "objectivity", while the strong are adaptive from the fitness of their ego.
"In matters where she is superior, it would be foolish of him to not listen." is not a Traditionalism of a Sovereign, but a piece of Plebianism.
There is a thread on ILP in the philosophy section titled " In tribute to the Beast ". The most recent entry in that thread has an immense amount of relevance to this thread here at KTS.
There's a handful of things I disagree with on that, but I'll focus on the subject at hand.
I am not speaking from the woman's point of view, of how to react when her wisdom is wasted on someone, whether to accept that pain or not.
From the man's perspective, one who is unable to identify superiority and benefit from its influence, is a fool.
A "noble hunter" or whatever that may be in your lovely theory, would necessarily possess the skill of valuing his woman's wisdom/superiority. A wise woman is a man's best council. If he squanders it, he is a fool.
Degrees, etc.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Come with a pain on your shoulders, come with a hundred pain in your hair, come with a thousand pain between your breasts and your feet, come like a river full of drowned pain which flows down to the wild sea, to the eternal surf, to Time!
Bring them all to where I am waiting for you; we shall always be alone, we shall always be you and I alone on earth, to start our life!" [Paraphrasing Neruda]
That is A kind of loving...
It is Fierce, to me.
The malaise of "improvement" is part of the feature of a stomach-predator of either gender.
The insistence reflected in the hedonistic mentality of a "In matters where she is superior, it would be foolish of him to not listen." is an extension of that same old Xt. pettiness of "salvation" capital. The weary, spiritually impoverished mind technopolized is enslaved to quantity-thinking in terms of maximizing pleasure and doing away with pain, with suffering, with errors, with innocence, with the freedom to COMMIT THEIR OWN MISTAKES, - all of which could prove to be as fatal as they are fruitful. The Xt. lowlife and the miserable hedonist would surrender to mathematics than majesty of a spirit, as long as the logic of a 'no pain, no gain' can be trumped with over-adaptation as an ends in itself. The safety of carefulness, surviving at any costs without suffering danger, disadvantage, costly mistakes and losses is the celebrated ideal of the spineless Xt.
Quote :
"Compassion is the most agreeable feeling for those who have little pride and no prospect of great conquests; for them, easy prey - and that is what those who suffer are - is something enchanting. Compassion is praised as the virtue of prostitutes." [N., JW, 13]
Quote :
"Whenever we are noticed to be suffering, our suffering is superficially construed; it is the essence of the feeling of compassion that it strips the suffering of what is truly personal: our 'benefactors' diminish our worth and our will more than our enemies do. In most cases of beneficence toward those in distress there is something offensive in the intellectual frivolity with which the one who feels compassion plays the role of fate: he knows nothing of the whole inner sequence and interconnection that spells misfortune for me or for you! The entire economy of my soul and the balance effected by 'misfortune' , the breaking open of new springs and needs, the healing of old wounds, the shedding of entire periods of the past - all such things that can be involved in misfortune do not concern the dear compassionate one: they want to help and have no thought that there is a personal necessity of misfortune; that terrors, deprivations, impoverishments, midnight, adventures, risks, and blunders are as necessary for me and you as their opposites; indeed, to express myself mystically, that the path to one's own heaven always leads through the voluptuousness of one's own hell. No, they know nothing of that: the 'religion of compassion' (or 'the heart') commands them to help, and they believe they have helped best when they have helped most quickly! Should you adherents to this religion really have the same attitude towards yourselves that you havetowards your fellow men; should you refuse to let your suffering lie on you even for an hour and instead constantly prevent all possible misfortune ahead of time; should you experience suffering and displeasure as evil, hateful, deserving of annihilation, as a defect of existence, then you have besides your religion of pity also another religion in your hearts; and the latter is perhaps the mother of the former - the religion of snug cosiness. Oh, how little do you know of the happiness of man, you comfortable and good-natured ones! For happiness and misfortune (Gluck und Ungluck) are two siblings and twins who either grow up together or - as with you - remain small together!" [N., JW, 338]
Quote :
