Poison for the Heart - and Women

[DHodges]

Having an impressive car, with lots of expensive and unnecessary gleaming chrome, huge tyres, and a monster sound system, is a sign that the fellow is able to produce a surplus of wealth.

The car is hard metal, and mechanical, like his mind. The car represents resistance, hard boundaries, and structure.

Oh man, I am so sick of this. It might be slightly more dignified to be a bull than to be a cow. Big deal. A bull is just a cow with balls. Your shit stinks the same. Let's get over it and move on.

[Kevin Solway]

And yet she creates a hurricane...of men sucked into her centrifugal draft, following her, themselves trailing vortexes of the debris of all they are willing to discard of themselves, to be with her.

Man creates a hurricane, but woman is one.

She uses man's consciousness for her own ends in the manner described by Esther Vilar in "The Manipulated Man".

[Kevin Solway]

Let's get over it and move on.

I think we have to go over this issue every once in a while for the sake of the new forum members.

Fortunately it's mainly restricted to just this one topic.

[David Quinn]

I'm not sure what I'm more puzzled about - Dave's temper tantrum or Kevin apologizing for speaking about masculine and feminine consciousness.

-

[David Quinn]

Elizabeth wrote:

Dan: Since on her best days she is 20% more conscious than Kevin on his, there seems to be no reason for the question other than to test Kevin's efficiency at judging others - which, admittedly, would be a somewhat interesting reason.

Elizabeth: OMG Dan finally caught on.

I'm not so sure that you and Dan are on the same wavelength there.

I'm also puzzled about this testing of Kevin's efficiency at judging others. The way you constructed the test is confusing to me. Even the need for a test in the first place is confusing to me. I wonder if you could take us through it.

-

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I'm not so sure that you and Dan are on the same wavelength there.

Well, from the exact words, perhaps not completely, but Dan already understood the rest of it. His answer was close enough to what I was trying to get him to understand on a similar enough interaction many months ago, I thought it was worth the affirmation.

I'm also puzzled about this testing of Kevin's efficiency at judging others. The way you constructed the test is confusing to me. Even the need for a test in the first place is confusing to me. I wonder if you could take us through it.

Not only was it a legitimate question and an acknowledgment that it is possible that he could have something educational to say to me, his answer would have provided me with an opportunity to assess his assessment skills. That interaction presented a growth opportunity to at least one of us - to me if he had something educational to say, and to him if he was quite off-base. His lack of a spelled out answer tells me that he is concerned with the repercussions of telling the truth. Although I give him credit for not wanting to alienate people who he wants to have a greater opportunity to see Truth, his inaction also speaks volumes to me about where his missing 30% is. To an extent he is right to not answer because he would need more answers than what he has to deal with the repercussions of telling the truth. Knowing one's limits, and respecting those limits, is also a form of wisdom.

Furthermore, don't assume that I have all of the same 70% that Kevin has. Kevin may have up to 9% of the 10% I'm missing even on a good day - so I may have up to 29% of Kevin's missing 30% even though at my best I may only be 20% ahead of him. If we exchange all we've got, that might bring us both up to 99% - and between the 2 of us, we might figure out that other 1%. That makes challenging him and asking for challenge in return from him a worthwhile endeavor.

[Faust]

why is "and Women" included in the title of this thread?

[Imadrongo]

Oh man, I am so sick of this. It might be slightly more dignified to be a bull than to be a cow. Big deal. A bull is just a cow with balls. Your shit stinks the same. Let's get over it and move on.

Hahaha. Agreed.

The car is hard metal, and mechanical, like his mind. The car represents resistance, hard boundaries, and structure.

And...? You haven't convinced anyone other than those who, like you, are afraid to fall and therefore won't climb. I see life as resistance, hard boundaries, and structure. I see the greatest degree of "freedom" as coming with power, not with impotence. You have an aversion to life and to power.

[Dave Toast]

DT: for me, the feminine dimensions of mind can just as obviously and consistently be seen in men.

KS: I doubt that. If that were the case we would see men everywhere wafting around the place in flowy see-through clothing, with flowers in their hair, and not taking any interest in machines, computers, and politics. Men would be dreaming about their wardrobe.

More and more so, we do see men 'wafting around the place in flowy see-through clothing, with flowers in their hair' these days. Perhaps not quite so literally but the very same psychology is in operation. To many modern men, there is no more important thing in life than their hair and how cool it makes them look. To most others it is at least something they devote a significant amount of time and thought to. Equally, clothing is occupying more and more of modern male's thoughts. Millenium Man really does dream about his wardrobe and the conquests he can wage with it. Couched in such terms as 'conquest', one might interpret such action as being masculine at root, arguably. But of course this is the very same process the female goes through. Her wardrobe too is all about the conquests she can wage with it. Different types of motivations may be at work in either case but they have the same end. And they’re both equally pathetic.

