The Feminization of Man

Yang is rare
yin is everywhere.
Matter is female

MagnetMan wrote:

Yang is rare
yin is everywhere.
Matter is female

I don't really know the relevance of this response MM, but...

...Antimatter is male.

Satyr wrote:

Then, I think, you've missed the best part of the movie.

All that you said is true, but the message, for me, was this:

Not all can be free.

1-You free a mind from his slavery and he becoems yours.
Free-spirits are rare.
Mankind is not a concept to fight over.
Certain parts of mankind are.

2- Manhood has gone underground...literally.
The only way to be male, in its fullest extent, is to hide it ion basements and express it in hiding.
A masculine spirit must now adopt feminine ways to preserve the better part of itself.
I include women in this.
he must live a double life; a schizophrenic life, where he is truly one way, in public, and another in private or amongst his own.

3- In order to build, you msut first destroy.
you can't work with the very thing you wish to destroy, from within it.
It will subvert your efforts and extinguish your desire with fatigue.

Like the building exploding, or those recruits that had to be first broken, every gain cotnains a cost, as every cost contains a gain.

There was some deep metaphoric stuff going on in the background. Like how about when he's reading the papers in the warehouse about the body parts speaking in third person and Tyler Durden says something along the lines of "I am this body part, I get cancer, I destroy the rest".

Unreasonable wrote:

MagnetMan wrote:

Yang is rare
yin is everywhere.
Matter is female

I don't really know the relevance of this response MM, but...

...Antimatter is male.

The feminine principle dominates
Almost everything is SHE
All is Mother Irth
She is eternally pregnant
Infinitely birthing
All are Her daughters.
All that matters

The male is a symbol only
a drone
a warrior
a worrier
a seeker
a lover
an artist
a fool
a seer

Satyr wrote:

Then, I think, you've missed the best part of the movie.

All that you said is true, but the message, for me, was this:

Not all can be free.



2- Manhood has gone underground...literally.
The only way to be male, in its fullest extent, is to hide it ion basements and express it in hiding.
A masculine spirit must now adopt feminine ways to preserve the better part of itself.
I include women in this.
he must live a double life; a schizophrenic life, where he is truly one way, in public, and another in private or amongst his own.

There's more to it. Industrialisation removed the family from the agrarian to the urban (the man-made ha ha ha). The male then colluded in the devaluation of family and subsequent removal from it, seduced by his own desire for competition with other males in the globalising 'market place'. The male abandoned his children, particularly sons, and the consequences of this are....... see 2- above.

So everyone stop hiding and admit fully to yourselves and others who you really are and who you could become if free.

maryshelley wrote:

There's more to it. Industrialisation removed the family from the agrarian to the urban (the man-made ha ha ha). The male then colluded in the devaluation of family and subsequent removal from it, seduced by his own desire for competition with other males in the globalising 'market place'. The male abandoned his children, particularly sons, and the consequences of this are....... see 2- above.

So everyone stop hiding and admit fully to yourselves and others who you really are and who you could become if free.

mary mary quite contrary
I have to call you on this

Evolutionary imperatives
moved man from the agrarian Bronze Age
into the industrial Iron Age

When farm economies could no longer support population increases
the family had to be broken up

Now that robots run the mass production lines
mom and pop can get back together with the kids again

No pain
No gain.

We were talking about interpretations of the movie/book....don't forget.

But as you called.....

When the emerging industrialists required a work force they enclosed the public land (that which the peasants could grow and graze their own grub whilst paying their taxes). This forced the hungry into the towns. Mommy produced the next batch of workers (whilst having to work as well, of course), Daddy went off to the mines and the rest is post modern history. At least in the UK that's the way it went. Maybe it's different in other parts of the world....

Now just that there are robots (and an endless supply of immigrants) to do the nasty stuff we run out of resources at one end of the supply chain.

Ain't life a biatch?

maryshelley wrote:

When the emerging industrialists required a work force they enclosed the public land (that which the peasants could grow and graze their own grub whilst paying their taxes). This forced the hungry into the towns. Mommy produced the next batch of workers (whilst having to work as well, of course), Daddy went off to the mines and the rest is post modern history. At least in the UK that's the way it went. Maybe it's different in other parts of the world....

You are missing an important step

The industrial Age began with craftsmanship
fathers and sons as their apprentices
moms were still at home.

The big ticket items were for the masons
the cathedrals and churches
the smithies handled tools and utensils
and the technical needs of the farms and mines
once that conscientious base was established
mass production took off

Quote :

Now just that there are robots (and an endless supply of immigrants) to do the nasty stuff we run out of resources at one end of the supply chain.

Ain't life a biatch?

All due to misunderstanding, my dear
I am trying to sort it out
and get everything back in the correct order.

Mothers were out in the fields with their partners and children.
Mothers were tending the animals, milking, skinning and tanning, making cheese and butter.
Mothers were in the weaving sheds weaving cloth, making felt, clothing, shoes, pottery, etc.
Mothers were spinning wool, knitting, reading, writing, singing, teaching, learning....