"As regards the distress of the soul, however, I look at each person today to see whether he knows it through experience or description; whether he still considers it necessary to fake this knowledge, say, as a sign of refined cultivation, or whether at the bottom of his soul he no longer believes in great pains of the soul and reacts to its mention in much the same way as to the mention of great bodily sufferings, which make him think of his toothaches and stomachaches. But that is how most people seem to me to be these days. The general inexperience with both sorts of pain and the relative rarity of the sight of suffering individuals have an important consequence: pain is hated much more now than formerly; one speaks much worse of it; indeed, one can hardly endure the presence of pain as a thought and makes it a matter of conscience and a reproach against the whole of existence. The emergence of pessimistic philosophers is in no way the sign of great, terrible states of distress; rather, these question marks about the value of all life are made in times when the refinement and ease of existence make even the inevitable mosquito bites of the soul and the body seem much too bloody and malicious, and the poverty of real experiences of pain makes one tend to consider painful general ideas as already suffering of the highest rank." [N., JW, 48]
Quote :
"If one considers how an overall philosophical justification of one's way of living and thinking affects each individual namely, like a sun, warming, blessing, impregnating, shining especially for him; how it makes him independent of praise and blame, selfsufficient, rich, generous with happiness and good will; how it incessantly turns evil into good, brings all forces to bloom and ripen and keeps the petty, great weed of melancholy and moroseness from coming up at all - one exclaims longingly, in the end: Oh, how I wish that many such new suns would yet be created! Even the evil man, the unhappy man, and the exceptional man should have their philosophy, their good right, their sunshine! Pity for them is not what is needed! We have to unlearn this arrogant notion, however long humanity has spent learning and practising it - we do not need to present them with confessors, conjurers of souls, and forgivers of sins; rather, a new justice is needed! And a new motto! And new philosophers! The moral earth, too, is round! The moral earth, too, has its antipodes! The antipodes, too, have their right to exist!" [N., JW, 289]
The Arrogance of the "Improvers of Mankind" always presents its stomach-predation as grass-roots 'humility', of being 'close to the earth', 'mutual respect', while it robs the others and of life in general of its innocence-of-becoming.
From here on, its the same logic that spills out in social and evolutionary issues.
From the arrogant mentality which sounds humble in its "everyone has some good qualities in them and some bad" - the sheer Violence of this "pleasantness" translates into forced civility and "respect", and the levelling of all racial achievements in base relativism it calls 'objectvity' and 'fairness'.
The inability to affirm something as a Whole, makes it Split the other first into good parts and bad parts and then the utilitarianism condescends to relativize the bad for the Pleasure and Usefulness the good parts provide.
In other words, every race is respectable. Every race has it usefulness. Every usefulness must be adapted to Survive-At-All-Costs. Liveliness is substituted for Eternal Life.
The reification of life like an egyptian mummy - existing itself becoming the sole ends in itself, displaces all majesty of liveliness, all fruitful living that bring with them the most painful states of living, displaces all Wholesomely-objective rank-values of superior/inferior in utilitarian terms of prosaic good and bad parts.
As I've already pointed this out somewhere else, slave morality is not mal-adaptive, but even extra-adaptive. Slave-morality means, "here I do not have to fight"; it is quick to dissimulate, approximate, and identify with what comes easy; it is passive reactive. Its an immorality of comfort, and utility. Its so well-adapted, that survival itself becomes the ends, managing to thrive "anywhere" "anyhow". Its extra-adaptive instinct makes it accuse the world, to redeem it, and redeems it to justify the world... meaning rather than rise up, compete, where ranks will fall into place, it creates opposites and divorces of things and makes extreme absolutes, so that it can remain beyond any comparison, without falling into any rank relation. It refuses to meet on an even plain, for then, its self will stick out and show for what and where it is.
What I consider slavish is extra-adaptability, in the sense, it wants to be at home anywhere and everywhere. Hence the preaching of love, co-operation, nurture, respect, civility.
To be at-home Everywhere is what is regarded by it as freedom. The slave type is averse to change; so it is averse to form, to structure, to boundaries. It is over-adaptive from the effacement of its ego as reflected in its definition of "objectivity", while the strong are adaptive from the fitness of their ego.
"In matters where she is superior, it would be foolish of him to not listen." is not a Traditionalism of a Sovereign, but a piece of Plebianism.
