Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Feminist Body Snatchers

Well, last night I think I sweated out the last of this thing. The antibiotics didn't hurt either. The problem is, when you have diabetes, illness and infection make your blood sugar shoot up in unpredictable ways. All of a sudden you can't control your sugar because of this new random variable (i.e., viral or bacterial parasite) that's been introduced into your system. And then, if you develop a bacterial infection, the sugar feeds the bacteria, in a vicious cycle. So each of my annual colds over the past several years has turned into a bacterial infection, something that never used to happen to me.

Naturally, I thought of how this is analogous to how mind parasites operate in the system of consciousness. First, how do we define mental health and illness? It seems especially important to define the former, or else we'll have no reliable way to gauge the latter. Importantly, we cannot just equate mental illness with "pain," for much psychological pain is healthy and adaptive, while a great deal of mental illness revolves around the inability to tolerate one's pain.

This inevitably leads to an inability to tolerate meaningful pleasure either, for primitive defense mechanisms aren't that discrete. They aren't like "smart bombs" that limit collateral damage. Rather, they're much more analogous to, say, amputating your foot to get rid of a hangnail. It will work, but you will be left with a part of yourself missing. And then, just like an amputee, you will begin to experience "phantom pain" where your limb used to be. There will be pain, but you won't know where it's coming from. As a result, you will do all kinds of dysfunctional things to rid yourself of the pain.

I was reminded of this in reading an article by a formerly promiscuous woman who had bought into the feminist ideology skank, whine and hooker, thus doing untold damage to her feminine nature without even knowing it. For feminism (there are some more traditionalist exceptions, but they are in the minority) is the bizarre ideology that teaches that feminine nature does not exist. As such, it is not so much an ideology as a defense against femininity. For whatever tangled developmental reason, femininity is equated with passivity or powerlessness -- even masochism -- so it must be amputated. As such, radical feminism is the disease it purports to cure.

But in the long run, this won't stop the pain. Rather it will merely increase it, often causing irreversible existential damage, such as in a Barbara Boxer, whose recent vile comments to Condoleezza Rice reveal a soul so depraved by feminism that I am embarassed to live in a state she represents. It's like having Maureen Dowd as a mother, if such an absurdity can be imagined -- a prototypical Woman Without Breasts if ever there was one. That's going to be one hungry baby! (But not as hungry as her internal baby, which never stops crying, column after column.)

This article, by Dawn Eden, is entitled Casual Sex is a Con: Women Just Aren't Like Men. It is a sign of the stupidity of our times that what was once common sense has been successfully driven to the fringes by leftists who deny (and therefore amputate) our divine-human nature in order to recreate a new and improved human being, which is always more or less a monster. But only literally. I am quite sure I have readers who, like me, when they see a Barbara Boxer, "see" a monster with their coon vision. Obviously this is quite distinct from the left, which projects their own inner monstrousness into the right. But only habitually. Here, I'll show you the difference.

Eden recounts her own quasi-groupie past, during which time she behaved as if her sexual nature were no different than a man's. Of course, in order to imbibe the feminist ideology in a big way (as opposed to merely dabbling with it in the manner in which adolescents experiment with different identities), one must be damaged to begin with -- there must be fertile soil for the virus to take root. In order to be healthy, one must ideally have a model of mature femininity and of mature masculinity bonded to one another in a harmonious, loving, and complementary way.

In Eden's case, she had anything but. As she describes it, her earliest attitude toward sex was very much influenced by what she observed in the life of her loser mother, "a free spirit who was desperately trying to make up missing out on the hippie era." Her parents had separated when she was just five, and her father is described as a decent but essentially weak man who "didn’t want to seem prudish and was clearly uncomfortable setting down rules for a daughter he rarely saw. He almost never talked to me about sex. It was simply understood that I would have sex when I was ready -- whether married or not."

Thus, growing up, she had "little concept of the meaning of sex and marriage." This is the void where the lie of feminism takes root and flourishes, for "like millions of other girls," she internalized the "misguided, hedonistic philosophy which urges young women into this kind of behaviour..." While it "harms both men and women," it is "particularly damaging to women, as it pressures them to subvert their deepest emotional desires."

Eden notes the truism that "The champions of the sexual revolution are cynical. They know in their tin hearts that casual sex doesn’t make women happy. That’s why they feel the need continually to promote it." Only now, at 37, does she comprehend the damage she did to herself: "I sacrificed what should have been the best years of my life for the black lie of free love. All the sex I ever had — and I had more than my fair share — far from bringing me the lasting relationship I sought, only made marriage a more distant prospect."

Now that is a critical point: They know in their tin hearts that casual sex doesn’t make women happy. That’s why they feel the need continually to promote it. I would not say that radical feminists consciously understand this, for mind parasites operate unconsciously. Like any other virus, once they take over the host, they reproduce themselves and "spread" to others. The parasite is not alive, but it "borrows," so to speak, from life, and wishes to "go on being," as does any living entity.

This is what explains the odd persistence of the irrational and discredited mind parasites of the left. In order to eradicate them, one must first comprehend the nature of the host! As the host becomes healthy and aligns itself with truth, the internal environment is no longer conducive to the presence of the mind parasite. But so long as the person has a compromised immune system, there will always be fertile soil for the parasite, no matter how many times it is defeated. For viruses don't really die, since they were never really alive. They just become dormant, or lodge into new hosts, or adapt to changing environments by mutating and manifesting in a new way -- the way Marxism mutated into multiculturalism or radical environmentalism. Truly, "the left will always be with us," just like polio or chicken pox.

Which is why, when I think of academia, the image of "body snatchers" always arises -- infected people trying to infect the next generation so that they can continue to feel "normal," even "superior." Imagine the pain one would have to endure at the conclusion of a long academonic career to realize one had spent one's life not educating, but abusing children and propagating illness. Not many have the courage to face this, thus the well-known phenomenon of the "tenured radical" who hasn't taken a new cognitive imprint since 1968. For naturally, the mind parasites do not technically enter the stream of time. Rather, they are a self-renewing "limit cycle," entirely circular and immune to outside influence. They are "deadness come to life."

I had never heard of this Dawn Eden person, but she has obviously become a controversial figure in the angry feminist world, in the sense that my sinus infection regards the antibiotics I am taking as "controversial." Here's one, pulled at random (it was the first that came up), entitled Dawn Eden: Nasty Little Piece of Work. Check out the coarse, hostile, and bitter tone of defensiveness expressed toward "our favorite little judgmental godbag":

"Her whole rationale for becoming chaste was that she wasn’t getting what she wanted -- marriage -- out of fucking drummers and hoping that her technique would result in a ring." "Dawn’s problem, as ever, is that she’s universalizing her own neuroses and damage and prescribing rules for everyone else based on what didn’t work for her... [H]er friendships were unsatisfying when she was desperately trying to get the men she fucked to love her, and it means that nobody can have satisfying friendships unless they’re chaste. Her desperately trying to get the men she fucked to love her and marry her didn’t result in a ring, so nobody can possibly find love and marriage if they’re not chaste..."

Now, I don't doubt that Ms. Eden is likely as neurotic as before. I am not saying that her attitude toward sexuality is without flaws, or that it represents my attitude. However, the difference between her and the unreflective feminists who are so angry with her is that she has some insight into her ideological mind parasites and is trying to prevent them from dominating and ruining her life. Therefore, it is not quite accurate to say that she is "universalizing her own neuroses and damage and prescribing rules for everyone else based on what didn’t work for her." Rather, this is specifically what feminists do. It is the entire basis of their project.

