Islam is Right About Woman

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Atla » Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:07 am

Lacewing wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:34 pm
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:14 pm
Then there is the other kind of bonding between adults, the 'real deal', which it turns out is a male emotion. That's something you can not comprehend.
How do you know?
Well maybe you can, I don't know. It is in some ways similar to the bonding between the mother and her child (has a similar intensity, absoluteness, feeling to it, probably), but it's also a highly different thing, a bonding between two adults.

Men are hard-wired to believe that women love them back the same way, and this illusion usually only shatters around the age of 30 (nowadays earlier).

I had many romances when I still pursued love, and several women were deeply into me and very seriously wanted to marry and have children. Later I found out that other men go through the same realizations in many ways. So I think I know what I'm talking about.

Age
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Age » Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:29 am

Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Islam isn't right about anything,
Are you absolutely sure that islam is not right about absolutely nothing at all?
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Generally, women are incapable of love between adults (this is something women can not comprehend and are totally unaware of), and are also cognitively inferior (especially in the abstract thinking department, which men more or less equate with intelligence).
If women are incapable of love between adults, then that suggests only me are capable of 'love between adults'.

If only men can comprehend this love and are aware of it, then what other adults, besides the male gendered adults, could these men actually being having this 'love between adults' with?
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Women also don't exist as a very centralized self, like men do. These are the things that prevent most men from achieving happiness actually, they are looking for an equal companion, but can't find one.
What is this 'love between adults' (which you say women can not comprehend and are totally unaware of) EXACTLY?

If women can not have this 'love between adults', then men obviously can not find 'love between a female adult'. But men just as obviously could find it among themselves.

You also say; that there is the other kind of bonding between adults, the 'real deal', which it turns out is a male emotion, which, you again say, is something women can not comprehend.

So, again what is this 'bonding and love between adults' that you speak about exactly?

Also, you say, this 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', and which women are totally unaware of and can not comprehend anyway, so what is it exactly that 'you', of the male gender', actually do to each other during these 'bonding and loving between adults'' events?

Obviously, if it is a 'male only emotion' and women are TOTALLY UNAWARE of the 'bonding between adults', which you male adults MUST DO with each other, then if you are NOT going to clearly express what this bonding is exactly and what takes place exactly, then obviously women will remain TOTALLY UNAWARE, and thus will NEVER comprehend.
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
So men tried to subjugate women, tried to force them, shape them into the kind of companion they wanted/needed. This attempt invariably failed, as the hard-wired human nature can't be changed on such a level.
So, if it can not be changed, then WHY do 'you', of the male gender, continually 'try to' subjugate, force, and shape women into what is essentially, as you say it is, a male ONLY emotion anyway?

Are 'you', of the male gender really just that STUPID?

If the 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', which women can not comprehend anyway, then 'trying to' do any thing else like 'bond lovingly with a female adult', than just 'bonding lovingly with males only', is just plain old STUPID and IDIOTIC.

If 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', then OBVIOUSLY only those adults of the male gender can bond only with those adults of the male gender ONLY.

I can ONLY go off of what you say and write. If I have heard and read you correctly, then just correct me. Maybe if you just explain as best as you can what this 'love between adults', which is a 'male emotion', is all about actually? Then those of us who absolutely NO idea what you are going on about, might become some the wiser.

Age
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Age » Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:47 am

Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:07 am
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:34 pm
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:14 pm
Then there is the other kind of bonding between adults, the 'real deal', which it turns out is a male emotion. That's something you can not comprehend.
How do you know?
Well maybe you can, I don't know. It is in some ways similar to the bonding between the mother and her child (has a similar intensity, absoluteness, feeling to it, probably), but it's also a highly different thing, a bonding between two adults.

Men are hard-wired to believe that women love them back the same way, and this illusion usually only shatters around the age of 30 (nowadays earlier).
How long has the male species been "hard-wired" to BELIEVE such a thing?

Also, is it an actual FACT that around the age of 30 (nowadays earlier) when this comes to light?

Just curious is it by any chance that this is exactly what actually happened to you around the exact same age?

Is there any chance that women do not love you back the "same way" you supposedly "love" them because of the way you are? Or, is solely because of women themselves?

And, you are not making it very clear when you say the 'bonding between mother and child' is similar to the 'bonding between adults' but it is also a highly different thing.
Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:07 am
I had many romances when I still pursued love, and several women were deeply into me and very seriously wanted to marry and have children. Later I found out that other men go through the same realizations in many ways. So I think I know what I'm talking about.
What do they realize; That women are not into them?

If yes, then WHY again?

