Men vs. Women

[Queen Solomon 1]

Men vs.Women

In the public relations sector, it is observed women behind the counter, give other women and men a hard time when handling customer service; their emotions trigger unfavorable public behavior. Sheer resentment is obvious. Rarely, do men display anything less than perfect behavior!

It's no wonder why it's a male dominant world when you see men are better men than women are women.

Many women don't seem to have the couth men do, nor do they seem to measure up equally in good character. "One bad apple spoils the whole barrel." Aging brings equalism in both women and men. Women are nurturers of humanity, but instantaneously like wildfire, she'll burn him in a flash. Her thunderous wrath can bring him to his knees if provoked. If he's smart he'll keep quiet during her rant unless spoken to. Women are thought to be unconscious which is akin to unaware, this is perceivable. Unaware of how she is perceived to others when emotionally ranting. To put out her flame is to understand what she's saying, then respond respectfully. She will be a queen to a king but verbally slaughter a slithering snake. Women as a whole are not jealous of other women, they are jealous of their man. For they know how inwardly good he's inclined to be. When her emotions are out-of-control, she fears he'll shun her for another woman not realizing she'd be emotional too. "Behind every good woman is a good man"

Men are constructors, builders of life. They envy women's beauty but think them little, not in height but in nature-- the weaker sex. It's been said, "the most degraded man is better than a woman" that just means men think on deeper levels than women are capable of. Men's handsomeness is as beautiful as women's beauty, equalism shines here. Men tolerate women to a high degree, to a breaking point which is rare, unless severely tormented enough to degrade his own self. They prefer to be entertained by television than to be subjected to women talk, badgering, nagging, long-windedness of saying nothing as the male perceives it, etc. A man will bend over backward to support his woman. Behind every good man is his mother.

Man or woman whatever you be, be the best anyone could be. Be your own best friend!



Queen Solomon 1st.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Some spicy truth in there, in places.

Not the "secret jealousy" though. That's a typical feminine perspective on behavior of men, because it cannot be understood.

The main thing missing from these wandering thoughts on genders, unsurprisingly, is the capacity of idealization. Historically weaker beings honed in on the skill of letting other, stronger life & thought constructors witness something special in them, some higher ideal, some hint of perfection, some impossible paradox in the flesh, bewildering, enchanting or inspiring. Or in other words: ones worth increases in some context of value. The birthing of new life was one, older specialty, based on biological realities. Later came the illusion that it connected with some extra capacity to care or feel beyond the organs, which is a strange idea not in line with any reality whatsoever beyond what the voices instructed to believe and how imprinted it became.

From situations born out of the dynamic above, a lot of drama arises. Simultaneous adoration and rejection. Sometimes this process can be mutual and create some immense hall of mirrors in which both genders, both humans, get lost in tragedy.

For a man to become a partner, a husband, wife, supplier & helper, first he turns himself into a version of woman ("Wife"). Couples never exist of man and woman for that reason. It's the special talent all men possess: to become, for all mind and purposes, a woman and a war. It's not possible in reverse. The very fact of impossibility is the foundation of the gender difference. However this difference is about way more than just about complexities of gender. Tracing these roots will lead to the function of consciousness itself. And then it becomes clear how it plays out in people and not just in the social gender roles life assigned in some context.

[FreeTheGenius]

Low thoughts of women is a sign of homosexuality. Only homosexual men disrespect the woman like that.

Men appear dumber than women, that is just my opinion.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Fair enough, the topic starter is actually female though.

In my experience it's repressed homosexuals who drop the gay thing out of the blue inside discussions ;-)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

But perhaps it's more interesting to put the issue in a more metaphysical type of wording, and go beyond the usual gender pap.

Mind does not materialize or develop from dust, from particles or matter. It never did and never will. This will ultimately doom certain branches of AI research and life sciences but nevertheless, great things will be learned from it so I'm not being just cynical.

Instead it's all the dust, the particle and all that matters, like matter, which flows out of "mind" for lack of a better word. This is not some mystical position but the most easy to discern truth of perception and existence. But then what is mind and what's known about it, if not another cause or effect in the whole fabric of things? And then we're thrown back to either "everything is mind" or "everything is matter" position, as if either would clarify a thing -- and it never really does. It's a thing to "hang on to".

But in all of that principle still rules. The creation flows from the creator like women, like semen, flow eternally out of the masculine first act. That is a starting point, a fertile perspective if you will. It only makes sense when taken, not a result of proof.

To understand a term like "masculine" one needs to first attain the position that the key issue is time and how you perceive of it. All our anxiety, suffering and alienation is a function of time, the scheduling, planning, perception of a past, the perception that nothing ever is accomplished or the notion that good changes into bad when enough time passes like bad stuff can grow into good. But these are at best the ability to look beyond minutes of time and mere glimpses, rays of larger cycles, asymptotic to eternity.

