Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

In this Discussion

Male Liberation
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    It finally dawned on me that my earlier paraphrazing of MLK speech the:"Free at last, free at last, thank Godallmighty we're free at last" that Aneros and all prostate massage devices are not only conducive to marijuana but in fact a pretty good fit for the male liberation movement as well.

    Is anyone here familiar with a few good male liberation sites?

    Anyway I've written a text allready for when I find one. I think like Sex, drugs and Rock and roll was characteristic of the sixties and of course the rise of feminism, perhaps the coming years will be the backlash Aneros, marijuana and male liberation ;)


    According to the wiki definition of male lib. there are 2 factions:

    Men's liberation from patriarchy

    This liberation theory holds that men are hurt by the male gender role and patriarchy and that men's lives are alienating, unhealthy and impoverished

    Men's liberation from matriarchy

    This alternative thesis holds that men are hurt by gender roles and the cultural, moral, and legal mores associated by matriarchy. It points to double standards with regard to military draft, a family sphere in which male-providership is both demanded and marginalised, and institutionalised misandry.

    Although I gravitate more towards the second I feel both are really missing the point, namely that the male and female psyche are fundamentally incompatible and true male liberalism is about being free from females all together, ironically feminism has in fact helped lift the veil that thousands of years of institutionalized religion has covered up, reveiling females true colors.
    Religion understood the hypnotic powers of the 'serpent' and so setup rules to protect males from females fully exploiting their achilles heel. Just look around in all major religions the sexual power of females(burka's etc) is reduced and the male is placed at the head of the family. This unnatural arrangement is in fact the only way the weaker sex(the male) can be protected from the lesser sex(the female)and procreation can happen harmoniously.

    So this is why IMO feminism will in fact help the TRUE male lib. movement, coz when women were restricted and placed in a role of dependancy they had to show affection and love etc for the man and do all in her power to please the male sexually and emotionally as that is what a male needs to be the provider for her and her babies.
    Feminism has lifted the veil and brought out the true colors of the female. All she cares about in reality is herself(she is of course biologically receptive and this influences her psyche) and her kids and as far as love is concerns she selects her sexslave on the basis of how a man can be used to her advantage. So if she gets equal jobs and pay all she needs is a spermdonor.

    What is the mechanism that makes the lesser of the two sexes able to manipulate the other?
    We all know the answer to that, but there is more to it and Sam Fryman made me aware of it, namely the hypnotic quality of the visual and their more developed linguistic aptitude. These two work in tandem proving that it really is true that behind every strong man is a strong woman. I think anyone that has ever looked at erotic imagery can catch himself going into trance. Now trance is a state used in hypnosis to bypass the critical mind and feed suggestions into the subconscious mind. This I believe is the way men get contaminated by the women's psyche, pussified into the female sphere of MATERialism, drudgery and mediocrity.
    The second influence is the fact that females really do, generally speaking, love the kids they've crapped out. It is after all their evolutionary task, it's what they're programmed to do. This is how the cycle gets repeated, maternal love for son, son seeks maternal love in female later on, but female only has love for herself and her offspring, so dupes him into being a sexslave etc.
    The third mechanism giving women power is making men believe that men who get plenty of pussy are cool and must really be someone for all those beautiful women to want him. As mentioned above there is nothing intrinsic in what a women seeks(like women completely neglected a genius like Van Gogh, whereas they're all over someone who owns a Van Gogh now), all she wants is to use a male for her own agenda, be that social status/proof, protection or whatever.
    The problem is is that the media brainwashes first boys and then men into believing that without a wife or a gf, you're just a pathetic loser, putting men under more (peer)pressure and in effect giving females the power to be able to either like a roman emperor put her thumb up; making the male part of the incrowd, or thumb down; condemn the male to a life as a social outcast.

    So all in all with the above mentioned influences it isn't strange that the males are cowering to females for love, affirmation and recognition

    Awareness is the first step, realizing HOW men get used is essential to freeing yourself from their insideous influence.Our evolutionary achilles heel or kryptonite if you will, is our strong sexual energy, that is in actual fact wasted on women. As Fryman noted, men don't think about sex all the time, but men are programmed TO REACT to sexual stimulance, otherwise this sexual energy would be sublimated into numberous spiritually creative pursuits.

    Wasting our sexual energy on women is compounded by the fact that men are sexually speaking both male(focussing outward, giving) as female(focussing inward,receptive). Like females we have a g-spot, namely our prostate.
    It's been mentioned here how the media obscures one of the biggest male killers in favor of women by just talking about what women can do to prevent and check up on cancers that kill them, well there are ways to greatly reduce the odds of getting prostate cancer and at the same time experience multiple whole body (female) orgasms by using a prostate massager.
    Personally I use the Aneros(which was initially developed as a medical device), and have achieved what the people on the Aneros Forum have coined the Super O. But there are other prostate massagers like [ edited by support, patent infringing product ] etc, I'm not here to sell a product but to make the male liberation movement aware of this so like the feminist movement was able to destroy male power but destroying the dependancy on males by giving them jobs ,equal pay, anti conception etc, prostate massagers destroy the sexual power women wield and thus truely liberate males.

    Coming back to the wiki classification IMO the 2 factions should be:

    a)the feminized male
    b)the pussified male
    Or stated another way the man who's goal in life is about ideas(memes) and the other who's goal is the transferrence of genetic material.The latter group I'll refer to as the pussified male as they've been contaminated with the female psyche, thus have taken a MATERialistic approach to life.

    Although I agree in part with the pussified man,in finding it disgraceful how women in our society have more rights than men in most legal issues(including child-custody), I believe preventing is always better than curing so despite the fact you've been deluded, mesmerized by the pussy, and taken on women's ways I can't really relate to your sorrow that your children have been taken away from you. If you'd stayed true to your spiritual nature you wouldn't have given the female her babies in the first place!

    So how does a man get pussified?

    We've probably all heard of hypnosis and subliminal programming, this is the checks and balance that nature has added to create a kind of equilibrium between the sexes. After all why should a male that's basically superior in all respects to a female want to stick around after he's done his deed? Anyone that's ever looked at erotic imagery must agree that men's achilles heel is the hypnotic quality of the visual, especially the erotic or the esthetically pleasing. You can be IN TRANCE looking at erotic pictures of beautiful women, time passes like you haven't even noticed you've been looking for half an hour. Also women are generally a lot more verbal than women, so how it works is they feed your subconscious mind with suggestions while you're staring at her.