Also, what is the actual number of "other men" that you use as your, "So I think I know what I'm talking about', conclusion? I think what might be found is your, "I know what I am talking about", "knowledge" comes from the whole amount of 'you' and a very few selected "others".

From what I have heard you say, you do not have much clue at all what you are talking about. If, however, I could be proven completely WRONG, by your responses to my clarifying questions posed to you.

Dachshund
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:40 pm

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Dachshund » Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:22 pm

[quote=Eodnhoj7 post_id=426546 time=1569971606 user_id=14533


Feminism is created and funded by men...it is literally a patriarchy telling women what to do, it is the ultimate underhanded way of putting women back in the kitchen and getting free blowjobs while doing it.

I dont know whether to laugh or feel bad while reading all of this...Islam will treat women better than the corporate world...until Islam becomes corporatized...and it will.
[/quote]




It's easy to over-think the consequences of the feminist movement. I mean, yes, I think you're right that it (feminism) ended up biting women on the arse. The feminist movement in the West agitated and protested and lobbied non-stop since the early 1970s (and the start of "2nd wave" Feminism), for women to be allowed to choose between having a full-time, 9-5, career in the workforce, or, being mothers in a traditional -type married, nuclear family. That was very stupid and destructive advice, but I do not think it was part of a pre-planned, corporate conspiracy cooked up by men in pin-striped suits. I think that you are right, women have (largely) been indeed been duped into the fray of becoming "zero-hours" wage-slaves or salaried "cannon fodder" for powerful business organizations in the West's neo-liberal marketplace, but I think it was a group of crazy women, those:academics, journalists, writers, political activists and popular celebrities who launched the so-called "Second Wave" feminist movement who bear responsibility for this.They are responsible also for a range of other forms of social devastation in the West that have come home to roost over the ensuing five decades to date. Never was there a more utterly mindless set of political ideologies than the dog's breakfast of: radical; Marxist/Social and Gender feminism that emerged in the late 1960's and early 1970's. I mean even, my fucking PET DACHSHUND DOG understands that men are very different to women. He can instantly distinguish between them and he adapts his behaviour accordingly when he is in the company of men or in the company of women. Despite this, highly- paid, female, feminist professors working in the American academy in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's (even up through the "2000's) were forever on their high-horses telling everyone: "No, no, no... it's actually not true that men and women are different, they are actually EQUAL; i.e; THE SAME." This BS is LITERALLY what they were spouting in their academic papers published in "The Timbuctoo Journal of Women's Studies" and other such high-impact, august organs of enlightened scholarship. I think this must rank as one of the greatest SWINDLES of the 20th century; to actually get away with persuading a large chunk of public (mostly, but by no means exclusively, other stupid women) that men and women are EQUAL in the sense of being THE SAME. That's something only a seriously crazy person, I mean only someone with a professionally -diagnosed, psychiatric condition like a delusory disorder or psychosis, say, schizophrenia, for instance, could believe.




The theory that the feminist movement was encouraged/sponsored by big business in order to provide a future source of cheap, disposable labour in the West is plausible, but I think it is mistaken. The reason is that during the early 1970's, the feminist protesters/demonstrators, academics, writers, journalists, etc launched a ferocious political assault on the traditional (Christian ) institution on marriage and thereby the nuclear family - i.e; a dad (male) and a MOTHER (female) and their KIDS (biological offspring). They did this by making it easier for women in the US to obtain what are called "no fault" divorces; this means that no reason WHATSOEVER is required by law for a woman to decide to divorce her husband. This sent the divorce - rate in America skyrocketing, and resulted in the break-up of countless thousands of families. In the 6,000 year history of human civilization there NEVER has been and enduring, successful civilization established in any region of the Earth that was not grounded on the nuclear family unit. NEVER, not ONCE; there are no examples in history of any exception/s. When, in a Western country like America, you attack and undermine the integrity and value of traditional (Christian) marriage as a worthy institution, you are, of course, simultaneously attacking the institution of the nuclear family. (And) doing this is like assiduously jack- hammering away at the foundations of your own cherished home; if you go too far in your destruction of the foundations, the whole house will come crashing down around your ears.




Starting with Betty Friedan and her best-selling book, "The Feminine Mystique" (1963), feminists told women in the West that to be a married mother and housewife was to be a "slave". It was to be chained to a mindless, tedious existence of quasi-menial, domestic chores such as caring for children and cooking, etc. Women in the US were told by Friedan and her feminist revolutionaries that by opting to be a "mere" married mother, they would never be able to realise their full intellectual, creative, spiritual, financial, etc; potentials, nor would they ever have any true independence from male oppression. The only way to achieve these things, they were told, was to go through college, get the best education possible, and then begin a career in a field of employment that suited their interests in the workforce.




