Patrick Brown

The misogynous posturing thread? - Or are some people just too touchy?

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Aetherous said:

I might end up making a thread that provides examples of how this isn't yet true, for the purpose of increasing our awareness and compassion. 

 

Could be an interesting discussion

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stereotype..stereotype, because stereotype stereotype think stereotype. 

I've been reading a book called Insight, and like the Matrix old bearded controller guy, says we make decisions quickly, often emotionally, then fill in the reasons afterwards.  Something hurts us and our intellect is off the races digging up reasons for why they're so bad.   Smart or dumb we master rationalizers, with intelligence giving us more fire power to fool ourselves. 

 

The truth is out there, but when it's self serving, aggrandizing our group while disparaging others it's suspect.  Not necessarily wrong, but there may well be a trail of rationalizations to get there, build on our confirmation bias.  A cure is slowing down, imagine being the other side.  Doing your best to see things through other eyes.  Seeing if you can allow the same emotional/ rationalization path to form.  

Then you can dispassionately compare the two and decide or decide its a bullshit scenario.  That the question is a bad one. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, freeform said:

This whole ‘all powerful 1%ers controlling the world thing’... I used to think along those lines... my views have matured a little though.

 

I’ve actually met a couple of people in the ‘1%’... and the reality of the matter is a lot less black and white than Patrick Brown espouses (the standard liberal pigeonhole).

 

Well I agree with some of what you say in your reply but I must point out that I'm not liberal and I really don't like politics. 

 

As for the 1% well the problem is most people would be happy with more than another and walk off into the sunset. The fact that theses very wealth people continue to acquire greater and greater wealth can only suggest a kind of sickness!  

 

11 minutes ago, freeform said:

Or maybe a large percentage of people (the 99%) eagerly put themselves in that ‘enslaved’ position. This is what I think is going on more than we realise.

 

This would be true if they had a choice but they often don't. Brexit is a good example as the decision of the people is being ignored as the wealthy and powerful try to keep us in the EU. There is also an strong element of trust given to leaders as working people just don't have the time to understand complex situations. Of course this trust has been badly damaged here in the UK with all the WMD balls of the Gulf war etc. 

 

17 minutes ago, freeform said:

They may complain, but in reality they feel comfortable that these things are taken care for them. Of course advertisers and corporations find this irresistable and exploit it as much as possible - otherwise they wouldn’t be doing their ‘jobs’ properly!

 

I don't think they're anywhere near as comfortable as they used to be. As for advertisers and corporation most people know that these types are scum but they tolerate them as long as they are checked. Of course these checks are being seen more and more to be bogus and biased. 

 

20 minutes ago, freeform said:

Do I think the world could be run better? Of course I do!

 

But conversely - do I think we tend to generally be making progress in that direction, and actually doing the best we can as a very flawed and also wonderful race? Yes I do.

 

I think we're at a crossroads and the choice is freedom or enslavement! Whatever happens chaos is coming of this I've little doubt. 

 

22 minutes ago, freeform said:

Do I think homogenising people - cutting down the best and brightest so that they’re rewarded the same as the laziest and least intelligent is the way to make the world better?! Nope. I’ve actually experienced communism - it doesn’t work.

 

The NWO (New World Order) wants to create a system very much the same as that in "Brave New World" which in turn is akin to the 'caste' system of India. Globalism is how they want to force this new paradigm on us. The elite already have their crowns made of gold encrusted with jewels for that is what they represent, wealth in the form of vanity and greed.

 

Back to this thread: 

Well using the fears of women is one way to gain electoral support to help create this global empire that essentially will enslave the whole of mankind within the machinery of the 'Beast'. This road to 'Globalism', the NWO, has actually been happening for several decades but as said above we're now at the crossroads because people have woken up to what's going on. So it's true freedom for the fist time in history or an absolute enslavement such as the world have never seen before.    

 

Time to choose? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

Whereas I agree with much of what you say I think you fall into the trap that the author of the video wants! If you step back you will see that people, male and female, are often manipulated, think memes, to push a narrative that benefits those in power.

Meh, I do not much care. I disagree with the sentiment of the video and have zero desire to dig for some deeper meaning.

 

2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

Certain aspects of the video are undeniably true whereas others are distorted by the author to serve his agenda. The key is to take what is true and leave the rest. People will always use polarisation to push their own agenda. 

 

The question is:

Does importing large numbers of foreign males into a stable society as cheap labour benefit the social cohesion or destabilise it? 

Cheap labor drives wages down thereby de-stablizing the economy making it almost impossible to earn a living wage especially for those who do manual labor.