    Anyways, so what then is the feminized male?
    Although this term sounds just as much derogatory as the former it isn't. In fact it's commenting on the truely liberated male. The male that realizes evolution has played a trick on men as well as women in making us sexually attracted to each other but mentally as well as sexually totally incompatible.
    As Jung explained when he was talking about Animus and Anima. We delude ourselves by projecting our inner Anima on the female(and vice versa), my question to you is:"Why go for counterfeit and indentured sexservitude to the duplictious female when the real thing is inside you all the time?"
    As explained above using a prostate massager has made me aware of the multiorgasmic potential of the receptive female orgasm and simultaneously made me aware of my inner anima.
    So not only do we condemn ourselves to a life of mediocrity when we willingly allow ourselves to be contaminated by the female psyche, ironically the reason we do it(pussy) is shortchanging ourselves by settling for the lesser of the 2 types of orgams males are able to have, the ejaculatory orgasm(eo),an orgasm that if lucky lasts a whole 12 seconds while sapping us of our creative energy and perhaps even reducing our lifespan(IMO this is one of the reasons females live longer, not quite as drastic as the salmon but must surely have an effect on man as well).
    Now the Super O is a completely different story, this type of orgasm doesn't fall of a cliff and anticlimax after ejaculation, there is in fact no resolution, but if willing you can increase the intensity to mindblowing proportions. Often I'm Super O-ing for hours on end and it's nice to know I'm improving my health at the same time ;)
    There's a lot to be said about Super O's , perhaps in the future I'll expand on the topic, but for now all you need to know is that e.o are the lesser of the orgasms you as male, it's your birthright to have and that you really are shortchanging yourself when you have sex with a women. Obviously we're programmed to respond to erotic imagery and auditory stimulance(that's why women fake their orgasms), but this can be used in conjunction with the Super O without letting women subliminally pussify you into a sexslave.
    IMO it's no coincidence the media and religion has stigmatized anal sex(at least for males) as being for homosexuals and other social deviants. It's this ignorance that keeps males sexslaves and at the same time helps kill off the older males with prostate cancer.

    Anyway I've joined the forum to hopefully add to the male awareness and ultimately liberation
  • MyTurn
    Posts: 447
    Helixer, luckily, I caught this post on a Saturday so I was able to read it. Athough your ideas were a little "scattered" and "draft" in your text, the fact that a few points were a little underdeveloped and you didn't seem to reach an overwhelming conclusion - you seemed to ask more questions than you answered - I agree with 90% of what you were saying. I think, although your opinions on women wanting men for their own personal needs, you are in danger of making the reader think you are bitter and misogynous if you don't "temper" or "soften the tone" of your points, thus men won't read your text coz, ironically, they'll see you as "saying mean things about women whose boots I lick and who I aim to please".

    The reason why Aneros won't ever be a true 100% male liberation meme or representation is for two reasons:
    a) obviously coz of the length of the rewiring journey + hygiene and inconvenience + homosexual misconceptions.
    b) men have intuited or internalized or have become socially wired to desperately seek women. Men are visual, so this internalization is almost instantaneous.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=Voyager;91967]Dude, What have you been smoking ?

    Yeah dude my ideas are really 'far out' huh? Weren't you the pussified guy that was 'papa' to somebody elses child?
  • Korkelz
    Posts: 294
    What's the main point you're trying to get across? Are you saying that part of the liberation of men will come when it is common for man to experience woman-like/multiple/Super-O orgasms? But then it seems like you are putting woman down and trashing the whole idea of marriage and pleasing your partner through sex. Where does that fit in? I'm not saying anything you're saying is wrong or bad, I just want to understand you so I can interpret and learn from your ideas.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566

    Athough your ideas were a little "scattered" and "draft" in your text, the fact that a few points were a little underdeveloped and you didn't seem to reach an overwhelming conclusion - you seemed to ask more questions than you answered



    I obviously wasn't exhaustive in my analysis as I presumed the reader would have the intelligence to connect the dots and think it thru. If you didn't understand something quote me.



    I think, although your opinions on women wanting men for their own personal needs, you are in danger of making the reader think you are bitter and misogynous if you don't "temper" or "soften the tone" of your points, thus men won't read your text coz, ironically, they'll see you as "saying mean things about women whose boots I lick and who I aim to please".



    I'm just describing nature So what? IMO having(partnered) sex with an Aneros in your ass is like walking in the dark with sunglasses on. I haven't said anything that wasn't true, just coz they're pussified doesn't mean the outsider can't have a more objective view of things.
    Anyway, I don't think anyone is offended about me saying bad things about women, they may be angry coz they know I'm right. If they want to stick their head in the sand, by all means.


    The reason why Aneros won't ever be a true 100% male liberation meme or representation is for two reasons:
    a) obviously coz of the length of the rewiring journey + hygiene and inconvenience + homosexual misconceptions.
    b) men have intuited or internalized or have become socially wired to desperately seek women. Men are visual, so this internalization is almost instantaneous



    Re-wiring would be fairly sponaneous if the grinders would try marijuana. You haven't tried mj yet, so your views are flawed.
    First have a Super O and then tell me if you still feel the same. But you're right, it's socially deviant, but just coz the majority hasn't caught on yet doesn't mean it's not better than the status quo.
    My take is if women must continue the pointless cycle of crapping out kiddies let them please pay topdollar for the sperm, 100.000 would be a good price to start the bidding
  • Korkelz
    Posts: 294
    Might we stop discussing *how* things were said? I'd like to know more about *what* was said. Helixer, can you comment on my post above? Main thing I am asking is where does marriage and sexual partners fit in to your philosophy?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=Korkelz;91986]Might we stop discussing *how* things were said? I'd like to know more about *what* was said. Helixer, can you comment on my post above? Main thing I am asking is where does marriage and sexual partners fit in to your philosophy?

    I presumed it would be obvious from the above, as I wrote first off, the text was intended for a male liberation site as it dawned on me how this movement could benefit from the combined use of Aneros and hash, just as perhaps the feminist movement could benefit from abortion and anti conception pil.
    Feminism has succeeded in equal rights for women at least in the male sphere of influence while retaining their own sphere of power, which in effect obviously doesn't constitute equality.

    Back to your question, it'll depend how their being pussified is having an adverse effect on the man.
    For example, how much are you tied down? Are you able to dream and go for your dreams without being restricted by your wife and her(in both legal and biological sense) baby?
    Is the life you're leading true to your character or are you pussified into the orderly, organised, MATERialistic rat race ?

    In short , now the sexual lure is gone how much of the intrinsic female character/psyche is enough to compromise your character for? Do you like the moodswings, the nagging, the never pleased attitude?
    Are you enough of a man to not need the confirmation of a women to believe in yourself?Coz what is her (inferior) opinion worth when sex is not an issue anymore? Enough to be pussuficated?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=imp;91988]"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
    Shakespeare's Hamlet Act III, scene II

    I guess it comes down to:
    what women think they want, • what women say they want• what women really want

    i.e. action's speak louder than words
  • Korkelz
    Posts: 294
    Helixer, it really just sounds like either you don't understand the ideal man - woman relationship or you've given up hope that the ideal relationship will ever exist. Either way, you should realize that all your solutions to these problems are just bandaids on a wound, but you'll never cure the wound itself. So this is all kinda pointless.
  • MyTurn
    Posts: 447
    [QUOTE=Helixer;91966]
    So if she gets equal jobs and pay all she needs is a spermdonor.


    This is where you first began to ...disconcert me a little. Possibly unintentional, but the tone is this suggests that you of the following mindset: "Since she thinks she's Miss Independent now...thinking she's on a man's level now...". Maybe I am just reading it wrong. It would come across more positive if you had said something like: "Now that, thankfully, we are on our way to female-male equality with equal jobs and pay....". Again, I may just be reading you wrong.


