...is illustrated here:
<a href="http://www.tip-thailand.org/Images/wede ... ed4.jpg</a>
The difference between man and woman...
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: The difference between man and woman...
Quite a good illustration.
Man: austere, pure, simple, straightforward, cutting to the core, non-duplicitious.
Woman: decorative, all over the place, conflicting desires and intentions, incoherent, never really achieves anything.
Man: austere, pure, simple, straightforward, cutting to the core, non-duplicitious.
Woman: decorative, all over the place, conflicting desires and intentions, incoherent, never really achieves anything.
Re: The difference between man and woman...
Macho Thomas comes up with an internet oldie.
Yes, women are great, aren't they?
Yes, women are great, aren't they?
-
birdofhermes
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm
men and women
I'm particularly fond of that picture and keep in in my inbox.
Man: austere, pure, simple, straightforward, cutting to the core, non-duplicitious.
Woman: decorative, all over the place, conflicting desires and intentions, incoherent, never really achieves anything.
Yes, being a woman, at least a great woman, is harder to pull off in a way because it is so much more complex a life. For this reason, women have 15% more blood flow to their brains. Yes, it appears more chaotic, and perhaps it is indeed a sign of inefficiency, but it is also because women engage in a wider variety of tasks. It certainly is easier to need less blood flow when you are able to focus on one thing at a time, and when large areas of concern are sort of gray for you.
It's interesting though, that yogis and experienced meditators have been shown to enter certain brain wave patterns which balance the two sides of their brains. Interesting because women are already born with a larger apparatus to connect the two hemispheres, which gives them a definite leg up in enlightenment. But as far as meditating, it appears women and girls have a harder time shutting off the minds than men do.
Oh it's all well and good to simply dismiss the emotional realm as superfluous. When even a small little girl sees an infant, or even another small helpless creature, her brain releases oxytocin - the same hormone that causes milk to let down and the uterus to contract. A small boy has no such reaction. So the world of things needing nurturing is just not very real to him. Naturally, when something is not very real to you, it is easy to dismiss it. But isn't it funny that women care about complex, living systems, and men care about how stuff works and moves.
According to the latest brain research, the inner experience of little girls is richer than that of little boys. They also have better impulse control, for hormonal reasons.
I was reading one such recent book, in which a couple described the behavior of the daughter and son when young. They boy, obviously very bright, was totally focused on machines from about age 2. The little girl had a whole fantasy life with her various dolls and stuffed animals. One day when going into the store, she took a stuffed animal to carry into the store with her, leaving two in the car. Her mother invited her to take another one. No, the girl said, if she did that, the one left behind would be lonely, whereas if she left two together, everyone would have company. The mother was struck by the fact that her little boy, in a million years, would never have even considered having such thoughts about a hunk of cloth.
This little girl will one day know how to raise a real man.
Man: austere, pure, simple, straightforward, cutting to the core, non-duplicitious.
Woman: decorative, all over the place, conflicting desires and intentions, incoherent, never really achieves anything.
Yes, being a woman, at least a great woman, is harder to pull off in a way because it is so much more complex a life. For this reason, women have 15% more blood flow to their brains. Yes, it appears more chaotic, and perhaps it is indeed a sign of inefficiency, but it is also because women engage in a wider variety of tasks. It certainly is easier to need less blood flow when you are able to focus on one thing at a time, and when large areas of concern are sort of gray for you.
It's interesting though, that yogis and experienced meditators have been shown to enter certain brain wave patterns which balance the two sides of their brains. Interesting because women are already born with a larger apparatus to connect the two hemispheres, which gives them a definite leg up in enlightenment. But as far as meditating, it appears women and girls have a harder time shutting off the minds than men do.
Oh it's all well and good to simply dismiss the emotional realm as superfluous. When even a small little girl sees an infant, or even another small helpless creature, her brain releases oxytocin - the same hormone that causes milk to let down and the uterus to contract. A small boy has no such reaction. So the world of things needing nurturing is just not very real to him. Naturally, when something is not very real to you, it is easy to dismiss it. But isn't it funny that women care about complex, living systems, and men care about how stuff works and moves.
According to the latest brain research, the inner experience of little girls is richer than that of little boys. They also have better impulse control, for hormonal reasons.