I would say that Eden has sensed certain universal truths about sexuality which she is still pursuing in a somewhat unavoidably neurotic way. She is probably too damaged to harmoniously align herself with the truths she has discovered, at least at this point in her life. This will have to await the establishment of truly healing relationships -- both vertical and horizontal -- so that the truth may be lived and assimilated and the soul may grow to maturity.

*****

I am also reminded of this article that appeared in the NY Times last month, What’s Wrong With Cinderella?:

"I finally came unhinged in the dentist’s office... where I’d taken my 3-year-old daughter for her first exam. Until then, I’d held my tongue. I’d smiled politely every time the supermarket-checkout clerk greeted her with 'Hi, Princess'; ignored the waitress at our local breakfast joint who called the funny-face pancakes she ordered her 'princess meal'; made no comment when the lady at Longs Drugs said, 'I bet I know your favorite color' and handed her a pink balloon rather than letting her choose for herself. Maybe it was the dentist’s Betty Boop inflection that got to me, but when she pointed to the exam chair and said, 'Would you like to sit in my special princess throne so I can sparkle your teeth?' I lost it.

"'Oh, for God’s sake,' I snapped. 'Do you have a princess drill, too?'

"She stared at me as if I were an evil stepmother.

"'Come on!' I continued, my voice rising. 'It’s 2006, not 1950. This is Berkeley, Calif. Does every little girl really have to be a princess?'

"My daughter, who was reaching for a Cinderella sticker, looked back and forth between us. 'Why are you so mad, Mama?' she asked. 'What’s wrong with princesses?'"

91 Comments:

Anonymous Tana said...

If I remember correctly Dawn Eden an agnostic Jew converted to the Roman Catholic Church recently.

1/17/2007 08:54:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Okay, Bob, how do you do it? You have officially scared the bejeebers out of me. Stop it! ;0) Do mind parasites ever collectively jump around in members of a group?

1/17/2007 09:42:00 AM  
Anonymous der fledermaus kompt said...

Well, Bob, you've kind of ventured into water that's over your head, I suspect. That's not a bad thing; boldness is a virtue in the pundit business. But...

Men are not qualified to pronounce authoritatively on feminist matters-- although they do it all the time--for obvious reasons.

Women pronounce on men's issues quite frequently as well.Laughable.

The interior/emotional needs of each sex aren't directly knowable by the other. Even individuals of the same sex are relatively opaque to each other.

The place to focus on is power parity: the combat zone inhabited by both sexes. In the bedroom, sex takes a backseat to control issues, intimate terrorism, and manipulative power gambits and ploys.

In the kitchen, the workplace, the laundry room, the struggle continues. Childcare, income allocation, promotions, and who gets to drive which car--everyhing is up for grabs.

Our age is in the labor throes of giving birth to the very first sexually level playing field, that is, absolute and utter power parity between men and women.

Both sexes can now play all they want in the dirty, dysfunctional terrain of their damaged inner selves, drowning in or transcending them as luck or fate would have it, without feeling one down on the other sex.

As long as no sex is beholden to the other, everyone has a fair shake at making it clear of the mess.

Marriage? Fine if you want it, Ok if you don't.

The innate differences in men and women don't mean as much as power parity, the unfettered control of a destiny by the person who lives it.

Feminism, far from being a virus, is an evolutionary force.

1/17/2007 09:48:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

hmmm....

The unknowable? It sounds like gender is your God.

1/17/2007 09:52:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

>> . . . Barbara Boxer, whose recent vile comments to Condoleezza Rice reveal a soul so depraved by feminism that I am embarassed to live in a state she represents<<

I'm embarrassed to share a hemisphere with her. Actually, I think in this instance Boxer cynically appropriated the traditionalist perspective - ie., women fulfilling the role of childbearing nurturers - to excoriate the childless Condi who, in Boxer's view, can't possibly have any developed empathetic, sympathetic sentiments.

This is a twist on the old lefty tactic of division into insulated groups, each with its own agenda and set of paranoias - ironically, this tactic really does stymie empathy and sympathy, which are the catalysts of a spiritual commonality.

1/17/2007 10:06:00 AM  
Anonymous bubba said...

Mozart, among others, would quibble with the flying one about die or der. I der not.

1/17/2007 10:14:00 AM  
Blogger NoMo said...

der fleder...Thanks for proving Bob's point -- you seem nothing more than a tragic product of your time. Stop and think, if you still can. Venture outside the foolishness of your programming. If you heart's not broken by what Bob said today, it may be too late.

1/17/2007 10:19:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

>>Feminism, far from being a virus, is an evolutionary force<<

Feminism is a evolutionary force only when in the context that anything can be truly revolutionary - the spiritual.

In the hands of most feminists and lefty-spouting automatons like you, fiedermaus, the spiritual force behind real feminism gets perverted into a soul-deadening materialism.

1/17/2007 10:22:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Jesus was a feminist.

Which is to say what is feminism?

Ah huh, huh yuk.

1/17/2007 10:25:00 AM  
Anonymous la skank said...

You mean to tell me that it is impossible to integrate the advantages of being a whore with those of one who is chaste? That they can't be blended?
Are you Serius?

1/17/2007 10:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

"The innate differences in men and women don't mean as much as power parity, the unfettered control of a destiny by the person who lives it."

I would almost have to agree with this on a purely horizontal level, Dupree. The field mouse may be a bumpkin, but he sure knows his neighbors and their little horizontal worlds. I think it is something worth discussing, so I'll play the fool for a bit. (Typecasting for me, actually!)

The idea and allure of personal power for a woman is bigger than she'll ever tell her closest friends, or even her counselor. Now, the consequences of misidentifying where that power comes from is the resultant mess we see nowadays.

But power-hungry women are nothing new, it's just that less and less do women need a man in order to secure their future. Still, in the horizontal flatlands of the field mouse, if we grasp for our power through a man, we're marrying him for his money. If we grasp that power for ourselves, the Boxer types discount us a dried-up and heartless. If we try to assert some sort of control over our destiny, we are not team players.

It's a nasty little cat fight nowadays, no matter what a woman chooses--if all of her choices are based on one source of power.

But Bob's point, field mouse, is that it's not just about the horizontal. The only true parity is found in the vertical, and from there, every sort of political, social, and even personal relationship has a better chance of becoming something more than the sum of its partners.

Every individual freedom born from O is more than the greatest accrual of power from anything less.

Maybe a post on the Descent of Freedom, Bob. That moment when we know where true power resides and so we can take up the Eternal Slackitude with some other wonderful Raccoon, laughing and looking silly, and greatly enjoying life.

1/17/2007 10:28:00 AM  
Anonymous bubba said...

Points of information:

The German word for a bat (flying mouse) is Fledermaus and it carries the feminine article 'die,' not 'der.'

All of this is so confusing for me!

1/17/2007 10:47:00 AM  
Blogger NoMo said...

1 + 1 = 3. Ahh, the mystical mathematics of a marriage between one man and one woman with the vertical priority firmly in place in appreciation of the Creator-intended order (or "natural" order, if you prefer).

1 + 1 = ?. Modern math (evolved, as fleder puts it).