    This I believe is the way men get contaminated by the women's psyche, pussified into the female sphere of MATERialism, drudgery and mediocrity.



    The mere fact that you are with a woman makes you mediocre? Here is an example of where you need to flesh out your thoughts a little.


    The second influence is the fact that females really do, generally speaking, love the kids they've crapped out. It is after all their evolutionary task, it's what they're programmed to do. This is how the cycle gets repeated, maternal love for son, son seeks maternal love in female later on, but female only has love for herself and her offspring, so dupes him into being a sexslave etc.



    ¿¡Qué!? Quoi!!!??? A woman has NEVER loved a man before? Only has love for herself, is a bit of a stretch. I would say women are, at least, these days, self-centred and care about what they can GET from you and GET FOR their kids. My ex-girlfriend who had a child before we got together, was without a doubt benefitting from the relationship more than I was. If it had continued, she would have:

    - had a carefree, oversexed youth and had a baby with a dickhead loser.

    - met me, who spent the time that she was laying on her back having fun, studying and building a future for myself, trying to give myself "high value" and potential.

    - got a better role model for her accidental son who she loves more than anyone and anything.

    - eventually moved in with me and and got her son's educational, financial and other needs attended to by myself, as her education and career prospects were not on track, nor was there any guarantee that they would ever be.

    So even in spite of living recklessly, she would have stumbled on me to save her kids life, lest he only have his dad as his role model, thus becoming a dickhead loser himself.

    But, extending this narcissistic behaviour to all women is a stretch. Unless you have proof that you can stretch it. In which case, this idea is underdeveloped.


    The third mechanism giving women power is making men believe that men who get plenty of pussy are cool and must really be someone for all those beautiful women to want him.



    100% agree. But men also fall into this trap too. We congratulate men who get lots of pussy. If we could begin to congratulate men who discover their man-pussy (prostate) and can say: "You say you want to fuck me, miss random lady who've never met before? Well, what benefit is that to me when I can have multiple Super Os alone?" - then we would turn the world on its head. Bars would become places where women try to get us Women who didn't try to pick us up or chat us up would never get one of us. Prostitution would dry up. We would become GOLDDUST. We would become "10's" (10 out of 10s, i.e. desirable and hot to women).


    If you'd stayed true to your spiritual nature you wouldn't have given the female her babies in the first place!



    A man that produces offspring has given in? So if men had followed your line of thinking, we would have been extinct millenia ago.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=Korkelz;91999]Helixer, it really just sounds like either you don't understand the ideal man - woman relationship or you've given up hope that the ideal relationship will ever exist. Either way, you should realize that all your solutions to these problems are just bandaids on a wound, but you'll never cure the wound itself. So this is all kinda pointless.

    Curious, so you actually believe in a ideal man-woman relationship?
    Please tell me more!!!!What's your take on that?

    I don't understand why ppl keep commenting on my solutions, as far as I can see I've described the inherent incompatibilty of the male/female psyche, the cruel joke nature played on us, etc, what solution?what wound?
    All I'm trying to do is help others become aware of their pussification and this selling out, this compromising isn't necessary anymore with the advent of the Aneros etc(read the text again)
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    @MyTurn:


    A man that produces offspring has given in? So if men had followed your line of thinking, we would have been extinct millenia ago.



    Finally we're getting somewhere, these are the type of questions I expected.....
    Let me ask you this, what is your take on making babies? is it to please your woman?
    or is it coz you believe you're passing on DNA so despite being mortal part of you lives on in that (combined)DNA? Coz in this case it's highly unlikely despite the MATERial characteristics that your son or daughter is like you, as it's the combination of genes, so the knowledge you've worked a lifetime to achieve will be wasted on them anyhow. Unless of course you're a racist and you feel strongly about preserving your 'race'.
    From the standpoint of the women I can completely understand why they want to crap out kiddies, after all they're biologically predisposed to do that and being MATERIalistic that's what they want, a materialistic remnant of themselves.
    For the un-pussified man however, the man that's stayed true to his disposition it should be about spiritual values, ideas, etc. Unless you could clone yourself using a woman to crap it out it's a pointless affair. So you work and defend your family when what you really want to pass on is nothing materialistic but spiritual, living on means, an idea living on, your life experience living on, a child that could be taught what you weren't become an enhanced YOU. Your spiritual reason d'etre gets wasted on a random collection of matter. So what if your child has the same skin color, the same eyes, nose, hair or whatever, are you really that racist to care about these things?

    The second point is well if we had things your way, we'd be extinct. Plausible but wrong, women who are predisposed to want to crap out babies would be willing to pay a lot of money for sperm, so let them bleed for it, like they've been doing to men for millenia using our achilles heel against us.
    And as I mentioned cloning/genetic manipulation makes sense coz that way a lifetime of knowledge isn't wasted on a 'piece of shit'. That to me makes sense, and women wouldn't care all they want to do is crap out kiddies. Let them do that with your genetically modified YOU.

    And then again, what if despite that mankind went extinct?
    It's a pointless cycle especially if there's nothing after death, why prolong the cycle what's the point? Mankind really so special, if mankind went extinct it might be a good thing for the rest of the inhabitants of this planet. On a personal note, why would you even care what happened after you died?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    The mere fact that you are with a woman makes you mediocre? Here is an example of where you need to flesh out your thoughts a little.



    The idea of Ancient Greece comes to mind, the cradle of our civilisation. The philosophies, mathematical thinking, theater, tragedy/drama etc, buildings, dorian scale(music), ideas emanating from this small area still has an influence on our thinking today.
    Arts, thinking flourished, there was only one place where that wasn't the case, Sparta, the only place in Greece where the women weren't put in a subservient position.

    I'd say the Greek was a feminized man, sure a culture of homosexuality but that's not what I mean, but possibly it was because of that that they came in contact with their feminine side. After all it was part of the training to be a soldier that the prepubescant or teenage boys would sleep with their teacher, discovering their feminine sexuality and thus their feminine side making them a more complete man.
    This feminized man is the direct route coz instead of projecting that female side onto a woman(who's biologically and mentally different, thus a chimera in any event) he goes for the real thing.
    A pussified man is a man compromizing on his ideals and integrity, a sexslave degrading himself to please the female, who twists his achilles heel for HER purpose, namely crapping out a kiddie and finding a dupe who'll risk his life for her and her kiddies or who provides for her.
    As I described above, the pussifying mechanism is something akin to hypnotism. Snap out of it! Coz you're living the woman's life, the mediocre, unspiritual materialistic life.