The only interest I see modern men taking in machines these days is dreaming about their car and, again, how cool it will make them look and feel; and the conquests they can wage thereby. Needless to say, this conforms to the very same psychology alluded to above. Also needless to say but I'll say it anyway, this psychology is all about one's sexual potency, the other side of the very same coin which dominates female psychology so. These are unconscious behaviour patterns as easily observed in modern day men as women.

That is not to say there are no differences whatsoever. Of course there are but modern men have become so feminised that it becomes harder and harder to use them as an obvious example of masculine thought. These are very different times to when your book was written. Feminism has already had its effect - this is a new epoch. Though the wisdom in Poison may be timeless, its initial acceptance by a readership (and crucially for uptake, its reputation thereby) is very much epoch-specific.

DT: To a slightly lesser extent, the masculine dimensions of mind can also be observed in women.

KS: They can . . . but most men mis-recognize masculine qualities in women because they are under the spell of women. Men tend to mistake intelligence or willfulness in a woman for consciousness.

No doubt. I think it's also worth noting that people might often mistake intelligence or willfulness in a man for consciousness too. I'm not going to speculate as to what spell they may be labouring under.

DT: With regard to your primary aim and the damage this somewhat moot point may do to it, do you think it's worth making right off the bat?

KS: There's very little true writing about women in the whole of world literature. There's Weininger, a little Kierkegaard, a little Schopenhaeur, a little of Buddhism, a little Dave Sim, etc. I really want to contribute to that, even if there is a risk involved.

So what?

How can the aim of writing a bit of truth about women compare to the aim of perpetuating wisdom?

Anyway, I have to have a section entitled "Women", and I can't very will skip over all the most important truths about them.

As such, the book's potential readership would be drastically reduced thereby. Do you think this would be conducive to your aim of perpetuating wisdom?

You may notice I'm having to ask that question again. This, specifically, is where I am coming from.

When dealing with the public, to some extent you have to deal in PR to be successful.

[Dave Toast]

It does in mine. Though the level of consciousness may vary in a given individual's engagement with pro wrestling (or even gossip, really), pro wrestling is still a more conscious activity than gossip. It has a very specific purpose, it has some formal rules and structure, choreography etc. There's nothing spontaneous about it. The higher rank it deserves in the scale of consciousness may only be incremental, but to me it nevertheless warrants it.

I also have to disagree with Kevin there. Pro-wrestling is far closer to the kind of conscious activity which leads to the creation of civilization and the development of genius than the feminine practice of mentally wafting around with flowers in one's hair.

The wrestlers and those who organize these events, as crude as they might be, are easily several levels above the scantily-clad girls who hold up signs between rounds.

Well you were rather set up with a straw man to kick into touch there boys.

Analyse for me the respective levels of consciousness involved in a woman leaving a man she loves because she thinks their child will be better for it, versus a bloke leafing through FHM.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I realize that the "woman" terminology threw me off of a recognition that I might have had more quickly had merely the terms conscious and unconscious been used.

For that reason I am very careful not to pressure women into becoming more conscious, or to belittle them for being what they are. To do so would be like belittling, say, a goldfish, for being only a goldfish and not being something else. To belittle goldfish would be very cruel considering that we people have bred goldfish for the sole reason that we enjoy looking at them and like having them around

Perhaps I should not have told David that I lost respect for him when he lied about not realizing that changing the term QRS to wisdom would change things retroactively as well - or weaseled out of it by stating that he did not realize this before the first time he changed it, then changed it back, but changed it again after realizing that the change would be retroactive - if in fact that is what he did rather than just bold-faced lie. I disagree that it is wrong to pressure "women" like David to be more conscious and truthful, but I suppose I should not have belittled him for what he is.

David, I apologize. You are perfectly charming just the way you are.

[Dave Toast]

A man's car is a display of his masculinity (and consciousness), whereas a woman's clothes are a display of her femininity (and unconsciousness).

Having an impressive car, with lots of expensive and unnecessary gleaming chrome, huge tyres, and a monster sound system, is a sign that the fellow is able to produce a surplus of wealth.

The car is hard metal, and mechanical, like his mind. The car represents resistance, hard boundaries, and structure.

This car creates a hurricane.

By contrast, the woman displays her femininity by wearing clothes that offer no resistence, no structure, and are vulnerable.

She is blown-over by the slightest hint of a breeze.

Surely the Wonderbra offers at least structure?

This is another straw man - men and their cars versus women and their wardrobes. Hows about men and their hair versus women and their two shitty part-time jobs?

[Leyla Shen]

It does in mine. Though the level of consciousness may vary in a given individual's engagement with pro wrestling (or even gossip, really), pro wrestling is still a more conscious activity than gossip. It has a very specific purpose, it has some formal rules and structure, choreography etc. There's nothing spontaneous about it. The higher rank it deserves in the scale of consciousness may only be incremental, but to me it nevertheless warrants it.