Having been very contentedly married to the same woman for over 30 years, I can claim to have learned a thing or two along the way.

1/17/2007 10:50:00 AM  
Anonymous bubba said...

Even Strauss can't pick a fight with Mozart.

What's a boorish guy to do?

1/17/2007 10:55:00 AM  
Anonymous Alan said...

"The place to focus on is power parity: the combat zone inhabited by both sexes. In the bedroom, sex takes a backseat to control issues, intimate terrorism, and manipulative power gambits and ploys."

fledermaus, is this really the world you live in?

1/17/2007 10:56:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

The swooping Bat might find it not a bad thing to remember that Carl Jung defined the opposite of love as, not hate, but the drive to power. On the other hand, serious power disparities in relationship torpedo the Good Life. Assessing and increasing one's legitimate power is subtle, complex, and often counter-intuitive.

A taproot of the superficial feminist mind virus is the Marxist-derived one that economic power trumps all. Economics is part of the mix, but disproportionate emphasis on fiscal and emotional autonomy is an alienating con game.

My suspicion is that sexually-promiscuous "feminism" was a ploy to lure women out of their realms of power in relationship with men and children, and to swamp them in exile in a world ruled by ageing undergraduate male values where the playing field in action will never be level. Scatter some kibble on the path, trap the rabbit, eat, throw away the bones and sell the pelt.

Great sophistication is now required for young women making their way upstream through all this. Going it alone contra mundum is past heroic, nearly impossible. Eden's a wise and clever (well-regarded headline writer) woman to have introspected on her experience, discovered the profound utility of traditional codes of virtue, and, as tana notes, sought out an accessible-to-all anchor in the Vertical.

1/17/2007 11:05:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

Further reflections on academic feminism by the scholar Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, whose questions about the scope of its harms and benefits led her in a similar direction. Links to her writing at the bottom of the article, including "Feminism is Not the Story of My Life": How the Feminist Elite Has Lost Touch With the Real Concerns of Women (1996).

Without irony, toward Fledermaus, I urge her (?) to meditate deeply on attaining independence of thought, rather than mere reaction against whatever thwarting forces of culture or family with whom she may believe herself in battle. Neither end of the continuum is likely to have her interests at heart.

1/17/2007 11:22:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

I think we can see this old strain of feminist body snatchers in current pop culture, especially the rap world. OK, I will admit I like some rap music and hip-hop (especially to dance to)but maybe it's the rebel in me! The whole culture of "players" and the sexualization of young girls say around 9 now. The style of clothes they make for little girls in small sizes did not even exist when I was a kid. It's pretty tragic that kids are even more rushed today to act older like adults missing a big chunk of the joy in being a child. I wonder if it is directly correlated to the leaps in technology and speed of information available.

1/17/2007 11:37:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Added to the end, in case you missed it, an article that appeared in the NY Times last month, What’s Wrong With Cinderella?:

"I finally came unhinged in the dentist’s office... where I’d taken my 3-year-old daughter for her first exam. Until then, I’d held my tongue. I’d smiled politely every time the supermarket-checkout clerk greeted her with 'Hi, Princess'; ignored the waitress at our local breakfast joint who called the funny-face pancakes she ordered her 'princess meal'; made no comment when the lady at Longs Drugs said, 'I bet I know your favorite color' and handed her a pink balloon rather than letting her choose for herself. Maybe it was the dentist’s Betty Boop inflection that got to me, but when she pointed to the exam chair and said, 'Would you like to sit in my special princess throne so I can sparkle your teeth?' I lost it.
'Oh, for God’s sake,' I snapped. 'Do you have a princess drill, too?'

"She stared at me as if I were an evil stepmother.

"'Come on!' I continued, my voice rising. 'It’s 2006, not 1950. This is Berkeley, Calif. Does every little girl really have to be a princess?'"

My daughter, who was reaching for a Cinderella sticker, looked back and forth between us. “Why are you so mad, Mama?” she asked. 'What’s wrong with princesses?'"

1/17/2007 11:51:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

>> . . . maybe it's the rebel in me!<<

Moon in Aquarius.

Heh.

1/17/2007 11:59:00 AM  
Anonymous PrincessSpirit said...

Fledermaus MEANT to say: "Feminazism, being a virus, is an evolutionary farce/fart."

Boxer, La Skank, or any professional Feminazi would make a great piranha-mate for IntegraMenace. He loves beratings & cyberfloggings given his obvious MasoNarchissistic bent. One fetid virus so richly deserves another!

"Free Love" is nothing more than two evil parasitics piggybacking, animal-kingdom style; nothing new under the sun or on the savannah.

Diseases never need a gender - Evil's already an Equal Opportunity Infector.

- PrincessSpirit -

1/17/2007 12:44:00 PM  
Blogger karrde said...

WRT Dawn Eden--she has a blog, in which she posted a long series about her turning towards Christianity, and her re-alignment of moral center. I've lost track of where the series was on her blog, though.

This gentleman can only read so much of Ms. Eden's womanly writing at any one time, so I've never finished it. However, that series of articles was a mixture of profound wisdom learned at great personal cost and slightly-shocked retrospective on the ways in which her past sins had been pushing her along the path towards spiritual death.

I have no idea of her spiritual state, but I know that her words attract a storm of hatred from members of the sect of self-worship that she used to be a part of. That is usually the mark of someone with some grasp of wisdom; though Ms. Eden should be known better by the company she keeps than by the enemies she breeds.

1/17/2007 12:51:00 PM  
Blogger karrde said...

Bad Link:

Dawn Eden's blog is at

http://www.dawneden.com/blogger/

1/17/2007 12:52:00 PM  
Anonymous bubba said...

princess ~

La skank IS inty. You must have missed a few posts.

1/17/2007 12:54:00 PM  
Blogger MikeZ said...

"This is Berkeley, California!" - that explains a great deal.

PS: News story in the last few days about curing diabetes in mice. Overnight. Google for "diabetes mice canada". The interesting connection is that insulin was also discovered in Canada (Banting and Best, 1922). Years away from showing up on the selves, though - but our grandchildren may never have to worry about it.

"der fledermaus kompt": did you mean "die fledermaus kommt"?

It's an odd notion that men and women are so dissimilar that one cannot speak on the other's issues. Different, certainly - in spite of what many feminists would have us believe - and the differences are essential - which is why there's one of each in a marriage - but not so different that each is incomprehensible to the other.

A news story in the last day or so turns on statistics that less than half of the women in the country are married (Google news: 'married couples'). The apparent motive behind the story (and the survey) seems to be to notice that fewer women are married nowadays. I think rather that the motive is yet another shot across the bow of Western culture, to promote the idea that marriage is no longer needed - an anachonism - and if that's the case, let's just do away with it - and doesn't Hollywood get along just fine without it - so why should anyone bother to go through that ceremony any more?

1/17/2007 02:03:00 PM  
Anonymous The Real Inty said...

No, La Skank is not Inty, has never been Inty. For your safety and knowledge, I will always include "inte-something" in my username, and I have only ever posted as "inte-something" except once, as "yerbuti" (although a Raccoon or two has co-opted my handle from time to time to make me look bad).

1/17/2007 02:04:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Fledermaus said-
"Men are not qualified to pronounce authoritatively on feminist matters..."

This type of argument is the same type of moronic argument that Boxer, and most on the Left use, yet ignore when they 'pronounce authoritatively'.