The feminist movement of the 1970's was successful in getting this kind of poisonous advice out to women in the West. It was spread through the mass print and electronic media in both explicit and more tacit implicit forms. Rebel feminist academics and intellectuals like the writer, Germaine Greer, and journalist/political activist, Gloria Steinem, became popular public celebrities and national spokeswomen for the feminist movement in Australia and the United States (respectively) in the early 1970's. Even pop music in the West carried the feminists' call for women to defy the patriarchal status quo and empower themselves as "free", independent agents. For example, the song, "I Am Woman", which exalts the push for women's liberation, was a giant hit across the West for the Australian pop songstress, Helen Reddy, in 1972; It ultimately sold millions of copies and became an enduring anthem of the women's liberation/feminist movement.



Feminist themes of womens' liberation ( from marriage, motherhood and domestic drudgery, etc.) also wriggled their way in the common, compulsory core curriculum in public schools. By the 1990's, the notion of "women in the workplace" had pretty much become an accepted aspect of mainstream Western culture. Today, almost three decades on (2020), it seems to me that the majority of young , White-European, women in the West (aged 18-25) have indeed rejected the traditional role of married mother,and are choosing instead to remain single (unmarried) and join the workforce. Moreover, the white birth rate in the US has fallen to a dramatically low figure relative to what it was in the 1950's and 1960's, before the dogma of 2nd-wave feminism had established itself as a recognizable entity within mainstream US/Western culture, which was by around the mid-1970's or so. I would expect that there is certainly a causal connection between the decreasing number of young, white, women in the US getting married and the current low white birth rate in America; though it would be difficult to quantity.




Since the 1960's Western feminists have exhorting young women to reject the fate the patriarchal status quo has reserved for them as full-time married mothers and housewives - to escape the "mind-forged manacles" of tedium and ennui that await them as hausfraus in the suburbs and become a free, independent, self-determining, autonomous agents. Doing this in the West, however, means that you will need have to have your own money ( and a goodly amount of it, BTW !), and that means you will need to get a full-time job that pays a decent salary.





So, young women are repeatedly told, by their teachers, by their peers, by the mass media, that they should "put off" getting married and having children until later in life and focus on getting a good education to qualify for a good job, and then go out and work and compete with men in the workforce. And this is indeed what they are doing. One of the problems I see with this is biological. That is, the ideal age (in terms of natural physical/ physiological readiness) for White Western European women to have babies is actually around 19-20 years old. At this age (and in their early 20's) they cope with pregnancy better; they also make for much better moms when they are younger, in terms of having the psychological stamina and bodily energy required to care for kids (* NB: having had my own children, I can absolutely assure you they are extremely physically and mentally demanding when they are young). (And) by, the way, I am not suggesting that all white Western girls ought get married be pregnant by the age of 20; I am merely relaying an interesting medical that any doctor would tell you,namely; that it is better in all respects for women to have children when they are younger, for example, (20-21-22) than older (33-34) or (40 +). My sister is 50, OK ? Here is what she and her friends did... Rather than get married when they were in their 20's, they worked in high-flying lobs: one as a psychiatrist; one as a corporate accountant; one as a lawyer in a big law firm; one as a dentist who eventually owned her own business. Firstly, all they ever did when I saw them socially (i.e. with my sister at a get- to together function, etc) was bitch 24/7 about how hard they worked and how much they hated work. Then, after they turned 40, suddenly, within a year or two, they're pretty well all married (!) Because they were all reasonably (at the very least) attractive girls, they had no trouble suckering suitable men (white, professional/business, cashed-up, etc) into marrying them. Trust me, women are very: deceptive; manipulative; crafty; and duplicitous (something that Nietzsche understood very clearly, Schopenhauer as well), they can trap men into marrying them as easily as spiders trap flies. So, why did they do this ? The answer is easy; they were intelligent, they knew their "biological clocks" were ticking and that it's not a good idea - for a number of medical reasons - to get pregnant too long after you turn 40. Also, women start to lose what physical beauty they have quite rapidly after 40, and you need to be attractive to sucker a high-class male with (plenty of cash) into marrying you. It's much harder to do when you're a woman aged 50 as opposed to 40; the ensnaring tactics that women use to bewitch men start lose their effectiveness after they turn 50. So, in sum, they wanted kids - just like ALL normal women desperately do- but they needed fathers for the babies and a good source of income, because they all wanted to quit work and be full-time moms after their babies were born, i.e. for at least until their kids are 5-6 years old and start prep- school or elementary school.