They may have been trapped indoors a little recently but don't worry they are breaking out!

maryshelley wrote:

Mothers were out in the fields with their partners and children.
Mothers were tending the animals, milking, skinning and tanning, making cheese and butter.
Mothers were in the weaving sheds weaving cloth, making felt, clothing, shoes, pottery, etc.
Mothers were spinning wool, knitting, reading, writing, singing, teaching, learning....

They may have been trapped indoors a little recently but don't worry they are breaking out!

When I said mom was still at home
it did not mean
not working

A woman's work is never done

maryshelley wrote:

Satyr wrote:

Then, I think, you've missed the best part of the movie.

All that you said is true, but the message, for me, was this:

Not all can be free.



2- Manhood has gone underground...literally.
The only way to be male, in its fullest extent, is to hide it ion basements and express it in hiding.
A masculine spirit must now adopt feminine ways to preserve the better part of itself.
I include women in this.
he must live a double life; a schizophrenic life, where he is truly one way, in public, and another in private or amongst his own.

There's more to it. Industrialisation removed the family from the agrarian to the urban (the man-made ha ha ha). The male then colluded in the devaluation of family and subsequent removal from it, seduced by his own desire for competition with other males in the globalising 'market place'. The male abandoned his children, particularly sons, and the consequences of this are....... see 2- above.

So everyone stop hiding and admit fully to yourselves and others who you really are and who you could become if free.

Shit, girl, you jumped ahead a few thousand years to make your excuses work and place the blame on men.

Sweet-cheeks, the idea that all deserve equal rights, that birthed feminism, was due to male competitiveness.

Feminism is a consequence of this trend, which also includes anti-racism, and speciesm and all sorts of pathetic ideals.

The family is the victim of this feminism.
The family didn't even begin deteriorating as an institution, until the feminist agenda came to be.

I'm not saying women are responsible, because you all just follow trends, and this was but another male invention meant to control the masses.
What I am saying is the, hypothetical, emancipation of women and the slow deterioration of the family institution, are inversely proportional.

Males competed with one another since the dawn of civilization, It was the woman that held the family unit together.

Globalization, is part o this trend towards uniformity that makes race and sex and religion and nationality, and family, and culture, in general, irrelevant.
Globalization is the mythology which attempts to judge all by their least common denominator, which is them as homo sapients or living organisms, and then integrating them within a value system that judges them in accordance to their discipline and acceptance of this mythology - rewarding them with money or privilege or fame.

Service to the whole, the State, is to distinguish one individual from another - the self-esteem of a slave.
Every other designation is to be eradicated.

The designation of male/female is but another one of those "primitive" categories that will be erased in tghe trend towards harmonious uniformity.

Satyr wrote:

r.

Globalization, is part o this trend towards uniformity that makes race and sex and religion and nationality, and family, and culture, in general, irrelevant.

True. Science and tech are inexorable global unifiers

Quote :

Globalization is the mythology which attempts to judge all by their least common denominator, which is them as homo sapients or living organisms,

Science is globalizing all cultures.
That is hardly the lowest common denominator.

Quote :

and then integrating them within a value system that judges them in accordance to their discipline and acceptance of this mythology - rewarding them with money or privilege or fame.

Capitalism cannot function indefinitely as an incentive in a global milieu focused on an increasingly desperate race for survival against ecological collapse.
It works reasonably well in a national milieu and only marginally in an international milieu.
But that is as far as the dollar can be stretched without printing the tens of trillions needed to get the whole planet up to speed. Its demise is already apparent.
]

MagnetMan wrote:

Its demise is already apparent.

That is very true; Capitalism is coming to an abrupt end.

People are going to understand this when the Amerikan Dollar approaches 0.00 and loses all value.

All value will then become electronic; your ID-debt & credit cards will own your contribution to all Institutional Societies.

Satyr wrote:

maryshelley wrote:

Satyr wrote:

Then, I think, you've missed the best part of the movie.

All that you said is true, but the message, for me, was this:

Not all can be free.

2- Manhood has gone underground...literally.
The only way to be male, in its fullest extent, is to hide it ion basements and express it in hiding.
A masculine spirit must now adopt feminine ways to preserve the better part of itself.
I include women in this.
he must live a double life; a schizophrenic life, where he is truly one way, in public, and another in private or amongst his own.

There's more to it. Industrialisation removed the family from the agrarian to the urban (the man-made ha ha ha). The male then colluded in the devaluation of family and subsequent removal from it, seduced by his own desire for competition with other males in the globalising 'market place'. The male abandoned his children, particularly sons, and the consequences of this are....... see 2- above.

So everyone stop hiding and admit fully to yourselves and others who you really are and who you could become if free.

Shit, girl, you jumped ahead a few thousand years to make your excuses work and place the blame on men.

Sweet-cheeks, the idea that all deserve equal rights, that birthed feminism, was due to male competitiveness.

Feminism is a consequence of this trend, which also includes anti-racism, and speciesm and all sorts of pathetic ideals.

The family is the victim of this feminism.
The family didn't even begin deteriorating as an institution, until the feminist agenda came to be.

I'm not saying women are responsible, because you all just follow trends, and this was but another male invention meant to control the masses.
What I am saying is the, hypothetical, emancipation of women and the slow deterioration of the family institution, are inversely proportional.

Males competed with one another since the dawn of civilization, It was the woman that held the family unit together.