 

2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

Other questions, that are valid include (this will be annoying to women):

  1. Is a woman's choice of a partner based on income and/or the physical strength of the man/woman?

Depends on the women. I chose my husband based on his kindness, fluency in sarcasm and how he treated his family and me. I got lucky because he was/is strong and handsome too.

 

Placing all women in the same basket based on their gender is an error.

 

2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:
  1. Do women consider a mans kindheartedness before his finances or ability towards physical aggression. 

I certainly did. I married my husband for his loving heart and gentle nature, not his financial stability or ability to beat someone's ass if the need arose.

 

2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:
  1. How important is a mans physical appearance when weighed against his heart and do women consider this when contemplating the outcome of breeding?

Appearance plays a role, sure. I'd have not given him a moment of my time had he been dirty and smelly. If a man can not take care of and nurture himself, he surely would be lacking in the capacity to do the same for other. When I met my husband I did not want children, so I was not interested in breeding to produce offspring, it was purely for pleasure, mine and his.

 

2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

Of course I could go on but that would be to labour the point. Perhaps a similar list could be created for men? Be my guest. 

Nah, I will pass. What a person chooses for themselves in a mate is their business, critiquing and questioning based on gender is beyond the scope of how I choose to spend my time. Frankly, it is none of anyone's business and just plain rude.

 

2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

Of course other elements of the video are very contentious and even offensive but they simply highlight a more base kind of individual, male or female, and are not indicative of the majority of society. Having said that the right for a woman to dress in a provocative guise is up to her and I would support her right to do so. Yet there is dressing in such a way and then adding behaviour with intent to illicit a response! I'll leave it there as I'm sure you can figure out where that goes!  

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

Yeah.. because if someone doesn't want to watch it, or are in anyway offended by it, then they simply don't possess the ability to construct valid arguments.

 

Subtle and sneaky...

 

But can you accept that a women's femininity could be used as a tool to pervert the direction of society if offered empty promises? You may feel empowered when governments make you feel more comfortable in the short term but in the long term they will take all your powers away! Not saying that will but aren't you suspicious of politicians motives? 

 

Or put another way, and excuse the pun, do you feel your vote is being bought? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

Meh, I do not much care. I disagree with the sentiment of the video and have zero desire to dig for some deeper meaning.

 

The author of the video does bring up one very interesting historical point about how women seem to gain greater control near the end of civilisations. I'm crap at history so don't know if there's any truth to this but perhaps somebody could help me out? 

 

14 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

Cheap labor drives wages down thereby de-stablizing the economy making it almost impossible to earn a living wage especially for those who do manual labor.

 

So you agree that cheap labour can destabilise society?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

But can you accept that a women's femininity could be used as a tool to pervert the direction of society if offered empty promises? You may feel empowered when governments make you feel more comfortable in the short term but in the long term they will take all your powers away! Not saying that will but aren't you suspicious of politicians motives? 

 

Or put another way, and excuse the pun, do you feel your vote is being bought? 

I don't see it in terms of national anything but I can get some of it on a personal level one on one with some woman. 

 

Where there's power plays for sex and emotional games.  From my point of view there are times a woman has put me through an emotional wringer, yet from there point of view, I was an inconsiderate and emotionally unavailable..  What I'm getting at is relations are hard on both sexes, even more so without maturity on both ends.. and at 54 years old I'm beginning to think maturity happens at 60. 

 

Again, I don't see National implications in it, mostly personal.   More woman are in Congress, but they're far from 50%.  There are more liberal woman elected then conservative, but both saw a bump.   It may bode well because woman tend to be more peaceful and compromising, but then again, high achievers tend to act against there stereotypes so its no sure thing. 

Edited by thelerner
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, thelerner said:

I don't see it in terms of national anything but I can get some of it on a personal level one on one with some woman. 

 

Where there's power plays for sex and emotional games.  From my point of view there are times a woman has put me through an emotional wringer, yet from there point of view, I was an inconsiderate and emotionally unavailable..  What I'm getting at is relations are hard on both sexes, even more so without maturity on both ends.. and at 54 years old I'm beginning to think maturity happens at 60. 

 

Again, I don't see National implications in it, mostly personal.   More woman are in Congress, but they're far from 50%.  There are more liberal woman elected then conservative, but both saw a bump.   It may well bode well because woman tend to be more peaceful and compromising, but then again, high achievers tend to act against there stereotypes so its no sure thing. 