By using this hypnocritical, idiotic 'reasoning' (which they never follow themselves), the Leftists are saying that truth, principles, virtues and logic are unattainable, except by Leftists, which is no surprise.

It's simply a variation of the same, stupid, condescending argument (which doesn't even rise to wrongness), designed to shut down debate.

"You aren't fighting in Iraq, so you can't possibly know anything about it"..."You aren't a man (or woman) so you can't possibly know anything about men (or women)"...
"You aren't 'sacrificing' your children to a war, so you can't know anything about it"...
"You don't know what it's like to be a pregnant woman with a headache, so you can't possibly know anything about abortion as a cure"...

Leftists don't believe in absolute truth, principles or virtues so they attack truth itself with absolute mindlessness and then pronounce themselves the authority on their utopia (hell).

1/17/2007 02:27:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Inty-
You do an excellent job making yourself look bad.
Nobody else here at OC can come close to your 'level'.

1/17/2007 02:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Kali the Blood Thirsty Bitch said...

If you destroy the greatness of Woman, you reduce life to scandalous nonsense. Monotonous, aggressive exchanges, and petty concerns and rivalries, and all the rest of the nonsense of mind divorced from the realm of feeling. You must have the Pleasure dome, temple and all. And then you will know what to do when you go to do business, when you go to the Congress. You will go there to make sure the Pleasure Dome is preserved, because you want to go back there tonight!

Once the Pleasure Dome is established, human beings are not going to create any war or mayhem that is going tp prevent or destroy that circumstance. But mankind (including Dawn's friends) is throwing it away with both hands. Everything about Woman---in other words, everything about the domain of feeling and the sensees,amd pleasurable association with the feeling and sense domain---is corrupt at the moment, and opposed. It is not just the Divine Spirituality that is opposed--Woman is opposed. That which Woman IS, that which she incarnates, that which her pattern is about, requires mankind to be integrated with it, as the core of life. The necessary project for the survival of Humankind is the restoration of the Pleasure Dome as the context of human life, the complete restoration of it, the liberation of the human disposition from the opposition to Woman, to Shakti, to feeling, to the art of all the senses, glorifying and turned toward the Divine Condition of existence. Done in temple, done in bed, done at meals, done in human community. The Pleasure Dome must be restored.

You wont find much Pleasure Dome philosophy over at Crux Project where Dawn hangs out!!!

1/17/2007 03:00:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

"My daughter, who was reaching for a Cinderella sticker, looked back and forth between us. “Why are you so mad, Mama?” she asked. 'What’s wrong with princesses?'""

My God, that is gonna be one messed up kid. The dentist was right on the money; that dragon lady really was The Evil Stepmother....and the Wicked Witch of the West, and Maleficent, and the Sea Witch...whats a poor little princess to do? Better call Child Protective Services....

1/17/2007 03:05:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Congressional pleasure dome. Priceless.

How do these people stumble in here?

1/17/2007 03:10:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

"Kali the Bloodthirsty Bitch," aka Dennis Kucinich.

1/17/2007 03:11:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

kali, just one word for that post:

whaaaaaaaaaa????

That woman-as-Supreme-Goddess stuff died out with the Egyptians and the Greek fertility cults.

1/17/2007 03:11:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

kali...the only Pleasure Dome I'm concerned about is the one in Miami, on the last weekend of January; Bears vs. Colts, wooo hooo!!

1/17/2007 03:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Integralist said...

As always, Bob and minions, you completely miss the integral solution to the gender problem.

The best aspects of masculine and feminine values can be combined to create an integrated hybrid being that transcends both male and female.

In the 21st century, what real need do we still have for "male" and "female" anyway? Aren't these outmoded terms getting to be a bit childish for our current level of development?

To say that men and women must experience their sexuality differently is ridiculous. We can all experience sexuality in the same way as evolved, integrated human beings.

To hold on to these archaic gender stereotypes is disfunctional and regressive.

I implore you, Bob and minions, give up your prejudices, join the modern world and embrace the feminist movement.

Men and women are equal whether you like it or not.

1/17/2007 03:27:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Come now, froll, you can do better than that. No one is going to take the bait if you appear too implausibly moronic.

1/17/2007 03:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Inty,

These "evolved, integrated human beings" - what do you call their sexual organs?

Paginis? Testaries?

1/17/2007 03:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Sheesh. Why should I leave banal comments when Lileks is again proving he is a Raccoon among the 'Coons:

link

1/17/2007 03:34:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Although it does explain the curiously neutered vibe Integralist gives off.

1/17/2007 03:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not just a vibe, it pervades every one of his comments.

There is an obvious lack of conviction.

A complete absence of balls.

That's why he keeps coming back, begging for external validation.

1/17/2007 03:40:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

I think "it" has already integrated.

1/17/2007 03:50:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

I think he's saying he's transgendered.

1/17/2007 03:51:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

LIleks proves that "coon consciousness," or "coonsciousness," for short, may be achieved outside formal tradition, and that there are everywhere souls which belong "invisibly" to the one and only vertical Church of the Perpetual Raccoon. Far from disproving it, this is an elliptical proof of our sacred doctrine.

1/17/2007 03:52:00 PM  
Anonymous bubba said...

Joan, thanks so much for the link. I had to find my inhaler to restore breathing normally. Now, integrating truth and humor, that's the real thing.

1/17/2007 04:04:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Lisa,

With regard to your comment of possible correlation with technology and the dress code of the young girls -yes there is one, it is called "Internet Pornography"

Follow the money

-Luke

1/17/2007 04:14:00 PM  
Anonymous PrincessSpirit said...

ROFL, the Feminazi in the article lives in Berkeley! HAH!

In my best Legally Blonde, Elle Woods, Legal Eagle in toe-tappin Prada-Boots, sympathetic voice: "Tho I can well imagine her horrified panic that her beloved Hippie-Haven has committed the unexpected about-face betrayal who now routinely "robs" its Flower-Chylde StepMuthahs of the old implicit (im-)moral demands & propagenda Feminasties once extorted & Legally Bound & Gagged their syncophant-followers to serve eternally til death - in her shock & rage she's clearly forgotten Princess' Rule #9, which clearly states: "Things Change, **it happens; but a Princess with Aplomb never gets her pantyhose in a bunch, and never trades her nylons for a Jockstrap."

Rule #7: "Princesses love & value real Men - we don't trap, paralyze & eat them as you Shelobs do. We Gratefully Total-Recall the immortal words of The Man Among Men when we spot your ilk on the hunt: 'Conseeder this a Deevorce!" They just won't read nor obey the "Do Not Eat The Men!" sign.

60s-70s FemiNasties should have learned by now electroshock-enforced brainwashing, coercion & compliance doth not a lovelife, partnership, marriage, family, community nor business make with sane men or women. Princess' Golden Rule #221: "What goeth around cometh around to bite a Feminasty in her balls." They've alienated men; femme-esbians dont want superbutch beeotches for mates. All they have left is their own kind.

Rule #144: "All Dominatrix and No Girlie-Girl makes Jane a FemiNasty - a professional lonely superangry man-eating princess-hating bile-dripping Black Widow Beeotch full of venom, poison & paranoia."

Rule #27: "A FemiNasty will happily burn her bras, but she'll never burn her Jockstraps; Maneaters ALWAYS keep trophies from their Victims." (Jane Fonda has closet-fulls.)

