Feminism

Feminism reduced to its simplest form....using a simple female as the specimen....



...more complex females exhibit the same behaviour using more sophisticated methods.

The attitude of confidence, is that of indifference towards the particular.

This indifference is an exhibition of power...as in independence, rather than the neediness of dependence.
The younger, less experienced, a bit simpler, female will respond to it instinctively...not understanding why herself.

The more intellectual, uncertain male, because he is self-aware and factors in possibilities beyond the immediate, will seem uncertain, lacking confidence, less assertive...she will feel this as weakness.

'Indifference' - Did anybody see that idiot driving recklessly with his car? He smashed it into a tree. He actually wasn't that indifferent, he was hurt in the accident and to come to the point, he felt devastated about his wrecked car.
Did anybody see that careful driver? His carefulness isn't deliberate, it's just his way of driving. Just like the reckless driver didn't intentionally drive recklessly - it was just the way he is. He actually may even feel much less devastated about wrecking his car compared to the reckless driver.

Indifference goes only so far.
I am thinking about the caricature of a shaky nerd who chokes on his own words when talking to girls.
That same nerd may handle highly toxic substances, at his work staying cool as a cucumber.

The reason is found in the way of relating -
Women are sexually not tuned to being related to as a subject.
Which is ironic...
I guess if they say 'Don't objectify women!' then that's precisely what is required.

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

The conclusion which is drawn is false and serves to further solidify a narrative. The conclusion being - "Little men with very big hearts."

I don't think the reason why those boys age 7 to 11 didn't slap those girls is found in their hearts for the most part. I'm not saying they don't have that kind of heart but the reason why those young boys didn't obey the authority figure was because of an established powerful narrative, an ideal, namely 'Boys should never hit girls.'

And now, this story is again solidifying that narrative via the appeal - "If you have a big heart, in other words, if you are 'good' then you don't slap girls." This is teaching boys to look for validation coming from women and society in general - Feminization.

Just as feminism is teaching women to pretend to be masculine this society is teaching men to remain boys - to not develop their masculine potential.
This is because the masculine potential of man has always a divisive and discriminative component and that's not part of the egalitarian dream.

Everything is pretend, in this world.
If you've got the money you can pretend to be anything, and others will play along.

The system is build on a collective agreement to not expose the other as a fake, if he reciprocates and does not go overboard.

Satyr wrote:

The system is build on a collective agreement to not expose the other as a fake, if he reciprocates and does not go overboard.

Either I am changing in the opposite direction or it's the media or both but the stories they spin and the talk which is being talked have become increasingly 'overboard' to me. And I'm not the only one.
A fragmentation into sub-groups.

The content can be whatever as long as the presentation is sharp (for one, good writing just doesn't happen, so it's very easy for above average writers to just play out the same old themes with new innovative cinematography... so what should of been a really tired moral message by now, is constantly regenerated). In that video though, it plays to another angle, which is being ordered to commit violence, and the kids refuse the command. The audience is "charmed"(if you're an idiot) by the over-the-top music, the sound of Italian(If you're not Italian), and the innocence of a first encounter between a boy and a girl... then the tone of the director immediately changes ("And now... Slap her!")... so a sudden shift in tone from a mature male which would stun a young boy anyways, but the young boys fights back (the "innocence of youth" fights back)... So what's the message? Violence ruins the magic of the moment.

Even if the narrative was that hitting girls is good, especially when ordered, the boys would still hesitate after experiencing that first magical encounter, it's just nature... that's what they're really playing off of...and the way they do it is very cheap... but it's nicely produced, so opinions will divided even more so.

Also, the girl is Italian(so one of their own to a degree)...would be interesting how the kids react if the girl was non-white and/or ugly...

A lot of people in the comments section are upset because the message is "you shouldn't hit a girl" and not "you shouldn't hit anyone", boy or girl.... as if this was a superior message...

sai molte canzoni insolita italiana, pb... sei italiano?

I'm not Italian, I just meant that the sound of Italian can be enamoring, especially when it complements these "innocent" scenarios... But someone that speaks Italian would be used to it.

