The Problem With Women Today

[Blair]

You love feeling superior and above it all don't you prince.

Not particularly, it really gets in the way of my compassion.

[Nick]

My own power to awaken a man (penis definitely included) from the dead, however, does. ;)

Is this any different from Skip? That is, aren't you both getting turned on by flirting with your own psychological sex?

[skipair]

He has clearly and grossly misidentified Woman with the biological female.

Yes, I am talking about the biological female.

On what logical grounds does Skip make the claim that a biological male can be possessed of these characters but be less of a machine uncontrollably lusting for a man-fuck with all its primitive and sexual switches flashing liking a beacon just because he has the penis between his legs?

I don't remember making that claim.

[skipair]

What do women lie about, exactly?

In broad strokes, she lies about who she is. She acts the part of what society deems acceptable and ideal. She acts the part of someone that guys would want to date, marry, and have children with. But if guys knew the truth, they wouldn't want to do that.

EDIT: Maybe the less obvious thing is seeing that there is nothing underneath the act. She's just vapor...

[Jason]

Oh, and by the way, will you stop advertising my Celtic fetishes, please . . . ?

Aye.

[Leyla Shen]

skipair:

What are your thoughts on this research:

The researchers found that men in the study who had the highest levels performed worst in the test, and suggest that is because they are particularly sensitive to sexual images.

Dr Siegfried DeWitte, one of the researchers who worked on the study, said: "We like to think we are all rational beings, but our research suggests ... that people with high testosterone levels are very vulnerable to sexual cues.

"If there are no cues around, they behave normally.

"But if they see sexual images they become impulsive."

He added: "It's a tendency, but these people are not powerless to fight it.

"Hormone levels are one thing, but we can learn to deal with it."

The researchers are conducting similar tests with women. But so far, they have failed to find a visual stimulus which will affect their behaviour."

[Leyla Shen]

Is this any different from Skip? That is, aren't you both getting turned on by flirting with your own psychological sex?

Yes. The comment you responded to was more tongue-in-cheek. The most important point(s) came before it.

[Leyla Shen]

The satisfaction people get from sex and emotional relationships is similar to the satisfaction one gets from taking a shit. Which is, it only brings comfort because things are so uncomfortable before hand. Taking a shit only feels good because it's such a relief from how uncomfortable one was before hand, sex and relationships only feel good because of the terrible feeling that one was lacking something.

You don’t think there’s a significant difference between the discomfort one feels when they need to take a crap and the terrible feeling of lacking something that leads to sex and relationships – a difference significant enough to warrant meaningfully distinguishing between these two things? I mean, as far as I know, Freud was the only one to link taking a crap to human psychology. So, do you think there is more to taking a shit than the discomfort that preceded doing so?

[Nick]

You don’t think there’s a significant difference between the discomfort one feels when they need to take a crap and the terrible feeling of lacking something that leads to sex and relationships – a difference significant enough to warrant meaningfully distinguishing between these two things?

I never said they were equivalent, I just said they had some basic similarities. Which is suffering, desire to end suffering, and relief from suffering (which causes the good feelings).

I mean, as far as I know, Freud was the only one to link taking a crap to human psychology. So, do you think there is more to taking a shit than the discomfort that preceded doing so?

I used taking a shit as an example because I asked some people which bodily function they would eliminate if they had a choice, and I thought for sure most, if not all would say taking a shit because of the mess, smell, and overall grossness. I was surprised to hear them say they would not want to stop being able to take a shit because it feels too good. I explained it only felt good because it feels so bad before hand, but they seemed to think the pain was worth the pleasure. I also explained to people that love only feels so good because one feels so terrible without it, but again they seemed to think the pain was worth the pleasure.

[skipair]

What are your thoughts on this research:

I'm skeptical about how they are trying to relate the effect to testosterone. I'd have to see exactly how they conducted it and what hard data they actually have. Without blood samples or however they normally test T levels, the measuring fingers thing sounds very sketchy, especially because T levels are variable and depend greatly on kind of diet and kind of exercise. It might be legit, but I get the sense they really just wanted to prove their hypothesis and say what they said.

Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see women's reasoning unaffected. When I go into sexual state it is essentially all I can think about and can't really perform any actions, like typing or whatever, nearly the way I normally would. But when I take a woman into sexual state with me, she continues to do everything normally. She can multi-task and I cannot.

