GENIUS FORUMS

I still remember this book ,I read it on pdf..long time ago,on David's site..I remembered I laughed so hard..
I agreed with the book,I mean.
On the same token..I'd like to ask a question for those whom produced maybe the most funny,hillarious and witty ,,book of wife,,(and maybe the most real humor on the net)..have you considered,,book of husband,,??..that would fix the things up to those whom think you are anti-woman..see what I mean?..but of course,David and Kevin..to write a book about that would mean to look into yourself,and see with remorse that indeed you both were born out of the same woman you hide inside yourself...ne's pas,mon amigos?
http://www.youtube.com/user/MenoftheInf ... DbAgWFNn_o
kisses to David and Kevin:)
ps..the reason is the consciousness only..the same one whom got you into this mess,is the answer...with one PUSH of mind,one can break thru...and indeed I have to see a woman doing it.Suicide is not an option.Worship is not an option.Trusting is not an option.Becoming is the only option..while the women have the greater potential as becoming,because they can sense the absolute more easily then men..they are also handiccaped by the mind factor of knowing.
In other words..this is a paradox..while men have lower potentials,due to mind factor they make it(the sages)..while women,having most of the potential ..due to lack of brain they are lost.This is the reason all the religions born by women are into magik..etck..amazonian ...while all the religions created by men are into thought and will.None are valid,on my opinion..there is a book of wife inside you,and there is a book of husband inside you..you pick..you lost the battle already..kisses:)

Each biological type has its imperfections, but regardless, there is the possibility that each can transcend their own plight, if they have the right intellectual disposition and environmental stimulus.

kriptodanny wrote:I still remember this book ,I read it on pdf..long time ago,on David's site..I remembered I laughed so hard..
I agreed with the book,I mean.
On the same token..I'd like to ask a question for those whom produced maybe the most funny,hillarious and witty ,,book of wife,,(and maybe the most real humor on the net)..have you considered,,book of husband,,??..that would fix the things up to those whom think you are anti-woman..see what I mean?..but of course,David and Kevin..to write a book about that would mean to look into yourself,and see with remorse that indeed you both were born out of the same woman you hide inside yourself...ne's pas,mon amigos?
http://www.youtube.com/user/MenoftheInf ... DbAgWFNn_o
kisses to David and Kevin:)
ps..the reason is the consciousness only..the same one whom got you into this mess,is the answer...with one PUSH of mind,one can break thru...and indeed I have to see a woman doing it.Suicide is not an option.Worship is not an option.Trusting is not an option.Becoming is the only option..while the women have the greater potential as becoming,because they can sense the absolute more easily then men..they are also handiccaped by the mind factor of knowing.
In other words..this is a paradox..while men have lower potentials,due to mind factor they make it(the sages)..while women,having most of the potential ..due to lack of brain they are lost.This is the reason all the religions born by women are into magik..etck..amazonian ...while all the religions created by men are into thought and will.None are valid,on my opinion..there is a book of wife inside you,and there is a book of husband inside you..you pick..you lost the battle already..kisses:)

Mensa says: I bet I could write a book about man if I put my mind to it. And without making generalizations, I could create a best seller if I chose to. It would be easy because the truth is within humanity and I have clear insight into humanity. To write about men is to know they are better men than women are women.

Any book about women is also a book about men; if not, it isn't really a book about anything.

What a vacuous comment, Dan.

Er, why? If you think the psychology of one sex can be stated and analyzed in absence of the other you are seriously, and deeply, mistaken. Unless it's a biology book - and not even then!

yes, I would agree with your second comment, in general principle. At minimum, the existence of the other would have to be acknowledged to examine either psychology, but I misinterpreted your original statement. I incorrectly presumed you were working the "women are nothing" angle, which is, in itself, a non argument, a vacuous statement.

Dan Rowden wrote:Any book about women is also a book about men; if not, it isn't really a book about anything.