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


-


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

Maybe, in time, we'll get over our disgust for pee and shit and display our pee and shit stains openly and proudly.

And let's support France, in her time of pain, by not putting on deodorant for a week.

He's not anti-feminist, he's not sexist and not racist.

Therefore, it's all a big joke.
Something to laugh about.
He's "messing" with feminist, exposing them, and, in the meantime, exposing himself.

And the beat goes on. This article was a gem.

The masculine feminized "juxtaposition" in the "Like a Girl" ad, portraying the convergence of sexual identity between the sexes, leveling it into a visual sublimation. The last one, classically shaming a female's desire for standards of her physical beauty, exacerbating her biological ambivalence, thus contributing further to the poisonous self-hatred feminism is based on.

All in all, the message of "individuality" which is the key meme that retains that acceptable neutral stance to include all, and stifle any objections or critical thinking. The "Just be" message, with no reason.

Six Empowering Beauty Campaigns That Prove Beauty Isn’t Just Skin Deep
Noël DuanFebruary 10, 2015

For decades, beauty ads were more about capitalizing on women’s insecurities than making them feel good about themselves. The idea seemed to be that if consumers didn’t feel pretty enough they would buy more to makeup to achieve whatever they thought was lacking. With increasing dialogue on gender inequality around the world and a feminist movement that even celebrities talk about, companies are finally realizing that women deserve more.

Dove was a pioneer pairing ads and empowerment. Their Campaign for Real Beauty, which launched in 2004, ditched models in favor of real women—with a range of happy, confident women with very real body types. It was unlike anything we had seen before. The campaign was named the #1 Ad for the 21st century by Ad Age. Today, top brands have realized that empowering ads that show women as strong, unique, and powerful are the way to really connect with women. In the past year, beauty companies, like Pantene and CoverGirl, have created pro-female ad campaigns. Some of them are even sparking dialogue about the status quo. Below, here are the videos that prove that beauty on the outside just isn’t cutting it anymore:



Ellen DeGeneres, Janelle Monáe, Queen Latifah, Katy Perry, Pink, and other inspiring women speak up about the put-downs they endured as girls. These powerful women prove that, in fact, #GirlsCan do anything.



This campaign cleverly compares and contrasts the way that men and women are perceived for the same roles. While a man is a boss, a woman is bossy. While a man is persuasive, a woman is pushy. While a man is neat, a woman is vain. The campaign urges women to not let labels hold them back.



Show me what it means to run like a girl. Show me what it means to fight like a girl. The director Lauren Greenfield asks people to act out what those phrases mean. For many, running like a girl involves flailing your arms and worrying about your hair, and fighting like a girl means pantomiming a catfight. The director then asks young girls to act out the same motions—and we see that they associate the phrase with being strong and powerful. It’s proof that something happens during puberty to affect girls’ self-esteem. The ad, which played during the Super Bowl, is a step towards changing perceptions about what it means to be #LikeAGirl.



“If someone says you’re smart, say yes—and. If someone says you’re pretty, say yes—and.” This social media campaign urges girls and young women to defy labels and celebrate their complexities. Girls aren’t one-dimensional, they can be pretty and smart, and strong and sensitive.



Dove invited mothers to sit in front of a Google Hangout and describe themselves to Gil Zamora, a FBI trained forensic artist. He could hear the women but couldn’t see them from where he was sitting. Dove then invited the daughters to describe their mothers to the artist while he drew. The two pictures are then shown side-by-side to the mothers and daughters. Said one mom, “It’s nice to know that someone thinks you’re that beautiful.”



Young girls talk about how they don’t like their naturally curly hair and wish they had straight hair because it’s “prettier.” Dove asked friends and families of the girls to help out and celebrate curls by wearing their hair naturally—because what you’re born with isn’t something to be ashamed of.