[Alex Jacob]

David writes: "This is what is so amusing about the seducer's existence. He believes that he belongs in the highest strata of men, whereas in reality he resides in one of the lowest. Mentally, he is firmly under the thumb of women, hence his constant need to enact strategies to conquer them and wipe them out of existence, or otherwise place them in his harem. All the while, he believes that he is an independent man (a "gamer") who is above it all.

"He is caught up in a baboon-like mentality and thinks this is what life is all about. He even calls those who laugh at such a mentality, and decline to participate in it, "deniers of life"..."

I think the 'denier of life' comment was mine. And what I mean about that is that yone has to examine carefully any platform that recommends denial as a strategy for dealing with the problems that life presents (that life is). Time and time again it has been discovered that 'religious types' recommend a kind of denial that suppresses stuff that shouldn't and perhaps can't be suppressed. Sometimes, the part of a person (a man) that engages in this denial strategy is just part of a mental construct, and our mind (the intellectual part of our personality) is just a part of a much greater part of what we are. We are not only our 'conscious self' and our ego---the part we identify with---but a greater 7/8ths of the rest of us is submerged, 'unconscious'. It is a standard Freudian picture I am presenting and, at the least, I think it is useful.

If you examine the kind of reactions some of the men here write---a sort of angry, bitterness about all that has to do with sex and all else that disturbs them about life, and the strategy of denial, suppression, avoidance, mockery that is recommended---I suggest one can see that it has a 'neurotic' element. I still think one has to work with one's whole self, and part of that self is sexuality, the unconscious triggers that exist below the surface. It is important to have less absolute certainty about the platform of mind as a 'solution' to anything. (I know psychologists who work a great deal with people who have been in cults that recommend suppression of sex, and also one can refer to the destructive aspect of Catholicism-Christianity in this sense: it has done a great deal of harm, and has not 'helped').

I think that women and men, if you go down into the very root of psychology, down into the most basic parts, respond to sexual and violent imagery in ways that are in fact appalling, certainly shocking to our conscious minds. That is the way nature designed the show: the wet lips of the vagina, the erect penis, all of that. It is raw, basic, flesh and blood stuff that is designed to by-pass the defensive mind and to go right to the core. Just as women, if you were really to look into it, can be manipulated with all the right cues, it is pretty obvious that men can too. I don't know if I would put men and women in a separate category.

In that sense I have used the term 'deniers of life' for David and Dan (etc.) It is not at all that I don't empahize with the horror of recognizing how utterly strange and material and sexual life is, and to what degree humans are dominated by these impulses, because I most certainly do. And I do because I see all these things (all parts of life, from the most basic and disturbing up to the highest) existing in me. And very frankly I don't think that we necessarily ever 'overcome' these basic facts of life, I think we make deals with them, I think we learn to manage them. You could say it like this: Erica Jong wrote in Fear of Flying that what a young girl dreams about, despite what she says or what society tells her to say, is a 'huge erection squirting sperm'. And you can find the same corresponding complex of intensity in boys. As long as you have the human animal, you will have these desires. The strangeness of out present is that it is all coming out in the open in very raw and new ways. It is pretty obvious that, in new ways and with new strategies, we are going to have to deal with it---not reject it and push it down (again) but more in the 'Tantric' sense, work with the energy, see what is underneath it.

It is funny you'd mention the 'baboon'. The relevancy of Desmond Morris' The Naked Ape to this conversation is quite apt. The way you describe yourself, and the way a number of you act, along with the quite ridiculous and obfuscating comments of the QRS Women, is that you are not a biological human, that is to say, a human ape.

It is true in a sense what you say: the classical seduction player, if he is not very self aware, is very much playing into the hands of pure, raw forces that move in the realms of 'lower' human consciousness. There are better ways, both for men and women, to spend their time. One way could be in a conscious sexual relationship where sexual energy is worked with and not denied. Where what we are (our longings and desires of a 'lower' order) are not denied and repressed but cultivated in a realm of 'higher cultural achievement'.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

Jason and skip,

"The sage sees the world as an expansion of his own self."

I wasn't expecting anyone to find anything common in my experience, so I'll tell a story that fleshes out this quote somewhat better than my abstraction about treating subconsciousness as consciousness did.