Contrary to feminist theories, marriage is a key pillar of social stability ffor both men and women and children. Women like Germaine Greer, Kate Millett and Shulasmith Firestone, notorious spearheads of 2nd Wave feminism in the 1970's demanded that the nuclear family be smashed and furiously advocated for easy divorce and unwed parenthood as steps on the ladder to "Women's Liberation" (i.e; liberation from male tyranny; from their status as "chattel" and as "sex objects" expected to administer competent blow jobs "on demand" :D ) They are forgotten now, except ,that is, if one is as unfortunate (as I was) to be a male who while killing time flicking through a recent edition of one of my younger sister's trendy/edgy women's magazines, came across a feature section on Germaine Greer. In this section there were, reprinted, large black and white photographs taken from a 1971 edition of a pornographic Australian magazine called "Suck". The photograph depicted Greer naked , lying on the floor and baring her arse for the camera with her legs spread back towards her ears in a "yoga" pose. Of these photographs, Greer said, "No one had ever seen a split beaver before, and there I was anus, vagina and face." These photographs were one of the most revolting and disgusting things I have ever seen in my life. The juxaposition of arsehole and face was symbolically appropriate, though I am still not sure which of the three personal anatomical features Greer refers to was in fact the ugliest ! :shock: To continue. The price of Greer and Co.'s so-called "liberation" has been very steep. It is a sad irony that the devaluing of marriage in the West has ultimately left women more, not less, vulnerable than they were pre-revolution. Women are commonly worse off financially after divorce than their ex-husbands. Those who worked before, during and after their marriages experienced a 20% decline in income after divorce, compared to men whose incomes rose by 30%. Forty percent of American children are now born to single mothers, and when combined with America's high divorce rate, it means that around one half of all American children will spent part of their childhood in a single-parent home. Children who grow up in broken homes or with single mothers are at placed at substantial risk for: educational impairment (poor academic performance, under-achievement, dropping out of high school); a broad range of psychiatric disorders including Substance Use Disorder, self-harming and suicide; early involvement with the criminal justice system and future incarceration; chronic, long-term unemployment as adults; welfare dependency; poverty and other negative life outcomes.




To put it in a nutshell, when you are striving and succeeding in accomplishing the task of destabilising, undermining and disintegrating the nuclear family in a nation like the United States, you are, in fact, fucking around with the fundamental, essential fabric of Western society - that which holds the absurd pieces together and makes for a civilized society, i.e; one in which life is basically worth living (well, at least for most people). Over the past several decades, there has been a steep decline in family stability among white European working class Americans and this has, in turn, generated an epidemic of so-called "diseases of despair (hopelessness): alcoholism; addiction to opiates (and deaths from overdoses) and suicide. Although there is no single factor responsible for this lamentable state of affairs, feminists have a lot of blood on their hands (IMO). On a personal note, I absolutely loathe them and I give them as much grief as I possibly can whenever they happen cross my path. Given the social damage they have caused over the past few decades, I think governments in the West ought declare an "Open Season" one them every year, where they can be legally shot on sight and a bounty paid for each red/green/blue/orange scalp.




You are right about Islam probably making a better boss for white European American women than those they they will currently encounter and serve in the Corporate sector in the West. I continue to be UTTERLY astonished at the stupidity of young women who still uncritically accept what the feminist movement has been telling them to do for the past 50 years and sign themselves up to work full-time in the modern Western marketplace. For the past 40 years or so, that marketplace has been run according to the key principles of the theory of market fundamentalism, that is, according to the principles of neo-liberal economic theory/ideology (those laid down by "Austrian School" economists like Hayak and Von Mises and Co.). This, in turn, means that the standard ,modern workplace is a stressful, oppressive, cut-throat, inhuman environment where all that counts is cutting costs and maximizing efficiency in order to generate as much profit as can be generated as fast as possible. The neo-liberal work ethic encourages ruthless ambition and valorizes extreme individualism and competitiveness. It's difficult for most men, let alone women who are not neurologically/psychologically wired-up for this kind of behaviour at all. If you strip neo-liberal philosophy down to it core tenets what you have is a conception of human nature that views human beings as atomized individuals who approach life by rationally maximizing their own self-interest. This reflects a profoundly flawed understanding of human being who are, by nature, ultra social animals; women more so than men in the sense that they are innately more compassionate, kind, caring, empathetic, nurturative and more disposed to experience the tender emotions/passions ( generally speaking) than men are. (And anyone who disagrees with that needs to pull their head out of of their arse)