Globalization, is part o this trend towards uniformity that makes race and sex and religion and nationality, and family, and culture, in general, irrelevant.
Globalization is the mythology which attempts to judge all by their least common denominator, which is them as homo sapients or living organisms, and then integrating them within a value system that judges them in accordance to their discipline and acceptance of this mythology - rewarding them with money or privilege or fame.

Service to the whole, the State, is to distinguish one individual from another - the self-esteem of a slave.
Every other designation is to be eradicated.

The designation of male/female is but another one of those "primitive" categories that will be erased in tghe trend towards harmonious uniformity.

Let me just put you right on something. SilentSoliloquey raised the fact that she had seen the film (of the book) fight club. Interpretations were requested. I gave a couple of well known and oft discussed interpretations. If you have some issues with the themes in the book take it up with the author. And 'man-made' is mentioned a fair amount in both book and film as I remember....

You will also note the phrase 'colluded in the devaluation of....' somewhere in my earlier post.

For my part: 'Emancipation' is an inevitable by-product of industrialisation and subsequently globalisation; as there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine a constant supply of fuel is required to maintain the energy levels and outputs. Whilst there is a constant supply of fuel in the supply chain the machine rumbles on but starts to use up immediate supplies of fuel. More fuel needed.....

One problem, of course, with 'emancipation' (as any faithful taliban will tell you) is 'education'; once you start to educate even in the most rudimentary of fashions all sorts of radical things can happen: Reading, writing, discussion; all dangerous things for those who want to keep the machine working in a particular way before you know it people are tinkering with the apparatus. Add to this the problem of resource depletion (both human and natural) and your machine is in big trouble. So even though the aim might have been to suck everyone in and spit them out the same; if you look around you might see some faltering....

What is needed in light of constant change is further adaptation. Not a return to the past when things were 'better' but a move away from what isn't working or patently hasn't worked towards something that might work better. In my observation and belief that large scale systems do not work - and that local solutions to local problems are required. What that probably means is that we stop and think, and talk and get beyond.....this blinkered and frankly boring men are this and women are that bullshit.

The twain shall meet and hammer it out.

MagnetMan wrote:

maryshelley wrote:

Mothers were out in the fields with their partners and children.
Mothers were tending the animals, milking, skinning and tanning, making cheese and butter.
Mothers were in the weaving sheds weaving cloth, making felt, clothing, shoes, pottery, etc.
Mothers were spinning wool, knitting, reading, writing, singing, teaching, learning....

They may have been trapped indoors a little recently but don't worry they are breaking out!

When I said mom was still at home
it did not mean
not working

A woman's work is never done

And I said Mother was never 'just' at home, well apart maybe from 18th century European aristos and middle class Mums from 1945 to 1960, that is! Women have worked in and out of the 'home' forever. Once upon a time the children to the workplace with the parents, were left with 'elders' or (shock horror!) at home alone. Now the kids are trapped in schools all day so I guess we have progress of sorts.

Ladies and gentlemen. Take off your blinkers!

maryshelley wrote:

What is needed in light of constant change is further adaptation. Not a return to the past when things were 'better' but a move away from what isn't working or patently hasn't worked towards something that might work better.

A movement towards is characterized by an underlying ideal.

Quote :

In my observation and belief that large scale systems do not work - and that local solutions to local problems are required. What that probably means is that we stop and think, and talk and get beyond.....this blinkered and frankly boring men are this and women are that bullshit.

[quote]It also "boring" to say turtles are like this and hares like that?
Categories are not accidental.

In order to change something you must first acknowledge it and understand it.
Discovering the dispositions the sexual types impose upon the individual is not boring and should not be dismissed as trivial by those trying to avoid the insights it provides.

For example, in order to more accurately and efficiently focus your energies, you must first analyze who and what you are; what attributes you posses and how they have been shaped by your genetic and experiential past.

To ignore them is to set yourself up for disappointments and chasing fantasies.

The delusion that all are equal is to be blamed for many instances of disillusionment and failures that can result in low self-esteem and dissatisfaction.
Passion and hard work can compensate, somewhat, for inferior talents and innate superiority, but they cannot overturn them.

The obviuos physical differences are being eradicated, through cultural effects, as are the not so obviuos mental ones.

The benefits are worshiped, while the repercussions are ignored.
The uniformity may feel pleasant and comforting but it has some dire consequences.
The elimination of distinction and individuality, for one. An elimination replaced with social utility, rewarded with wealth and privilege.

A system eliminates all other sources of identity, especially natural ones but alien cultural noes, as well, so as to replace them with identities derived exclusively from the system itself.

Productivity and consumerism become cultural ideals because they are such sources of identity.
How useful you are to the system, determines yuor value to the community.

Feminine traits are always more useful and so they are promoted as ideal, in both males and females.
Females have an easier time of it, most, because they are instinctively predisposed to them, being that they are also part of the characteristics that makes them succesful reproductive machines.

Capitalism didn't invent exploitation and repression and gender and greed, it simply took the preexisting and reshaped it to fit into its desired premises. It directed them, when it could, and repressed them when it couldn't or when they were too detrimental to its premises.

Quote :

[quote="Satyr"]A movement towards is characterized by an underlying ideal.

And just as you approach some arbitrary 'ideal' something goes and changes.... a move away from one thing entails a movement towards something different. Standing still is only a momentary option.