Continuing.
In a neat anticaptory passage in GM, Nietzsche remarks,
Quote :
"And just as the common people separates lightning from its flash and takes the latter to be a deed, something performed by a subject, which is called lightning, popular morality separates strength from the manifestations of strength, as though there were an indifferent substra tum behind the strong person which had thefreedom to manifest strength or not. But there is no such substratum; there is no 'being' behind the deed, its effect and what becomes of it; 'the doer' is invented as an after thought, - the doing is everything.
Basically, the common people double a deed; when they see lightning, they make a doing-a-deed out of it: they posit the same event, first as cause and then as its effect. The scientists do no better when they say 'force moves, force causes' and such like, - all our science, in spite of its coolness and freedom from emotion, still stands exposed to the seduction of language and has not rid itself of the changelings foisted upon it, the 'subjects': no wonder, then, if the entrenched, secretly smouldering emotions of revenge and hatred put this belief to their own use and, in fact, do not defend any belief more passionately than that the strong are free to be weak, and the birds of prey are free to be lambs: - in this way, they gain the right to make the birds of prey responsible for being birds of prey . . .
When the oppressed, the downtrodden, the violated say to each other with the vindictive cunning of powerlessness: 'Let us be different from evil people, let us be good! And a good person is anyone who does not rape, does not harm anyone, who does not attack, does not retaliate, who leaves the taking of revenge to God, who keeps hidden as we do, avoids all evil and asks little from life in general, like us who are patient, humble and upright' - this means, if heard coolly and impartially, nothing more than: 'We weak people are just weak; it is good to do nothing for which we are not strong enough' - but this grim state of affairs, this cleverness of the lowest rank which even insects possess (which play dead, in order not to 'do too much' when in great danger), has, thanks to the counterfeiting and self deception of powerlessness, clothed itself in the finery of self-denying, quiet, patient virtue, as though the weakness of the weak were itself - I mean its essence, its effect, its whole unique, unavoidable, irredeemable reality - a voluntary achievement, something wanted, chosen, a deed, an accomplishment.
This type of man needs to believe in an unbiased 'subject' with freedom of choice, because he has an instinct of self-preservation and self-affirmation in which every lie is sanctified. The reason the subject (or, as we more colloquially say, the soul) has been, until now, the best doctrine on earth, is perhaps because it facilitated that sublime self deception whereby the majority of the dying, the weak and the oppressed of every kind could construe weakness itself as freedom, and their particular mode of existence as an accomplishment." [GM, 1.13]
The typical J.-Xt. moralities will be quick to hunt for a scapegoat to dump their Blame for everything that occurs to carry on their vocation of being the "Improvers of Mankind", as if the strong were somehow free-to-do-so,, and dangled as a useful tool for demonizing them, in order to justify and feel good about its own weariness.
What is underlined in blue above, then becomes easy fodder to such slave-moralists, when they can simply isolate comments without studying the thinker as a whole, and convolute him as if he were exhorting rape there, than exposing the moralizing tendency of the weak. Re-posting what I remarked elsewhere,
Nietzsche said,
Quote :
"When one speaks of humanity, underlying this idea is the belief that it is humanity that separates and distinguishes human beings from nature. But, there is, in reality, no such distinction: the "natural" qualities and those properly called "human" grow inseparably. Human beings in their highest and noblest capacities are wholly nature and bear within themselves its uncanny dual character. Those abilities that are thought to be terrifying and inhuman are perhaps even the fruitful soil from which alone all humanity can grow in emotions, deeds, and works."