    My guess is the Greeks understood this and that's why they've played such a seminal role in our civilisation
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    ¿¡Qué!? Quoi!!!??? A woman has NEVER loved a man before? Only has love for herself, is a bit of a stretch. I would say women are, at least, these days, self-centred and care about what they can GET from you and GET FOR their kids



    It's a biological necessity, different evolutionary strategies, again:
    what women think they want, • what women say they want• what women really want

    So when she says I love you and pussifying you, who she's really thinking about at best is her kiddie but more likely herself
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    Maybe I am just reading it wrong. It would come across more positive if you had said something like: "Now that, thankfully, we are on our way to female-male equality with equal jobs and pay....". Again, I may just be reading you wrong


    It's positive in the sense that now the mechanisms get exposed. That feminism wasn't about equality but about limiting men's sphere of influence without limiting women's sphere, in effect giving women the jobs and the power and IMO the less dependant a woman is the less she'll have to show her socalled loving/caring side, that was all theatrics after all, part of the pussifying, to dupe the man into a lifelong indentured servitude

    Now Pandorra's box has been opened it's up to the men's liberation+Aneros+hash to complete the proces. Sure 'harmonious relations' could be established by going back to the dark ages of religion, but that,( restricting BOTH sexes freedom) would be too high a price to pay, just for the sake of keeping the crap cycle continuing
  • MyTurn
    Posts: 447
    You seem to suggest that men get no benefit from having offspring, men don't want to nurture a kid, impart wisdom, or be proud of a kid that turns out well. You think men would be happier living to the age of 70, having had a few beers with friends and a big house that gets passed on to the government coz they have no offspring.

    Your base thinking is correct: men are pussified. Men can now be free of the "slave to the pussy" syndrome now that we are in the age of the Aneros. We can even put up with less societal ("impress and get women = you are an alpha male") and relationship ("please and provide for a woman = you are an acceptable male to this society and to your woman") bullshit.

    You are even correct that we have different goals, men and women.

    But, you go a little beyond by suggesting that we might as well be extinct, that men shouldn't have kids unless money exchanges hands.

    I've asked the question on this forum so many times: Is our need for women diminished now that we can Aneros? I think the users here say it in some my polls. Basically, that the Aneros gives you pleasure. A woman/family makes you feel complete, provides intimacy, gives your life purpose, etc.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    You seem to suggest that men get no benefit from having offspring, men don't want to nurture a kid, impart wisdom, or be proud of a kid that turns out well. You think men would be happier living to the age of 70, having had a few beers with friends and a big house that gets passed on to the government coz they have no offspring



    In life I'm sure men would have more potential without the wife and her kiddies holding him back.
    And so what if your property gets passed onto the government instead of to your pieces of shit? if you're dead would you really care, IMO you'll be to engrossed into infinity to bother about pussymatter


    But, you go a little beyond by suggesting that we might as well be extinct, that men shouldn't have kids unless money exchanges hands.
    I've asked the question on this forum so many times: Is our need for women diminished now that we can Aneros? I think the users here say it in some my polls. Basically, that the Aneros gives you pleasure. A woman/family makes you feel complete, provides intimacy, gives your life purpose, etc..



    First off, did I say men shouldn't have kids unless money exchanges hands?

    The second point is well if we had things your way, we'd be extinct. Plausible but wrong, women who are predisposed to want to crap out babies would be willing to pay a lot of money for sperm, so let them bleed for it, like they've been doing to men for millenia using our achilles heel against us.And as I mentioned cloning/genetic manipulation makes sense coz that way a lifetime of knowledge isn't wasted on a 'piece of shit'. That to me makes sense, and women wouldn't care all they want to do is crap out kiddies. Let them do that with your genetically modified YOU.



    For the rest, needing a woman to give purpose and make your life complete is utter brainwashed nonsense,more lies to keep the pussified sexslaves from exploring their true potential. I'm sure the majority believe this, I used to believe it myself, I've opened my eyes...

    As I've written before about the 'Zone'. This state of being completely in the moment, relaxed and open to subconscious potential, this is completeness, a woman just brings you down to the earthly state of whining babies, moneylove, and materialism...
    I guess it ultimately depends on yourself, are you a dependant pussified sexslave or do you see the biological reality that the male and female is fundamentally incompatible, your choise

    Again: those pussified men of the poll put the Aneros in while having sex with their wife, i.e. put sunglasses on in the dark, why believe anything those desperados have to say anyhow?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=Polecat;92022]Helixer,

    As most of us know, this is a forum for the discussion of prostate massage and techniques for heightening the male sexual response. Surely there are other places you can find to vent yourself in this way. It seems like all of your threads as off late are angry, off-topic, treatises on one subject or another. They all have a similar pattern too, someone calls you on posting here, you question why nobody is open to hearing what you have to say and then you resort to ad hominem attacks. Really man, enough of this stuff. Can't you just get back to talking about having fun with your Aneros?

    Paul

    It's not really off topic for one, as I believe male lib. as marijuana is the perfect fit for the Aneros.
    As for the ad hominem attacks, my style is rhetorical, I'm the one getting the ad hominem attacks, they don't reason, they don't read what I'm trying to say. So please, you called me on ad hominem attacks, substantiate if you will, coz accusing me of something is just slander if you don't back it up
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=Mr7G;92026]Ad hominem | Define Ad hominem at Dictionary.com



    This is a clear example of an ad hominem attack.

    slander | Define slander at Dictionary.com

    Slander is an oral falsehood, therefore Mr. Polecat's statement, being both truthful and written, can not, by definition be considered slander.

    The definition I used:
    2. A false and malicious statement or report about someone

    So you're saying my use of slander is false?

    Let's talk(or write if you will) about ad hominem attacks now, for those of you ignorant of the meaning, here it is:


    directed against a person rather than against his arguments.


    So after all the text I wrote, the grand effort I put in to enlighten others, instead of criticizing or complementing the stuff I wrote about Voyager tried to discredit it not by giving reasons I was wrong, but by making out the stuff I wrote was ridiculous by making me ridiculous.
    That my friends is the meaning of ad hominem attack!

    And my reply actually had a reasoning behind it, namely, why does he want me to look stupid, what's his motive, why is he trying to discredit my writing by ridiculing me? Then it struck me, he might be offended coz he knows it's true but doesn't want to see it. I was just letting him know I understood why he would be against it.
    So true, if someone attacks me ad hominem, how can I reply to someone beyond reason but by getting ad hominem back?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    I'm actually proud of what I've written, like the stuff on Ancient Greece, after MyTurns(much appreciated) question:

    The mere fact that you are with a woman makes you mediocre? Here is an example of where you need to flesh out your thoughts a little.


    The idea of Ancient Greece comes to mind, the cradle of our civilisation. The philosophies, mathematical thinking, theater, tragedy/drama etc, buildings, dorian scale(music), ideas emanating from this small area still has an influence on our thinking today.
    Arts, thinking flourished, there was only one place where that wasn't the case, Sparta, the only place in Greece where the women weren't put in a subservient position.

    I'd say the Greek was a feminized man, sure a culture of homosexuality but that's not what I mean, but possibly it was because of that that they came in contact with their feminine side. After all it was part of the training to be a soldier that the prepubescant or teenage boys would sleep with their teacher, discovering their feminine sexuality and thus their feminine side making them a more complete man.
    This feminized man is the direct route coz instead of projecting that female side onto a woman(who's biologically and mentally different, thus a chimera in any event) he goes for the real thing.
    A pussified man is a man compromizing on his ideals and integrity, a sexslave degrading himself to please the female, who twists his achilles heel for HER purpose, namely crapping out a kiddie and finding a dupe who'll risk his life for her and her kiddies or who provides for her.
    As I described above, the pussifying mechanism is something akin to hypnotism. Snap out of it! Coz you're living the woman's life, the mediocre, unspiritual materialistic life.