I was reading one such recent book, in which a couple described the behavior of the daughter and son when young. They boy, obviously very bright, was totally focused on machines from about age 2. The little girl had a whole fantasy life with her various dolls and stuffed animals. One day when going into the store, she took a stuffed animal to carry into the store with her, leaving two in the car. Her mother invited her to take another one. No, the girl said, if she did that, the one left behind would be lonely, whereas if she left two together, everyone would have company. The mother was struck by the fact that her little boy, in a million years, would never have even considered having such thoughts about a hunk of cloth.
This little girl will one day know how to raise a real man.
Re: men and women
birdofhermes wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr>it is so much more complex a life. For this reason, women have 15% more blood flow to their brains. ... women are already born with a larger apparatus to connect the two hemispheres, which gives them a definite leg up in enlightenment....According to the latest brain research, the inner experience of little girls is richer than that of little boys. They also have better impulse control, for hormonal reasons.<hr>
It's obvious that these findings are open to all kinds of interpretation, and yours is but one specifically designed to support your agenda. No direct correlation between these vague medical theories and the sweeping assumptions you make about their alleged affects exists in any way at all. You could just as easily make the argument that they are retarded imbeciles due to the flooding of hormones and inability to focus logically.
Martin
Quote:Quote:<hr>it is so much more complex a life. For this reason, women have 15% more blood flow to their brains. ... women are already born with a larger apparatus to connect the two hemispheres, which gives them a definite leg up in enlightenment....According to the latest brain research, the inner experience of little girls is richer than that of little boys. They also have better impulse control, for hormonal reasons.<hr>
It's obvious that these findings are open to all kinds of interpretation, and yours is but one specifically designed to support your agenda. No direct correlation between these vague medical theories and the sweeping assumptions you make about their alleged affects exists in any way at all. You could just as easily make the argument that they are retarded imbeciles due to the flooding of hormones and inability to focus logically.
Martin
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
Re: men and women
<span style="color:white;">Paul: Macho Thomas comes up with an internet oldie. Yes, women are great, aren't they?</span>
I don't see the macho part. I imagined being offered those two devices at the same price. I would definitely buy the one with the colorful buttons, because it seems better value and more fun.
Thomas
I don't see the macho part. I imagined being offered those two devices at the same price. I would definitely buy the one with the colorful buttons, because it seems better value and more fun.
Thomas
men and women
Quote:Quote:<hr>birdofhermes
This little girl will one day know how to raise a real man. <hr>
Absolute truth.
A woman in mother mode is like an army.
In lover mode she is like a rabble.
A man in father mode is like a cause.
In lover mode he is like a dictator.
This little girl will one day know how to raise a real man. <hr>
Absolute truth.
A woman in mother mode is like an army.
In lover mode she is like a rabble.
A man in father mode is like a cause.
In lover mode he is like a dictator.
Re: men and women
Sorry, Thomas. You have a great smile!
Another internet oldie for ya.
<a href="http://www.good4asmile.com/funpics/men_ ... ote.htm</a>
Another internet oldie for ya.
<a href="http://www.good4asmile.com/funpics/men_ ... ote.htm</a>
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: men and women
Thomas wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr> I imagined being offered those two devices at the same price. I would definitely buy the one with the colorful buttons, because it seems better value and more fun. <hr> This is classic misogny, of course - reducing woman to the status of a toy. For most men, that's all that women are - multi-knobbed bits of fun. The evil of this outlook lies in the way that it pressures women not to develop consistency in their thinking and behaviour, and thus blocks off their chances to evolve into the simplicity of a sage.
Quote:Quote:<hr> I imagined being offered those two devices at the same price. I would definitely buy the one with the colorful buttons, because it seems better value and more fun. <hr> This is classic misogny, of course - reducing woman to the status of a toy. For most men, that's all that women are - multi-knobbed bits of fun. The evil of this outlook lies in the way that it pressures women not to develop consistency in their thinking and behaviour, and thus blocks off their chances to evolve into the simplicity of a sage.
In labour for those in labour OR pap-producers vs prodders
“In labour for those in labour†OR “prodders vs. pap-producersâ€
Keywords: survival, evolutionary winners, competition, egotism, emotion
Because humans have developed to ensure their continuity at the expense of the survival of other species (this might be the definition of egotism), they focus on survival as an ultimate ordinance. What is survival for humans as a species? By nature, it is continuity by remaking.