But he also continued,
Quote :
"According to nature you want to live? O you noble Stoics, what deceptive words these are! Imagine a being like nature, wasteful beyond measure, indifferent beyond measure, without purposes and consideration, without mercy and justice, fertile and desolate and uncertain at the same time; imagine indifference itself as a power-how could you live according to this indifference? Living-is that not precisely wanting to be other than this nature? [N., BGE, 9]
and,
Quote :
"We have learned differently. We have become more modest in every way. We no longer derive the human being from "the spirit" or "the deity"; we have placed him back among the animals. We consider him the strongest animal because he is the most cunning: his spirituality is a consequence of this. On the other hand, we oppose the vanity that would raise its head again here too-as if the human being had been the great hidden purpose of the evolution of animals. The human being is by no means the crown of creation: every living being stands beside him on the same level of perfection. And even this is saying too much: relatively speaking, the human being is the most bungled of all the animals, the sickliest, and not one has strayed more dangerously from its instincts. But for all that, he is of course the most interesting." [N., AC 14; cf. GM Ill]
In other words, Nietzsche connected the Beast within the human with its intelligent and cunning capacity... and the 'Blond Barbarian' precisely with the non-indifference and the non-natural - for, if one were as indifferent as nature, and didn't discriminate at all, one would be dead;
Quote :
"The barbarian in each of us is affirmed; also the wild beast. Precisely for that reason philosophers have a future." [WTP, 127]
Without nuances, the decadent relativist conFuses the barbarism of the weak with the barbarism of the strong, that N. only all too well had out-anticipated:
Quote :
"The suspicion arose that all moderation was weakness, or a sign of growing old and weary (-thus La Rochefoucauld suspected that "virtue" was a pretty word among those who could no longer take any pleasure in vice). Moderation itself was represented as a matter of severity, self-conquest, asceticism, as a fight with the devil, etc. The natural delight of aesthetic natures in measure, the enjoyment of the beauty of measure, was overlooked or denied, because one desired an anti-eudaemonistic morality.
The faith in the pleasure of moderation-that pleasure of the rider on a fiery steed!-has been lacking hitherto.- The mediocrity of weaker natures has been confused with the moderation of the strong!
In summa: the best things have been slandered because the weak or the immoderate swine have cast a bad light on themand the best men have remained hidden-and have often misunderstood themselves." [WTP, 870]
He clearly saw the danger in such confusion;
Quote :
"Your equity, you higher natures, impels you toward suffrage universel, etc.; your "humanity," toward mildness confronted with crime and stupidity. In the long run you thns make stupidity and the unscrupulous victorious: comfort and stupidity-the mean.
Externally: age of tremendous wars, upheavals, explosions.
Internally: ever greater weakness of man, events as excitants. The Parisian as the European extreme. Consequences: (l) barbarians (at first, of course, below the form of culture so far [e.g., Duhring]; (2) sovereign individuals (where masses of barbarian force are crossed with a lack of all restraint regarding whatever has been). Age of the greatest stupidity, brutality, and the masses, and of the highest individuals." [WTP, 130]
and distinguished the J.-Xt. Taming of the Beast, from the Noble Sovereign's Breeding of the Beast:
Quote :
"There is no worse confusion than the confusion of breeding with taming: . . . Breeding as I understand it, is a means of storing up the tremendous forces of mankind so that the generations can build upon the work of their forefathers-not only outwardly, but inwardly, organically growing out of them and becoming something stronger." [N., WTP, 398]
And,
Quote :
New barbarians - { cynics, experimenters, conquerors } - union of spiritual superiority with well-being and an excess of strength.
I point to something new: certainly for such a democratic type there exists the danger of the barbarian, but one has looked for it only in the depths. There exists also another type of barbarian, who comes from the heights: a species of conquering and ruling natures in search of material to mold. Prometheus was this kind of barbarian." [WTP, 899, 900]
The Blond Barbarian is a Breeding and Storing Up of the Beast within and its grand organization, whereas the Xt. Brute Barbarian is a letting go, and letting loose, a frivolity of the beast within. The Blond Barbarian is self-disciplined, the Xt. Barbarian seeks to be tamed, and as Satyr reminded here of Sartre's remark,, the slave is in terror of his own freedom and seeks stronger chains. The Xt. nihilist and the Brute Barbarian destroys indiscriminately in order to be destroyed:
Quote :
"Extreme positions are not succeeded by moderate ones but by extreme positions of the opposite kind. Thus the belief in the absolute immorality of nature, in aim- and meaninglessness, is the psychologically necessary affect once the belief in God and an essentially moral order becomes untenable. Nihilism appears at that point, not that the displeasure at existence has become greater than before but because one has come to mistrust any "meaning" in suffering, indeed in existence. One interpretation has collapsed; but because it was considered the interpretation it now seems as if there were no meaning at all in existence, as if everything were in vain.