    My guess is the Greeks understood this and that's why they've played such a seminal role in our civilisation
  • dan
    Posts: 2
    ..............................................
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=Mr7G;92037]There is nothing in this question which tries to discredit your post. it is merely a question. He did not accuse you of being right or wrong, in fact there was no comment about the content of your post at all. There is absolutely no indication that his question accuses you of being ridiculous, in fact there is no accusation at all. You could have simply and politely replied "I have not been smoking anything" or you could have chosen not to reply at all and ignore his question. There is nothing in that question that can be considered an ad hominem attack on you or your post. But your response was to not only ignore the original question but to cast aspersion on his character in defamatory terms when you said That did constitute an ad hominem attack.
    I will take your word at face value when you said :What I can not fathom is how you could possibly infer such animosity from the simple question Isn't it more likely this was simply a satiric post that you misinterpreted and to which you over reacted?

    So you honestly believe you're not ridiculing someone who's written a lengthy treatise, by trying to make out that I was talking thru my hat? trying to suggest my effort was just a load of garble due to intoxication?(Just for the record if it had been written under influence it would never have been as clear and coherent.)

    You truely want me to believe that it was meant literally?
    This was ad hominem and you know it!, as he was trying to discredit what I wrote by discrediting the person, whereas my reply wasn't ad hominem in the rhetorical sense as he made no arguments what so ever, besides I backed up what I said, he didn't!


    you could have chosen not to reply at all and ignore his question



    So now you're blaming me that I responded to ridicule?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=dan;92041]Helixer, it more sounds that you are a slave under drugs and "super-o", or? It seems sex for you is only the orgasm and all women is good for is a mediocre orgasm, I don´t think that´s the only reason men wants women, and it seems at least some here does appreciate a women even if they can have the "super-o" so who says you are right.

    Actually since I can have a Super O anytime I want, the value of it diminishes, in fact whereas the traditional sex is obviously sexual, the Super O has taken on a spiritual significance. But as I told MyTurn I've got many interests, Super Os are just of many and hash I only use in combination with the Aneros. So, no, I'm no slave to drugs and Super O's.
    Many here are defensive and hostile coz they feel I'm degrading women, possibly, but that's not the main message, the main message is one of LIBERATION from our evolutionary predicament. It's not the dark side, we're free at last ;)
    It's true that (partnered) sex gives a mediocre orgasm and that it's possibly even detrimental to men's health and may even shorten our lifespan. It's also true when a man gets pussified(like hypnosis but then with the pussy as bait) he adapts to the woman. I tried to explain the mechanism, women have a hypnotic quality like a snake. If you don't believe this look at some erotic imagery and notice how you drift off into trance.
    When you're pussified the banal issues of a woman's life become your life.Pussified you take in her banal suggestions and carry them out like a good little sexslave, you might even believe your projected anima really loves you while she's taking care of nr 1.

    it seems at least some here does appreciate a women even if they can have the "super-o" so who says you are right.



    Read what I wrote again and make up your own mind. Don't forget the power of peer pressure, media etc as well. I read somewhere that children exposed to texts about feeling old and fragile actually got influenced and started acting that way. That's advertising.
    We all know love is a projection of your female side, but that's not what the media want, they want your self love, your feeling of worth etc to be placed outside of yourself, claiming the only way you can be complete is with the love of a woman(MATERialism so they can sell lots of products and pollute the planet).
    It's the same mechanism as selling a car with sex. Or connecting some product to happiness, it's effective otherwise ppl wouldn't advertise. "you need this product to be happy"or "you need a woman to feel complete" is there really any difference?
  • dan
    Posts: 2
    ............................
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    it comes to kids I suppose that is a mutual decision and not only because the woman wants that


    Pussified :) now all we need is the scientists to make your asshole into a womb and you can be crapping out babies for her.



    Even if partnered sex in your opinion is not so good I guess it´s good enough for many and they wouldn´t trade it for super-o if it comes with a price of loosing intresst in sex with a woman



    True some men are even too ignorant to try anything other than penile stimulation. However I can't help but finding it curious having(partnered) sex with an Aneros up your ass, what's the point? Either you are in the female mode or in the male mode, a little bit desperate.

    I guess it's just ignorance of the pussified masses, no offense!


    it almost sounded like you wanted a boyfriend instead with this talk about how inferior women are in every area



    I'm stating facts, women are inferior to men, just look around you and ask of what you see has been done by women? Composers?philosophers?painters? of course you'll probably say 'material girl'Madonna, magnifico! genius! or Spice Girls'Girl power'.
    So because I make this concise observation what? you're making me out to be a homosexual? I don't see the link, explain please

    Maybe you feel you are happy without a women but many others are probably not, no offense just my opinion



    I've tried to explain the influences that make a man believe without a woman he isn't complete, my hope is with the Aneros the male liberation movement will reach a critical mass and stop this feminist brainwashing. Coz it's not the fact itself that makes men unhappy, it's the images, advertisement-like associations being made, peer pressure etc.

    Hopefully if the Aneros catches on this making men emotionally and sexually dependant on women is going to disappear. Coz it is directed at men.
    I read somewhere a widower doesn't outlive his wife that many years, but the other way around a widow just keeps on going. For some it's just that women live longer, for me that means men are the targets of the indoctrination of emotional dependancy, or perhaps women just think of themselves anyway
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    The biggest point you are trying to get across is that sex with vomen are inferior hence we don´t need them and sex( or more specifically orgasm) is the only thing man wants them for hence their "powers" over man



    Well, let's put it this way, did you play with girls before puberty? Did you want to be around them?protect them? love them? or did you prefer playing football with your friends? or did you play house? pretend you were the father and she the mother?
    Puberty makes you long sexually for a woman and the rest is bullshit, the rest you make up, or society makes up to make it less animalistic, give it meaning.

    you feel women are inferior mentally and biological for a man and "female" orgasm and ancient greece was so great it just sounded in your view a partner shold be selected by orgasm ability firstly, and as you said women are inferior there, hence my comment about a boyfriend even if it was in not a so serious mode




    The main point I'm making is that men make the concessions to the woman and disregarding the rest of the bullshit, the reason is ultimately sexual.


    Personally I don´t care if women are inferior to men, why wouild I care if a female partner is less smart than me, pretty irrelevant. I also suppose there are more succesfull males because for a long time men had have more opportunities for different careers, when women more recently have been given the same opportunities and just not be at home and caring for the children



    That's the feminist line, try thinking about it biologically, women don't have to achieve anything, their (biological)mode is RECEPTIVE.
    And I'm sure there are smart women around, that's not the point, it's the incompatibility once you take sex out of the equation. Sure even then, men will be pussified, but I believe ultimately it's still the result of that trance like state.

    But once again, I´m not selecting partner based on if they are inferior to me in some way, like being bad on math or similar

    .