Humans have a sexual remaking, meaning two different “sectioned†types (“cut†off from each other, ie “sexâ€). They are two different types because of the continuity imperative: one type is constantly holding (labouring to maintain attachments between survival inputs and “itself†– including in “itself†all the things it holds) and the other type is constantly creating the links to survival inputs that the other maintains.
The former type, according to the survival-by-remaking “prick†(instinct), is a curer and a carer; the latter type is a kind of gaseous current that labours in an apparent chaos to “generate more energyâ€. The generation of energy is a process of establishing an order, or destroying an order; it builds and breaks so that the other type can glean inputs for the consequent “remakes†(the next set).
Because one type is by comparison more dependent on the risk activity of the other type, it is perceived by the entire species to be less capable of generating inputs on its own or ensuring the total species’ continuity. However, because “traditional†risk-taking behaviour has generated a scarcity of inputs (by not ensuring the continuity of other species), as a result the entire species has come to a point of conflict.
That is, because one type is attached to securing the remaking process, and the other obsessed with supporting that process, the species as a whole has lost its capacity to survive within its whole system.
Simply, they fuck (everything else off).
The obsession in this forum with genius, logical thinking, reason and rationality demonstrates the return to a different kind of remaking – the destruction of the traditional risk activities and creation of new risk activities. The emphasis on non-attachment, non-security, non-maintenance, and non-continuity of the problematic human types (that have caused problems in how the species survives) is about “risking†the species’ survival by eliminating that type.
Eliminating the security-conscious “holdersâ€, and turning the “on the edge†or “generator†types in on themselves to destroy the species’ “prickâ€, revolves around using the species’ most developed faculty, its brain (comparatively, since survival of the fittest is its obsession) to destroy an old order and establish a new one. A bit like an orb-weaver spider remaking over and over to predate on selected insects.
The effect of remaking all the species into a one-type brain category is both:
- to reduce the entire population physically by eliminating a “holder†brain type, including the attachment to remaking
- to ensure the remaining population is more focussed on non-egotistical inter-system survival, ie survival of the wisest
Many of those wise generator brain types (whether originally born a holder or a generator) must choose to eliminate themselves, to discourage attachment and self-maintenance by their demonstration. It would not seem to be a matter of will, but of the logic of causality. However, the wise must first create enough of the “de-holder-ed†types, out of both holders and generators.
From a different perspective, survival of the fittest (that is, wisest) can be seen as yet another egotistical attachment. Can the wise be sure that what their brains are generating is not caused by attachment to the “new generator†logic of special continuity?
Emotions are a reaction to ensure survival at the cost of another surviving, and are thus related to egotism, the concept that one human surviving at the expense of others is better.
Kven
Keywords: survival, evolutionary winners, competition, egotism, emotion
Because humans have developed to ensure their continuity at the expense of the survival of other species (this might be the definition of egotism), they focus on survival as an ultimate ordinance. What is survival for humans as a species? By nature, it is continuity by remaking.
Humans have a sexual remaking, meaning two different “sectioned†types (“cut†off from each other, ie “sexâ€). They are two different types because of the continuity imperative: one type is constantly holding (labouring to maintain attachments between survival inputs and “itself†– including in “itself†all the things it holds) and the other type is constantly creating the links to survival inputs that the other maintains.
The former type, according to the survival-by-remaking “prick†(instinct), is a curer and a carer; the latter type is a kind of gaseous current that labours in an apparent chaos to “generate more energyâ€. The generation of energy is a process of establishing an order, or destroying an order; it builds and breaks so that the other type can glean inputs for the consequent “remakes†(the next set).
Because one type is by comparison more dependent on the risk activity of the other type, it is perceived by the entire species to be less capable of generating inputs on its own or ensuring the total species’ continuity. However, because “traditional†risk-taking behaviour has generated a scarcity of inputs (by not ensuring the continuity of other species), as a result the entire species has come to a point of conflict.
That is, because one type is attached to securing the remaking process, and the other obsessed with supporting that process, the species as a whole has lost its capacity to survive within its whole system.
Simply, they fuck (everything else off).
The obsession in this forum with genius, logical thinking, reason and rationality demonstrates the return to a different kind of remaking – the destruction of the traditional risk activities and creation of new risk activities. The emphasis on non-attachment, non-security, non-maintenance, and non-continuity of the problematic human types (that have caused problems in how the species survives) is about “risking†the species’ survival by eliminating that type.