"Oooh, tha Horr-rrarrhh!" (in Fran Fine's finest JAP-accent.) "What's WRONG with those wimmin?"

There's far worse to suffer for Betty Bra-Burner et al. Her children have finally come home to rule her roost. Disney, Mattel, Lisa & Frank, Mead & dozens of gizmo-giants catering to school-age Primetime Princesses are laffin all the way to the Bank, raking in bux by the billionz, spurring the Princess & Girlie-Girl crazes at lightspeed, far faster than Feminazis can whine, rant n rage against it, even faster than they can megamarch on Washington & stage public book, dvd & cd burnings.

Tweeners & Teeners are smarter than their lava-lamp hynotized, Valium popping predecessors: SmartGirls know they have Choice, and they Choose to not follow their Hippie-parents weed-induced purple hazed drug influenced Psychophilosophic footsteps they clearly see are antithetical to having healthy relationships, work & family lives. Baby-boomer children who've suffered decades of brokendown selves, families & divorces are very aware now of the exposed, undeniabley damaging dysfunctional legacy left by FemiNasties. They want better for themselves now they're no longer brainwashed or fooled into thinking Feminazism is the only way to be a real woman.

"You just can't keep a Girlie-Girl down, can you, you Beeotches?" (Rule #47): Manly-Men (Princes) refuse to be annihilated & emasculated; Girlie-Girls refuse to fall for the FemiNasty Pills their Evil Stepmuthahs peddle; theres no one FemiNasties coerce & control except their own kind. Their impotent battlecries echo "SHillaries of the world, Unite! We CAN finally have a Female Chief of Staff & Prezident, trust us, join us." I'm sensing Wicked Stepmamas R Us Consortium is about to blow soon, like Krakatoa in all its Fiery Fury.

The One-Two Punch: Punch #1: Move over FemiNasties, you're completely outmaneuvered & outnumbered by moguls & mavens of Fashion, Toy, Game, Home Furnishings & Entertainment industries being soundly defeated by them daily. The Capitalist Cash cow thrashes your propagenda which is increasingly consigned to dusty ancient backracks at Books-A-Million. Your wickedy-wackety-witchy identity is crumbling & caving in upon itself, melting in a puddle of goo, same demise your name-sake WickedWitch suffered. Here's a Victoria's Secret bra to blow your nose with. You never imagined 40yrs ago you'd be thoroughly beaten by Victoria & Versace, by Barbie & the Bratz, did you?!!

Most importantly Punch #2 TKO: Little Girls show they have more identity, wisdom & smarts than their FemiNasty Muthahs. Truth: Girlie-Girls run the show now (just ask their daddys) as their indefatigable influence on the American market marches to reign & rule stronger than your best efforts ever did, especially at Christmas time & birthday parties as their continued demand for Princess-Wares, Gadgets & Gizmos rises off the richter, even in Hippie-Havens.

You never expected to be beaten by other Females, much less your own Daughters, did you? Hehehehe! :D

Admit it: You grossly underestimated the eternally resurrecting Positive Power of Princesses, didn't you? Who says there's no Justice in a Princess' world?

Elle Woods Concludes: "Oh, and for all you FemiNasties who read this comment: Try to remember, I'm not speaking of the counterfeit petulant princess version who are nasty, spoiled-skanky, maneaternipulatives like You all are: I speak of a Spiritually Royal Type of Woman you know nothing about that is alien to you. The type of Godly women who existed long before your twisted version ever hit the scene en masse. We continue to exist despite your best efforts to eradicate Us & Men too; We will exist long after you're dead & buried in the ideological netherworld all Psychotyrants pass into when they finally breathe their last evil."

- PrincessSpirit -

Working hard writing "The Modern Girls Guide to The Positive Power of a Spiritually Healthy Princess"; "The Princesses Golden Rulebook: 1,001 Spiritual Rules Every Princess Should Know"; "Original Princesses and Their Counterfeiters - Don't be Fooled by Skanky Knockoffs" and the soon to be BestSeller: "FemiNasty Muthahs, ManEater Beeotches & Flying Monkeyboy Disorders."

1/17/2007 05:16:00 PM  
Anonymous ms. E said...

Mad mama is just civilizing her little pricooness, so she'll grow up into a proper femfrog.

1/17/2007 05:20:00 PM  
Anonymous PrincessSpirit said...

PsychoWeenie, FemiNasties don't want to integrate with anyone, Getta Grip!

"Integrated hybrids" as Hermaphrodites usually hate resultant identity/gender mess & confusion, it produces pain to them they don't wish on their enemies. They aren't more spiritually developed or higher up the vertical than anyone else. There's no need to even go there.

You've already convinced us you're an absolute nutcase. Now we see you're really quite a mess. But do, feel free to date & relate w/any Feminazi you please if you deem it integral. We'll see how long it takes before they pull Fat-Bastard's "Get een mah Belly!" routine til you're devoured body & soul. Thats what they think of hybrids!

- PrincessSpirit -

1/17/2007 05:28:00 PM  
Anonymous Xivilai said...

Curiously, the process of the mental parasite comes to mind more as a mental and/or spiritual leprosy; a dedening of the senses, loss of function in extremities (like, I dunno, maybe the prefrontal cortex?), and a weakened ability to repel harm that leads to even the tiniest nicks growing into terrible rot that leads to... well, unpleasant loss, and I'll leave it there.
Amusingly, these spirit-lepers even have their own 'colonies' (like San Fransisco), although their exile is more often self-imposed.

1/17/2007 05:51:00 PM  
Anonymous PrincessSpirit said...

Xivilai: They definitely have spiritual gangrene going on. Spiritual leprosity has its etiological, epidemiological & metastatic stages just like any other psycho, spirituo, or biological immune-system diseases. Some spiritual lepers are terminal cases more so than others.

It's their Choice to stay sick even tho they don't need to be spiritually toxic. I think we should tattoo green Mr/Ms Yuk symbols to their foreheads to warn peeps.

Antivenom, antivirus, antibiotics & antileprous cures are all available up the Vertical if one is willing to take their Truth-medicine & spiritually journey to heal ones parasites, psychosicknesses & spiritual ebola condition before Death comes knocking. Sadly, many just simply refuse health.

Their chronic choice of Rebellion, as in "I will not!" used as avoidance in a wrong way by all PsychoTyrants is the negative choice that keeps them sick & spiritually unevolved. They also are given to delusional pridefilled outbursts (they're psychospastic, like Tourettes syndrome) "I Am God! You must listen to me! I'm The Best!" due to deep psychoses, identity fractures, reality confusion, jealousies, massive insecurity & covetousness ensures they'll stay in PsychoTyrant sickness for decades or eons.

Parasitic psychospiritual vampires are internal to oneself and external to ones world/work/blog, etc. One here in particular is so dysfuncationally retarded it has neither good nor common sense to know when to leave even though its unwanted and rejected repeatedly. That's a parasite for you. Its what dealers trafficking in psychotoxic illnesses do to themselves. Jesus called it dead-on when he addressed them: "You are the rot inside the Grave, full of death and dead mens bones! Harlots, vipers!" etc. He basically called them poisonous putred bloated maggotty corpses with a whitewashed veneer that did no good to hide their hideousness from His Eyes. Bodysnatchers, indeed.

- PrincessSpirit -

1/17/2007 06:34:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

"The best aspects of masculine and feminine values can be combined to create an integrated hybrid being that transcends both male and female."