    Exactly, men don't select on that basis(neither do women for that matter, unless of course it gives them status). And I've personally found the women that arouse me most are the ones with a fabulous body(trim, big tits, ass) and a dumb, hollow look in their eyes, like a barbiedoll.
    I know it's not politcally correct to say this, but I think there are more guys that feel the same way.
    But then, imagine after she's crapped out her kiddies, I think that's why the divorce rate is so high, men and women are fundamentally incompatible and it's better just accepting it, than crying like a little girl when she takes your children away and end up paying alimony
  • MyTurn
    Posts: 447
    [QUOTE=Helixer;92036]
    A pussified man is a man compromizing on his ideals and integrity, a sexslave degrading himself to please the female, who twists his achilles heel for HER purpose, namely crapping out a kiddie and finding a dupe who'll risk his life for her and her kiddies or who provides for her.
    As I described above, the pussifying mechanism is something akin to hypnotism. Snap out of it! Coz you're living the woman's life, the mediocre, unspiritual materialistic life.


    OK, sum up for me, a spiritual, unMATERialistic life. Don't explain what men should not be doing, but what we should be doing. What should a man fill his days with? What lifestyle, activities, goals, destiny, purpose? What should a man struggle through life for if not to provide for their offspring and legacy?

    What if women refuse to pay or it is illegal or doesn't catch on? What are our purposes then? What will complete the life of Helixer and give him happiness. Please don't say a couple of bags of weed and a piece of plastic up your arse. There has to be more, dude!

    You are, oddly, making me think long and hard about if women really do use us for our sperm and protection. Man....I dunno! I'd like to think not. Maybe subconciously? Gosh, that's bad. I hope not. Ahh, you're fucking with my brain and breaking my heart with respect to females.
  • MyTurn
    Posts: 447
    I kind of subscribe to some of Helixer's thinking.

    [QUOTE=dan;92055] it´s just as much about the ride there and the arousmnet for the women in question I think.

    This is (a) why the Aneros will notbe used by all males one day, and (b) why men will always want women, even if women's use for us is reduced to sperm donoring. Most men (not myself so much) have this inbuilt desire and fantasy to please women, especially sexually. They see it as validation of their sexual prowess, virility, and masculinity. They see a woman's pleasure as the most arousing thing ever, even more arousing than their own pleasure. In fact, men get a psychological pleasure from seeing women have a physical pleasure.

    Basically, men are like desperate bacteria, fumbling around for a host, and women are like the "host" or "host body" or "host breeding ground", ready to select the least useless bacteria. The bacteria is grateful. The host just wants the bacteria to prove itself. Constantly.

    If it weren't for women's biological need to reproduce, I wonder if girls would all just have a G spot toy and wouldn't need us? It's hard enough to get a woman, and she wants you for her biological functioning (birthing). Imagine if she didn't have the biological urge to have offspring!
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=dan;92055]My point is men want women for more than just sex, love and companionship for example, is love created by society you mean? And even the sexpart isn´t just about the physical feeling of the weak ejaculatory orgasm as you put it, it´s just as much about the ride there and the arousmnet for the women in question I think. So I can´t see how drugs+aneros can replace that as you say. I guess I don´t see most of your points as any major problems really, not for me personally at least.


    My point is men want women for more than just sex, love and companionship



    As I tried to convey earlier, but maybe you didn't understand coz you didn't answer my question?
    Anyway I'll try again:
    Before puberty set in injecting all kinds of sexhormones into your brain and before you started desiring women sexually, did you love woman or feel you needed to be loved by them for recognition or praise or compagnionship to make your life complete?My take then as it is now, I didn't feel the need for compagnionship coz women always played the dumbgames
    Coz you seem to be trivialising the sex part and at the same time blowing up the bullshit part out of all proportions. Without the sex the rest is bullshit

    is love created by society you mean


    To quote Ross Jeffries, love is a process you inflict on yourself. Ultimately this is true, ultimately it's your own doing, but, just like it's true that you can only hypnotise yourself, that doesn't mean there aren't some really good hypnotists about that can 'help' you hypnotise yourself.
    But there's more to it. We live in a culture that degrades men if they don't have a partner, that subliminally tells you you need a woman to be happy and complete. Films like the '40 year old Virgin'.

    Giving the example of Ancient Greece, I can hardly think of a society more misogynist, with the exception of Sparta that was void of any culture or art. Women were kept out of view and just to make babies.

    Do you really think these guys were brainwashed into believing if you didn't have a women you were a loser?or your life wasn't complete? or the guy that got the most pussy was the cool guy? I think not!

    Why? for one the Greeks didn't place very much value on the judgement/opinion of the female, and thank God for that or Greece would never have been such a seminal influence
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566

    OK, sum up for me, a spiritual, unMATERialistic life. Don't explain what men should not be doing, but what we should be doing. What should a man fill his days with? What lifestyle, activities, goals, destiny, purpose? What should a man struggle through life for if not to provide for their offspring and legacy?



    Men are by nature creators(like women are parrots), I actually expected another line of questions like about mediocrity. Something like:"you say women lead to a life of mediocrity but look at men like JS Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Paul McCartney :), weren't these guys inspired by women to make great art?"

    This is what you always hear, and I believed it myself for a long time. Perhaps the pussified 'art' of today is inspired by women, as these 'artists' are all about merchanidising and selling products and making lots of money, and having lost of pussy. I for one don't consider this garbage art and I doubt it's appeal will last centuries, unless of course we're pussified even more, but now with the Aneros that hardly seems likely.

    My take on my heros is that these guys went into that magical/mystical place that is known today as the 'Zone', they were one with their craft and the Universe. And a bit like the football player Johan Cruijff who was a great player DESPITE smoking cigarets, or George Best DESPITE being an alcoholic I think it's the same with these guys. It's mindboggling to think what kind of music they would have made if they hadn't been brought back down to mediocrity by their wifes and crapped out babies.

    See the Zone is a state free from expectation or outcome where the male psyche goes into receptive mode, receptive that is to the Great Spirit. I think, although it's obviously got nothing to do with sexuality, this is why percentagewise a large proportion of homosexuals is artistic. They are already open to their feminine/receptive side. As I said it's not the MATERialistic counterfeit, but the REALDEAL.

    Anyway for the rest I'm not really into prescribing, I'm just trying to describe as accurately as possible so hopefully men can make up their own mind.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=imp;92071]Let's see the scores :

    Voyager - 1
    imp, polecat & Mr7G - 2
    Korkelz - 3
    dan - 4
    MyTurn - 5
    Helixer - 20

    Helixer is the winner!
    Give him his crown of laurels!
    Now, Let's get on with serious prostate play! :rolleyes:

    P.S. Now that you're liberated, would you take your own advice and go into the 'Zone' and come back only when you've created a great work of art?