Eliminating the security-conscious “holdersâ€, and turning the “on the edge†or “generator†types in on themselves to destroy the species’ “prickâ€, revolves around using the species’ most developed faculty, its brain (comparatively, since survival of the fittest is its obsession) to destroy an old order and establish a new one. A bit like an orb-weaver spider remaking over and over to predate on selected insects.
The effect of remaking all the species into a one-type brain category is both:
- to reduce the entire population physically by eliminating a “holder†brain type, including the attachment to remaking
- to ensure the remaining population is more focussed on non-egotistical inter-system survival, ie survival of the wisest
Many of those wise generator brain types (whether originally born a holder or a generator) must choose to eliminate themselves, to discourage attachment and self-maintenance by their demonstration. It would not seem to be a matter of will, but of the logic of causality. However, the wise must first create enough of the “de-holder-ed†types, out of both holders and generators.
From a different perspective, survival of the fittest (that is, wisest) can be seen as yet another egotistical attachment. Can the wise be sure that what their brains are generating is not caused by attachment to the “new generator†logic of special continuity?
Emotions are a reaction to ensure survival at the cost of another surviving, and are thus related to egotism, the concept that one human surviving at the expense of others is better.
Kven
-
suergaz
----
Hi Kelly, are you a woman?
Quote:Quote:<hr>The effect of remaking all the species into a one-type brain category is both:
- to reduce the entire population physically by eliminating a “holder†brain type, including the attachment to remaking
- to ensure the remaining population is more focussed on non-egotistical inter-system survival, ie survival of the wisest<hr>
Can you explain this to me in other terms?
Quote:Quote:<hr>The effect of remaking all the species into a one-type brain category is both:
- to reduce the entire population physically by eliminating a “holder†brain type, including the attachment to remaking
- to ensure the remaining population is more focussed on non-egotistical inter-system survival, ie survival of the wisest<hr>
Can you explain this to me in other terms?
in labour for those in labour
Suergaz:
Hi Kelly, are you a woman?
Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The effect of remaking all the species into a one-type brain category is both:
- to reduce the entire population physically by eliminating a “holder†brain type, including the attachment to remaking
- to ensure the remaining population is more focussed on non-egotistical inter-system survival, ie survival of the wisest
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you explain this to me in other terms?
Kv: I am learning the "new generator logic" and am in a process of de-holder-ing.
What is your interpretation of that quote?
Hi Kelly, are you a woman?
Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The effect of remaking all the species into a one-type brain category is both:
- to reduce the entire population physically by eliminating a “holder†brain type, including the attachment to remaking
- to ensure the remaining population is more focussed on non-egotistical inter-system survival, ie survival of the wisest
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you explain this to me in other terms?
Kv: I am learning the "new generator logic" and am in a process of de-holder-ing.
What is your interpretation of that quote?
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
Re: men and women
<span style="color:white;">David: This is classic misogny, of course - reducing woman to the status of a toy. For most men, that's all that women are - multi-knobbed bits of fun. The evil of this outlook lies in the way that it pressures women not to develop consistency in their thinking and behaviour, and thus blocks off their chances to evolve into the simplicity of a sage.</span>
You surely put a lot of interpretation work into a picture of an electronic device. Makes me think of Doctor Rorschach.
Besides, women can be multi-knobbed bits of fun and be spiritual and wise at the same time. I realize this may sound odd to the sageus australicus, but wisdom and humor are not mutually exclusive.
Thomas Edited by: Thomas Knierim at: 12/19/03 1:35 pm
You surely put a lot of interpretation work into a picture of an electronic device. Makes me think of Doctor Rorschach.
Besides, women can be multi-knobbed bits of fun and be spiritual and wise at the same time. I realize this may sound odd to the sageus australicus, but wisdom and humor are not mutually exclusive.
Thomas Edited by: Thomas Knierim at: 12/19/03 1:35 pm
Re: men and women
Quote:Quote:<hr>I realize this may sound odd to the sageus australicus, but wisdom and humor are not mutually exclusive.<hr>
Yep, you're a riot, Thomas.
Yep, you're a riot, Thomas.
