GENIUS FORUMS

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 10:45 pm

Aviloth wrote:I never demanded you explain anything to me. You're the one who came into this topic criticizing people that they don't understand masculinity and femininity, and in a very blunt way. I've been telling you, if you really knew better, you wouldn't waste so much time an energy angrily criticizing every person who's trying to engage with you, and instead shine some light on the matter. Which you can't, because you really don't understand anything yourself.

Rather than the word 'criticize' I would have chosen 'explained'. I explained that neither Diebert or Jupi really understand the issues involved in relation to masculinity and femininity and that neither of them have any relationship at all with actual women. If, or when, you understand their mutual situations as I do, you will better understand how ridiculous is their pose.

To get 'light shone on the matter', in your case (and as I suggested) will take a good deal of time. I say that based on what of you I can know reading what you have written.

Why are you still here if all the people here are apparently too underdeveloped to understand you? Why don't you move to more fertile grounds with people of your own great intellectual development? Because you're not as great as you think, and well, people here are still feeding the monster attention. Which I guess I will stop doing now.

What you have just said here, is so typical of the girlish-men who regularly pass through. It is emotional to the core, *offended*. It belies a certain intellectual delicacy. You'll fit in very well! This illustrates my point: there is something about this place that attracts an essentially non-masculine sort who desires to put on a pose of masculine hardness. Read Nietzsche, read Weininger and pose.

And so it goes . . . Best of luck in your endeavors!

Yes I'm offended, and I'm not ashamed of being only human. Being offended is not the same as blaming someone for offending me.
There is no posing on my end.
Your demeanor of reasonableness isn't fooling me. It's shaming, demeaning, passive aggressive. You're lying and twisting and shifting, especially when exposed. Ironically all this smells of femininity to me.

jupiviv wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 6:45 pm @Avolith, on youtube, Barbarossaa (bar bar), razorbladekandy and AlexanderMGTOW have very good insights about the causes of the decline in traditional families/marriages. The task of understanding the far broader idea of femininity - as used on this forum - is lugubrious, because you need to integrate many kinds of ideas from disparate subjects into your thinking.

For the philosophical context and underpinnings, you should probably start with the output of the forum founders. Those are available on the forum archives and on http://theabsolute.net/ Then you can move on to books by Weininger, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, bits of Buddhism (the original Dharmapada, Zen master Hakuin) and Hinduism (no-nonsense translations of the Bhagvad Gita, Avadhuta Gita, the Vedas, the Upanishads). PDFs or EPUBs of most of those books (and many others) are available on Library Genesis. However, be warned that it may be illegal to download e-books with extant copyrights or which are not in the public domain.

In the end you have to judge for yourself what is wise and what isn't. All of the literature I mentioned will, at best, give you a very rough outline of what your own thoughts might look like, but you have to think them.

Thanks, i'll be having a look at these

It's shaming, demeaning, passive aggressive.

Shift these words a bit and you'll have something:

Shaming = I'd change it to being hard and direct and not relenting. It is the only way to be.

Demeaning = largely the same but your use of the term 'demeaning' means that you feel demeaned. Change that and you will avoid a morass that will not serve you. I have no such intention and, in fact, there is nothing to be gained. Accurate description is what I am after.

Passive aggressive = There is nothing passive about my approach! It is directly and openly aggressive.

Harumph! Next you will insult my avatar and then you'll go too far! Watch it, buddy!

Jupi, lugubrious was an awful big word. Too big in fact. Repent!

Avolith wrote:Yes I'm offended, and I'm not ashamed of being only human.

Better jump-start his foray into Nietzsche. Electrodes to the testes, perhaps?

Should he come down India-way can he crash on your couch and do you have enough Cheetos in stock for two avid philosophers pursuing Hard Truths? and will mother allow visitors?

Avolith, what is your view of Beethoven? Like?

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:01 am Jupi, lugubrious was an awful big word. Too big in fact. Repent!

Avolith wrote:Yes I'm offended, and I'm not ashamed of being only human.

Better jump-start his foray into Nietzsche. Electrodes to the testes, perhaps?

Should he come down India-way can he crash on your couch and do you have enough Cheetos in stock for two avid philosophers pursuing Hard Truths? and will mother allow visitors?

Avolith, what is your view of Beethoven? Like?

Yeah casually mentioning putting electrodes on my balls to someone else, as if I'm not here, also throwing out, in relation to me, some Nietschze reference you know I won't have read about. I'm not sure what objectively constitutes demeaning speech if that's not it. You are delusional about what your pose really is. I have already acknowledged several times that I realize not having read these works is a weak point, but I'm sure in your universe this all serves some purpose, or I speculate that this plain unethical behavior is somehow justified by some concept you read about during your studying and completely misinterpreted.

You're sharing personal details about jupi and dieberts relationship status and plain saying that this makes their pose ridiculous. While I'm sure they don't care, it's classic shaming tactics, poisoning the well. Whatever their relationship status doesn't change the validity of their arguments or understanding of any topics. You keep making things personal, and whenever challenged to engage on the content of argument itself, you hide behind some enormous complexity of the subject matter that can't be discussed.