ITSSS ALIIIIIIVVE!!!!

[see Shelley, Mary]

1/17/2007 07:03:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

"The necessary project for the survival of Humankind is the restoration of the Pleasure Dome as the context of human life, the complete restoration of it, the liberation of the human disposition from the opposition to Woman, to Shakti, to feeling, to the art of all the senses, glorifying and turned toward the Divine Condition of existence."

Soopah Freak, Soopah Freak, shees Soopah Freeeaky, yow!!

1/17/2007 07:06:00 PM  
Anonymous die fledermaus kommt said...

Well, I am chastised in regard to the spelling of my handle as well as the sensible reader who pointed out that men could probably make fairly accurate guesses about what goes on inside a woman's heart and mind (I had at first thought not).

I will modify my position thusly:

Innate difference exist between men and women, but how women express their innate differences is no longer up to men.

The earning power of women has bought them the freedom to do as they will.

Men might complain, but they really don't have much leverage anymore. She makes as much as he does, so why listen to that noise?

Men who prefer a traditional relationiship (Christian headship) will have to find the few women who feel like living that vision out. The vast majority of women are going to depart from the old script, as it simply isn't a good deal. Why settle for less power than men? That just sucks.

What is the new compact between men and women? That is the interesting question. And, it won't favor one sex over the other.

1/17/2007 07:13:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Sorry, die fleder, you have no idea what a "traditional relationship" or "Christian headship" is all about. You only speak of power. Fortunately, that has nothing to do with the honor and respect shown and the deep regard each one has for the other under "Christian headship". When its the way its meant to be, not the warped, perverted thing its become in much of the world today, there is nothing that comes close -- real intimacy, real depth, real relationship. Equality doesn't mean having the same roles, but sharing the "power" in such a way that power struggles are nearly unknown. I don't blame you for not knowing of what I speak -- the world is intent on ever further deepening the perversion of the "natural" order.

1/17/2007 07:27:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

die fledermaus kommt--

Must agree with Nomo. You are just one healthy relationship away from undermining your entire worldview. However, your worldview has its own desire to go on being, so it probably wouldn't allow that.

1/17/2007 08:13:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

die fledermaus kommt

No offense, but 98% of men would steer as far clear of you as humanly possible. You strike me as the least desirable possible woman, even if you look like a movie star.

The hostility and hardness that comes through in your posts grossly overwhelms whatever redeeming qualities you may otherwise have.

Just my 2 cents, in case you're having diffculty finding a husband. Then again, in your case that probably isn't a concern of yours now that you earn so much.

1/17/2007 08:14:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

"What was it about my answers that confounded her? What if, instead of realizing: Aha! Cinderella is a symbol of the patriarchal oppression of all women, another example of corporate mind control and power-to-the-people! my 3-year-old was thinking, Mommy doesn’t want me to be a girl? "

"There is spice along with that sugar after all, though why this was news is beyond me: anyone who ever played with the doll knows there’s nothing more satisfying than hacking off all her hair and holding her underwater in the bathtub. Princesses can even be a boon to exasperated parents: in our house, for instance, royalty never whines and uses the potty every single time."


Unfortunately, Peggy Orenstein hasn’t yet come to the realization that her unresolved rage against the ossified stereotypes she’s been fighting her entire life, and using the princess image for her own manipulative parenting techniques, will have more to do with screwing her daughter up than will a little make-believe in a princess costume.
And I call the last "quote" in the article a little mommy make-believe

1/17/2007 08:18:00 PM  
Anonymous inte-skank said...

Bob and minions,

Are you people too dense to get the fruit-salad view of living life to the fullest on an integrated plane?
Why so stiff in your traditionalist views of life? Top, bottom, AC/DC, what does it matter? All systems are GO baby.
Lighten up those loafers and live!

You can be assured that you are hearing from the genuine article.

1/17/2007 08:59:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

inte-skank:

There's nothing worse than a boring troll.

Simple-minded, transparent baiting is no fun for the rest of us. It isn't annoying either, it's just pathetic.

1/17/2007 09:19:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

a flighty mouse coma's by any other spelling said...
"Why settle for less power than ..." and "they really don't have much leverage anymore. She makes as much as he does, so why listen to that noise?"

A tip for the tipsy: if this is seriously a key issue in how you approach your relationships, it really isn't going to make a difference what script you read from or gender you combine with - you're sunk.

1/17/2007 09:27:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

dfk:
You sooooo don't know what you're missing!

At this rate, you won't find out how wrong you are without decades of severe emotional beatings.

Wake up! It's not too late.

Listen to Dr Laura's radio program to hear the life damaging results of what you are thinking. Won't take you long to hear your own story & what it leads to.

Go to B&N, browse her books & see if you are not there in the stories.

Do some homework, save yourself & your progeny years of misery.

Even if you can't see it, it's very clear from where I'm standing.

1/17/2007 09:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Paul G said...

Re: Relationships as power struggles-

One descriptive word came immediately to mind: machiavellian

What a moronic way to approach something as simple as a friendship, let alone something along the lines of marriage.

Besides, who has the kind of time it takes to keep track of all that nonsense? Didn't we learn anything from watching Seinfeld? Sooner or later, even the best laid plans spin completely out of control, and when you get to the front of the line, all Life tells you is: "NO SOUP FOR YOU!"

1/17/2007 09:56:00 PM  
Anonymous die fledermaus kommt said...

I believe that 40-60 percent of marriages devolve into struggles for control.

The modern marriage is impossibly freighted with expectations. When these aren't met, people point their fingers at each other and begin a campaign of intimate terrorism.

Some of you out there are going to know exactly what I'm talking about.

My own situation is pretty desperate, I must admit, which colors my perception. Love has been a rough road for me; I feel left behind. Perhaps I shouldn't be so outspoken; this post hit a nerve, I guess.

A some point became very down on love, and then had a thought that the problem was my huge expectations for love, not the thing itself.

The two main things are sex and conversation--if your partner can deliver those, then the rest can be shrugged off.

But I want my own money. This I know for sure.

1/17/2007 10:25:00 PM  
Blogger hoarhey said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/17/2007 10:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

die fledermaus kommt,

This last post doesn't sound anything like the person who wrote the first post.
It sounds more open, more vulnerable, a little less certain AND more human.
Perhaps you are making some headway.

1/17/2007 11:18:00 PM  
Anonymous yerbuti said...

Smoov,

You know what you can kiss!

1/17/2007 11:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Real Integralist said...

The last Integralist and Inte-skank posts were NOT me. In fact, don't assume that any post is me because some Raccoon here is so pathetic than he or she insists on aping me.

Get a life, coon.

1/17/2007 11:29:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

dfk said:
"if your partner can deliver"

No wonder you're down on love.

What decent & truly able to love person would want to deal with such a self-centered gimmie-gimmie-it's-all-about-me-getting partner.

I'm betting you attract exactly the same all-about-me type, both of you watching like hawks, ready to tear into each other at the first misstep.

That's no way to live.

Get a clue & do something about it.

1/17/2007 11:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Alan said...

die fledermaus: I would have to agree with you that a lot of marriages end up as power struggles...as I've seen it in other marriages and experienced the frequent opportunities for it in mine.

However, that is an inversion of what true marriage is about. We all have to struggle to be the person who is worthy of that type of marriage and if both spouses are committed, progress can be made.