Morality guarded the underprivileged against nihilism by assigning to each an infinite value, a metaphysical value, and by placing each in an order that did not agree with the worldly order of rank and power: it taught resignation, meekness, etc. Supposing that the faith in this morality would perish, then the underprivileged would no longer have their comfort - and they would perish .
This perishing takes the form of self-destruction-the instinctive selection of that which must destroy. Symptoms of this self-destruction of the underprivileged: self-vivisection, poisoning, intoxication, romanticism, above all the instinctive need for actions that turn the powerful into mortal enemies (as it were, one breeds one's own hangmen); the will to destruction as the will of a still deeper instinct, the instinct of self-destruction, the will for nothingness.
Nihilism as a symptom that the underprivileged have no comfort left; that they destroy in order to be destroyed; that without morality they no longer have any reason to "resign themselves" -that they place themselves on the plain of the opposite principle and also want power by compelling the powerful to become their hangmen. This is the European form of Buddhism-doing No after all existence has lost its "meaning." [WTP, 55]
Quote :
"What means one has to employ with rude peoples, and that "barbarous" means are not arbitrary and capricious, becomes palpable in practice as soon as one is placed, with all one's European pampering, in the necessity of keeping control over barbarians, in the Congo or elsewhere." [WTP, 922]
Quote :
"Struggling "civilization" (taming) needs every kind of irons and torture to maintain itself against terribleness and beast-of-prey natures.
Here a confusion is quite natural, although its influence has been fatal: that which men of power and will are able to demand of themselves also provides a measure of that which they may permit themselves. Such natures are the antithesis of the vicious and unbridled: although they may on occasion do things that would convict a lesser man of vice and immoderation.
Even now one believes one must disapprove of a Cesare Borgia; that is simply laughable. The church has excommunicated German emperors on account of their vices: as if a monk or priest had any right to join in a discussion about what a Frederick II may demand of himself. A Don Juan is sent to hell: that is very naive. Has it been noticed that in heaven all interesting men are missing? - Just a hint to the girls as to where they can best find their salvation. If one reflects with some consistency, and moreover with a deepened insight into what a "great man" is, no doubt remains that the church sends all "great men" to hell-it fights against all "greatness of man." [WTP, 871]
Quote :
"The quantity of the aim in its effect on the perspective of evaluation: the great criminal and the small one. The quantity of the aim that is wanted is also decisive for him who wills whether he respects himself or feels dejected and miserable.-
Then the degree of spirituality in the means in its effect on the perspective of evaluation. How different the philosophical innovator, experimenter and man of violence appears from the robber, barbarian and adventurer! - Appearance of "disinterestedness."
Finally, noble manners, bearing, courage, self-confidence how they alter the valuation of that which is attained in this way!" [WTP, 779]
Quote :
Christian barbarism... destroyed the instinct for a grand organization of society..." [WTP, 90]
The Blond Beast of the many eyes is not the same as the Blind Beast.
In the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the author points out how Blind Beasts have always appropriated Nietzsche to Justify their Brute Barbarism:
"The abandoned Audi with Vermont plates was located at a truck stop along Interstate 84 in Sturbridge, Massachusetts. The police were on the right track, and on the following day, the boys were found. On February 19, a police officer overheard a trucker ask over a CB radio whether anyone could take two boys to California. The trooper radioed back that he could, asking the driver to drop them off at a specific place, and he soon met the boys there. They had been caught an hour short of Indianapolis at another truck stop — a far cry from their ultimate destination of Australia. Tulloch, an adult, was arraigned on the murder charges. On February 24, Parker was returned to New Hampshire, where he faced a hearing in juvenile court and the likelihood of being waived to an adult court. (He was.)
In November, Tulloch pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. Parker made a plea deal to tell everything and to testify against Tulloch in exchange for a second-degree murder conviction. It was Tulloch who had instigated the plan, he said. Parker told of their attempts to kill and rob several other people before they succeeded with the Zantops, and explained that they'd pretended to be students doing a survey. Having won their way inside, they proceeded to stab the couple to death. Supposedly, it was the "perfect murder," because they had no connection to the victims, but they'd been careless. Jim said he'd had second thoughts before they began, and had later regretted the act. Tulloch had a lot of influence over him, and on his own he wasn't so sure of their ideas.