    Philosophy is art IMO as well, just like mathematics is, my personal expression is just as artful as my musical or graphical expression, only a different mode of expression.
    Anyway, I understand you feel this site should only be used for talking about orgasms and Super O's, surely this site should be about more than just productpromotion besides there's plenty of 'evidence'all ready built up over the years, why only regurgitate?
    To me the prostate massage has far more reaching consequences than just multiorgasmic potential.
    Most discussed on this site is experiencial, and since the Super O IMO is more akin to a spiritual experience instead of only baser arousal and sexual why limit it just to the base level?
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=MarkM;92073]Helixer,

    I think your use of Martin Luther King's likeness is in really bad taste given the openly hostile and misogynist tone of this rant. It's totally inappropriate, he would have never bought into any of this hogwash. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    MarkM

    Anyways, without letting myself get despondent by the hostile response of some ppl to the positive concept of LIBERATION. Let me reiterate:
    Critical mass. In phases. First the openminded, intelligent ppl, then perhaps the ppl like dan and Myturn(openminded but scared or timid) and then the critical mass gets reached an then the dumbasses and sheepl jump onboard ;)
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=MarkM;92084]Helixer,

    Your characterizations of those who have responded to this thread are pretty predictable. And once again, you return to the ad hominem attacks by referring to those who disagree with you as "dumbasses". You can't be reasoned with unless, that is, we agree with you. Your approach in dealing with people is abrasive and antisocial and frankly not befitting this forum. Furthermore, the discussion here is hopelessly off-topic, hopefully it will be closed soon.

    I suspect that the truly intelligent folks in this forum are the ones who have decided to bypass this thread altogether (as I will be doing from now on).

    MarkM

    Í see I could better not have responded at all than rushing my responses.
    I'll elaborate my first response.
    You wrote:

    I think your use of Martin Luther King's likeness is in really bad taste given the openly hostile and misogynist tone of this rant. It's totally inappropriate, he would have never bought into any of this hogwash. You should be ashamed of yourself.



    I find it astonishing, all you can distill from the all I've written is mysogynism, if that's all you see , then obviously you're blind to the true message of liberation, blind to the selfempowerment etc. My message is positive, but you only see negative. That's not my fault.
    Besides, as is often the case, when one preaches freedom, or any other positive message there are always ppl like yourself that don't want the status quo disturbed. MLK killed, Gandhi killed, Lennon killed, Jesus killed, etc...Thank God we live in the age of the internet.

    I see my message hasn't been interpretated right, it couldn't be, my mistake, I rushed it, sorry.....
    What you couldn't have known is that I've put this message on the antimisandry site as I thought it was a male liberation site. The Aneros site generally has intelligent members, after all it takes a certain openmindedness to step over the stigmatized anal region and get into prostate massage.
    First I was 'charged'with being a 'jerkoff salesman' as I presented myself as Aneros Liberated Male. The majority view on that site was that user equates to salesman. Informing them about the benefits of prostate massage and how it was true male liberation was in their view deserving of a hostile response.
    Then when it was clear I wasn't a salesmen they were hostile coz 'real men don't orgasm anally but cum with their dick'.

    Call me narrowminded for calling them dumbasses, but ppl ignorant and wanting to stay ignorant I don't have any patience for.
    Jesus would say:"Forgive them father for they know what what they do", I say:"Fuck em!, they want to whine about their babies being taken away from them when they knew what they were getting into deserve to be conned, or guys that ARE willing to wait for virtual reality and a female robot to take away the power from the feminists, but aren't willing to try something like the Aneros coz 'men don't do that' are in my honorable opinion DUMBASSES. It's not ad hominem it's backed up with proof.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    [QUOTE=imp;92076]Oh Hon, you don't understand what I feel at all.
    You are so caught up in your battle of the sexes, you are blinded to even wider possibilities.
    In the battle of the sexes, I don't care who wins or loses because we hermaphrodites win either way!
    And Hon, even monkey's with crayons can be considered 'artful'.

    P.S. My, my, Hon, you must be a pretty kinky boy wanting 'dumbasses and sheep' to jump onboard with you, You are openminded! What else is open?

    This isn't about a battle of the sexes, it's about male liberation.
    I guess some people view nature as perfect, the Christian view, God made us perfect, so God exists. Although I'm not an atheist, I lean more towards the Richard Dawking's view of evolution didn't make things perfect. Perfection is as it were a work in progress.
    That's my view, men and women are fundamentally incompatible, let's just accept it. Different evolutionary strategies. Dogs are even better suited to men than men are to women.



    .S. My, my, Hon, you must be a pretty kinky boy wanting 'dumbasses and sheep' to jump onboard with you, You are openminded! What else is open?



    Ít's sheepl, meaning ppl acting like sheep, the Joe 6pack.
    What I meant to say is, change is gradual, even positive change, some ppl are scared or just plain narrowminded. Like with the prostatemassage, some ppl don't do it, 'coz men don't cum that way'. Most ppl here have passed that stage. But what I'm writing goes against everything that we've been brought up to accept(but then so is the Aneros so it's a good match) so even ppl that are openminded enough to accept prostatemassage as something they can have in their ass while f-ing their gf or wife, don't accept the ultimate message, namely that the Aneros is best done on your own. There should be something in the user manual like: "for best results use on your own".
    So that's what I mean, change goes in phases and I believe something positive like the Aneros only takes time to reach a broader audience, and exposure
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    Unfortunately you deleted your message dan, but I'll respond anyway

    You say that before puberty you had an interest in girls. Maybe that's the difference, I hated the games girls played, I found them irritating if anything, it was only after puberty set in that I became attracted. But looking at it objectively at their psyche, I still don't like their interests. Research has shown for example that women highly rate going shopping and bingebuying whereas sex doesn't rate very high at all. And it's not coz women are romantic coz men even rated a romantic evening with their significant other much higher than women did.

    So I'm just wondering what attracted you to women at a prepubescant age? Did you like knitting? Did you like to play house or play with dolls? what exactly was the attraction.

    Maybe that's why your psyche is more compatible with women if you liked girlsgames?
    Do you also like shopping and talking about your weight and clothes and stuff now?

    Anyway, coming from a minority view then(at least if you're right), before puberty I didn't like girls and I didn't like girlsgames or mannerisms. After puberty I've always compromised, pussified.

    It's not so much that the attraction to women is gone, unfortunately that's beyond my control. This is why I can feel a kinship with paedophiles coz there almost in the same boat. Sexuality is beyond my control. Looking at women objectively, other than sex and sexrelated bs there's nothing I like about women. I don't see it as misogynism after all they can't help it like I can't help being sexually attracted to them.
  • Helixer, I really love listening to viewpoints that differ from my own, and yours is quite radical from ones I've previously seen. I would agree that the Aneros frees me in a certain way - no longer will the female psyche be dominate over me in any way, nor will I experience a weakness in dealing with the opposite sex because of my desire to get some. And it is also true that many females are well aware of the power they hold over males and use it to their advantage. However, my viewpoints aren't quite as cynical as yours. I am of the firm belief that both the males and females have something more to offer each other after they get past that their barriers. The male barrier is of course the lust we feel for females and pursuing them merely for sexual relations. The female barrier is kind of an emotional dependance on the male. We each have our burdens to bear, we each must overcome these to be truly liberated. But if a liberated male and a liberated female, free from their bonds were to join together, wouldn't you say that that would be a healthy relationship in which both parties would benefit from? Love as well is not just a female thing. As a male, it is something I still desire. The ability to partner up, commit to that partner for life, and become one - the truest of union, while accepting their faults and acknowledging yours. To me, that is what it is all about.