Why women would be so intent on entering the workforce in today's advanced, industrialized Western nations as soon as possible, as opposed to getting married and becoming stay-at-home mothers and housewives is TOTALLY beyond me. :?: I mean, If I were a reasonably attractive, intelligent, normal 22 -year- old white, Anglo-European woman living in the US in 2019, I know exactly what I'd do; that is, I'd find a decent, well-adjusted man who had a good job, get married and start having babies ! Why would I want to throw myself into a nightmarish, "dog-eat-dog" jungle of a job- market, wherein nothing matters except cutting expenses, the competitive maximizing of profit, and whatever methods it takes to do this are legitimized. Why would I want to work for some corporation that places me under video surveillance every moment I am at work to monitor my behaviour for efficiency? Why would I volunteer myself to become, in short, eminently disposable, " corporate, multinational "cannon fodder" ? A miserable "wage/salary slave" ? One would have to have rocks in their head, surely ?! Because, as I say, even hardass, big men find the brutal, cold, impersonal, cut-throat, rationality, and isolation of the neo-liberal marketplace psychologically taxing. It's no wonder that there is a plague of mental illness among young women (aged 16 - 24) in the United States. One in four of them have: "self-harmed" (that's a psychiatric term, and a classic example is repeatedly cutting one's forearms or upper arms with a razor or sharp instrument like a knife or shard of glass as a means to temporarily reduce severe psychic distress); one in eight have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), while anxiety disorders; clinical depression; phobias, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and Eating Disorders (e.g. anorexia nervosa, bulimia, etc) affect over 26 % ( !). That constitutes a female health crisis.




Anyway, this post is getting far too long. Sorry the points above are presented in such a desultry manner, but hopefully you get the drift of what I am saying, which is that feminism has wreaked havoc on the West since the early 1970's. It has inflicted phenomenal damage on American and British, etc; societies and people STILL haven't woken up to the problem ?



Regards



Dachshund (Der Uberweiner)
Last edited by Dachshund on Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Lacewing » Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:11 pm

Dachshund wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:22 pm
[his opinions about what women should want and do, although he isn't one himself]
For me, speaking as a woman, I am most thankful that I was not expected to follow a certain path in life. I wanted to explore my options. I was eager to work, even before completing school, so that I could have my own money to start building my own life.

I did not dream of having children and getting married (as many girls may have)... I dreamt of living life on my own terms and with my own ingenuity. Why shouldn't any human have that opportunity? I had watched my grandparents work themselves to death without much joy to live their idea of the American dream. Both of my grandmothers revealed to me that being married and having children was not all it was presented to be. They wished they'd lived lives that were more fulfilling for themselves. I couldn't wait to see what I could do and create with my own freedom as a human.

I have lived a very unconventional and fulfilling life, and I am most grateful for that...every day! My grandmothers would be happy for me. I do not mind that I've not had children. I've experienced all kinds of freedom and fun and adventure, while also working in corporate America and finding success that has brought me to where I am. Most of my friends have done the same, and are childless too! I love children, but I felt like my own childhood was a constant sacrifice for me... so why would I want to turn right around and have children that I would need to constantly sacrifice for? It's just not necessary or intelligent to be popping out more beings on this planet as if that's our main purpose. Men have no business trying to tell me what to do, even though they try it anyway. I discovered early on that I was being naturally smarter than a lot of men I was encountering in life, and I wasn't willing to fit into a lesser role for them.

Men would be best served by focusing on developing/evolving themselves (it's not enough just to be born male), and allow women to do the same with themselves and their lives. Our biological functions are not some cosmic purpose that we must cater to -- and it's good that contrived roles evolve. We're not simple animals that need to keep our population intact. We are thinking and aware beings capable of SO MUCH MORE. Why shouldn't we explore THAT?

I have accomplished a great deal in my life. And, in general, whenever men have come around and seen it (at various stages of my life), they try to interject themselves -- telling me what I should do. As if they were capable of accomplishing any of it themselves, which they didn't. When women have seen it, they are inspired and supportive. I know quite a few very strong and amazing women. They are self-made, and their men tend to be in a supporting role, although the women wish their partners were more equal in their passions and contributions. But we all work with our arrangements the best that we can...and we all do what we do for different reasons.