Tulloch also accepted a deal when his insanity assessment fell apart. He pled guilty to two counts of first-degree murder and to one count of murder conspiracy and received a life sentence without parole. Lehr & Zuckoff conclude that he is a psychopathic individual, without remorse, leading the more vulnerable Parker into his callous plan.
In fact, these journalists uncovered his past and found that his plan to acquire $10,000 for starting a new life by murder and theft was based in his belief in his own superiority. He'd aspired to become president of the U.S. by age 35 and then to rule the world. Tulloch was a reader of Nietzsche, and was especially impressed with the idea that, without God, there were no absolute moral values. A powerful individual could decide what was right — including murder — and do it. Tulloch told one teacher he thought he had a "divine intellect," but while he was bright, he was not particularly productive. Nevertheless, he and Parker were convinced they were superior beings and the people around them were worthless and stupid. Like Raskolnikov, it turns out they were wrong.
But just what did Nietzsche actually say?"
"But just what did N. actually say?"... it doesn't matter.
Left to the "Improvers of Mankind", no doubt N. or I, or whoever else will be blamed for the craziness of the other. The Freedom to Make their Own Mistakes is a Privilege of those Able to take Accountability for their actions. A Sovereign is Able to Permit himself his mistakes and does not behave like a victim. When cowards roam around refusing and unable to take accountability for their own mistakes,, let us go on a witch-hunt and find someone to be Made Responsible for those cripples who cannot.
Left to the "Improvers of Mankind", some Blind Beast may prowl around killing others, and Thomas Harris or Fuller, the creators of Hannibal, would be Made Responsible for how the Brute Barbarian interprets them.
By this logic, all artistic license should be revoked.
By this logic, all art and artists and imagination and freedom of spirit would Have to cater only to public interests, their well-being, and their safety. Let us all regress and never raise the bar of evolution in fear of how some brute may interpret what he's not initiated for. This is what Political Correctness and the culture of victims and enforced civility is. Art and Philosophy will have to be moderated when the times you live in are populated by beasts who are immoderate. As mentioned in the above quote, but this is exactly what is impossible. Civilization means, the Blond and the Blind Beast grow simultaneously in parallel. The same conditions responsible for the emergence of one, will also inevitably produce the other. And moral laws meant to Tame the Brute end up castrating the Blond, and mankind remains dangerously self-stunted.
A Noble Hunter was once a beating heart. Spirit and soul in soliloquoy. In the Blue Valentine, we see what starts out as romance, as love, as passion, ends up icicled and butchered into a comfortable utilitarianism, a contract of convenient memory management of agreeing to share the same narrative. The 'Improvers of Mankind' and hedonistic stomach-predators cannot help but strait-jacket him into their moralistic good and evil, and reify him till he is left like a "useful resource".
Absent fathers are not a Physiological issue alone on the Feminization of mankind, but strait-jacketed fathers also have Subtle effects on the psychological upbringing of children and their subconscious psyche. Crazies and blind brutes are not only the after-effects of fathers no more,,, but of those fathers also, whose soul contracted and de-clawed and unforgiven for being nature's own innocent design.
The stomach predation of the beastly takes many faces...
It goes from "'You are so talented, You can Improve' well-meaningness" to you "Good-for-nothing, are you a Man?"...
And how easy to then sing, 'we always hurt the ones we love'...
Awww, those poor poor strong people. You give him a little bird in his hand and the option to crush or let go... but in reality there is no choice... he must crush because... he... can't... help... himself...
Black Panther
Gender : Posts : 164 Join date : 2013-11-26 Location : on your mind
The aim of feminism is including the masculine and feminine properties into the woman. So that she never has to be afraid or give up control. Because woman is the weak gender this control can only be sustained by a brutal tyranny. The tyranny must strike at the heart of mans vulnerability. Mans primordial vulnerability is his care, his will to protect. This is mans heart and at this heart the poisonous arrow of feminism was fired.