 

Well I don't know much about American politics but it does seem that more women elected is just another way to garner more votes. It's like a game of one-upmanship until they find another way to appeal to a group so as to up their votes. 

 

As for being put through the mill emotionally by women, yes been there got the T-shirt, several in fact! One of the reasons I've remained single for the last twenty years is a lack of connect with the women in my past. Of course it could have been all my fault and probably was but I'm happier alone and have found myself so all is good. 

 

Also in my fifties but rediscovering that carefree innocent me of my teenage years but without the angst of feeling alone! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

The author of the video does bring up one very interesting historical point about how women seem to gain greater control near the end of civilisations. I'm crap at history so don't know if there's any truth to this but perhaps somebody could help me out?

It would makes sense. Without women are there any civilizations? They are the incubators of life. Banned together in a dying civilization women could decide who breeds with whom, or not at all.

 

9 minutes ago, Patrick Brown said:

So you agree that cheap labour can destabilise society?  

I would agree it could be a contributing factor. Could possibly keep folks suppressed without the opportunity to realize their full potential lending to feelings of inadequacy, exacerbating mental illness and imaginable increased crime rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

It would makes sense. Without women are there any civilizations? They are the incubators of life. Banned together in a dying civilization women could decide who breeds with whom, or not at all.

 

I think the author of the video was specifically suggesting they were passing laws and running governments. As said I can't comment as I simply don't know the historical facts but then again history books are full of BS! If you think women choose who to breed with in a dying civilisation you're deluding yourself right? We're back to the old thing of women choosing the strongest male for protection regardless of anything else.  

 

Don't worry I don't want kids never did and I don't even want a women anymore. In fact if a very intelligent beautiful women paid me I wouldn't have sex with her. Apparently fornication is a sin/miss!

 

Hey do what thou wilt for that shall be the whole of the law, didn't someone famous once say that? LOL  

 

6 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

I would agree it could be a contributing factor. Could possibly keep folks suppressed without the opportunity to realize their full potential lending to feelings of inadequacy, exacerbating mental illness and imaginable increased crime rates.

 

I sense a degree of sarcasm, correct me if I'm wrong? As for crime rates who knows what's going on? Murders are not high in the modern world but paedophilia is rampant as is prostitution and sex slavery. Of course if you're busy shopping this fact could be missed! 

 

Conditioning and mental torture may not seem a big deal but in a small country there's nowhere to run and escape it. Think of the days when religion ruled civilisations and if chose to single you were frowned upon or murdered? These days it's a different form of oppression as now we can't even use the word 'mankind'!!!! We're not sure whether to be fem or butch, masculine or feminine in fact the male identity has been eroded away over decades!

 

Here's some historical facts:      

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

But can you accept that a women's femininity could be used as a tool to pervert the direction of society if offered empty promises?

 

I've been considering this, and two women who used their wiles to effect society come to mind - Cleopatra, who managed to delay the inevitable fall of Egypt to Rome, and the Empress Theodora who saved the reign of her husband.

 

And there is also the Virgin Queen of England who ushered in the golden age - although I don't quite think that was what you intended. 

 

7 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

You may feel empowered when governments make you feel more comfortable in the short term but in the long term they will take all your powers away! Not saying that will but aren't you suspicious of politicians motives? 

 

 The government does not make me feel empowered.

 

7 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

Or put another way, and excuse the pun, do you feel your vote is being bought? 

 

I wrote this awhile back:

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a few I forgot.. Emma of Normandy, for one, and Eleanor of Aquitane for another.. both greatly effected the history of the country you now call home. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ilumairen said:

There were a few I forgot.. Emma of Normandy, for one, and Eleanor of Aquitane for another.. both greatly effected the history of the country you now call home. 

 

 

 

Queen Hatshepsut of course.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to have a civilization without women. I guarantee it will die out in one generation. However, try to get over the hyper masculinity that causes you to feel threatened by anything even remotely feminine, actually tap into the feminine and you realize that it is only through the feminine that civilizations arise. Nations are conquered by the men, but civilizations are always born from the mothers. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. Stop worrying about losing your masculinity and you will stop losing your masculinity. Stop fearing the feminine and you can start to learn the whole truth (or lack thereof). 

 

And moderators, isn't it about time to move this to Off Grid? 

Edited by Aaron
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/02/2019 at 9:45 AM, Apech said:

Queen Hatshepsut of course.