I also have to disagree with Kevin there. Pro-wrestling is far closer to the kind of conscious activity which leads to the creation of civilization and the development of genius than the feminine practice of mentally wafting around with flowers in one's hair.

The wrestlers and those who organize these events, as crude as they might be, are easily several levels above the scantily-clad girls who hold up signs between rounds.

Well you were rather set up with a straw man to kick into touch there boys.

Analyse for me the respective levels of consciousness involved in a woman leaving a man she loves because she thinks their child will be better for it, versus a bloke leafing through FHM.

Exactly. It's precisely here in this deliberated web of "subtlety" that what truly is the last vestiges of actual misogyny finds its most feminine breeding ground.

Weininger needs no apologetics. He did not need to be redone, modernised, or anything else. But really, I think Kevin thinks he does because he wants to distance himself, and the feminine, from Weininger's Jew.

[David Quinn]

Dave Toast wrote:

Analyse for me the respective levels of consciousness involved in a woman leaving a man she loves because she thinks their child will be better for it, versus a bloke leafing through FHM.

Well, needless to say, we could only do such an analysis in the most general of terms, based on stereotypes, as we don't have any information about the individuals involved. I'll just make a few observations:

It is my experience that very few women do things for "the sake of their child". Children tend to come a distant third in comparison to their relationships with men and their status in the world of womanhood. How often to do we see a woman staying with her abusive husband and turning a blind eye to the abuse that he showers upon her children? Her own needs as a woman nearly always come first.

So when I hear about a woman leaving her husband or boyfriend for the sake of her child, the first thought that comes to mind is that she is leaving because her needs as a woman aren't being met. That is more likely to be the real reason.

As for a man leafing through FHM .... well, I personally have never met any men who make a habit of reading FHM. But I have to assume that some men do, otherwise the magazine wouldn't be selling. It could be that there is a high turn-over rate, with some men reading a few editions before growing bored and moving on. I doubt very much that anyone over 25 would be reading it regularly. Whereas women of all ages leaf through women's magazines religiously, I have the impression that it is only young men looking for tips in becoming more attractive to women who read FHM.

But I'm open to being corrected in this.

-

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

when I hear about a woman leaving her husband or boyfriend for the sake of her child, the first thought that comes to mind is that she is leaving because her needs as a woman aren't being met. That is more likely to be the real reason.

So you just make up your pretty little head what the truth is, and if you hear anything that doesn't support your truth, you just figure that someone is lying. How delightful.

[David Quinn]

Elizabeth,

DQ: I'm also puzzled about this testing of Kevin's efficiency at judging others. The way you constructed the test is confusing to me. Even the need for a test in the first place is confusing to me. I wonder if you could take us through it.

Elizabeth: Not only was it a legitimate question and an acknowledgment that it is possible that he could have something educational to say to me, his answer would have provided me with an opportunity to assess his assessment skills. That interaction presented a growth opportunity to at least one of us - to me if he had something educational to say, and to him if he was quite off-base. His lack of a spelled out answer tells me that he is concerned with the repercussions of telling the truth. Although I give him credit for not wanting to alienate people who he wants to have a greater opportunity to see Truth, his inaction also speaks volumes to me about where his missing 30% is. To an extent he is right to not answer because he would need more answers than what he has to deal with the repercussions of telling the truth.

What is this truth that he is neglecting to spell out? And what would be the repercussions of his doing so?

Furthermore, don't assume that I have all of the same 70% that Kevin has. Kevin may have up to 9% of the 10% I'm missing even on a good day - so I may have up to 29% of Kevin's missing 30% even though at my best I may only be 20% ahead of him. If we exchange all we've got, that might bring us both up to 99% - and between the 2 of us, we might figure out that other 1%. That makes challenging him and asking for challenge in return from him a worthwhile endeavor.

Mozart was very conscious when it came to music, but just how conscious was he of the nature of Reality? Do we say that Mozart was 50% conscious because he was highly conscious of music and not much else? If Kevin had met Mozart and exchanged views would that have resulted in Kevin ascending into 80% or 90% consciousness?

What is an example of something that you are conscious of that Kevin isn't?

-

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

David,

What is the point of your fishing expedition?

Mozart was very conscious when it came to music, but just how conscious was he of the nature of Reality? Do we say that Mozart was 50% conscious because he was highly conscious of music and not much else? If Kevin had met Mozart and exchanged views would that have resulted in Kevin ascending into 80% or 90% consciousness?

Do you seriously believe that this is a good comparison?