Of course we can't forget the "Viagra" ads which are now being marketed by women actors. Promoting the message that a man, or even a blue pill, is no longer in control of his sexual impulse. The primitive obsession of a man lowering himself to the sexual urge of a feminine standard. Imagine the new generation of men in their 50's or 60's occupying themselves with their sexual prowess, like little adolescent nitwit boys.

About the Dove commercials -
That reality is only in your head is already a given.
Now it's just about choosing to be pretty and awesome by telling yourself just that.

About x-pal -
Although club MGTOW is talking about the 'evils' of women x-pal won't give up an inch on his romanticized view of them which he has been taught from the cradle onwards. It's not just about that narrative - He's innately not suited for a less cozy outlook on life.

It is a biological normal tendency that women select men upon resources.
In the old days it were the old ways which ruled; thus the men with the resources were the men whom were the most skilled, the most intelligent and creative and the most physically - although correlated with the mind, will power; mind over body - fit.

Today we live in a inverted system with unnatural ''morality''.
From biological specializations derived a normative system, a caste society - thus ''morality'' in relationship with biology (genes, behaviour patterns, average gender and racial differences etc.,) - thus it is not due to a ''collapse of morality'' that we live in a so called ''immoral world'', but because of Modern sheltering of any natural consequences for denying the self-evident and Nature an sich.
Thus artificial ''norms'' propagated through the media and educational filtering system to implant, through repeating patterns, ideas on what is to be regarded ''good'' and what as ''evil'', not anymore ''good and evil'' as within biological context, but as it is today sheltered from consequences as death, punishment through biological resistance and exile.
Such patterns are also the fundament of democracy and the directed ''free will'' of the masses.

If the normative system is inverted (man becomes woman, woman man, reality becomes a delusion and Paradise / Utopia reality - always in the near future, as they proclaim), than the hierarchy is inverted as well. A artificial hierarchy were not the men as described above are on top, but the men who subject themselves to the system and through subjecting themselves they earn State given diplomas (status) to be placed on top of the economic ladder, thus are given access to the State (alpha-male) shared resources, which a actual Rebel (he who would be on top of Natural hierarchy) is denied access.

As Satyr described - Instead of genetic selection in correlation with ideals in touch with reality and health and biology; we have memetic selection as to direct women to choose men upon being a ''pious Christian'' or a ''good citizen''. The so called ''bad boys'' merely mimic carelessness, a trait of 'being in control'; but they are not - they are just as ridiculous as those on top of the economic ladder; just in another degree, just as dependent upon the State as all the other Manchildren and Manimals.
Women are the filter of a society, of the ideals; only access for the men who live up to certain ideals, and if these ideals are unnatural, then she will, even though after settling with a fat-bellied infantile Manchild; feel attraction towards that healthy, rebelious in a way, muscular, tall man with lesser edumucation degrees.

Hypergamy is no more than a modern term referring to a primitive, primal, natural behavior characterizing the female type.
nothing new about a female's desire to marry (copulate) up the social ladder.

In the wild, in natural environments, the female does not necessarily have to like the alpha-male, dominating the group she belongs to.
She likes belonging to power, submitting to it, because it offers her, and her possible offspring, an advantage; a stable, safe place to continue on.
She has evolved the tastes to facilitate her natural role, and so she finds it seductive if the male holds power, or is closer up the hierarchy-ladder, withing whatever social group she just happens to belong to (because females are not only born into groups, but are often integrated into them from other groups).
She feels no loyalty, or her loyalties are shallow and base, so as to make her easily adaptable to whatever social hierarchy, and whatever rules and ideals this hierarchy espouses.
It is part of female nature to quickly shift loyalties, and simply adopt the new rule and ideal, if there is a shift in the power structure of the group she belongs to.
This is why females care little about philosophy, or deeper, patterns of behavior (relating to existential patterns of interactivity) but are more pragmatic....pragmatic meaning interested in the present, or the more shallow past, which we call present ([presence).  
A female does not care about idea(l)s and history beyond a certain perceptual-event-horizon, or a certain temporal limit, which centers around her and her place in the group.
For her what is superior, in the long-term, is lost in her analysis of what is superior in the present, and so she can adapt to any social environment, and only applies her mind in ascending within it, or in becoming appreciated to the one who holds the top-spot.
Womanly obsessions with gossip and relationships is natural.
The institution, therefore, and living up to its standards, is the only thing she values.
The institution being nothing more than the abstraction of the alpha-male, just as God was - its the secular version of the Divine.

