Genius Forums - "Masculinity"?

jonfield · Post by **jonfield** » Mon May 29, 2006 6:27 am

I don't understand why "Masculinity" would be included with "Truth, Courage, Honesty, Logic, Wisdom, Perfection" in the description of this forum.

Cato · Post by **Cato** » Mon May 29, 2006 7:05 am

I imagine that would be because "truth, honesty" et al, would be qualities that only the strong can possess. And strength is often equated to masculinity, that being someone not afraid to stand up while others sit down. (But I am speaking hypothetically and not speaking for the board admins)

But, do I detect some underlaying, hinted at politically correct bull about "why don't you mention femininity"?

Are you one of those who feel it necessary to say "his or her" instead of sticking with the traditional "his" when discussing anything generally in the possessive? If so, you bore me. If not, then what is your beef?

Now, my reply to your post is an example of a masculine argument, isn't it?

So, buck up and get a pair, Jon!

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Mon May 29, 2006 8:28 am

Truth, courage, honesty, logic, wisdom and perfection are all traits that only the masculine possess. Delusion, fear, dishonesty, illogic, unwisdom and imperfection are all traits that only the feminine possess.

It doesn't have to do with men being the stronger "species", necessarily.

A man who is in possession of truth, courage, honesty, logic, wisdom and perfection can be seen as weak compared to other men and women. A woman who possesses delusion, fear, dishonesty, illogic, unwisdom and imperfection can be seen as strong compared to other women and men.

Such is often the case in our society.

To the degree that you have the traits in the saying here, you are masculine. To the degree that you don't have the traits, you are feminine. Perfection is being purely masculine, which means having all of the traits.

I do have something to say about perfection being in the saying...no one here is perfect by any means. It's something that you strive for (not to say that it's impossible for a person to be perfected in one way or another). The creators of this forum aren't perfect. I'm not perfect. Unwise isn't perfect, despite what he may want to think of himself.

I think that the more you see your imperfection, the closer you are to truth, courage, honesty, logic, wisdom and perfection...in a sense.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon May 29, 2006 10:17 am

Masculinity = Consciousness. The relationship between consciousness and things like Truth and Wisdom is something I would hope requires no explanation.

Dan Rowden

suergaz · Post by **suergaz** » Mon May 29, 2006 10:30 am

Hi Dan, masculinity doesn't equal consciousness. That's the honest and logical truth of it.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon May 29, 2006 10:41 am

Well, hey Zag. In my conceptual scheme and lexicon masculinity does equal consciousness. By "consciousness" I'm referring to self-awarness, self-referential conceptualisation as opposed to visceral immediacy. I maintain that the masculine dimension of mind (i.e. the dimension of mind generally expressed more often and deeply by biological males) is synonymous with consciousness.

But, as you know, it's all about the definitions and categories. There is no right and wrong, only utility. Your perspective I find useless.

Dan Rowden

Cato · Post by **Cato** » Mon May 29, 2006 10:44 am

...so, let me take a stab at it...

-Masculine in the action sense

Consciousness as in a sought after thing, an effort made.

-Feminine in the passive sense, no action intended.

A lack of consciousness because of passivity, without striving to attain it.

suergaz · Post by **suergaz** » Mon May 29, 2006 10:47 am

In my conception, things equate to what they are, always. This has significant bearing on my lexicon. The masculine necessarily pertains to sex. Consciousness, to the sexes.

Cato · Post by **Cato** » Mon May 29, 2006 12:40 pm

... being married, I find my wife utterly unconscious to sex.

HA!

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon May 29, 2006 4:00 pm

suergaz wrote:In my conception, things equate to what they are, always. This has significant bearing on my lexicon. The masculine necessarily pertains to sex. Consciousness, to the sexes.

Can you expand a little on this, Zag. I get that "masculine" pertains to sex (or at least "gender"), but in what sense does consciousness pertain to the sexes?

Dan Rowden

suergaz · Post by **suergaz** » Mon May 29, 2006 4:14 pm

In the sense that not only males are conscious.

Kevin Solway · Post by **Kevin Solway** » Mon May 29, 2006 9:46 pm

suergaz wrote:In the sense that not only males are conscious.

If you want to stay on the forum you'll have to do a lot better than your responses here. Your thoughtless one-line responses, that are completely without meaning, have the tendency to kill threads, which wastes the efforts of other people.

As you well know, we are here talking about masculinity, and not males. It is obvious that all women are masculine to some degree, and are conscious to that same degree.

suergaz · Post by **suergaz** » Mon May 29, 2006 9:58 pm

What is obvious is that you cannot find fault with the truth of my sentences.

The nonsense about what my responses have a tendency to do, about their being thoughtless, and completely without meaning make you appear ridiculous.

David Quinn · Post by **David Quinn** » Mon May 29, 2006 11:36 pm

I'm not sure that calling the moderators ridiculous and refusing to heed their advice is going to do much for your cause.

Instead of the glib one-liners, why not send us something a bit more substantial. How about giving us a decent essay of several lengthy paragraphs explaining your point of view on an issue you hold dear. In other words, give us some kind of concrete evidence that you do actually engage in the process of thought.

This is what makes the writings of someone like Hu Zheng immeasurably superior to yours. He always inserts his one-liners and punchlines on the back of some substantial reasoning, and they have a thousand times more impact because of it. His humour and playfulness thus enhanced the forum and raised its level of intelligence. Your humour and playfulness, by contrast, merely comes across as banal.

-

Sophia19 · Post by **Sophia19** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:56 am

Why is masculinity not associated with male? Why is strength only associated with that which is overt? What about quiet strength?