 

Women and their hats! :rolleyes:

 

1 hour ago, Aaron said:

Try to have a civilization without women. I guarantee it will die out in one generation. However, try to get over the hyper masculinity that causes you to feel threatened by anything even remotely feminine, actually tap into the feminine and you realize that it is only through the feminine that civilizations arise. Nations are conquered by the men, but civilizations are always born from the mothers. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. Stop worrying about losing your masculinity and you will stop losing your masculinity. Stop fearing the feminine and you can start to learn the whole truth (or lack thereof). 

 

And moderators, isn't it about time to move this to Off Grid? 

 

I'm actually quite androgynous for a man so the women having a knee-jerk reaction here are missing the point/opportunity to put forward their case. We also have the old polarise and divide phenomenon which is pretty obvious. So it seems men have to become more feminine but women can remain the same right?! Or perhaps both are wrong and stuck on greed and vanity trips? 

 

Aaron why should this post be moved exactly? Is it simply because you disagree with the discussion or is it more fundamental? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

Women and their hats! :rolleyes:

 

 

I'm actually quite androgynous for a man so the women having a knee-jerk reaction here are missing the point/opportunity to put forward their case. We also have the old polarise and divide phenomenon which is pretty obvious. So it seems men have to become more feminine but women can remain the same right?! Or perhaps both are wrong and stuck on greed and vanity trips? 

 

Aaron why should this post be moved exactly? Is it simply because you disagree with the discussion or is it more fundamental? 

 

 

Patrick 'Epicene' Brown.

 

has agood ring to it.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Aaron said:

 Stop worrying about losing your masculinity and you will stop losing your masculinity. Stop fearing the feminine and you can start to learn the whole truth (or lack thereof).

Now here's a coincidence, don't know who wrote the following but it's relevant here:

 

Quote

 

There seems to be a lot of confusion about calling out toxic masculinity. It's not an attack on the masculine at all. It's calling our false masculinity, sometimes called "boy psychology." It's rooted in fragility and fear and pretends to be tough, in charge, and powerful in desperation.

 

Real masculine power (eros) balances the feminine power (agape). It uplifts, protects, and strives to evolve.

That which is threatening, threatened, must put others down to feel powerful, or oppressive is not the real masculine at all.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Patrick Brown said:

 

Women and their hats! :rolleyes:

 

 

I'm actually quite androgynous for a man so the women having a knee-jerk reaction here are missing the point/opportunity to put forward their case. We also have the old polarise and divide phenomenon which is pretty obvious. So it seems men have to become more feminine but women can remain the same right?! Or perhaps both are wrong and stuck on greed and vanity trips? 

 

Aaron why should this post be moved exactly? Is it simply because you disagree with the discussion or is it more fundamental? 

 

My feeling is that, especially in the current climate,  it's misogynistic, and though it has the right to be discussed,  it needs to be identified as such. I also feel it may violate the ToS as well in regards to bigotry and hate speech. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Aaron said:

 

My feeling is that, especially in the current climate,  it's misogynistic, and though it has the right to be discussed,  it needs to be identified as such. I also feel it may violate the ToS as well in regards to bigotry and hate speech. 

Are you a shill? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patrick you got to admit the title is provocative, ie Why Women DESTROY NATIONS * / CIVILIZATIONS - and other UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS

 

If it was- Why <supply ethnic group> DESTROY NATIONS*CIVILIZATIONS- and other UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS, I think you'd get a similar wtf responses. ie If the ethnic group was Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, Australians, Canadians.. pretty much any race, creed, color or sexual orientation etc., you'd also catch flack. 

 

I know woman; sisters, mother, friends.. I even married one once and believe me none of them would see the title in terms of opportunity for enlightening conversation.  Which is what I'm sure you were hoping for 

There's probably better phrasing then the shouting they-DESTROY NATIONS & CIVILIZATIONS.  Perhaps better to hit on some aspect in the OP speech then lead with a title that screams misogyny. 

Edited by thelerner
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I have thought about changing the title. I just used the video title because it was quick and easy.

I'll change the title to something less, err, provocative.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were in charge all threads with titles suggesting that women "destroy nations" would go straight to the pit without even a day`s wait-and-see stopover in Off Grid.  Especially if the phrase "destroy nations" was in all caps.  Especially if the opening video featured an opening image of a sexually provocative woman in a bikini who appears to be all of 18 years old.  

 

What`s next  -- black men DESTROY NATIONS and other UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS introduced with a black youth in a speedo?  Ageing gay men DESTROY NATIONS and other UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS introduced with a photo of a Fire Island orgy?

 

I`d stomp out such inflammatory rhetoric like the internet cockroach posts they are...but cooler heads prevail.    

Edited by liminal_luke
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites