On 28 Mar 2015, at 9:12 pm, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Kim, > >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Kim Jones <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 26 Mar 2015, at 2:21 pm, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> http://www.raqqa-sl.com/en/?p=857 >> >> So most of these women are Brits? WTF! Makes your blood run cold. People are >> turning into zombies left right and centre. There is absolutely nothing >> whatsoever in organised religion for women. This whole conflict is a boys' >> club tribal thing. Women are necessary to the tribe because a good metric of >> any tribe's success is the number of willing female participants. Just ask >> Ghengis Kahn. Just ask the Christians; they have women dress in >> form-obscuring vetements as well; they are called "nuns" and presumably they >> lie around all day having erotic fantasies about being loved conveniently by >> Jesus without all the messy boy stuff that goes with sex. > > I think this model of men as exploiters and women as victims is too > simplistic. If only it were that simple.
The model I use is the tribalism model. The tribalism model involves exploiters and victims, yes, but this is not necessarily a gender distinction thing. Some people obtain real power in the world for a reason that some others too can have a purchase on, so a cooperative group forms which then exists to make others do what the group wants and it is quite as simple as that, initially. Group psychology aids survival so it has immense selection value in terms of evolution. I imagine social amoebas get together for much the same reasons. The plurality of selves somehow projects or reverts to a "group self" or, in today's terms: a corporation. A person is a corporation; an immense number of cooperating entities that all answer to the name "Freddy". > > I've been trying to understand the horror of ISIS, and more specifically what > could lead women living in the west to join the movement. One of the dynamics > that seems to emerge from analyzing recruitment strategies and interviewing > people that defect the movement is this: hard as it may be to believe, the > jihadist fighter archetype seems to be a powerful sex symbol for certain > women. Many women are victims in this situation, but so are many man. And > other women collaborate in the vicitimization and are responsible for > encouraging men to become jihadist fighters. Of course. I merely claim that the majority of the all-powerful tribes on Earth are boys' clubs, but women have sometimes refused to be accessories to this as in the case of feminism. Briefly, from the gender angle: The female perspective: as hunter-gatherers (we have never stopped being this) it makes sense to mate with the blokes who command the most resources! This is the motivating factor. Bad boy behaviour is sexy because it promises powerfully well for a woman's protection. A good boy will don a suit and get on life's treadmill to work steadily toward some shared dream perhaps but an unshaven bad boy will realise that dream a lot sooner, the good boy having died of a stress-related coronary well before realising his dream. >From the male perspective: the more women we co-opt into our tribe, the more >sex we get and the bigger and more powerful the tribe will become. We need >baby factories. The baby factories don't have to believe in our dogma but it >helps. They don't have any choice, really because if we need them we will >simply abduct them. > > The psyche of both women and men is not as simple as mainstream culture likes > to paint it. Why do you think 50 shades of grey was so popular? Haven't seen it so cannot comment. Tell me. Why was it so popular? I thought if people wanted to watch porn these days they can simply look at oceans of it for nothing online at home. Why pay eighteen bucks to watch it in a dark cinema with the raincoat brigade? I guess it has a lot to do with peoples' prurient fascination with the possibility that pain might be erotically interesting and what that says about us as a species? Am I getting warm? > > When the Romans first met Germanic tribes, they were surprised to see women > in the back with spears, ready to kill any man who tried to defect from the > front lines. For this reason the Teutons only placed the ugly fat ones at the back, the slender gorgeous ones being reserved for the orgy after the battle, should they win ( which they often did). The Romans, being the more successful tribe, no longer needed the ugly fat women at the back prodding them in the bum with spears. > > Men and women are physiologically different, which makes them more naturally > fit for different tasks, and men make better warriors. Please! "Hunter Gatherers" - "warriors" is a boys' club term for it. > But biology has a more unified plan, and everyone conforms to the plans of > biology through instinct. You betcha > I think that blaming one of the genders is missing the point. This might be clearer if you could say what it is I am blaming them for. The existence of and the continued dominance of Earth's "boys'-only clubs" is at one and the same time our greatest success and our greatest failing as a race of either sex. Do I need to illustrate that? The place of women in boys' clubs is to give the boys permission to believe their own bullshit (whatever that might be and only for however long believing and living by this bs secures the subsistence and the prosperity of the tribe.) > The characteristics of a gender have been evolved by millions of years of > selection, and women preferences play a role in this selection process. Women want men to protect them while they are carrying babies. Is there actually anything else to it than this? They need the men to conceive the babies and they then need them to slay the mammoth and keep the people from the other side of the river under control. Other than that, seen from this gender perspective, I don't see any other reason women need men. Of course men need women FAR more than women need men. Even sperm can now be synthesised apparently, so tell me, what is a man for, now? I try to see persons, not genders. Take me for example. My name is "Kim" and most assume that I am female on that account. I have intentionally never clarified this because sure as shit as soon as people know what gender you are, that then subtly influences how they treat you! > > Many people (notably feminists) complain about the "alpha-male" sociopathic > douchebag ruining society for everyone. But there ARE a bunch of alpha-male sociopathic douchebags ruining society for everyone. I complain about it all the time. Most of them are banksters and some of them may be extra-terrestrials if Karen Hudes of the IMF is right. It goes waaaaaaaay beyond the gender debate... > But then, if you investigate further, this archetype has a lot of success > with women. > This archetype DOES have enormous success with women. See the problem? We are locked into tribalism as never before! We have never left the fucking cave, mate. Women still love bad boys but bad boys only love each other (ie the group, the tribe, the clan, the secret society, the dogma, the current bullshit - whatever) while of course all the time tipping their semen into some likely lass because that's supposed to be the entitlement of a good tribal corporate member. > It is our biology itself that we have to transcend -- the parts of the > program that no longer serve us, and evolution is too slow. Yes. Transhumanism looking good. Church of the Subgenius, Extropians etc. Love it... > It's not going to be an easy path. We are still sophisticated monkeys, both > men and women. I put more faith in the transformative power of technology > than in political change. > My recommendation would be more along the lines of a week somewhere in the country every now and then, camping out under the stars with no gadgets and listening to the sounds of nature alone and staring at the sky at night. >> >> But I do think by now that that slew of apocalyptic zombie movies that the >> world passed through recently was some kind of cultural dream or clairvoyant >> nightmare about this ISIS-led zombie apocalypse we now appear to be heading >> for. You like that? "Beheading for"...... > > This is an interesting point. The first wave of zombie movies was more a > criticism of consumerism: showing the horror of going to the mall and seeing > your fellow humans in a weird trance of buying irrelevant stuff and not > caring about anything else. All art is mirroring the human condition somehow. These films were to me a snapshot of the horrors rising to the surface of the collective human psyche at this time. We now live in a world where the person sitting beside you on the bus or the train or the plane could harbour the desire to be a mass murderer or prepared to kill you and others in his quest to kill himself effectively. The German wings disaster shows that every human has a potential heart of darkness that needs only the right triggers. Was Andreas Lubitz really a sick man? A defective unit, much like Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik, with a touch of schizophrenia, maybe? Schizophrenia is said to be amongst the most undiagnosed of all illnesses in society, meaning their is a lot more of it around than people care to admit. My gut-feeling is he was as "normal" as you and me but suddenly realised the world is a video game anyway and you can always just crash the plane to reset the game. > > I think the second wave became very popular with a recent break in trust in > the political systems of the west. It's not that average citizens don't trust > the government, it's that they can't even make sense of what's going on, or > if someone is really in charge. Oh, there is someone in charge, believe me. > This leads to a fear that things could be out of control, and that social > contracts could collapse at any moment. They could and they do. Just look at The Middle East. A sinkhole of human misery and corruption as always. > This is also what leads to the popularity of cartoonish ideas like the > Illuminati -- an attempt to make sense of the hyper-complex > almost-out-of-control, 7 billion people society with a simple narrative. It is out of control and the need to simplify things is real, yes. Except the Illuminati concept of exclusive and networked secret societies is also real, however cartoonish it sounds and looks. The apparent cartoonish nature of the Illuminati is precisely what has protected them for so long from prying eyes. And it's no simple narrative either. How the world came to be under the thumb of the boys' clubs is the blind spot of all history. Kim > > Telmo. > >> >> We had one young bloke here in Oz, disappeared recently to Syria to fight >> with IS. Anglo. Good kid with high "intelligence" apparently. Got hooked by >> the jihad thing. His mates said he had a chip on his shoulder and had >> "turned weird". What ISIS offering apparently more convincing than life in >> the burbs of Sydney as a molly-coddled youngster in middle class, white >> supremacist Australia. ISIS said "Here comes one! Stick a bomb belt on him >> and send him off to oblivion". Which they did; he detonated it and managed >> to blow up an empty car and himself. Can you be a failure as a Jihadi? This >> kid was. >> >> >> Kim >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