My long-term relationships were focused on fun...because I was established in myself, and I wasn't looking for a role or for support. My recent short-term relationship was also focused on fun, but we were just too different for the long-term...and I'm not desperate or willing to work so hard to make anything last just to be in a relationship. My phases of being single have been just as delightful (if not more so)...so I'm not afraid of them! :) Still, like many people, I hope to meet a kindred partner to co-create and share a blissful life with. However, it's always important to me to live fully NOW, in this moment...because it's all I've got, and I want to see what I can do with it. I'm not waiting or counting or lamenting on anyone else. I love the people (friends and neighbors) in my life dearly. I do not have sex with them, as some on this forum like to accuse. Being able to love and connect with other beings deeply is a soulful sense and feeling -- it's NOT an activity, like sex. It is understandable that people who haven't experienced the distinct dynamics of both, might conflate the two.

It is interesting to see males on this forum talk about women in such aggravated ways. I am guilty of talking about men in such ways at times too. Men DO have insights into elements of women, and certain kinds of women, but that is not the complete picture. And by only focusing on that which these men can rant about, they are reducing the potential of their universe. :D There is ALWAYS much much more to the contrary! If you don't see it, you need to ask yourself why... because it is not because there isn't so much more there!

I think human beings are human beings FIRST, and genders second. Every human being can be amazing...or not. Gender has nothing to do with it. Genders are only for procreating. So to assign roles and agendas must be a conscious and mutually-agreeable arrangement for a specific purpose. If it is used to limit, subdue, control, objectify, or despise for some perceived inferiority, then that is very ignorant and self-defeating. Men and women obviously have different attributes. The intelligent thing to do is to utilize those in the best ways possible that encourage further development and expansion for each. NOT to pit them against each other like some kind of power-play -- because if you do that, each will have their own weapons and abilities, and it will not be pretty or pleasant for either to waste such energy and potential.

I suggest that you men who are so focused on talking about women and what they lack, or are, or should be -- talk about men for awhile, using the same kind of critical focus. What are a lot of men actually all about in their lives, how do they not hold up their end of partnerships, how do they become lazy and stop developing themselves because they are already the "privileged and in some cases exalted ones" simply for being born with a male body? Talk about how corrupt and conniving they can be. How they would go to war and kill innocents just because someone tells them to, or to prove that they are a man (whatever that means). Talk about how they've crafted religions to further glorify themselves, which have destroyed lives and civilizations. How great numbers of them have sexually abused countless children and women.

Are you able to see a broader picture of why the pendulum might be swinging as it does? Why women (or anyone) might have to work so hard and become extreme to get out from under extreme oppression and/or ignorance?

Are you able to be balanced in your assessments of human beings? Or are you just raging against women because you need to blame someone for not having a life (nor living in a Universe) that YOU can treasure?

Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Atla » Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:19 pm

Age wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:29 am
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Islam isn't right about anything,
Are you absolutely sure that islam is not right about absolutely nothing at all?
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Generally, women are incapable of love between adults (this is something women can not comprehend and are totally unaware of), and are also cognitively inferior (especially in the abstract thinking department, which men more or less equate with intelligence).
If women are incapable of love between adults, then that suggests only me are capable of 'love between adults'.

If only men can comprehend this love and are aware of it, then what other adults, besides the male gendered adults, could these men actually being having this 'love between adults' with?
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Women also don't exist as a very centralized self, like men do. These are the things that prevent most men from achieving happiness actually, they are looking for an equal companion, but can't find one.
What is this 'love between adults' (which you say women can not comprehend and are totally unaware of) EXACTLY?

If women can not have this 'love between adults', then men obviously can not find 'love between a female adult'. But men just as obviously could find it among themselves.

You also say; that there is the other kind of bonding between adults, the 'real deal', which it turns out is a male emotion, which, you again say, is something women can not comprehend.

So, again what is this 'bonding and love between adults' that you speak about exactly?

Also, you say, this 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', and which women are totally unaware of and can not comprehend anyway, so what is it exactly that 'you', of the male gender', actually do to each other during these 'bonding and loving between adults'' events?

Obviously, if it is a 'male only emotion' and women are TOTALLY UNAWARE of the 'bonding between adults', which you male adults MUST DO with each other, then if you are NOT going to clearly express what this bonding is exactly and what takes place exactly, then obviously women will remain TOTALLY UNAWARE, and thus will NEVER comprehend.
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
So men tried to subjugate women, tried to force them, shape them into the kind of companion they wanted/needed. This attempt invariably failed, as the hard-wired human nature can't be changed on such a level.
So, if it can not be changed, then WHY do 'you', of the male gender, continually 'try to' subjugate, force, and shape women into what is essentially, as you say it is, a male ONLY emotion anyway?

Are 'you', of the male gender really just that STUPID?