Quote :

It also "boring" to say turtles are like this and hares like that?
Categories are not accidental.

Male and female humans; turtles or hares? Hare behaviour? Turtle behaviour? Human behaviour? Male behaviour? Female Behaviour? Animal behaviour? Primate behaviour? Mammalian behaviour? Specialist or speciest?

It becomes boring when people cannot get beyond the same tired old assertions. Women get pregnant so they are incapable of thinking. Men are bastards because they just can't help themselves. Women have breasts so they can't lift heavy objects. Men have a penis so they can't raise children.... boring and nonsensicle and ultimately meaningless.

To always define one-self according to someone else's narrow definitions and ideals can lead to dangerous dysfunction.

Quote :

In order to change something you must first acknowledge it and understand it.
Discovering the dispositions the sexual types impose upon the individual is not boring and should not be dismissed as trivial by those trying to avoid the insights it provides.

For example, in order to more accurately and efficiently focus your energies, you must first analyze who and what you are; what attributes you posses and how they have been shaped by your genetic and experiential past.

To ignore them is to set yourself up for disappointments and chasing fantasies.

So there are only two types? Or are there a range of types on a spectrum? If you look at primate sexual behaviour, for instance, what you will find is a range of behaviours from monogamous to polygamous to promiscuous. Strange that you find all of these behaviours in humans of both 'sexes'. What does that tell you about humans?

Quote :

The delusion that all are equal is to be blamed for many instances of disillusionment and failures that can result in low self-esteem and dissatisfaction.
Passion and hard work can compensate, somewhat, for inferior talents and innate superiority, but they cannot overturn them.

The disillusionment comes from the belief that hard work is not necessary to achieve something valuable. Life is a struggle. Can humans strive to be 'superior' humans? And, if so, are superior humans only to be measured by the achievement of material wealth within any given culture? Or are there other measures to hold oneself against or to strive for?

Innate superiority in human to human terms - what is that.....? The brainiest; the brawniest; the most handsome...?

Quote :

The obviuos physical differences are being eradicated, through cultural effects, as are the not so obviuos mental ones.

The benefits are worshiped, while the repercussions are ignored.
The uniformity may feel pleasant and comforting but it has some dire consequences.
The elimination of distinction and individuality, for one. An elimination replaced with social utility, rewarded with wealth and privilege.

Well people are becoming more obsessed with how they look.... certainly things are inflating. The physical differences between (certain) men and women are becoming more marked; not less so. So called ideals that no-one should or could come 'up' to. It's pretty ugly. And it isn't working.

Quote :

A system eliminates all other sources of identity, especially natural ones but alien cultural noes, as well, so as to replace them with identities derived exclusively from the system itself.

Productivity and consumerism become cultural ideals because they are such sources of identity.
How useful you are to the system, determines yuor value to the community.

A system tries to impose identities. Individuals (indeed whole communities can) resist; sometimes at very high cost.

Quote :

Feminine traits are always more useful and so they are promoted as ideal, in both males and females.
Females have an easier time of it, most, because they are instinctively predisposed to them, being that they are also part of the characteristics that makes them succesful reproductive machines.

Females have an easier time of it.....? What planet do you live on, seriously? Life is a struggle made all the more difficult by.....pah! Soon women and men will realise all this gender battling is leading them right up the garden path without a paddle.....just where the system wants us. Divided into nice little individual units of production.

Quote :

Capitalism didn't invent exploitation and repression and gender and greed, it simply took the preexisting and reshaped it to fit into its desired premises. It directed them, when it could, and repressed them when it couldn't or when they were too detrimental to its premises.

Capitalism is a system imposed on a set of people by another set of people. There is a collusion of sorts from both parties in an attempt to maintain the status quo as it offers benefits to both. When the costs begin to outweigh the benefits things start to creak and the steam runs out.

maryshelley wrote:

. Now the kids are trapped in schools all day so I guess we have progress of sorts.

The price has been steep.
We have a literate work force
which is largely migratory
with no fixed estate
and broken families

MagnetMan wrote:

maryshelley wrote:

. Now the kids are trapped in schools all day so I guess we have progress of sorts.

The price has been steep.
We have a literate work force
which is largely migratory
with no fixed estate
and broken families

Did you not detect the sarcasm there?

progress of sorts


A minor point (or maybe not) humans have always been migratory.....that's how we all got where we are.

maryshelley wrote:

Did you not detect the sarcasm there?

progress of sorts

More or less
was just defining
of sorts

Quote :

A minor point (or maybe not) humans have always been migratory.....that's how we all got where we are.

Not during the 600 generations of the Bronze Age
We became rooted there.

The hunter/gatherer migrations
of the Stone Age
were seasonal
family groups stayed within their prescribed territory
the females never left it
only the males migrated

MagnetMan wrote:

maryshelley wrote:

Did you not detect the sarcasm there?

progress of sorts

More or less
was just defining
of sorts

Quote :

A minor point (or maybe not) humans have always been migratory.....that's how we all got where we are.

Not during the 600 generations of the Bronze Age
We became rooted there.