EyeofJesus says: I know that Dan, that's why we say 'man' pertaining to both man and woman. The statement I made about knowing that men are better as men than women are as women was only an opinion which I shouldn't have used the word 'know'. That was a foolish error on my part, however, you locked me out of the forum for that, and I want to know why? Actually, I do know why, however, I notice you jumping on me any chance you can get, to catch any error I might make.

In 1979 prolific feminist author Betty Friedan and author of "The Hazards of Men" Herb Goldberg conducted a live debate, in which many of the extant problems between masculine and feminine ideologies were discussed. The insights of these two authors surpasses our current cultural evolution.

The debate is available on youtube and begins with Goldberg and Friedan discussing the past and changes that occured up to the present (as of 1979) and then proceeds to talk about the present (as of 1979).

Betty Friedan is often credited with giving the feminist movement its momentum, but even by 1979 the movement had strayed far from Friedan's vision. In Friedan's view, published in 'The Feminine Mystique', the problem women were facing was intimitely bound to problems men were facing. She felt that women were not just being victimized by men, but that in-fact they were playing the victim role, while men were playing the dominant. She considered these to be primarily cultural ideals, to which men and women aspired and modeled themselves on. Goldberg points out that unless a man display pride, confidence, assertiveness, agressiveness, and so forth, he could not attract a female. Speaking of himself he states that when giving lectures and appearing before crowds he became very sexy to the opposite sex, but otherwise he's seen as a short, balding, curly-haired jewish guy, and consequently invisible to women. Both submit that so long as women lust after this ideal of manhood, they pressure men to adopting those traits, the very same traits which women grew to dislike. Feminists want men to be soft, gentle, caring and considerate, but this is in contrast to what they desire sexually. They overlook the soft, gentle, caring men, and gawk at the muscle-bound, sports car-driving, violent egomaniacs.

For man's part, by contrast, he desires a woman who plays the victim role, who comes across as an undefiled flower of nature, who is innocent and soft. Consequently, the man desires someone who is vain, irresponsible, irrational and clingy. The same traits which he will later grow to despise when the novelty of it has worn off. But men also hold women to these standards through their sexual selection. So Friedan and Goldberg both view the problem as an interplay or dance between the man and woman, or the dominant and submissive, or active and passive consciousnesses.

As I said before, Friedan is credited as one of the prime influences that kickstarted the feminist movement, but by 1979 she saw that feminism had become anti-man. To this she states that it is an obvious hypocrisy, because women blaming men for their station, further solidify the view that women are innocent, irresponsible, and clingy, and that men are dominant, assertive and aggressive. This "backlash" from the feminist movement was no way out of the problem and only served to give it concretion. Even to this very day, the feminist movement and men and women in general completely overlook the larger body of Friedan's work and continue to promote the exact same gender ideals.

Dan Rowden wrote:Any book about women is also a book about men; if not, it isn't really a book about anything.

Dan..be aware of my words and sink them in your thick ...thick head..that book was all about how the women are idiots from the man's point of view..it was not iota of praising women.
Obviously either you haven't read the ,,Book of wife,,..or you are truly an arrogant being.
And I thought I will provoke some talks here,not morons posting couple words,and not even leaving their name to know whom was posting.
What is the matter with you guys?..(and with you Dan?)
Have a little respect for the others and say your name,after you post your stupid 3 words genius style..at least I told you I am danny..whom are you?..themanof infinite?..Dan?
And if you think,Dan..that that book shows where women are praised,please send me a quote from it,and stop your delusional thinking about,,Any book about women is also a book about men; if not, it isn't really a book about anything..prove it with more then couple words,and also say you said it.
Danny
ps..what's the matter with you guys?..obviously I am in the morons forum not in the genius forum...5 words responses and not leaving your name?..is that the future of insanity of forum style you encourage?
And I thought I'll find intelligent people here...but all I'd found were 6 words posted..here and there..with no name or nobody to address....sheer insanity indeed.May all your genius balls fry in the kriptodanny hell..really...you have no respect for people,zero respect for life,and much less for the women whom gave you birth..shame on you,says the mahayogi!