-
WolfsonJakk
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 6:50 pm
Re: men and women
Thomas mentioned,
Quote:Quote:<hr>...sageus australicus...<hr>
A new species perhaps?
Tharan
Quote:Quote:<hr>...sageus australicus...<hr>
A new species perhaps?
Tharan
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: men and women
Thomas wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr> David: This is classic misogny, of course - reducing woman to the status of a toy. For most men, that's all that women are - multi-knobbed bits of fun. The evil of this outlook lies in the way that it pressures women not to develop consistency in their thinking and behaviour, and thus blocks off their chances to evolve into the simplicity of a sage.
Thomas: You surely put a lot of interpretation work into a picture of an electronic device. Makes me think of Doctor Rorschach. <hr> Just providing a contrast to your own pieces of Rorschachism.
Quote:Quote:<hr> Besides, women can be multi-knobbed bits of fun and be spiritual and wise at the same time. <hr> You're dreaming, Thomas. A wet dream, by the look of it.
The only way that a woman can become spiritual and wise is by reducing herself down to the one knob (and thereby attain coherency in her thinking). But they won't be encouraged to this if misogynists such as yourself keep praising how fantastic they are already are in the multi-knobbed state. The worst of it is that you're killing their souls simply for own sexual pleasure.
Quote:Quote:<hr> I realize this may sound odd to the sageus australicus, but wisdom and humor are not mutually exclusive. <hr> <a href="http://www.theabsolute.net/seat/seat1.html" target="top">Life and Death</a>
<a href="http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/pr ... l#cowching" target="top">Cow Te Ching</a>
<a href="http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/pr ... l#cowching" target="top">The Book of Wife</a>
Quote:Quote:<hr> David: This is classic misogny, of course - reducing woman to the status of a toy. For most men, that's all that women are - multi-knobbed bits of fun. The evil of this outlook lies in the way that it pressures women not to develop consistency in their thinking and behaviour, and thus blocks off their chances to evolve into the simplicity of a sage.
Thomas: You surely put a lot of interpretation work into a picture of an electronic device. Makes me think of Doctor Rorschach. <hr> Just providing a contrast to your own pieces of Rorschachism.
Quote:Quote:<hr> Besides, women can be multi-knobbed bits of fun and be spiritual and wise at the same time. <hr> You're dreaming, Thomas. A wet dream, by the look of it.
The only way that a woman can become spiritual and wise is by reducing herself down to the one knob (and thereby attain coherency in her thinking). But they won't be encouraged to this if misogynists such as yourself keep praising how fantastic they are already are in the multi-knobbed state. The worst of it is that you're killing their souls simply for own sexual pleasure.
Quote:Quote:<hr> I realize this may sound odd to the sageus australicus, but wisdom and humor are not mutually exclusive. <hr> <a href="http://www.theabsolute.net/seat/seat1.html" target="top">Life and Death</a>
<a href="http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/pr ... l#cowching" target="top">Cow Te Ching</a>
<a href="http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/pr ... l#cowching" target="top">The Book of Wife</a>
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
Re: men and women
Wet dream? Killing souls for my pleasure? Seems you are getting a bit huffy, David.
It must have been that remark about australopitecus.
Oh well, forget about it.
<span style="color:white;">David: The only way that a woman can become spiritual and wise is by reducing herself down to the one knob.</span>
Good luck with reducing, then.
Thomas
It must have been that remark about australopitecus.
Oh well, forget about it.
<span style="color:white;">David: The only way that a woman can become spiritual and wise is by reducing herself down to the one knob.</span>
Good luck with reducing, then.
Thomas
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: men and women
Thomas wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr> Wet dream? Killing souls for my pleasure? Seems you are getting a bit huffy, David. <hr> Just speaking the truth.
Quote:Quote:<hr> Wet dream? Killing souls for my pleasure? Seems you are getting a bit huffy, David. <hr> Just speaking the truth.
-
Dan Rowden
- Posts: 5740
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: men and women
Thomas lives and breathes convention.
Ergo, Thomas is a Zombie.
Enough said.
Dan Rowden
Ergo, Thomas is a Zombie.
Enough said.
Dan Rowden
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
Re: men and women
David, if you pretend to speak anything remotely resembling truth you should be able to prove it and tell me which souls I have murdered. While you are at it, you could explain us what a soul is. I thought you didn't believe in souls!?
Thomas
Thomas