It becomes clear that men historically had a greater sense of the timeless and infinite, a drive to pull all into the presence -- or transcend the presence into the infinite, to become the bridge, even through procreation if nothing else... Perhaps because of the tribal and cultural rolls, the need to plan, look over horizons, abstract the hunt and tactical war planning, to decide daily over life and death of himself, a few others or even many, and who knows, perhaps this is even about older biological wiring but right now it doesn't matter. We have now to deal with the archetype of Man, as our whole thinking and feeling is still ruled by the types. Any emancipating movement aiming to change that landscape is powerless as there's still little understanding of why it became like that in the first place. And what it means to change it.

There's clearly a nod to Weininger needed here and lets just quote the most vibrant words on the topic:

The present is the one thing over which a person has power; whoever feels free in it will use it, like the sadist; whoever feels that he suffers in it, because it is not real for him, seeks to awaken it to eternity. The ethical striving of both may also be characterized this way: one wants to transform all eternity into present, the other, every present into eternity. The same holds for space. The sadist believes in, and hopes for, happiness on earth (1)

Of course it helps to understand Weininger wrote "Woman" is sadistic (anyone with a woman's sensibility who is active) while “Wife” is masochistic. Or more directly "the sadist is the fate of the woman; the woman the fate of the masochist". This is about idealism and projection, naturally. The basic orientations in life put in other terms as not to get to fixated on "being" a gender form.

Time (crime) is the setting as real of the not-real: separation of a past, that has been given power, and a future, over which no power is wanted, from the present, which is thus no longer eternity . . . Just as with crime: the setting as real, actualising, of some kind of unconsciousness (2)

To push it all one step upwards the following is offered for contemplation.

... the impulse of the timeless into time, of the spaceless into space. We meet this problem everywhere; it is the relationship of freedom to necessity. The dualism in the world is what is incomprehensible. The motif of original sin is the mystery: the ground and meaning and purpose of the fall from timeless being, from eternal life into non-being, into the life of the senses, into earthly temporality – the fall of the guilt-free into guilt. I am never able to comprehend why I committed the original sin, how the free could become unfree. And why? Because I can only recognise a sin when I am no longer committing it. Either the person has become like the absolute, and has entered into eternal life – then he cannot exist in material form, limited in space and matter. He will, if psycho-physical parallelism obtains, receive a body that has become one with all of visible nature; he becomes the soul of nature, and nature becomes his body, just as the tree beneath which the Buddha died was said to have begun to bloom at his death – because a new life permeated the whole of nature. The other possibility is that the person falls into nothingness; he dissolves into nothing but material atoms: the absolute criminal. (2)

References to the used quotes from Otto Weininger:

1. On Last Things translated by Steven Burns
2. Collected Aphorisms, Notebook and Letters to a friend translated by Martin Dudaniec & Kevin Solway

[Queen Solomon 1]

It's not that men can't reveal their emotions, because they do with other men. But, generally speaking for men to show their feelings to women, they feel weakened by that, for they see women as the weaker sex who relies on them to be strong. Women seek security, she needs to feel safe for she knows she's weaker than man physically speaking, otherwise, she is strong in other aspects of her nature.

Men correct one another, it's as though they are a force to be reckoned with.

Girls are all about me-me-me they're the go-getters.
Women are about We, the nurturers, supporters, the do-ers.

Boys are about big idea schemes
Men are about building the plans for the blueprint on their minds.

Children are absorbing their surroundings? What's going through their wondering minds, minds like sponges. Some wonder, some wander, they all win. What do they win you ask? They win by determination their willpower drives them. There is no loser kid, there is only the lost kid who hasn't found himself yet but he will through time. Time is the essence of all things.

"HE" made man the head of the household"

Why not women?

[Queen Solomon 1]

Why do you suppose men subtly dominate? They know themselves the smarter gender—they show but don’t tell. ”You are what you think” Are they smarter than women?
Smarter how ? The female asks? Smarter in strength of mind—they’ll fight their own to protect the female known to be the weaker sex—in thought. A term men use for women is little. A term women use for men is hero. One thing observed is men don’t like to take commands from women—it attributes to them feeling weak undermined by the female gender. But, it seems natural for females to take commands from males. But, that’s all changed women unflinchingly show the middle finger.
The Bible states God made male the head of the household—why wasn’t women considered the head? Women know they are emotionally unstable during menstruation. Men exude an even keel revealing an emotionally well-balanced character tolerating to his breaking point.
It was mere but scholarly men who wrote the Bible claiming to be inspired by God. But, when it was written centuries ago, it was a patriarchy dominance more back then, than now.
Are men better men than women are women? Or are women better women than men are men?
Has women’s wrath or voice silenced the males? Deflating egos to the point of female dominance? Women have come a long way from the Suffrage movement, knocking down the obstacles marring their voice. Who’s thinking
and being heard now? Roles have reversed, women are dominating? Do we point a finger in blame at her for today’s youth’s problems— lacking male dominance? No, it’s not only the brain developing itself, but the world is changing rapidly, intervention is coming to save the world from itself. That intervention is technology namely AI.
Donna Thompson

[Pam Seeback]

Donna, in relation to what Diebert has suggested above, that is, a more metaphysical view of male-female dynamics, have you studied anything of the Kabbalah, aka Jewish Mysticism?