    I've gotten past that point in my spiritual journey where I no longer feel loneliness even in periods of extended solitude. To me, it signals that I'm healthy, I've mastered myself, and now, if I choose to take a mate, I do so completely free of any sort of biological imperative, but rather an imperative of personal initiative. My priority is to share my journey with another now, because that is what I feel deep in my soul to be right for me. I can see you feel strongly about your path as well. If you wish to experience this separation from women as your life, I certainly won't stop you. Your happiness and spiritual nature is one of your own choosing. I wonder though if this is how you really feel. Be certain you aren't just harboring past resentments before setting on this path, because the path of regret isn't one you want to walk. Try to look at it from all the angles.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566


    The male barrier is of course the lust we feel for females and pursuing them merely for sexual relations. The female barrier is kind of an emotional dependance on the male.



    IMO the female barrier is the need to find a male to protect, provide and to make babies, and using the male's strong need for sex(the male's achilles heel) to bind him to her, pussifying him into her realm. Creating the emotional dependancy of the male. Coz after all, this pussifying is an essential ingredient, without it men would just do their deed and walk away to the next woman. The skill of creating an emotional dependancy in the male was an essential part of women's evolutionary strategy.
    Sure to a certain extent women are affected as well, but not as is shown in the media or as you claim to be the case, namely to a larger extent than males are, coz think about it, her and her babies survival couldn't permit that she became so emotionally attached to him as he was to her, even willing, in many cases(pussified as he was) to DIE for her!!
    Why?
    What would happen if the man got killed by a rival or wild animal? Could she be overcome by grief? No, her and her babies survival depended on a male . So obviously women that were emotionally attached wouldn't survive, coz they'd have to be off whoring another man, pussifying him into emotional dependancy.


    But if a liberated male and a liberated female, free from their bonds were to join together, wouldn't you say that that would be a healthy relationship in which both parties would benefit from?



    As I stated earlier to dan when he was trying to make out that we desire more in women than just sex(and sexrelated issues)


    Before puberty set in injecting all kinds of sexhormones into your brain and before you started desiring women sexually, did you love woman or feel you needed to be loved by them for recognition or praise or compagnionship to make your life complete



    What I'm trying to say is without the drive for sex men and women would be so far apart from eachother that would be a bit like the prepubescant age.Sure we're brainwashed daily that if you don't have a gf, wife or whatever you're incomplete, pathetic, unhappy and a loser.
    MyTurn was making out like I was wanting to poison his mind , but society does that!
    Just imagine you're feeling perfectly healthy but in the coming hours people come up to you ask:"Are you feeling allright? You don't look so well, perhaps you should see a doctor" My guess is after 10 of those remarks you'll be feeling sick!!!

    It's this negative programming I'm talking about. If you look at it objectively, what that's inherent to the female psyche would you want to spend the rest of your life? Looking back before puberty I NEVER played with girls, they didn't appeal at all, why? coz the sexhormones didn't contaminate my brain yet! Coz see, without these bonds there's nothing really connecting male and female.
    But I'm interested in what you have to say about this.
  • HelixerHelixer
    Posts: 566
    @MyTurn: I had responded to this before, but one wrong move screwed everything up and I lost perhaps the best thing I ever wrote :(
    So, alas in a different vein:


    Most men (not myself so much) have this inbuilt desire and fantasy to please women, especially sexually. They see it as validation of their sexual prowess, virility, and masculinity. They see a woman's pleasure as the most arousing thing ever, even more arousing than their own pleasure. In fact, men get a psychological pleasure from seeing women have a physical pleasure.



    We're programmed as males to respond sexually to women and women's signs that the baby making process is having a good chance of succeeding.(her auditory signals). This isn't what this topic is about. It's the issues that go beyond the sexual. That men and women have a lot in common. As I stated I don't believe this


    OK, sum up for me, a spiritual, unMATERialistic life. Don't explain what men should not be doing, but what we should be doing. What should a man fill his days with? What lifestyle, activities, goals, destiny, purpose? What should a man struggle through life for if not to provide for their offspring and legacy?



    I answered this question already but it dawned on me my answer might not have been satisfactory.
    I guess the answer would be what would you do different if you believed you didn't need a female to live a fulfilling life?
    If you felt you didn't have to impress females with money or status, how would you live differently.
    This message of liberation is just a framework, like the scientific method was a framework, ultimately it's your own discovery
  • I can recall a memory from elementary school - 4th grade or so. I felt an attraction toward a girl I knew. Not a sexual attraction mind you, but something. I told my best friend at the time that I really liked her, and I felt nervous about talking to her. At the time, I didn't feel any sort of sex hormones coursing through my blood. My like for another human being was genuine. Perhaps I could of liked a guy just as much, but at that point in my life it just felt like this pure kinda feeling, where nothing else obscured it into something it wasn't. It felt like an attraction to someone who could be an important part of my life.

    Fast forward to today. That never panned out, she's now married with two kids, except she lives the life I always seemed to crave deep down, a life of love and family. For me, the joys of life do not cease at the sexual, they extend to life itself, to the experience, to the journey. The power of what you are feeling, this super-orgasm, it may feel like what you have sought all your life. It may indeed be the prize at the end of the rope for many men, a taste of a heavenly existence where there are no problems, only pleasure.

    But the greatest of treasures and discoveries are worthless without someone to share it with. And not just any someone, someone with whom I can be close with on an intimate level, just for the sake of it. Just because it feels right. Do I need a deeper reason? There is a certain allure to your way of thinking Helixer. I've gone through the journey of self realization and attained my personal liberation. During that journey, I encountered many philosophies, some of which worked for others, and I can see that every persons journey toward that liberation is different. But my core motivation for improving myself to this point has always been women. I don't think there is a straight man alive who hasn't worked to better himself because of a woman's influence, whether that influence was positive or negative.

    I'm well aware of cannabis and its potential to give deep insight. It's the very reason people get paranoid - they cannot handle the conflicting thoughts that come from such deep thinking. One thing I noticed is that I can convince myself that pretty much anything is the truth. Every argument seems to have its rationale and allure, and may even seem clear and concise. That is why knowledge is useless. Without several of the women in my life, I would still be asleep in a dream state, a state of mere survival and spiritual lethargy. What about your life? Even if every woman who stepped into your life you deemed as a curse, did they not prompt you to higher levels of thinking, new ways of encouraging growth? Over 1 year ago, I felt like a woman had crushed my soul. Yet I always found a way to thank her for what she did, because she awoke the fire in me to continue walking on my journey toward liberation, until here I stand, free from all power of persuasion.

    Ironic that you use Martin Luther King's speech in your post. You see women as many white people once saw black people. You think of them as not human. You allow yourself to treat them with inequality. Fitting isn't it that such an iconic figure you chose to quote would tell you this? Perhaps this is another block in your spiritual journey, one you must get past. But I leave that for you to decide. Women are not my enemy. Women are human. I am human. We are the same. That girl who I thought crushed my soul one year ago? I made it my personal mission to help her realize her liberation to, to whatever end that entails. That is how I express my gratitude.

    Think carefully about what you've read here. Are you allowing yourself to be a slave to pride, lust, and envy? Are you truly liberated just because you have discovered this power along the way? Is this the way of your life, to be motivated strictly by personal pleasure? That is the message you are sending out right now. If it be true to yourself, then more power to you. But I sense a lot of turmoil behind your words. Am I wrong?
This discussion has been closed.
All Discussions