Both properties are contained within both man and woman. Man's primordial vulnerability is is vanity, and every woman, whether in awareness of that fact or not, is an expert at exploiting it. Feminists are the ones who stopped caring.
Black Panther
Gender : Posts : 164 Join date : 2013-11-26 Location : on your mind
You didn't understand what I said at least but you have your opinion. What I was saying is that mans primordial weakness is his care. Every man is weak when he has a child or a woman as he must protect them, and this is his weakness. The feminists made strategic use of this weakness and exploited man and turned him inside out, now his heart is on his sleeve and he is weak in direct reactions and inferior to nature wild at first glance. But strength is now his hidden heart and it will do some monstrous deeds to woman as vengeance and to turn the tables straight because in the end woman will beg to be subjected again.
Black Panther
Gender : Posts : 164 Join date : 2013-11-26 Location : on your mind
She will beg to be part of the kingdom of the new man. Because the men she has bred this feminist politician are worth nothing besides their inner rage and this rage compels them into brotherhood and from this the new wars will be fought and thousand years of fighting dark hearts and only fire will prevail and woman will forget soon enough that she was once ready to leave the house.
Black Panther
Gender : Posts : 164 Join date : 2013-11-26 Location : on your mind
Hoe does one defend against stomach predation? For the man, hardness and mockery. The woman must be willing to be mocked. Only ugly women don't want to be mocked.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Resistance appears as indifference and indifference as strength. In the Apollonian world, the animal passion is experienced as overwhelming by the god who guards borders, and it is seen as blind, chaotic, unchained; Resistance to this force by Eluding it, running away from it comes to imply strength. The nude nymph who runs away like nature is most attractive and clever. In the Apollonian, a strong dionysos gives him the vigour for perseverance in the chase.
In the Dionysian world, the animal passion is experienced as intelligent and nature is seen as hypersensitive. Not the guarding of borders and resistance, but the Empathy for balancing contradictions in confrontation and submission, not eluding, appears attractive. The maenad merged in her lord's leopard skin, who holds the throng, bringing together nature is most attractive and cunning. In the Dionysian, a strong apollo gives him the clarity for organzing multiple contradictions.
-
In Apollo's world, indifference is a measure of security and how much one can do without the other - Need. A resisting female would be equivalent to an aloof masculine and erotic. A submissive female would be an embarassment reeking of weakness and insecurity if she were to surrender.
In Dionysos' world, indifference is a measure of firmness and how much one can affirm/appropriate the other as it is - Excess. A submissive female would be equivalent to an aloof masculine, and erotic. An eluding female would be an embarassment reeking of weariness and unconfidence if she were to resist.
Whether a man loves the resisting spirit or the submissive soul, reflects his own needs and ideals.
Compare these two different passages:
Quote :
"Panic passion is unstable for the same reason that it is violent and futile: it is entirely opposed to marriage. Just as Pan's landscape is detached from the city and its agricultural land, so his erotic behaviour remains detached from the institution that gives passion its acculturated form. Lucian finally makes this detachment explicit in one of his imaginary dialogues when Pan responds to his father Hermes: "Tell me, Pan, are you married yet?—Oh, no, father! I belong to Eros, after all, and I wouldn't want to get bound to one woman."
A solitary vagabond, a wanderer through snowy wastes, in frontier territories off the beaten track (mountains, gullies, rocks), Pan seems gripped by a constant and eccentric restlessness. The erotic life of this creature follows the pattern of his wanderings, and consists of a sequence of passing encounters, furtive and violent couplings, often unnatural and altogether extramarital.