The hunter/gatherer migrations
of the Stone Age
were seasonal
family groups stayed within their prescribed territory
the females never left it
only the males migrated

Rooted where?
And do I just take your word for it?

maryshelley wrote:

And just as you approach some arbitrary 'ideal' something goes and changes.... a move away from one thing entails a movement towards something different. Standing still is only a momentary option.

"Standing still' is not an option...the illusion of it is.

From a metaphysical standpoint all is in constant flow. There is no static state.

The value judgments of stillness is based on a differentiation in rates of change.
The direction one moves towards is what we call character or personality. The ideal, we will never attain, defines us in this way.

Quote :

Male and female humans; turtles or hares? Hare behaviour? Turtle behaviour? Human behaviour? Male behaviour? Female Behaviour? Animal behaviour? Primate behaviour? Mammalian behaviour? Specialist or speciest?

It becomes boring when people cannot get beyond the same tired old assertions. Women get pregnant so they are incapable of thinking. Men are bastards because they just can't help themselves. Women have breasts so they can't lift heavy objects. Men have a penis so they can't raise children.... boring and nonsensicle and ultimately meaningless.

To always define one-self according to someone else's narrow definitions and ideals can lead to dangerous dysfunction.

If it disturbs you that you are defined by your past and that someone can then discover yuor essence by analyzing this determining past, is not my problem.

Definitions are either more or less accurate.
Claiming that another's is "narrow" without being able to justify this claim is a way of dismissing an insight using the insinuation that you escape its premises.

Defining yourself, may be a pleasant thuoght, and comforting, but it isn't honest, when you factor in the truth that you did not choose any of your tastes or traits or even the time and place you were born into.

The nurture over nature fails and is only a nice little pacifier, suckled by the naive wanting to preserve the idea that they are masters of their own destiny, with no effort involved.

If that were the case then a chimp cannot be defined by us. It, too, can be human, if given the opportunity and nurtured "correctly".

Quote :

So there are only two types? Or are there a range of types on a spectrum? If you look at primate sexual behaviour, for instance, what you will find is a range of behaviours from monogamous to polygamous to promiscuous. Strange that you find all of these behaviours in humans of both 'sexes'. What does that tell you about humans?

That humans intervene on natural processes and impose memes over genes.

Human meddling.

Monogamy isn't innate. It must be taught, trained and supported by religion and social rules, under threats and using promises.
Promiscuity is a natural mechanism of ensuring variety to meet variable environmental conditions.

Quote :

The disillusionment comes from the belief that hard work is not necessary to achieve something valuable. Life is a struggle. Can humans strive to be 'superior' humans? And, if so, are superior humans only to be measured by the achievement of material wealth within any given culture? Or are there other measures to hold oneself against or to strive for?

Innate superiority in human to human terms - what is that.....? The brainiest; the brawniest; the most handsome...?

Superior within a given environment. The fittest.
this is where the conflict between natural and man-made environments produces contradictions in behavior.

But what is the defining characteristic of our species in reference to other species?
Reason.

Quote :

Well people are becoming more obsessed with how they look.... certainly things are inflating. The physical differences between (certain) men and women are becoming more marked; not less so. So called ideals that no-one should or could come 'up' to. It's pretty ugly. And it isn't working.

There are not only physical ideals.

Being a good Christian, for example.
Being compassionate and tolerant, is another.

Quote :

Females have an easier time of it.....?
What planet do you live on, seriously? Life is a struggle made all the more difficult by.....pah!

Can you read?

Reread what I said and in what context I said females have an easier time of it.

Quote :

Soon women and men will realise all this gender battling is leading them right up the garden path without a paddle.....just where the system wants us. Divided into nice little individual units of production.

There is no battle.
I am not battling women. They are incapable of offering any challenge to my positions. They simply follow trends,a s you are, with this desire to sweep it all under the carpet, forget about it and just assume that we are different but equal and that we all need each other.

Hell, I need a tree, will I ignore the fact that it is mindless and flatter it and call it a spirit, or will i study it, find patterns in its behavior, see the differences and exploit it to my advantage?

I am exploring the human condition and you are trying to impose a gag-rule upon it, because some of the insights trouble your romantic idealism.

That's just too bad, now isn't it?

The system wants thoughtless, automatons, that simple take certain of its ideals as self-evident and they feel all united and the same.
The system is creating this illusion of individuality so as to keep a semblance of division, while it promotes uniformity as part of this individuality.
The system depends on uniformity, not on differentiation.

An Orwellian method.

Quote :

Capitalism is a system imposed on a set of people by another set of people. There is a collusion of sorts from both parties in an attempt to maintain the status quo as it offers benefits to both. When the costs begin to outweigh the benefits things start to creak and the steam runs out.

What a beautiful display of romantic idealism and naivete.

Capitalism simply institutionalizes and directs particular, preexisting human traits.

Exploitation, you pathetic creature, wasn't invented by capitalism.
Farming is the exploitation of one species by another, or of one group by another.


Husbandry and domestication does not only occur when man dominates another organism, but when one human group dominates another.
It's part of natural selection.

The practice of exploitation is not unique to systems.

We exploit one another constantly.
Economic is but the standardization of this give and take of interactions.

We exploit friends. We exploit lovers.
We exploit family.


We take, and we offer in order to maintain the relationship.
So, we compromise and we give so as to continue taking.