In the Kabbalah, the Divine Man (as in conscious Adam) is explained via a cosmology of the Divine Body, a Body of 10 emanations called the Sefirot. From Wikipedia, Sefirot: "Two sefirot (Binah and Malkuth) are feminine, as the female principle in Kabbalah describes a vessel that receives the outward male light, then inwardly nurtures and gives birth to lower sefirot. Corresponding to this is the Female Divine Presence (Hebrew: שְׁכִינָה‎, Shekhinah)."

What makes the Kabbalah such an illuminating study is that the ego's worldly desires (the 'war' between men and women included) are not viewed as evil or sinful - to be avoided, or hated, or rejected - instead, as being absolutely necessary to the process of 'turning around' to desire to receive/reach the LIght (to become the qualities of the Creator). In the Kabbalah, desire is understood to be a holy expression of spirit's movement from the dualistic world of time and space to the unified world of the eternal and infinite. Obviously, sexual desire is an integral part of this movement. And because it is the soul that experiences desire on the ascent (in contrast to the physical body of the descent), male and female are understood to be principles, not genders, meaning that regardless of one's sexual orientation in the physical world (heterosexual, homosexual, asexual, etc.), one becomes Male Light and Female Understanding once they enter and contemplate the metaphysical world of the Ten Sefirot of the Divine Body.

[Queen Solomon 1]

No, I haven't studied Kabbalah as yet but I aim to read some considering what others have mentioned. One Christian person I know speaks lowly about Kabbalah which is Hindi. I have read some Hindi Eastern religions & philosophy, I do own BHAGAVAD-GITA AS IT IS. I'm more in favor of the Bible's writing over any others. I prefer reading Chinese wisdom and philosophies.

Currently, I'm trying to remember a few names of our forefathers who were plagued with mental illness or insanity. Hitler was deemed insane, Mozart was an oddball, I'm writing an article titled Mental ill or mental skill. I don't support psychiatry at all, there's no medical evidence of a chemical imbalance or any psychiatric labeling--I've done my research and have Doctor's names opposing psychiatrists. Dr. Peter Breggin Psychiatrist says the only chemical imbalance in the brain, is the one they put there through prescription drugs.





Donna Thompson

[SkipRusssell]

The only difference between men and women is that women have an egg which causes them to be:
1) mothering
2) provider seeking (I'm pretty give me money)

Otherwise men and women are exactly the same.

[SkipRusssell]

Close intimate relationships are caused usually by a difference in Yin and Yang - or bluntly speaking how much a person is a top or a bottom emotionally/sexually. The egg does soften women into people who are more yin than men. Even the most masculine woman is softer than the most feminine man, but not that much softer.

Outside of egg business, if a modern woman is raised intellectually into a corporate office role, for example, it is nearly impossible to differentiate her reasoning or emotional security from a normal guy in the same position. Provider seeking qualities in women are left somewhat dormant - though the difference in dress etiquette does still soften them more than technically necessary, as it does from birth, since it is still cultural for women to be pretty. Eventually this will be done away with.

Usually a bigger difference in Yin/Yang is seen better in the second and third world where women are raised from the beginning to get their money from men. On the whole, however, women don't like that role since they are genetically almost as hard as men anyway, and because the bisexual male mind, aside from egg business, operates exactly the same as women - particularly in regards to seeking a long term monogamous relationship, almost any man can function in a relationship with any woman.

The main function, if you are going to zoom into the relatively low difference between polarity, is of self esteem. The higher self esteem the man, the more he is a top. The higher self esteem the woman, the more she is a bottom because the egg behavior takes social credit from Yin roles. It is unfortunately not possible for a Yang woman to be high self esteem, but in the case that she has a relationship with a relatively more yin, sexually non-stimulating man and he is instead in the role of a respected peer, the dredged up darkness from intimate romanticism with people who do not like themselves does not appear and both can be happy and functional.

The reason my betrothed was blind before her predecessors turned on the rest of her brain was to make her especially dependent for survival on others and therefore very, very soft. This was necessary for me because as a heterosexual man who takes no pleasure in sexual submission or receptiveness of any kind, all other women are too hard for me.

The reason I am totally heterosexual is because the wizards designed me so that my rib cage does not allow a range of breath lower or higher than certain points that are otherwise totally common to everyone else, and this correlates to areas in the brain that do not get activated in me. Namely 1) being biologically programmed to seek a relationship (it just so happens that my blind future wife is good business for me) and 2) the ability to receive pleasure from being physically and sexually dominated (though it is possible to receive emotional pleasure from 'domination'/frame ownership as was the case when I was a child with my Dad (or Mom) or was the case when I had mentors as a young adult, for example here on GF and also in the seduction community, though I have none now.

[Flanker27S]

Low thoughts of women is a sign of homosexuality. Only homosexual men disrespect the woman like that.

Men appear dumber than women, that is just my opinion.

That's something I've heard recently, and every passing day makes it more and more realistic to me. As if misogynists were internally angry at women for not making them "feel normal". As the person who introduced me to this theory said, "how many men beat their wives because their soulmate is a man?"