HelloThar

Agape,

I used to feel like this a lot until I realized that it's not women in particular it's stupidity and that applies as much to women as to men. You figure the average I.Q. is a base 100, then at least 50% must be stupider than that. Very few people in general are creative or passionate about life, they have no dreams or ambitions and are just barely above the level of a functional retard. Intelligence, passion, creativity, hard work, dedication, vision, I agree those are traits usually men have more so than than women, but not many men have them.

The majority of women are as you describe, boring, dull leaches just acting as parasites to men and popping out babies for 18 years of payments, but I've met some pretty retarded men also. We as men are just as bad in our own right, we foolishly and intentionally put ourselves in situations to have our blood sucked by women, and enjoy every minute of it. We give them 1/2 our wealth when we marry them, and pledge our support for at least 18 years financially with each child. That's just a given, you play with fire you get burned, and we are pyromaniac moth's drawn to women flame.

The problem isn't women, its stupidity and lack of passion. The ignorant masses of our population could vanish overnight and we wouldn't be missing anything. Women in my opinion are not lesser than men on average, it's that we have too many stupid people on this earth. There is a movie called idiocracy, watch it.

It isn't my intention to be sexist or whatnot. It is easy to see though that there are differences between males and females and I am just pointing out that this assumption of creativity being a feminine trait seems to be an incorrect one from my experience. I don't dispute that women have their own complementary traits to men's just that creativity I cannot see as being anything other than a male trait.

 

This has been niggling me for a few days. In all the yin yang and other spiritual bent texts they always talk about the 'feminine polarity' being creative. If that is so, females themselves should have the highest abundance of feminine energy. As such they should be the MOST creative. I see people trying to defend this position by saying that it's just a feminine trait which males poses and use but as I just stated women themselves would obviously have more of this being FEMALE and thus by analogy would be more creative but this is, from my experience, categorically incorrect.

 

Yet again this has caused me to be more skeptical to the pie in the sky theorizing of most 'spiritual teachings'.

 

Sometimes this spiritual stuff has good insights but often I find it is inaccurate even seemingly arbitrary in its speculation.

 

My first hand experience with the real world indicates that this claim is 100% inaccurate as the hotter the women ie the more feminine her energy is the LESS creative she will be. Anyone who has not lived in total isolation from the opposite sex their whole lives (I guess this might explain why the people making these claims do so as most of the 'spiritual gurus' do indeed live in total isolation from society their whole lives and come up with their elabourate theories while high on gamma waves or whatever whilst living in a cave and most are celibate, many probably never even having had sex at all) will know the hotter the girl the less she has to do to get by. Conversely nearly all creative pursuits have been done so by males either directly or indirectly to either attain the favour of women or as an outlet to distract/circumvent love lost etc/as a cathartic outlet to their pent up libido.

 

Men create and women just enjoy the fruits of men's labour. Everything you see in sight was created by men, not women. I don;t deny women are nurturers and all that but they are doing so from the safe nest that males create. Women are the most conservative creatures you can imagine and never dare taking risks instead just huddling within the confines of conformity. These are broad generalizations I know but that is all I wish to scrutinise- the general distribution of a given sample, not an exception such as a masculine lesbian. I really don't see how it could realistically be interpreted any other way.

Hello Thar!