The tone of your previous post was passive agressive because, for example, after doing all of the afore mentioned, malicious speech, you wished me the best of luck, obviously not a heartfelt wish given the rest of your remarks. It's rather silly that I'm having to explain all this though.

Your avatar seems to me like it's supposed to be some kind of parody, to signal that you're nothing like a superficial young girl. Given your behavour, only makes me think like you have some fear of being exactly that.

Woe is this great philosopher, suffering because the uneducated don't understand the deeper meaning behind electrocuted balls

Avolith wrote:You're sharing personal details about jupi and dieberts relationship status and plain saying that this makes their pose ridiculous.

Oh that's fine. Diebert doesn't like the trapeze either.

...obviously not a heartfelt wish given the rest of your remarks.

I would rather say it was sincerely 'mind-felt'.

It's rather silly that I'm having to explain all this though.

That is true. You are taking yourself quite seriously.

Yeah casually mentioning putting electrodes on my balls to someone else, as if I'm not here...

Yet I knew you were *here*. Does that change things?

Your avatar seems to me like it's supposed to be some kind of parody, to signal that you're nothing like a superficial young girl. Given your behavour, only makes me think like you have some fear of being exactly that.

What if I told you I was wearing girl's panties and a training bra? What then?

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:15 am

What if I told you I was wearing girl's panties and a training bra? What then?

Why ask me what would happen - just be a girl if you feel like it instead of worrying and poking to get some external approval beforehand. You are what you are, and you'll have to deal with that

But.. but.. well do you find me cute? Do you find me (insofar as my avatar is a reflection of me) kissable?

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 1:15 am But.. but.. well do you find me cute? Do you find me (insofar as my avatar is a reflection of me) kissable?

Yes you're attractive. Also, I've some other stuff to do now, take care!

OK, I luv you now. Welcome to Genius Forum! I will be your ally and, perhaps, your guide through the Maze...

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 1:15 am But.. but.. well do you find me cute? Do you find me (insofar as my avatar is a reflection of me) kissable?

Your sense of humour must warm up the slow winter evenings.

jupiviv wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 7:44 am

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 19, 2018 1:15 am But.. but.. well do you find me cute? Do you find me (insofar as my avatar is a reflection of me) kissable?

Your sense of humour must warm up the slow winter evenings.

Merry christmas to all, Including my nemesis, Santiago Odo (yes you are my nemesis), because I'm super virtuous. I'm glad santa clause has arrived but he does give me some creepy vibes. I will just assume that one of his raindeer has died and that he'll get over it soon, so I will still receive my presents of ez enlightenment

Well?

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 7:42 amWell?

Well what?

Your EZ Enlightenment . . .

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:14 am Your EZ Enlightenment . . .

Working on it

A contradiction in terms. One does not *work* on EZ Enlightenment.

May I suggest giving up?

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:09 pm A contradiction in terms. One does not *work* on EZ Enlightenment.

May I suggest giving up?

Well let's say I'm reading the materials to form the necessary understanding, which right now happens to be David Quinn's book

Oh God ...

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:49 am Oh God ...

Oh dear, already lost your patience with me? Did you roll your eyes when you typed 'oh god'? Or am I supposed to direct myself to your avatar, instead of you as a person directly - which isn't your role playing, but a nietzschean pose which makes it totally genius

I had no patience to begin with. Yet I am here . . .

I have but one eye as I am a cyclops.

You can direct yourself to my avatar if you wish sonny!

Who are we, really, behind the draps d'arras of our personalities?

Santiago Odo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 01, 2019 12:37 am I had no patience to begin with. Yet I am here . . .

Yes, to instruct me in the ways of zen with mysterious rhetorical questions, right?

I have but one eye as I am a cyclops.

You can direct yourself to my avatar if you wish sonny!

I direct myself to you

Who are we, really, behind the draps d'arras of our personalities?

What is such a platitude going to do other than to make us lazy and forget ourselves.

Esteemed Avolith,

Zen and 'mysterious utterances' have the purpose of alluding to things which cannot be stated openly. Such mysterious utterances are, in themselves, draps d'arras behind which our desired & intended meanings hide. A mysterious utterance, and perhaps like Polonius, is both a Scout and a Spy.

You are reading David Quinn. How sad that makes me. I commiserate with you even though you show no misery. Once you are clear that you read your way into prison I can then begin the work of freeing you. I can't begin to free you until you defend your prison.

If you really & truly want to encounter a true effervescent bon vivant and delicious intellect, you must encounter Gustav Bjornstrand! If any man who had ever set foot here could be said to be anywhere near Enlightenment, it is he. And yet he denied that 'enlightenment is a genuine category'. Now there is modesty!

He is said to have said:

• Nets are for catching fish; after one gets the fish, one forgets the net. Traps are for catching rabbits; after one gets the rabbit, one forgets the trap. Words are for getting meaning; after one gets the meaning, one forgets the words. Where can I find people who have forgotten words, and have a word with them?

Can I have a word with you, Avolith?