If the 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', which women can not comprehend anyway, then 'trying to' do any thing else like 'bond lovingly with a female adult', than just 'bonding lovingly with males only', is just plain old STUPID and IDIOTIC.

If 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', then OBVIOUSLY only those adults of the male gender can bond only with those adults of the male gender ONLY.

I can ONLY go off of what you say and write. If I have heard and read you correctly, then just correct me. Maybe if you just explain as best as you can what this 'love between adults', which is a 'male emotion', is all about actually? Then those of us who absolutely NO idea what you are going on about, might become some the wiser.
Hello channeler of God, how are you today?
I may have skipped most of what you wrote, and would like to take this opportunity to remind you to take your daily dose of antipsychotics. Please don't skip them.

Age
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Age » Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:59 pm

Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:19 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:29 am
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Islam isn't right about anything,
Are you absolutely sure that islam is not right about absolutely nothing at all?
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Generally, women are incapable of love between adults (this is something women can not comprehend and are totally unaware of), and are also cognitively inferior (especially in the abstract thinking department, which men more or less equate with intelligence).
If women are incapable of love between adults, then that suggests only me are capable of 'love between adults'.

If only men can comprehend this love and are aware of it, then what other adults, besides the male gendered adults, could these men actually being having this 'love between adults' with?
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
Women also don't exist as a very centralized self, like men do. These are the things that prevent most men from achieving happiness actually, they are looking for an equal companion, but can't find one.
What is this 'love between adults' (which you say women can not comprehend and are totally unaware of) EXACTLY?

If women can not have this 'love between adults', then men obviously can not find 'love between a female adult'. But men just as obviously could find it among themselves.

You also say; that there is the other kind of bonding between adults, the 'real deal', which it turns out is a male emotion, which, you again say, is something women can not comprehend.

So, again what is this 'bonding and love between adults' that you speak about exactly?

Also, you say, this 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', and which women are totally unaware of and can not comprehend anyway, so what is it exactly that 'you', of the male gender', actually do to each other during these 'bonding and loving between adults'' events?

Obviously, if it is a 'male only emotion' and women are TOTALLY UNAWARE of the 'bonding between adults', which you male adults MUST DO with each other, then if you are NOT going to clearly express what this bonding is exactly and what takes place exactly, then obviously women will remain TOTALLY UNAWARE, and thus will NEVER comprehend.
Atla wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:04 pm
So men tried to subjugate women, tried to force them, shape them into the kind of companion they wanted/needed. This attempt invariably failed, as the hard-wired human nature can't be changed on such a level.
So, if it can not be changed, then WHY do 'you', of the male gender, continually 'try to' subjugate, force, and shape women into what is essentially, as you say it is, a male ONLY emotion anyway?

Are 'you', of the male gender really just that STUPID?

If the 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', which women can not comprehend anyway, then 'trying to' do any thing else like 'bond lovingly with a female adult', than just 'bonding lovingly with males only', is just plain old STUPID and IDIOTIC.

If 'bonding between adults' is a 'male emotion', then OBVIOUSLY only those adults of the male gender can bond only with those adults of the male gender ONLY.

I can ONLY go off of what you say and write. If I have heard and read you correctly, then just correct me. Maybe if you just explain as best as you can what this 'love between adults', which is a 'male emotion', is all about actually? Then those of us who absolutely NO idea what you are going on about, might become some the wiser.
Hello channeler of God, how are you today?
I may have skipped most of what you wrote, and would like to take this opportunity to remind you to take your daily dose of antipsychotics. Please don't skip them.
You skipped most of what I wrote because you started to notice that you are completely incapable of answering my very straightforward, simple and basic clarifying questions that I posed to you. This is because you have absolutely NO idea about what it was that you were going on about. "Love between adults" is a "male emotion". That was about one of the funniest things that I have heard for a while now.

If you are totally incapable of clarifying just the most simplest of clarifying questions, then you have absolutely NO hope of elaborating on what it was that you were saying.

Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Atla » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:02 pm

Age wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:59 pm
You skipped most of what I wrote because you started to notice that you are completely incapable of answering my very straightforward, simple and basic clarifying questions that I posed to you. This is because you have absolutely NO idea about what it was that you were going on about. "Love between adults" is a "male emotion". That was about one of the funniest things that I have heard for a while now.

If you are totally incapable of clarifying just the most simplest of clarifying questions, then you have absolutely NO hope of elaborating on what it was that you were saying.
Your assumptions are as wrong as always :)

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:28 pm

Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:19 pm
and would like to take this opportunity to remind you to take your daily dose of antipsychotics. Please don't skip them.
Who are you to assume he needs such treatment? Are you his Doctor or something?