In the modern, present, money is the code of measuring piety (loyalty, submission), if you will, or measuring value within the group's standards.
But the female need not understand it on this level. For her money equals resources, and resources is what ensures her and her offspring's health and well-being.
The male who has access to resources is like a high-priest (representing the alpha male, as a devout, chosen, special beta male would) - this is power through association.

So, here's how this develops in the present conditions:
The male who submits to the alpha, monopolized by the institution, which in no more than an abstraction, agreed upon but still directed by a particular segment of males (this distancing is what creates a buffer of anonymity protecting the true alphas from retribution and challenges - clever huh?)

Let's leave this controversial, conspiratorial issue aside and proceed...this submissive male, who is emasculated by adopting the alpha's - in this case the institutional - rules, morals, values, standards, ambitions etc. will have access to resources making him desirable to the female, on a pragmatic (shallow, immediate) level.
Therefore, the most emasculated, beta, even omega, male will be given, will be permitted (rights), access to resources controlled, monopolized, by the alpha - and whomever lies behind this ambiguity (abstraction = simplification/generalization).
Let's not delve into what Democracy is and if it is pure, or if it functions as it was intended to....theoretically.
The more emasculated a male is, no matter what symbols he purchases and what genetic markers he cultivates (emasculation is intellectual, mental - you can completely dominate someone bigger and stronger, as you can dominate a lion and a wolf...)...the more access to resources he is permitted to have....making him desirable, pragmatically, by females.

See why omega-males are the fiercest defenders of feminism, and of the status quo?

Anywho...to go on....

In the wild the alpha was also the one that controlled whatever resources were accessible and available to the group.
So, you see the connection made by females on a visceral, intuitive, instinctive level: he who has access to resources is best.

But, within human environments, manmade environments, where institutions regulate access and behavior and all resources available and accessible, the one who is given the privilege of accessibility is the one who submits, is indoctrinated, is submissive to the institutional power the most.
He is not the one who collects and protects resources, displaying his genetic value, but the one who submits the most, the most effectively, despite his genetic inferiority, to the one who DOES collect and controls resources.
Those rare occasions where some male circumvents the rules, and does not face the institutional reprisals, aside, we can see why males are so obsessed with money and, those of that are why their main motive and interest is always sex, and access to females.

It's so predictable it has become a social caricature, a modern stereotype: the one most obsessed with sexual access is usually the one least in possession of past/natural markers that display said value, and is, most often, the one most obsessed with sex and sexual displays.
(S)He will also be the one more dedicated to correcting, compensating, for whatever is lacking by using money and social status.

To put it another way....
The one with the least self-knowledge,and/or the one who is least proud of this self-knowledge (sense of self as the sum of all past - nature) is the one who will be the most sexually obsessed, and the one who will go to the most extreme lengths to display whatever sexual value (s)he does appreciate as "high".

To use another context: the one most insecure about his positions, and his own intelligence, will be the one most likely to declare victory, over another, or the one who will use reference, deference and innuendo to imply his/her value.
The braggart need not be overt....he sometimes uses more subtle ways, such as name-dropping, casual information offering meant to imply personal superiority, and so on...
Exhibitionism is a social rule, in Modern times, just as is narcissism and schizophrenia - it is the norm, not the exception.
All symptoms of decline - of modernity, and its reliance on Nihilism to persevere internal socioeconomic harmony and cohesion.

Visit ILP to observe the specimens of Modernity....emasculated males who brag about their access to resources so as to what?
Yes...to attract females to them.
A desperate need...often involving straight-up payment.
Females completely indoctrinated into the Modern standards, but only superficially and with minimal, if any, understanding of what this means - exhibited in an inability to defend views they, supposedly, hold dear.