Earlier this month, I was sitting in the Central Academic Building, people-watching (junk food for the soul). It was packed with students, and there was a line of at least thirty people at Tim Horton's. From my chair, I had a view of all their faces.

At some point, I noticed that a girl in line was looking at me. As soon as our eyes met, she started talking a lot louder to her friends, and her movements became extremely animated. She kept looking over at me to see if I was amused. It reminded me of the reaction I get from children, and the corner of my lip curled in a smile. I'm not sure how much of the shy smile was deliberate, but I certainly glanced away despite myself.

She bought her coffee and disappeared. Several minutes later, I stretched at what I thought a random moment, and out of the sheerest coincidence, as I was turning to crack my back, she was walking toward me with a friend. There had been no way I would have known she was coming back. This time, I simply ignored her. I was kind of unnerved by the coincidence. The timing was too perfect, almost choreographed.

The last I saw of her, over all the noise of CAB, I heard her say a word, a little too loudly. Already, and even though I had never seen this girl before as far as I know, I could recognize her voice. "Sorry." As far as her consciousness extends, it was part of a different conversation.

Just as if I had been dealing with a dog, I can abstract a meaningful dialogue from this, but the fact is that I viewed the world in the exact same introverted, self-aware way that I view myself. The world, her included, was responding fluidly to me, with actions in the world building and expanding upon my own thoughts and actions.

[David Quinn]

What do women lie about, exactly?

In broad strokes, she lies about who she is. She acts the part of what society deems acceptable and ideal. She acts the part of someone that guys would want to date, marry, and have children with. But if guys knew the truth, they wouldn't want to do that.

EDIT: Maybe the less obvious thing is seeing that there is nothing underneath the act. She's just vapor...

By the same token, if guys knew the truth, they wouldn't have any reason to get involved in the seduction game. The same truth that undercuts love and marriage also undercuts the pleasures of seduction.

If everything a woman does is a lie, or mere vapour, then there is no real basis for a seducer to get his kicks. Isn't it the case, then, that in your attempts to receive the ego boosts involved with seducing that you are also participating in a lie?

The primary task for women is to allow themselves to be pushed over so that puffed up, narcissistic men can indulge their dionysian fantasies and channel their sexual energy in the direction of their ovaries.

Yeah, what did you think? Of course it's sick. But such if life.

This is just another lie. You're passing off the responsibility for your own choice to participate in this sick pastime by pretending that you have no choice, that it is ingrained in life itself.

You are quick to describe women as being liars and yet, as things stand, you are an even bigger liar yourself.

At the moment, you are a young, slim guy with glowing skin. What happens when you are older and fatter and have poor skin, and are possibly homeless? Do you think you'll get the same reaction then?

No, especially if homeless it'd probably be too creepy. But older and fatter and poorer skin is still in the realm of possibility, lessening with a higher degree, probably at different and variable rates for each, and at different rates and variables for different girls.

To be honest, I find your whole swinging dick thing creepy, full stop. It also indicates a lack of character, since you are using your dick as a kind of prop to make up for the shortfall in the powers of your personality. Famous seducers in the past never had to make use of such a crude prop.

It would be better and more honest if you stopped thinking of yourself as an alpha male who is part of a "secret society" and other similar ego-boosting spin. That's just another lie. You need to face the very real possibility that you are, in fact, becoming a sexual deviant. An ordinary, garden-variety pervert.

Anyway, onto a more interesting subject:

If gorging on swinging dick goes to the root of her survival mechanism, why would she give her social status a higher priority?

It doesn't go to the root of her survival mechanism. It is one facet of what attracts her to a man, which is one facet of the social matrix, which she creates and manouvers through via her lies, acting, and soulessness. THAT is the root of her survival mechanism.

Do you think that a woman's propensity for swooning at the hands of an alpha male is also part of her lying and acting? Or do you class it as part of her underlying real nature?

-

[Jason]

David, was you and Sue having a kid intentional or an accident?

[David Quinn]

Unintentional.

-

[Jason]

Did you consider abortion? Why/why not?

[David Quinn]

Of course. But there were health issues involved. Why do you ask?

-

[Jason]

Because I find it interesting that you and Sue, of all people, given both your very strong views on these issues, managed to end up having a romantic and sexual relationship and a kid.

[Loki]

Yes, it is....ironic, I suppose.

[David Quinn]

Speaking for myself, I was still in the process of formulating my views on the subject, and on life generally. But yes, I can see that it would be interesting to some observers in the here and now.

When you're not sure about how you want to lead your life, as was the case for me back then, your future becomes a lottery.

-

[Jason]

How old were you when Sue got pregnant?

[David Quinn]

26.

-

[Jason]

I think the 'denier of life' comment was mine. And what I mean about that is that yone has to examine carefully any platform that recommends denial as a strategy for dealing with the problems that life presents (that life is).

And then, in contrast to David and Sue, we have Alex trying to liberate the "deniers of life", who(if I remember correctly) has himself decided never to have children, never to experience life as a father, and is possibly regularly using "unnatural" methods to achieve it.

[Jason]

Jason and skip,

"The sage sees the world as an expansion of his own self."

I wasn't expecting anyone to find anything common in my experience, so I'll tell a story that fleshes out this quote somewhat better than my abstraction about treating subconsciousness as consciousness did.

Firstly, and probably of little consequence, that Lao Tzu quote isn't what I identified with in your post...

At some point, I noticed that a girl in line was looking at me. As soon as our eyes met, she started talking a lot louder to her friends, and her movements became extremely animated. She kept looking over at me to see if I was amused. It reminded me of the reaction I get from children, and the corner of my lip curled in a smile. I'm not sure how much of the shy smile was deliberate, but I certainly glanced away despite myself.

She bought her coffee and disappeared. Several minutes later, I stretched at what I thought a random moment, and out of the sheerest coincidence, as I was turning to crack my back, she was walking toward me with a friend. There had been no way I would have known she was coming back. This time, I simply ignored her. I was kind of unnerved by the coincidence. The timing was too perfect, almost choreographed.

The last I saw of her, over all the noise of CAB, I heard her say a word, a little too loudly. Already, and even though I had never seen this girl before as far as I know, I could recognize her voice. "Sorry." As far as her consciousness extends, it was part of a different conversation.

That description of your personal inner experience makes me see you as much more vulnerable and sensitive than I've previously perceived you to be(based on reading your other posts to GF.) I like this person, I like this Trevor. Maybe you usually present a tough facade to GF?

Just as if I had been dealing with a dog, I can abstract a meaningful dialogue from this, but the fact is that I viewed the world in the exact same introverted, self-aware way that I view myself. The world, her included, was responding fluidly to me, with actions in the world building and expanding upon my own thoughts and actions.

So is your main point that we colour our experiences of the world a lot?

[David Quinn]

David writes: "This is what is so amusing about the seducer's existence. He believes that he belongs in the highest strata of men, whereas in reality he resides in one of the lowest. Mentally, he is firmly under the thumb of women, hence his constant need to enact strategies to conquer them and wipe them out of existence, or otherwise place them in his harem. All the while, he believes that he is an independent man (a "gamer") who is above it all.

"He is caught up in a baboon-like mentality and thinks this is what life is all about. He even calls those who laugh at such a mentality, and decline to participate in it, "deniers of life"..."

I think the 'denier of life' comment was mine.

One of the many labels you inflict on people here, yes.

You also thrust me into that position because you are more comfortable if you give me a label.

The irony of this is too much.

And what I mean about that is that yone has to examine carefully any platform that recommends denial as a strategy for dealing with the problems that life presents (that life is). Time and time again it has been discovered that 'religious types' recommend a kind of denial that suppresses stuff that shouldn't and perhaps can't be suppressed. Sometimes, the part of a person (a man) that engages in this denial strategy is just part of a mental construct, and our mind (the intellectual part of our personality) is just a part of a much greater part of what we are. We are not only our 'conscious self' and our ego---the part we identify with---but a greater 7/8ths of the rest of us is submerged, 'unconscious'. It is a standard Freudian picture I am presenting and, at the least, I think it is useful.

And yet you are unwilling or unable to apply this principle to yourself. You are just as much as suppressor and denier as those whom you criticize here. For example, you constantly deny the value and existence of the philosophic life, as well as the understanding and experience of Truth, or indeed any kind of post-baboon life at all.

Everyone denies things in one form or another, whether it be the baboon's mentality or the philosophic mentality, or something else. It is inescapable. So for you to criticize people on the basis that they are deniers is equivalent to criticizing them on the basis that they breathe.

Do you even know what I am talking about here?

In any case, I don't advocate that people should suppress whatever is inside them. Quite the opposite, I believe that people should bring it all to the surface as best they can, so that they can begin to deal with it consciously and intelligently. Suppression can have its temporary uses, but in the long-run it causes far more harm than good.

If you examine the kind of reactions some of the men here write---a sort of angry, bitterness about all that has to do with sex and all else that disturbs them about life, and the strategy of denial, suppression, avoidance, mockery that is recommended---I suggest one can see that it has a 'neurotic' element. I still think one has to work with one's whole self, and part of that self is sexuality, the unconscious triggers that exist below the surface.

I agree that one should work with one's sexuality and not against it. But that is different from simply indulging in it willy-nilly and giving it free reign. Most people have violent triggers inside them as well, but that doesn't mean they should start bashing people in the pretext of "working with one's whole self". The existence of these triggers shouldn't be denied and suppressed, but neither should they be freely expressed just for the sake of it. One has to acknowledge and deal with these triggers in an intelligent, forward-thinking manner.

The aim should be to grow beyond these things in a purposeful, yet natural manner. Indulging in dionysian fantasies and otherwise obsessing about sex is appropriate for people in their teens and twenties. It is the natural period in which to do these things, just as playing with toys is a natural phase of childhood. How old are you now, Alex? In your 50's? And you are still obsessing about sex and pursuing dionysian fantasies. That seriously reeks of stagnation to me.

It's clear that you are very attached to the baboon mentality and sexual orgiastic pleasure, and you are trying to find ways to justify this self-indulgence. And one of the ways you do this is by labeling those who aren't interested in following suit with things like "priest" and "denier of life". It is simply a self-serving exercise on your part.

I'd far rather see the open bitterness of an idealistic philosopher struggling against the power of woman in his mind than the smug jolliness of a fellow who has succumbed and given up on truth altogether. It shows that he still has some life in him.

It is important to have less absolute certainty about the platform of mind as a 'solution' to anything. (I know psychologists who work a great deal with people who have been in cults that recommend suppression of sex, and also one can refer to the destructive aspect of Catholicism-Christianity in this sense: it has done a great deal of harm, and has not 'helped').

Your mind operates just as much from a platform of absolute certainty as anyone else's here. It is a very vague, wishy-washy platform to be sure, but it is there nonetheless. But again, you don't seem to have the ability or willingness to uncover this facet inside yourself. It is something that is firmly suppressed by your own mind.

I think that women and men, if you go down into the very root of psychology, down into the most basic parts, respond to sexual and violent imagery in ways that are in fact appalling, certainly shocking to our conscious minds. That is the way nature designed the show: the wet lips of the vagina, the erect penis, all of that. It is raw, basic, flesh and blood stuff that is designed to by-pass the defensive mind and to go right to the core. Just as women, if you were really to look into it, can be manipulated with all the right cues, it is pretty obvious that men can too. I don't know if I would put men and women in a separate category.

The difference is that men have greater powers of mind and can teach themselves how to stop acting in such a reactionary, pavlovian manner and behave more consciously with long-term goals in mind.

It is not a question of setting up mental defences and hoping nothing gets through, but of reprogramming the mind from top to bottom using the tool of wisdom (the understanding of emptiness) as an aid.

In that sense I have used the term 'deniers of life' for David and Dan (etc.) It is not at all that I don't empahize with the horror of recognizing how utterly strange and material and sexual life is, and to what degree humans are dominated by these impulses, because I most certainly do. And I do because I see all these things (all parts of life, from the most basic and disturbing up to the highest) existing in me. And very frankly I don't think that we necessarily ever 'overcome' these basic facts of life, I think we make deals with them, I think we learn to manage them.

I know for certain that you have no experience or knowledge of what is truly "highest" in life, and therefore no knowledge of the relationship it has with the rest of life. What you think of as the "highest" is merely the upper echelons of the baboon mentality.

Given this, it is entirely understandable that you believe sex goes to the heart of life. Because, for you, it does.

-