Satyr wrote:

"Standing still' is not an option...the illusion of it is.

From a metaphysical standpoint all is in constant flow. There is no static state.

The value judgments of stillness is based on a differentiation in rates of change.
The direction one moves towards is what we call character or personality. The ideal, we will never attain, defines us in this way.

So which direction are you flowing towards or away from satyr? Absurdity lies in all directions it seems.

Quote :

If it disturbs you that you are defined by your past and that someone can then discover yuor essence by analyzing this determining past, is not my problem.

And if you and I are determined solely by our pasts then we may as well lay down and do nothing ever again for you imply that we cannot ever get beyond what has been.

Quote :

Definitions are either more or less accurate.
Claiming that another's is "narrow" without being able to justify this claim is a way of dismissing an insight using the insinuation that you escape its premises.

As 50% of my genes are from maternal lineage and 50% from paternal lineage how will you determine and analyze my 'essence'? Which bits fit where? If all wombs are exactly the same and all penises are alike what point is there in having such a brain as humans? We might as well just screw ourselves into the future.

Quote :

Defining yourself, may be a pleasant thuoght, and comforting, but it isn't honest, when you factor in the truth that you did not choose any of your tastes or traits or even the time and place you were born into.

My grandparents never tasted a banana. How will I determine whether or not I will like bananas? Will it depend upon whether my mother likes bananas? Or whether my father likes bananas. Or does it depend on the fact that humans are omnivorous?

No-one chooses where or when they were born!

Quote :

The nurture over nature fails and is only a nice little pacifier, suckled by the naive wanting to preserve the idea that they are masters of their own destiny, with no effort involved.

Nature, nurture, nutrition, education, experience; all are factors in shaping the individual. No-one can determine their destiny they can only flow in a certain direction....

Quote :

If that were the case then a chimp cannot be defined by us. It, too, can be human, if given the opportunity and nurtured "correctly".

Have you seen what happens to humans and chimps that are not nurtured? You cannot 'nurture' one species into being another species. You can, however, teach a chimp sign language so that it can communicate with a human very successfully. Tell me how do you define a chimp?

Quote :

That humans intervene on natural processes and impose memes over genes.

Human meddling.

No. That humans exhibit a range of sexual behaviours. Impose all you will those behaviours will and do out (they are called divorce rates).

Quote :

Monogamy isn't innate. It must be taught, trained and supported by religion and social rules, under threats and using promises.
Promiscuity is a natural mechanism of ensuring variety to meet variable environmental conditions.

Monogamy exists in nature. Polygamy exists in nature. Promiscuity exists in nature. All different sexual behaviours in the general scheme of things.



Innate superiority in human to human terms - what is that.....? The brainiest; the brawniest; the most handsome...?

Quote :

Superior within a given environment. The fittest.
this is where the conflict between natural and man-made environments produces contradictions in behavior.

But what is the defining characteristic of our species in reference to other species?
Reason.

Reason and emotion.
Given enough time, of course, other mammals may also develop these characteristics; hell! Such characteristics may already exist in other mammals (hint: they do!). You see once you remove the 'sacred' from the human you are back to being, well animals, after all. So what may appear to be uniquely human suddenly begins to look uniquely primate; uniquely mammalian; uniquely verteabrate; uniquely earthly.

You can boil down or ratchet up the definitions. At whim. So if you boil down the female better do it to the male too. Or the species or the genus, etc, etc.

Quote :

Females have an easier time of it.....?
What planet do you live on, seriously? Life is a struggle made all the more difficult by.....pah!

Quote :

Can you read?

Reread what I said and in what context I said females have an easier time of it.

I can read. We are all having a hard time of it. Aren't we? So...let's just carry on with that.... or change.

Quote :

Soon women and men will realise all this gender battling is leading them right up the garden path without a paddle.....just where the system wants us. Divided into nice little individual units of production.

Quote :

There is no battle.
I am not battling women. They are incapable of offering any challenge to my positions. They simply follow trends,a s you are, with this desire to sweep it all under the carpet, forget about it and just assume that we are different but equal and that we all need each other.

Forget about what? Sweep what under the carpet? Your definitions? I'm not sweeping them under anything. I'm shoving them back at you.

Good luck with your not needing and your autonomy, though. I'll carry on with mine. Our species doen't need us so why should we worry about it?

Quote :

Hell, I need a tree, will I ignore the fact that it is mindless and flatter it and call it a spirit, or will i study it, find patterns in its behavior, see the differences and exploit it to my advantage?

Flatter all you will. The tree cannot not hear you. Cut it down and burn it. Exploit it by all means and when you have cut down and exploited it do the same to the one next to it now that you have understood it so perfectly. All those very inconvenient trees why not cut them all down and what will you have...? Deforestation. But do carry on exploiting by all means. Plenty of trees left, aren't there?

Quote :

I am exploring the human condition and you are trying to impose a gag-rule upon it, because some of the insights trouble your romantic idealism.

That's just too bad, now isn't it?

I am not trying to gag you. You are trying to gag me. Aren't you?

Quote :

The system wants thoughtless, automatons, that simple take certain of its ideals as self-evident and they feel all united and the same.
The system is creating this illusion of individuality so as to keep a semblance of division, while it promotes uniformity as part of this individuality.
The system depends on uniformity, not on differentiation.