That is what Gagdad and others in this little community point to when they talk about a change in being resulting from aligning ourselves with truth, love, and beauty.

I second Ximeze' recommendation about Dr. Laura. Her work has saved more marriages than you can know (yes, even more than Gagdad, sheesh). She recently did a book signing here in OC and if you weren't there three hours before the start, you were out of luck. The number of people I overheard in my short time figuring out I was too late who were talking about simple changes they made based on the common sense advice of Dr. Laura was incredible. She knows more about the practicalities of the ideal male/female relationship than anyone I've read or heard. As male and female, we have different needs and ways of giving that complement each other. Yes we are equal....but still different.

Also, having the third partner in your marriage of God is incredibly important as it takes a marriage of a diad and makes it a triad where the duality is mediated and made whole. Jointly putting your relationship in God's care takes a good deal of the power impulse out of it as well.

1/17/2007 11:38:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Inter:
What did you expect?

You spent so much time running all over the map with your chaotic rantings, going here & there, reversing, not making sense, falsely promising to go away & now you're complaining?

Joan of A tagged you when she called you a liar. Liars eventually get caught out.

Refresh your memory with the story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf.

1/17/2007 11:54:00 PM  
Anonymous juliec said...

DFK, if your biggest concern in a relationship is "control", you're going nowhere fast. It sounds to me as though you've bought into the idea that a married woman, especially if she doesn't work outside the home, is nothing more than a prostitute or a domestic slave.

Speaking as a married woman, who had (and still has - my husband simply wants me to be happy, whatever I choose to do) the option to pursue a career, I decided against it. You talk about power issues? try this one. He earns the money; I control it (he doesn't have time or energy to deal with handling bills, I do). If I played power games, I could do whatever I wanted - set up a secret account, gamble, shop us into poverty - he wouldn't know, until it was too late.

His happiness is directly dependent on mine: if I am upset, he - like most men who love their wives/ girlfriends - will do absolutely anything within his power just to put the barest hint of a smile on my face. The merest curl of anger or derision from my lips is enough to crush him. Because I have this power, I consider it my sacred duty as his wife to never abuse it. As it happens, he has a similar power over me, and could crush me just as easily.

If I were ever to be so heinous as to abandon him, he would be an empty shell of the whole that he is, because I hold his heart within my own. Sure, he would recover, but the scars would never really fade. This is not something we discuss, nor something we test each other with, because we love and trust each other. We don't fight about power or control, because we depend upon each other, and we have each other's backs. We have lived through poverty, loss and sickness together, as well as good health and the glow of success (and believe me, sudden success can threaten a weak relationship just as much as poverty).

A good marriage isn't about "power". It's about love and trust and balance. It's about joining two lives together in a way that makes them both the better for it. Together, we are accomplishing far more with our lives than either of us ever could have alone, he in his career and I with my art. But the best part of every day is still, after thirteen years, those sweet conversations when we go to bed, sharing the last moments of the day before drifting off to sleep.

If all you worry about is power, you are missing out on all of the most important, special gifts of being married. Don't buy into that crap - it will only make you miserable, bitter, and paranoid - and ultimately extremely lonely. Life is so much sweeter than you realize; I wish you could see what I see.

1/18/2007 12:00:00 AM  
Anonymous mountainman said...

die fledermaus kommt:

"The two main things are sex and conversation--if your partner can deliver those, then the rest can be shrugged off."

Sex? How much? Just what kind? For how long? You'll never be quite fulfulled...

Conversation? What topics? How long? In what depth? You'll never be totally satisfied...

It sounds like you have made a lot of progress, and are down to the last two stumbling blocks. Just give them up too.

I spent 40 some years looking for someone who met my standards: brilliant, hiker, adventurer, runner, conversationalist, scholar, skilled companion, lover, soulmate, ........

And you know what? Nobody could fill that role. And I finally dispaired of ever having the relationship I knew I could have. I gave up. I just starting doing what I enjoyed doing and gave up any expectations of finding a particular kind of person. And you know what. Almost immediately, one came along. I went to Nepal on a spiritual trek. She went to Nepal on a spiritual trek. And we met. She didn't even know what a trek was exactly. I got to "save" her by getting her some clothes and equipment which eased her time in the mountains. She was a singer and sang her thanks to me. Was I looking for a singer? No. Was I looking for an actress who understands deeply the human condition? No, never thought of that. Was she looking for a physicist and outdoorsman? Not on your life. But she too had given up looking to match her dreams and we had both taken the step of surrendering to a "higher power" and trusting in "his" will for us. And the miracle just happened.

Our agreement is that there is nothing either of us has to do for he other. Anything we do is voluntary, optional, and done because we want to do that for the other. That thought was in our vows. There are no requirements of each for the other, just that we want the other to grow to be the best that he/she can be, whatever that is. We have given up expectations and offer support as we can, but it is not required. We are together because we want to be together.

Married at 52, just celebrating our 14th aniversary, not too bad. And the vertical dimension of our togetherness just grows and grows. We just both are willing for it to happen.

Getting our egos out of the way and to be willing to grow along spiritual lines was all we could manage, but it was sufficient.

You're almost there. Go on...have a miracle!

Mountainman

1/18/2007 02:27:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Julie C:

That was a beautiful comment. I align myself with your sentiments entirely.

1/18/2007 05:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Oh, and for Paul G., uhm… yeah, “The Bat” not the “Field Mouse.” Being a Tick fan, and not an Opera buff, things get confused. I’m so ashamed!!

But you gotta consider where I work every day.

1/18/2007 05:40:00 AM  
Blogger Gaude said...

Somebody get that woman a copy of Bettleheim's "The Use of Fantasy".
Good grief!

You can't beat down the innate differences, you can only pervert them.

And, judging from the title of her book, her little daughter is a "too precious child"*: one that it took tremendous effort, time and $$$ to produce and her only egg in the basket. Her one shot at getting Feminist Parenthood, or Parenthood at all, right.
I don't wonder that she's a nutcase.

The girls and I used to play a game called: "How much would you hate to be their kid?"

This little one is a real contender...Not Child as Pet, or Child as Fashion Statement, but Child as Ideological Proof.


*Not that they're all not unique and precious, but all that more than usual anxiety has an effect. Some parents can get over this, but not the agenda-driven.

1/18/2007 05:43:00 AM  
Blogger Gaude said...

The web's best love story: "How I Married Karen" at
http://www.seraphicpress.com/

Go, thou, and read.

1/18/2007 06:07:00 AM  
Blogger Iggy Bliss said...

Julie C, VERY well said. And I say this especially as my wonderful wife just vocalized those exact sentiments when she read some of the commentary over my shoulder.

Man, it's great to be we.

1/18/2007 07:27:00 AM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

gaude: what a great love story! Especially the chapters on asking her father's permission, and tearing up the list of sins. It's kind of like taking a refreshing cool shower to wash off the slime from the content of Der Flakeymouse, Inty and Kali-Flower-Child.

1/18/2007 07:40:00 AM  
Anonymous Paul G said...

Joan - Being a fan of The Tick myself, I did catch that little nuance. Perhaps you should change your handle to: "American Maid"?

1/18/2007 07:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Integralist said...

Don't listen to that man behind the curtain. I meant everything that I said. Real Integralist indeed!
And if this keeps up, I'm going to leave here, never to return!