But, even those more sophisticated ones will not be able to withstand the pressure of adapting, and of using wealth as their measure of personal value.....if not wealth then something that implies an institutional intimacy, such as credentials sanctioned by a famous, established evolution institution (education, corporation, military, government etc.)

Now this produces an interesting, to me, phenomenon.
This phenomenon is based on the lag, or the contradiction between ideal and real, or between environments produced and maintained by human interventions and those which preceded such interventions - the artificial/natural divide.
Females, despite being thoroughly indoctrinated in that usual superficial;, uncommitted level (unless a commitment in blood has been made) will repeat the communal evaluations and standards and morals and principles, from memory - believing they are their most loyal adherents), and yet they will behave in ways that contradict them....particularly when the communal values and standards are distinctly nihilistic...as they are in Modernity.  

They will say, and choose, pragmatically, and still not be happy with their choice....
This is more true as they get older and the pragmatism of their evaluations slowly becomes dominated by more immediate, social concerns, and less so early on, before they have bee thoroughly integrated, when they still function with those genetic evaluation dominating their psyche.
Before social reality shifts the balance, females are still attracted to symmetry...and by symmetry I do not only mean physical beauty (manifestation of past nurturing), but also intelligence which is mental symmetry, displaying itself in humor, in reasoning, in confidence (indifference), and in creativity.

But all of this evaluated superiority must be compared to personal interests....the main one being well-being.
So, the male must also be non-threatening, emotionally present, where weakness, up to a level, can be admitted so as to offer the female the sense of comfort.
All this is part of a primal flirtation process.

But still it is interesting how like attracts like; I see those particular kind of ugly women with an partner equal in ugliness. Especially the facial characteristics seems to be in a kind of harmony in regards with partner selection.

The older rich guy walking through the shopping mall seems often to be accompanied with a woman with blonde (dyed) hair, tall and wide hips - with the exception of height, it are the kind of women whom are often to be seen with negroes. But what distinguishes is, exposed through the clothing these kind of women wear; the one walking next to that rich, older, not so attractive White man - has a ''expensive'' price ticket on her clothes and still exposes a cheap expressiveness of ''primal'' sexuality as do those amongst the negroes, though I see also the most unhealthiest women, black and white, amongst the negroes. But the most ''attractive'' you see amongst the negroes are the ones you see also directing the money of some easiliy manipulated, reasonable ''rich'' guy, or one who has the richer swagga.

Though, often I also see couples whom do not look like each other at all; the face has often an expression in cohesion with the mind - thus I guess opposites in character and physical fitness, but maybe alike in intellect, that the one who is genetically brighter is suppressed through means of the media for example.


Thus even the economic superiorty of certain men does not attract that many women to such an extent that they would give up their lifestyles of hedonism and particular degree of superficiality. Or it is because these men can pick, as simple as that..
And the ''economic'' kind of women also seem to be in touch with the economic kind of men; I took a picture of one presented in the newspaper whom I found to be a good example of having a ''economic expression''. The face..

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



ILP is one of the many expressive hives; I like the G+ and Youtube comment sections (and the videos themsevles) to observe all kinds of people of all different backgrounds and ideologies. Of course Islamic video attracts the muslims, the ''atheistic'' and Christian sections attracts the secular-humanists, the MGTOW attracts branches of their followers such as here ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]), where men express their hatred towards all women because they cannot get the higher quality ones. And they hate the kind of women they attract because they deem them as ''superficial whores'', yet what do they have to offer themselves - the place you search defines your essence.

The words of scientists concerning such matters needn't be taken too seriously. Even if one had the time to read their full report, and investigate their sources, one would still be left with taking their word on some matters. One may, first, simply go by one's own observations. Men have obviously achieved far more than women in intellectual pursuits, but it's also obvious enough that men are more likely to be extremely stupid than women. So for one fatigued from propaganda, the results shown in the bell curve in the above video are welcome. They confirm what experience tells us. But, a non-MRA male needn't welcome the results because they flatter, or at least fail to humble, his gender. If women happended to actually be the all-around most intelligent gender, then a study that showed that would be welcome, assuming it was well explained and rather than adding fuel to the interests of those spreading the propoganda claiming the same results, it exposed such propoganda for what it is, even while actually verifying its general message.