An Orwellian method.

Has the system acheived that then?

Quote :

Exploitation, you pathetic creature, wasn't invented by capitalism.
Farming is the exploitation of one species by another, or of one group by another.

Any decent farmer will tell you if you keep exploiting without replenishing whatever you're exploiting runs out.

Quote :

We exploit friends. We exploit lovers.
We exploit family.

And how do all these people feel about that? Does it matter, to you?

Quote :

We take, and we offer in order to maintain the relationship.
So, we compromise and we give so as to continue taking.

Give and take, eh? That's beginning to sound a bit like co-operation; by another name. And you know where that might lead?

maryshelley wrote:

So which direction are you flowing towards or away from satyr? Absurdity lies in all directions it seems.

"Satyr"?!

Satyr is a persona; an aspect of who I am.
It's not an ideal.

Quote :

And if you and I are determined solely by our pasts then we may as well lay down and do nothing ever again for you imply that we cannot ever get beyond what has been.

Once more you use absolutes to attempt to escape the truth.

Replace "solely", with predominately, and "cannot ever" with slow incremental changes using the will, directing becomnig towards an ideal, and exerting much effort in discipline and resistance and work.

Quote :

As 50% of my genes are from maternal lineage and 50% from paternal lineage how will you determine and analyze my 'essence'? Which bits fit where? If all wombs are exactly the same and all penises are alike what point is there in having such a brain as humans? We might as well just screw ourselves into the future.

Are you acting dumb or are you so?

Your lineage is as you say...but both are human beings with whatever that lineage determines how the female and male types are characterized by.

Quote :

My grandparents never tasted a banana. How will I determine whether or not I will like bananas?

Taste it.

The past, fool, reveals itself in the present.
I need not know the entire history of an individual to see the final outcome and deduce it from it.

Quote :

Will it depend upon whether my mother likes bananas? Or whether my father likes bananas. Or does it depend on the fact that humans are omnivorous?

No-one chooses where or when they were born!

Bananas, you little child - because now you are using childish tactics to escape - represents an amalgamation of nutrients, with a past as it has developed within a particular environment.
How you react to it is determined by your lineage and the needs you have and the tastes this has determined.

Your grandma need have tasted a banana to have determined how you would be inclined to react to it.
Your reaction is her own.

My grandma loved spicy foods. My mother doesn't.
I do.
I've inherited that taste from her, even if she may not have ever tasted some of the spicy foods I have access to.

Quote :

Nature, nurture, nutrition, education, experience; all are factors in shaping the individual. No-one can determine their destiny they can only flow in a certain direction....

Did I say they can determine their own destiny or that they can slightly alter it, if they will to do so, with great effort?

Quote :

Have you seen what happens to humans and chimps that are not nurtured?

They get spoiled.

Quote :

You cannot 'nurture' one species into being another species. You can, however, teach a chimp sign language so that it can communicate with a human very successfully. Tell me how do you define a chimp?

You can teach it to imitate, yes.
There are billions imitating civility without understanding it.

A chimp: A phenomenon, based on a consistent pattern, replicating itself, and exhibiting consistent reactions and behaviors in reference to specific simulations.
A phenomenon that has split off a family tree due to some prolonged period of genetic isolation.

Quote :

No. That humans exhibit a range of sexual behaviours. Impose all you will those behaviours will and do out (they are called divorce rates).

You are so foolish it's becomnig frustrating.

Sexual divergence is how repressed sexuality depressurizes.
Sex, as was already noted, has also evolved to play social roles of relationship building, and reinforcing status and bonding individuals so as to facilitate cooperation.

You like the idea of a humanity that is so diverse that nothing definite can be said about it, as can be said about chimp or alligator behavior.
It offers you the comforting notion that you cannot be understood or placed in a box and then manipulated. Yet, marketing and politics speaks otherwise.

Watch the documentary Century of Self, and get back to me.

Humans, and especially women, are not as complicated or mysterious,a s you would like to think.
They are but another species with particular traits, potentials and behavioral patterns.

Quote :

Monogamy exists in nature. Polygamy exists in nature. Promiscuity exists in nature. All different sexual behaviours in the general scheme of things.

Yes, you fool, and each within different species.

Are you, fucking, that dense?
People like you drive me up the walls with your simplicity, trying to escape reality.

Yes, there are species that exhibit monogamous reproductive behavior....none of them are primates.
There are also species that can breath under water...not humans.

There are also creatures that eat only one kind of leaf.

Quote :

Reason and emotion.

Spoken like a true female.

Emotion is an ingrained reaction to specific stimuli, offering the advantage of efficiency or a mechanism of forcing a particular kind of behavior that may go against preexisting behavior...an evolution that overrides previous genetic programming.

Quote :

Given enough time, of course, other mammals may also develop these characteristics; hell! Such characteristics may already exist in other mammals (hint: they do!). You see once you remove the 'sacred' from the human you are back to being, well animals, after all. So what may appear to be uniquely human suddenly begins to look uniquely primate; uniquely mammalian; uniquely verteabrate; uniquely earthly.

You can boil down or ratchet up the definitions. At whim. So if you boil down the female better do it to the male too. Or the species or the genus, etc, etc.