Carmel wrote:yes, I would agree with your second comment, in general principle. At minimum, the existence of the other would have to be acknowledged to examine either psychology, but I misinterpreted your original statement. I incorrectly presumed you were working the "women are nothing" angle, which is, in itself, a non argument, a vacuous statement.

Well, I'm a little surprised you got that "angle" from my statement. The sexes are so intimately bound both biologically and psychologically that there's no such thing as a book purely about one of them.

Ryan Rudolph wrote:Each biological type has its imperfections, but regardless, there is the possibility that each can transcend their own plight, if they have the right intellectual disposition and environmental stimulus.

I assume you are Ryan....what makes you think,Ryan....that you can transcend your condition if you were a chicken?..it was some logical brain from the chicken?
Intelectuals?..as I remember Kevin Solway, David Quinn and Dan Rowden were promoting some suicidal dude's wisdom.(Ottto Weininger)
Such insanity is hard to digest..indeed..
May all of you grow the wisdom muscle..and stop the insanity of Otto..if you want to be immortals..if not ,just follow his wisdom and kill yourself..see if I care..
And if any of you replies with some stupid 5 words,and refuses to to leave his name..(so I know whom the fuck wrote it)..then I'll abandon this forum.
Danny
kisses:)..but you guys never heard of the kiss.....why I am bothering.You are all geniuses and KNOW it all...well..wish you luck while you are 6 feet underground..you'll be the most genius in the cemetery...really.

kriptodanny wrote:

Dan Rowden wrote:Any book about women is also a book about men; if not, it isn't really a book about anything.

Dan..be aware of my words and sink them in your thick ...thick head..that book was all about how the women are idiots from the man's point of view..it was not iota of praising women.

Actually, it's neither of those things. You are a brick calling a vapor, dense.

Obviously either you haven't read the ,,Book of wife,,..or you are truly an arrogant being.

The third possibility is that you have no understanding of the psychology of the sexes. I know where my money's going...

And I thought I will provoke some talks here,not morons posting couple words,and not even leaving their name to know whom was posting.

Well, discussion boards are complex. You can't always have what you want. And my comment was, and remains, the most meaningful statement in this thread so far.

Have a little respect for the others and say your name,after you post your stupid 3 words genius style..at least I told you I am danny..whom are you?..themanof infinite?..Dan?

Hey, genius, my name is on the left hand side of my post. You're using it in your reply to me. Am I missing something here?

And if you think,Dan..that that book shows where women are praised,please send me a quote from it,and stop your delusional thinking about,

Why should women - or men - be "praised"? Praised for what, exactly? The book is a satirical work.

,Any book about women is also a book about men; if not, it isn't really a book about anything..prove it with more then couple words,and also say you said it.

I explained why in my reply to Carmel, but really, it's so obvious only a moron would be blind to it.

ps..what's the matter with you guys?..obviously I am in the morons forum not in the genius forum...5 words responses and not leaving your name?..is that the future of insanity of forum style you encourage?

Er, what? "kriptodanny" amounts to "leaving your name"?

Dan Rowden wrote: Hey, genius, my name is on the left hand side of my post. You're using it in your reply to me. Am I missing something here?

Yes you are..I never look on my left side..would have been better then reply to people named adamant,or ,,allenergy,,..or some freaks indeed who choose ,,whatever,,..and read the left side.
This is a sign of cretinoisms in you,Dan..by adressing people from the left side...and recommeding people to lookon the left..
I am Danny..In center..go fuck yourself with your looking..is my real name..is that you promote,you cocksucker?
The side you adress,moron..is the side they actually CHOOSE to be called.
They do that by posting...
Danny
ok?..and good luck in your quest,and Ihope you bann me soon,so I won't suffer the insanity of people saying 3 words..please save me...and ban me..if you do I'll do for you one wish on your thick forehead..it will get smaller.
Danny:)

kriptodanny wrote:

kriptodanny wrote:

Dan Rowden wrote: Hey, genius, my name is on the left hand side of my post. You're using it in your reply to me. Am I missing something here?