Who (what theorists/scientists) are making these "lines in the sand" definitions of what is masculine and feminine as well as their worth?

I am here to understand.....

Sophia

jonfield · Post by **jonfield** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 5:34 am

Sophia19 wrote:Who (what theorists/scientists) are making these "lines in the sand" definitions of what is masculine and feminine as well as their worth?

It's called sexism (or 'genderism').

oborden · Post by **oborden** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 7:47 am

Sophia19 wrote: Why is masculinity not associated with male? Why is strength only associated with that which is overt? What about quiet strength?

Who (what theorists/scientists) are making these "lines in the sand" definitions of what is masculine and feminine as well as their worth?

I am here to understand.....

Sophia

Quiet strength?

What theorist? Well I guess you would be looking for the board admin, they being the one who decided what should be at the top of the page. I donâ€™t think anyone here is a scientist. My understanding of it is thus: seeking the truth uncompromisingly is a difficult task. It requires strength, courage and consciousness, consciousness defined as interacting with the world using primarily logical thought. These qualities are more perceptible in those who are biologically male, but the seeds of masculinity can be found amongst both sexes.

MKFaizi · Post by **MKFaizi** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:12 pm

I had a problem with a gay guy manager recently. Very feminine dude.

No matter my effort, I have always offended gay men. What I said would not have offended most females or males. But, unfortunately, I hurt the little girl's feelings.

Here is what I said: "I have not had time to do it."

Here is what she heard: "I have not done it."

Being a bitch, he wrote me up for it so that the document has to go in my employee file.

I had to travel thirty miles to soothe his ruffled feathers.

Naturally, if I was a good looking man, the document would have been torn up. If I was a very feminine little girl, the document would have been shredded.

Bitches in charge cannot stand assertiveness.

Gay male bitches especially cannot tolerate a masculine woman. I have no problem with gay men but gay men have historically had a problem with me.

I loathe the feminine mentality no matter the gender or alternate gender.

Faizi

R. Steven Coyle · Post by **R. Steven Coyle** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:20 pm

That's funny.

MKFaizi · Post by **MKFaizi** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:48 pm

It is funny but, then, it's not.

My gender, in this case, was not a political factor. Never would be -- because I can tell you truthfully, I would not tolerate that. Never did.

But the gay dude was political. I had to apologize to him because he was gay and I offended him. HOW DARE ANYONE OFFEND A QUEEN?!!

Little girl thought I was making fun of him.

"Oh, that mean girl. She was making fun of me. She was mean, mean, mean!! OOOOHHH!! I will punish her. I am going to call the doctor in Fincastle."

She did do that. The doctor is a whimp -- easily twisted by anyone in any sort of authority.

However, he could not say that I am not an excellent worker. Truth is, the doctor is also an unconscious fag. So, he sucked up to the drag queen -- until he fully realized the dude is a queen. Kind of embarrassing. But too late to back down. He had to uphold the queen. Should go over good in the next doctor-brother meeting.

I had to travel thirty miles to soothe this queen's feathers. I call him Fluffy.

The unfortunate thing is that I could not care less that a manager is a gay man. I don't care if a gay man came to work in drag. I have worked with transexual nurses. I don't give a shit.

The pretense gets me. The bitch-slap gets me. The tolerance for the bitch-slap gets me.

I want to see the cunt do my job for a single day. He would tuck his pathetic tail inside his pussy and run. He is such a woman that he has no clue.

Faizi

Sophia19 · Post by **Sophia19** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:14 am

oborden wrote: Quiet strength?

Matter of opinion....

Some perceive passiveness as weak especially passive aggressiveness....

Some see the ability to ignore overt disrespect as strength.... or the ability to tolerate the intolerable for a higher purpose as strength..... or the ability to assert themselves in ways that do not cause aggressive response a strength.....

Personally I do not see either as a strength or weakness..... too black and white...... both have relevance depending upon the situation..... whether or not a gender carries more or less of one is irrelevant..... both qualities can complement one another rather than represent negative opposites.....

Matter of perception.... I suppose....

Sophia

Diebert van Rhijn · Post by **Diebert van Rhijn** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:57 am

Sophia19 wrote: Some perceive passiveness as weak especially passive aggressiveness....

Sophia, could you be a bit more specific? There were a lot of posts before yours that talk about equaling masculinity with consciousness. So where did you get this stuff about passive vs active? Better to address a person or statement directly. Opinions on the matter do vary here.

It seems to me quite clear that the general idea, at least for many on this board, is that the question is not active or passive behavior, but in how far anything is done consciously. If someone remains quiet or remains tolerant because of being conscious of the situation then such is a masculine act. It has to cut perhaps into an automatic tendancy to do or say something. If someone blabs on and on or is violent without being much conscious of the underlying drives and effects, then that would be feminine.

In a much deeper sense I think consciousness is the active, creative principle. But that has in my opinion no necessary relation to outward behavior.

redschmed · Post by **redschmed** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:47 am

I'm new here. First post. I don't see how any of those words apply. It appears to me that each individual interprets words uniquely. So, for me, they aren't even there. OK. Tell me how stupid I am. Onward...

R. Steven Coyle · Post by **R. Steven Coyle** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:55 am

Hey redschmed,

What specifically do you not understand about the words used?

Are you reading the words in context?

R. Steven Coyle · Post by **R. Steven Coyle** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:05 am

Hi Sophia,

You have self-awareness. But you still need approval for it.

My intention is not to be judgemental, for the sake of being judgemental.

What are your thoughts on the duality of yin and yang?