1/18/2007 08:30:00 AM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

"....don't assume that any post is me ...."

So are we to assume that you've never even been here to post?
mmmm-kay!

1/18/2007 08:34:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

gaude: it is 'The Uses of Enchantment'.

:)

Great Book!

1/18/2007 09:32:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

The Real Inty said...
"For your safety and knowledge, I will always include "inte-something" in my username..."

Remember the 70's ILGWU ad campaign with the song "Look for the Union Label"? Well...


Look for the Inte label
when you are seeking a disguise for your thoughts.

Remember somewhere Integralist's trolling,
their ideas going to conflate truths, and burn down the house.

Inte's think three hard, but who's complaining?
Thanks to the I.L.G. they're integrating our way!

So always look for the Inte label,
it says you're able to have it both ways!

1/18/2007 10:07:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

inty said:

The best aspects of masculine and feminine values can be combined to create an integrated hybrid being that transcends both male and female.

See dictionary entry for:
1. Marriage
2. Intercourse

Good day, Sir!

1/18/2007 10:17:00 AM  
Anonymous inte-skank said...

"So always look for the Inte label,
it says you're able to have it both ways!"

Both ways?
Why limit yourself!
I want it all ways in everyway!
You up for it?

1/18/2007 10:18:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

die fledermaus kommt said...
"I believe that 40-60 percent of marriages..." are combinations of one or two people with no clue as to what is true or false in the world, let alone in ethics or values. Without them, without Right and Wrong, don't be surprised that Power is all that is left to seek or experience. It's the same in politics and everything else.

"...A some point became very down on love, and then had a thought that the problem was my huge expectations for love, not the thing itself."

Love isn't a thing, or something you get, it's something you make. Together. Out of shared goals and values.

"But I want my own money. This I know for sure."

I'm sure you can get it. Maybe even all of it. What then? It can't buy you Love.

1/18/2007 10:26:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Juliec & Mountainman, I think that wraps it up pretty well.

1/18/2007 10:34:00 AM  
Anonymous juliec said...

Gaude - what a beautiful story! Thanks for linking to it.

1/18/2007 10:37:00 AM  
Blogger MikeZ said...

Integralist: "To hold on to these archaic gender stereotypes is disfunctional and regressive. ... an integrated hybrid being that transcends both male and female."

I'm afraid you're marching to the beat of an entirely different drummer.

There are, of course, a few people who, through the magic of modern surgery, make the attempt to transcend.

joan: thanks for the Lileks link. On a bad day, he writes better than most everyone else does on a good day.

real integralist: Thanks for the heads-up. That didn't sound like you, but ... one never knows.

PrincessSpirit: Going on strong as ever. If you get even one of those books out, It'll be a Good Thing. (PS: The first one is always the hardest - but Dr Bob can probably tell you about that.)

fledermaus: "Men who prefer a traditional relationiship (Christian headship)..." The problem with the Bible is that we can interpret it any old way we want (unless we've spent a lot of time reading commantaries). A lot of people read Paul and decide that man is supposed to be able to lord it over woman, and part of their argument is, "well, man was created first, therefore more important". Following that logic, the animals must be even more important than man, becuase they were created even earlier.

I don't think we should put too much emphasis on the Bible as a guide to contemporary marriage, because it was written about 2000 years ago, to a culture half a world away.

I'm sad to hear that you're in difficulties there. "What is the new compact between men and women? That is the interesting question. And, it won't favor one sex over the other."

Precisely - and that's a good thing.

"The two main things are sex and conversation -- if your partner can deliver those, then the rest can be shrugged off."

That might be part of the problem. There's more to it than that. Little things, like love, for instance.

OK, what's love? The Old Greek Guy said that love is wanting for the other person, that which is good for the other person, just for the sake of the other person.

Even that old curmudgeon Paul at least knew what he was talking about - see 1 Cor 13:4 - "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud...."

1/18/2007 11:30:00 AM  
Anonymous eastside souljah wahine said...

Dear fledermaus,

I have dropped in and eavesdropped on this blog and recognized my former self in your emotions. I am impressed by your humility and teachability - especially when not all the responses were kind or sensitive. Please be encouraged to hear from my own experience that love and happiness are possible - in marriage even! I found my way back to the traditional beliefs I used to despise, and with all my modern sophistication I had to realize that they were...true. It was a long process. I am 53 now and my marriage is very happy (it used to be a battleground) and it is not about power. Divine grace made it possible - I don't know how to tell you how to get it. It's always available but how does one come to the point where one can accept it? The process is mysterious but undeniable and changed my whole life. My children are also happy, wholesome and fill me with pride and joy. I thought I had lost all those things in the maelstrom of the 60's-induced culture revolution. I haven't gone backwards - it's more like a spiral going back around, and UP. If you like to read you may find CS Lewis' novel 'That Hideous Strength' intriguing. I will quote briefly from chapter 7 "The Pendragon:"
"I thought love meant equality," she said, "and free companionship."
"Ah equality!" said the Director. "...Yes, we must all be guarded by equal rights from one another's greed, because we are fallen. Just as we must all wear clothes for the same reason. But the naked body should be there underneath the clothes, ripening for the day when we shall need them no longer. Equality is not the deepest thing, you know."
"I always thought that was just what it was. I thought it was in their souls that people were equal."
"You were mistaken," said he gravely. "That is the last place where they are equal. Equality before the law, equality of incomes--that is very well. Equality guards life; it doesn't make it. It is medicine, not food."
"But surely in marriage...?"
"Worse and worse," said the Director. "Courtship knows nothing of it; nor does fruition. What has free companionship to do with that? Those who are enjoying something, or suffering something together, are companions. Those who enjoy or suffer one another, are not. ....It is not your fault. They never warned you. No one has ever told you that obedience---humility--is an erotic necessity. You are putting equality just where it ought not to be. ..... ..... obedience and rule are more like a dance than a drill--especially between man and woman where the roles are always changing."

Ah there is so much more! I offer you the words of St. Paul (whom I used to HATE) 'submit yourselves one to another as unto the Lord.'

And lest you think it's boring, another quote from chapter 14 of That Hideous Strength; 'Real Life is Meeting'
"It ought to have been she who was saying these things to the Christians. Hers ought to have been the vivid, perilous world brought against their grey formalised one; hers the quick, vital movements and theirs the stained glass attitudes...in a sudden flash of purple and crimson, she remembered what stained glass was really like."
God bless you Fledermaus. We all have been deceived in one way or another, but Truth is still there and will find you as is already happening.

1/20/2007 01:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You folks know about the "collapse comments" button, located at the top of the comment column? It reduces all the comments to just a list of names, then you can click on the names whose comments you have an interest in. If you are familiar with this blog and its cast, then you can get a pretty good idea of what's going on in the "rancor" dept without having to sift through all the crap.

Ximeze, I have just added you to my short list (River Cocytus, due to his inane postings and GB Bloviating w/o attending life experience, made the list first...after, of course, Princess spirit, who necessitated the need for the "collapse comments" feature in the first place.
X, you made the list because you are so mean spirited. Socially breezy and light, until you decide to spread 'em and drop a Bitch Bomb. You are the worst kind of man-hater: undetected to self. Who needs your kind of bitchy spice in the stew? Eeeyyew! Like finding a turd pile behind a stack of books..."what were they thinking?"

1/20/2007 05:16:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home