If we take it that the prohibition of incest generally functions to make possible exchange and communication in the form of marriage, we can then say that Pan represents this exchange and communication in an exaggerated form. The resdessness of the goat-god and his sexual promiscuity are just as contrary to marriage as is the introversion that is incest. Thus Pan on the erotic level turns out to be an anti-Oedipus. Pan's sexuality seizes whatever is available, or becomes perverted. It is by definition nonfamilial and wild. It is perhaps worth noticing in this connection that the figure against whom he defines himself in order to claim his territory is Demeter, a mother who does not succeed in separating from her daughter! In Pan's case, it is excessive desire that opposes him to marriage and leads to the fragmentation and dispersion of his erotic objects. Panic sexuality is crippled by glut; it is cut off from its object, which vanishes in the end (cf. Echo, Syrinx), by a desire so intense that it cannot establish a relationship with an objective purpose. We shall see that Greek accounts of panic eroticism bring us, very naturally, to the myth of Narcissus." [Borgeaud, The Cult of Pan]
and,
Nietzsche wrote:
"Not only does the bond between man and man come to be forged once more by the magic of the Dionysian rite, but nature itself, long alienated or subjugated, rises again to celebrate the reconciliation with her prodigal son, man. The earth offers its gifts voluntarily, and the savage beasts of mountain and desert approach in peace. The chariot of Dionysus is bedecked with flowers and garlands; panthers and tigers stride beneath his yoke. Man now expresses himself through song and dance as the member of a higher community... He feels himself to be godlike and strides with the same elation and ecstasy as the gods he has seen in his dreams. No longer the artist, he has himself become a work of art..." [BOT, 1]
In other words, the Apollonian heat is burning hot red of the fevers of individuation - the need to disassociate from mother nature and come into one's own individuality - it is the pangs of one who wants to become an Artist by organizing the wild chaotic passion symbolized by nature-the-unmarried-nymph. The virgin. A married woman would be seen as tainted by the god Apollo. The apollonian oedipal instinct is to abandon home in the chase of the impossible immortality. The mother is feared of devouring him and he longs to escape. What is feared here is Retardation, regression. A question of space, need to explore. Attractive is who seduces with possibilities. She says, Be more. Degradation is erotic. Asking everything of him is her pride, and he is drawn to her need. The demand to prove and reveal himself, her cruelty, her needy desire, makes her attractive to him. The woman who gives him pain feels real to him. Courage is demonstration.
The Dionysian heat is cold incandescent white of the fury of individuation - the need to associate with mother nature and be reborn - it is the desire of one who wants to become a piece of Art Itself, by embrace of all the painful turbulence, contradictions symbolized by nature-the-married-wives who leave their homes and husbands. The whore. An unmarried woman would be seen as infertile by the god Dionysos. The dionysian odyssean instinct is to abandon calypso's offer of immortality in the nostalgia for return home. The mother is revered for making him a possibility and he longs to consummate. What is feared here is Oblivion, abandonment. A question of time, need to be remembered. Attractive is who promises hope. She says, As you are. Trust is erotic. Asking nothing at all from him is her pride, and he is drawn to her excess. The remand to gloat and revel himself, her vulnerability, her trusting desire, makes her attractive to him. The woman who gives him joy feels true to him. Boldness is self-love.
Retardation and Oblivion are both a kind of blindness, darkness... the eye of the Apollo is physical, and of Dionysos is inward.
Both desires are coupled with tragic wisdom of their kind. In Apollo's world - the trepidation of fleeting individuality gives a shiver. He becomes a wanderer needing to see and experience it all urgently... the voyeur. He prays to Apollo the Seer, the Healer for the song of visions. In Dionysos' world - the nihilism of acute perception of reality gives a paralysis. He becomes a recluse seeking to release all he has seen urgently... the sage. He prays to Dionysos the Demiurger, the Liberator for the dance of freedom.
A satyr is a bit of both - he chases and hunts as much as he plays the flute alone.
In any case, as N. finally concludes, whether resisting or submissive, man falls in love only with his own desire.
Interesting how in Troubador poetry, the two come together. The lowly knight singing to the unattainable lady of his lord merges into the worship of Marion as (both) Virgin-Mother. The desire for the eternal feminine is still to be in love with one's desires.
There's a handful of things I disagree with on that, but I'll focus on the subject at hand.
I am not speaking from the woman's point of view, of how to react when her wisdom is wasted on someone, whether to accept that pain or not.
From the man's perspective, one who is unable to identify superiority and benefit from its influence, is a fool.
A "noble hunter" or whatever that may be in your lovely theory, would necessarily possess the skill of valuing his woman's wisdom/superiority. A wise woman is a man's best council. If he squanders it, he is a fool.
Degrees, etc.
Is it true that behind every nobleman there stands a noblelady?