Yes you are..I never look on my left side..would have been better then reply to people named adamant,or ,,allenergy,,..or some freaks indeed who choose ,,whatever,,..and read the left side.
This is a sign of cretinoisms in you,Dan..by adressing people from the left side...and recommeding people to lookon the left..
I am Danny..In center..go fuck yourself with your looking..is my real name..is that you promote,you cocksucker?
The side you adress,moron..is the side they actually CHOOSE to be called.
They do that by posting...
Danny
ok?..and good luck in your quest,and Ihope you bann me soon,so I won't suffer the insanity of people saying 3 words..please save me...and ban me..if you do I'll do for you one wish on your thick forehead..it will get smaller.
Danny:)

just bann me..for I am a mahayogi....but of course,since dan the genious is here..what's the point?..bann me me and make you happy..otherwise I WILL GIVE YOU DEADLY wisdom,even your grandmother would not digest.
Danny:)
ps..now bann me and get it over with..

Being is a power..show me the power..and Jesus walked on water..
Don't fuck with me..I respect you.
Also I ..really..if anybody responds to me with 2 words..and never leaves his name..I'll go nuts.
please TELL me what WAS the name of the person writing..and DO NOT BELIEVE in the NONSENSE some people tell you to ,,look at the left side,,..
LOOK at the end of the message..that's all..
of course.is a curse..
For I WILL curse personally anybody whom responds to me...and they forget to say their names,and force me to to look(on the left,as the Idiot Dan said) and see it's not a name.,,
Danny
This is the mahayogi danny from http://kriptodanny.blogspot.com/.if I see ANYBODY not saying their names,and just fucking around with words..I will distroy them,as power,soul,and body..trust me..even if I am banned..enough is enough...This is the Mahayogi curse..you MUST say your name,after you post..or you suffer in ways I can't fanthom...trust me..or match my powers..up to you.
Danny
Do not delete this post,Or I'll distroy you as body/mind/soul/for being a pretender of truth..be careful..Dan

kriptodanny wrote:I hope you bann me soon,so I won't suffer the insanity of people saying 3 words..please save me...and ban me..if you do I'll do for you one wish on your thick forehead..it will get smaller. Danny:)

Your wish is my command.

Dan Rowden wrote:The sexes are so intimately bound both biologically and psychologically that there's no such thing as a book purely about one of them.

Moreover, it would also necessarily have to be about things outside the whole problem of the sexes, so that the problem itself can be contrasted with them and better understood. Therefore, only a great genius like Weininger can properly write such a book.

Z-line kryptodanny

Dan:
Well, I'm a little surprised you got that "angle" from my statement.

Carmel:
hmm, so am I, a little... On the one hand I've never known you to be big on random, drive-by insults to women, but, on the other hand, you're prone sporadic bouts of cynicism. I mistakenly chalked it up to latter. my bad.

Dan:
The sexes are so intimately bound both biologically and psychologically that there's no such thing as a book purely about one of them.

Carmel:
yeah, ain't that a bitch;)...but, I think that's all the more reason men and women should attempt to reconcile with "the other".. not that we need to sit around the campfire holding holds and singing "Kumbahyah", but too many of the discussions I've seen on gender issues are set up like a battlefield. There's no real dialogue taking place, just men and women trying to shove their opinions down each other's throat, or be "right"... as if there is such a thing with a relative issue such as this...

The whole "battle of the sexes" thing is egotistical nonsense, much like most of politics. I have no real time for it, even though each side occasionally - very occasionally - says something meaningful. Any true "battle of the sexes" takes place in your own head - which reminds of a funny aphorism:

"It's hard to fight an enemy who has outposts in your head." ~Sally Kempton