Identity politics is the insatiable search for the lowest, all-encompassing, denominator.
In metaphysical terms it is akin to the search and the identification of a presumed, particle, all-inclusive, all-explaining, substance.
This authoritarian bent is ironically a fundamental characteristic of the liberal mind-set, or of the Nihilist, the Modern.
When God has been killed and declared dead the mind must replace Him with a more up-dated alternative absolute, which offers the same certainty and comfort, the same hope for liberation from the experience of need/suffering, as did the metaphor of the Alpha-Male monotheistic God.
Monism translated into more modern terms.

With monosim the experience is dismissed, or selectively sampled, because the prime objective is unification, integration, of pattern divergence, experienced as multiplicity, into a singularity.
Feminism, egalitarianism, scientific presumptions about the god-particle, the indivisible atom, philosophical monism, stemming, in the west from Parmenides, dismissing appearances as illusion, so as to preserve the one, as a viable concept, are all part of the same modern nihilism, infecting man and his thinking.

Connecting the noumenon, the abstraction, the word, to the phenomenon, the apparent, the appearance, is how you deal with this dis-ease.

The subject of identity has now entered a phase of ridiculousness.
The implication is that despite genetics, and how they manifest aesthetically, is different from the spirit, the essence, of the individual.
The Christian soul is insinuated and never admitted.

Species: sexual, reproductive category.

Sexes: types evolved to facilitate a more efficient combining and passing on of genes.
Each type evolves the traits required for it to facilitate this reproductive role.
Mutations can only be judged in relation to this, as more or less fit, or by how they improve (make more efficient) or degrade (make less efficient or totally contradicts the role) the reproductive role.

The subject of sex is central to all human behaviors because a species is primarily a reproductive type, and so the word "human" is only meaningful within the contexts and the sub-categories of this fact.

Organism is a self-organizing, incomplete unity.
Its organs are what are what organized...and to a lower level its cells, each integrated into an organ role.
The relationship between organs, how they (inter)act, determines the organism's overall essence, and sex, with its hormonal effects and its organ distributions, affects this essence profoundly.
hormones are biological methods of triggering and determining organ qualities, and so they shift the organ relationships accordingly.

Organ (inter)actions also determine character, personality being the social application, manifestation, of this character.
Essence is therefore the foundation of what is called character.

Past manifests as presence; it exposes this organ (inter)activity aesthetically.
Past is the sum of all nurturing, called nature, and appearance is the manifestation of its entirety.

Essence refers to this manifestation, and to the ongoing (inter)activity of this inherited organ (inter)activity, and this is personality. It involves the repression and accentuation of traits, determined by this organ (inter)activity, so as to produce a more effective (re)action to environment.
Environment, like the organism within it, is dynamic, not static.

The study of all of this is called psychology.
Psychology is a central theme in all human behavior, such as art, philosophy, innovation, culture, society, politics, and so on.

This is subjectivity.
Objectivity involves the filtering of psychological effects from the mind's dispositions, and its (inter)activities, particularly its evaluation, its judgment, of world, involved in the discipline of philosophy, so as to attain a more lucid comprehension of existence, and of the human condition.
Therefore, comprehending sex, and defining words by connecting them to phenomena, rather than detaching them, is essential in understanding the human condition, and formulating a method of filtering out its effects: emotion, self-interests, solipsism, Top<>Down thinking, nihilism are all byproducts of human psychology upon human perceptions, and analysis of these sensual perceptions.

Listen to these Liberal douche-bags excuse this.



If it were two male teachers and a 16 year-old female student, they would be screaming in rage, asking for their heads.

My gut asks...was the male student a Negro?
Odds are he is.

Pedophilia stretched...as is sex, in general. stretched until it becomes transparent.
Transsexuals are the new oppressed sexual class to be liberated.
After that?

.