What if your assumptions that he needs treatment is just plain and simply wrong as always?

.

Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Atla » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:33 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:28 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:19 pm
and would like to take this opportunity to remind you to take your daily dose of antipsychotics. Please don't skip them.
Who are you to assume he needs such treatment? Are you his Doctor or something?

What if your assumptions that he needs treatment is just plain and simply wrong as always?

.
I can also assume it to be likely that you have a split mind at least since childhood. What are you gonna do about it?

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:45 pm

Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:33 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:28 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:19 pm
and would like to take this opportunity to remind you to take your daily dose of antipsychotics. Please don't skip them.
Who are you to assume he needs such treatment? Are you his Doctor or something?

What if your assumptions that he needs treatment is just plain and simply wrong as always?

.
I can also assume it to be likely that you have a split mind at least since childhood. What are you gonna do about it?
You have absolutely no proof of any knowledge to do with another persons mind, except your own self-imposed pompous authoritarian busy little body pathetic assumptions based on your own screwed up head projected at others. You are a reactive little snarly ankle biter to what you only think you are reading into which incidentally have no proof of ever proving what you only think and believe is there, and that's all you are and do on this forum.

.

Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Atla » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:51 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:45 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:33 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:28 pm


Who are you to assume he needs such treatment? Are you his Doctor or something?

What if your assumptions that he needs treatment is just plain and simply wrong as always?

.
I can also assume it to be likely that you have a split mind at least since childhood. What are you gonna do about it?
You have absolutely no proof of any knowledge to do with another persons mind, except your own self-imposed pompous authoritarian busy little body pathetic assumptions based on your own screwed up head projected at others. You are a reactive little snarly ankle biter to what you only think you are reading into which incidentally have no proof of ever proving what you only think and believe is there, and that's all you are and do on this forum.

.
Or maybe you do resemble other people I knew who had various kinds of fractured minds. And maybe Age does resemble a low IQ psychotic to me, who thinks that he's channeling the universe.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:57 pm

Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:51 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:45 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:33 pm

I can also assume it to be likely that you have a split mind at least since childhood. What are you gonna do about it?
You have absolutely no proof of any knowledge to do with another persons mind, except your own self-imposed pompous authoritarian busy little body pathetic assumptions based on your own screwed up head projected at others. You are a reactive little snarly ankle biter to what you only think you are reading into which incidentally have no proof of ever proving what you only think and believe is there, and that's all you are and do on this forum.

.
Or maybe you do resemble other people I knew who had various kinds of fractured minds. And maybe Age does resemble a low IQ psychotic to me, who thinks that he's channeling the universe.
You simply cannot compare people you do not know or have never met to people you know who had fractured minds, what ever the fuck that is supposed to mean..you cannot just go around thinking you have got other people, especially people you have never seen before in your entire life at all and then believing you have them all figured out just based on what they choose to write about on a philosophy forum regarding the topic God, seriously dude, you have a disgusting atttitude.

Do you not appreciate that Age is actually a very intelligent human being?

.

Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Atla » Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:01 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:57 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:51 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:45 pm


You have absolutely no proof of any knowledge to do with another persons mind, except your own self-imposed pompous authoritarian busy little body pathetic assumptions based on your own screwed up head projected at others. You are a reactive little snarly ankle biter to what you only think you are reading into which incidentally have no proof of ever proving what you only think and believe is there, and that's all you are and do on this forum.

.
Or maybe you do resemble other people I knew who had various kinds of fractured minds. And maybe Age does resemble a low IQ psychotic to me, who thinks that he's channeling the universe.
You simply cannot compare people you do not know or have never met to people you know who had fractured minds, what ever the fuck that is supposed to mean..you cannot just go around thinking you have got other people, especially people you have never seen before in your entire life at all and then believing you have them all figured out just based on what they choose to write about on a philosophy forum regarding the topic God, seriously dude, you have a disgusting atttitude.

Do you not appreciate that Age is actually a very intelligent human being?

.
Age is not intelligent and neither are you.
And just because someone as crazy and dumb as you can't even attempt to 'get into the head' of others, that doesn't mean that other people can't be better at it.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Islam is Right About Woman

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:11 pm

Atla wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:01 pm
And just because someone as crazy and dumb as you can't even attempt to 'get into the head' of others, that doesn't mean that other people can't be better at it.
That's where you lack intelligence, so dream on. No two minds can ever meet each other. At the fundamental level the body is made of electrons that never ever come into direct contact with each other..so there is no way you can get out of your own mind never mind get inside someones else's..you really do talk a load of shit Atla.

.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests