Re: The Problem With Women Today
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:34 pm
Not particularly, it really gets in the way of my compassion.Jason wrote: You love feeling superior and above it all don't you prince.
Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment
http://www.theabsolute.net/phpBB/
Not particularly, it really gets in the way of my compassion.Jason wrote: You love feeling superior and above it all don't you prince.
Is this any different from Skip? That is, aren't you both getting turned on by flirting with your own psychological sex?Leyla Shen wrote:My own power to awaken a man (penis definitely included) from the dead, however, does. ;)
Yes, I am talking about the biological female.Leyla Shen wrote:He has clearly and grossly misidentified Woman with the biological female.
I don't remember making that claim.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?
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.Dan Rowden wrote:What do women lie about, exactly?
Aye.Leyla Shen wrote:Oh, and by the way, will you stop advertising my Celtic fetishes, please . . . ?
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."
Yes. The comment you responded to was more tongue-in-cheek. The most important point(s) came before it.Nick wrote:Is this any different from Skip? That is, aren't you both getting turned on by flirting with your own psychological sex?
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 wrote: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.
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).Leyla Shen wrote: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 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.Leyla Shen wrote: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'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.Leyla Shen wrote:What are your thoughts on this research:
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.Lao Tzu wrote:"The sage sees the world as an expansion of his own self."
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.skipair wrote: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.Dan Rowden wrote:What do women lie about, exactly?
EDIT: Maybe the less obvious thing is seeing that there is nothing underneath the act. She's just vapor...
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.skipair wrote:Yeah, what did you think? Of course it's sick. But such if life.David Quinn wrote: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.
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.skipair wrote: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.David Quinn wrote: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?
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?skipair wrote: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.David Quinn wrote:If gorging on swinging dick goes to the root of her survival mechanism, why would she give her social status a higher priority?
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.Alex Jacob wrote: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).
Firstly, and probably of little consequence, that Lao Tzu quote isn't what I identified with in your post...Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Jason and skip,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.Lao Tzu wrote:"The sage sees the world as an expansion of his own self."
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?Trevor Salyzyn wrote: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.
So is your main point that we colour our experiences of the world a lot?Trevor Salyzyn wrote: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.
Alex Jacob wrote: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.
You also thrust me into that position because you are more comfortable if you give me a label.
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.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').
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.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.