[David Quinn]

Elizabeth,

DQ: when I hear about a woman leaving her husband or boyfriend for the sake of her child, the first thought that comes to mind is that she is leaving because her needs as a woman aren't being met. That is more likely to be the real reason.

Elizabeth: So you just make up your pretty little head what the truth is, and if you hear anything that doesn't support your truth, you just figure that someone is lying. How delightful.

I'm just saying that experience has taught me this is how women generally operate. I'm happy to be proven wrong in a specific case, but I would be compelled to look into it thoroughly before I was satisfied that something exceptional was taking place.

One thing I have learned about women is that they almost never behave for the reasons they say they do. As a result, I never take anything they say at face value.

-

[David Quinn]

Elizabeth,

What is the point of your fishing expedition?

I'm trying to understand your test. It is still confusing to me.

DQ: Mozart was very conscious when it came to music, but just how conscious was he of the nature of Reality? Do we say that Mozart was 50% conscious because he was highly conscious of music and not much else? If Kevin had met Mozart and exchanged views would that have resulted in Kevin ascending into 80% or 90% consciousness?

Elizaberh: Do you seriously believe that this is a good comparison?

I don't know. I assume this will become clearer to me when I understand the nature of your test.

-

[Kevin Solway]

why is "and Women" included in the title of this thread?

It has been suggested that I remove pretty much the entire section entitled "Women" so as to make the book more easily acceptable to a wide audience.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I'm trying to understand your test. It is still confusing to me.

I never take anything they say at face value.

Then no wonder you are confused. You once accused me of having a bit of the Red Dwarf android in me, but since then you have decided that I am a woman, therefore you "never" take anything I say at face value. I'll try to communicate to you in a way that you will understand, but don't worry your pretty little head about it if you don't understand a word of this.

I don't know. I assume this will become clearer to me when I understand the nature of your test.

I don't know that you ever will understand. Perhaps you shouldn't think about it anymore.

[Leyla Shen]

]It is my experience that very few women do things for "the sake of their child". Children tend to come a distant third in comparison to their relationships with men and their status in the world of womanhood. How often to do we see a woman staying with her abusive husband and turning a blind eye to the abuse that he showers upon her children? Her own needs as a woman nearly always come first.

And that this makes the abusive man less feminine than the victimised woman epitomises the height of wisdom so much so that in all his incrementally grand consciousness he remains with her in order to cater to her needs--or his?

Surely there has to be something better than this to address the very seed of consciousness itself in men.

[Dave Toast]

It is my experience that very few women do things for "the sake of their child". Children tend to come a distant third in comparison to their relationships with men and their status in the world of womanhood. How often to do we see a woman staying with her abusive husband and turning a blind eye to the abuse that he showers upon her children? Her own needs as a woman nearly always come first.

We see it less and less often these days David. There must be a reason for that, right?

And I would dispute your conclusion here anyway. Mothers just as much as fathers would give their own life for their child. There is no relationship and status building to be done when you're dead.

So when I hear about a woman leaving her husband or boyfriend for the sake of her child, the first thought that comes to mind is that she is leaving because her needs as a woman aren't being met. That is more likely to be the real reason.

And what if she said that isn't the reason; rather that the reason is that, though she loves him, she thinks their child would be better off without his influence?

You would tell her that this is likely not to be the real reason and she would want to know how it is that you can know better than her about the reasons she remembers considering in her conscious decision.

As for a man leafing through FHM .... well, I personally have never met any men who make a habit of reading FHM. But I have to assume that some men do, otherwise the magazine wouldn't be selling. It could be that there is a high turn-over rate, with some men reading a few editions before growing bored and moving on. I doubt very much that anyone over 25 would be reading it regularly. Whereas women of all ages leaf through women's magazines religiously, I have the impression that it is only young men looking for tips in becoming more attractive to women who read FHM.

And looking at tits.

There are plenty over 25 who subscribe to FHM, over 40 in fact. After that they might move on to GQ or something like that. It's still the same mindless pastime I was invoking.


It doesn't matter anyway as my scenario was a straw man too. Hows about analysing the processes going on in a male and female mind while they compile their playlists for their respective iPods. That is a genuine comparison, offering a chance to make a genuine argument.

In fact don't bother. The point was simply that the given scenarios were straw men.

[Dave Toast]

why is "and Women" included in the title of this thread?

It has been suggested that I remove pretty much the entire section entitled "Women" so as to make the book more easily acceptable to a wide audience.

Don't make it sound like I'm suggesting that you water it down to appeal to the lowest common denominator mate.

I'm simply suggesting ways to stave off the possible tragedy of only a handful of people reading your 'greatest book in history'.

[Imadrongo]

Watering it down is probably a good idea. I imagine there are probably a lot more dumb blond chicks down there in Australia and it seems like your generalization only applies well to these women. At least change it to "Feminine" and note that emasculated women don't fit here and many effeminate males do.