And, still, degree makes all the difference, as the Butterfly Effect teaches us that slight modifications result, in time, in huge differentiation.

A chimp differs from a human in a few percentage points, but look what kind of the difference that makes.

Now let us say one human being differs from another in 1/1000%.
What a difference that makes.

Quote :

I can read. We are all having a hard time of it. Aren't we? So...let's just carry on with that.... or change.

Translation: Let us ignore these uncomfortable, for me, insights and return to the delusion of uniformity and equal potentials, as the culture urges us to do.
We'll be happier if we just stop resisting the norm.

Now, THAT'S the difference between a male and a female attitude.

Quote :

Forget about what? Sweep what under the carpet? Your definitions? I'm not sweeping them under anything. I'm shoving them back at you.

You've done nothing of the sort.
You are simply preaching ignoring them so as to find gender peace...or some such bullshit.

There is no gender war, as you've been taught to believe.
Women simply represent the tool, the method, males use to dominate each other and what they use to determine human destiny.

Quote :

Good luck with your not needing and your autonomy, though. I'll carry on with mine. Our species doen't need us so why should we worry about it?

"Worry about it"?!

But your willingness to remain as dependent as you are, is also indicative of your gender's psychological leanings...is it not?
Did I not explain your kind well?

That many women proved my points by trying to persuade me that their uniformity is best and a sure way to happiness, as if such a thing is even possible, was perfect.
That many of you women proved my every word while trying to disprove them, was particularly entertaining.

There was an AnitaS trying to excuse her sex from reality, by claiming child birth was to blame for why females are absent from philosophy (males having no social or family burdens, of course) and then also claiming that philosophy does not exclude females, which it doesn't, while never saying anything that would prove otherwise and pointing to female astronauts and college graduates and the such as evidence of what?

Did I not state that females do well under authority, accepting education and accomplishing much within social contexts, while never, ever exhibiting any thinking outside the box, contrary to social convention and only doing so when influenced by another male ideal?

Where a college graduate equates to an Einstein or a Kant or a Michelangelo, I don't know.
But what a conveniently comforting idea.

Quote :

Flatter all you will. The tree cannot not hear you. Cut it down and burn it. Exploit it by all means and when you have cut down and exploited it do the same to the one next to it now that you have understood it so perfectly. All those very inconvenient trees why not cut them all down and what will you have...? Deforestation. But do carry on exploiting by all means. Plenty of trees left, aren't there?

See what i mean about female emotinoal thinking and the falling back on exaggeration when reasoning fails?

did I advocate deforestation or uncontrolled exploitation?
Did I not say that instincts must be controlled?

Quote :

I am not trying to gag you. You are trying to gag me. Aren't you?

Not at all. I want you to keep on posting. it provides real-time evidence of everything I've ever said about male/female intellectual differences.

Quote :

Has the system acheived that then?

no, and it never will. As I said there are no absolutes and one is characterized by the towards an ideal.

what characterizes this system, you, and those like you 9majority) is yuor idealization of uniformity...a hidden self-hatred and dissatisfaction with the world - a death wish, really.
Like the Christian desire to find 'life after death". An oxymoron, to say the least.
Like saying, to find "black, whiteness" or "strong weakness".

Quote :

Any decent farmer will tell you if you keep exploiting without replenishing whatever you're exploiting runs out.

No shit!!!
Now this is turning into a debate over the degree of exploitation?

Jeez, girl, you've got no leg to stand on, so now you wobble about trying to find crutches.

The difference between the term exploit and interact is mainly one of degree, where both parties use each other in relatively equal measure, but still one dominates the other.
This last is unavoidable.

Just as the difference between a whore and a lady is the price she requires to spread her legs and offer herself up to please and to be pleasured - to be used and to receive recompense for it.
Economics, babes, is also based on natural preexisting phenomena.

Nothing is ever invented from the ether....it is based on soemthing else.
Gender was not invented by men...it was morphed, shaped, manipulated out of preexisting sexual roles.

Quote :

And how do all these people feel about that? Does it matter, to you?

Again with the feelings.

Reason knows of no feelings, if it hopes to be objective.

As for the emotional angle I say this:

From an early age i realized that not all deserve my understanding, my help, my compassion or my love and friendship.

I offer it all with care and discrimiantion.

Quote :

Give and take, eh? That's beginning to sound a bit like co-operation; by another name. And you know where that might lead?

Cooperation, as was already noted, is a compromise.

One only compromises out of need or if the returns promise to be greater in the long-run.

All is selfishness, dear naive woman.
Even your altruism and fake egalitarianism is a forces concession.

[quote="maryshelley"]

MagnetMan wrote:

Quote :

A minor point (or maybe not) humans have always been migratory.....that's how we all got where we are.

Not during the 600 generations of the Bronze Age
We became rooted there.

Quote :

Rooted where?
And do I just take your word for it?

In the soil!

The Bronze Age was entirely devoted
to the domestication of Nature
the protection of land and herds

Clan boundaries were fiercely contended
Nobody left home
unless it was to visit an alliance
made by marriage
it could get you dead!

Family estate was the name of the game.
in that Age of development

We have to rekindle that ancestral spirit
of home pride
and stop ruinning after the buck