Original RI quotes only

Moderators: DrVolin, Elvis, Jeff

Original RI quotes only

Postby brainpanhandler » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:15 am

Jackriddler wrote:GM:

I thought, certainly based on thread title and OP, that the original subject was the, ahem, male victimology prevalent in our culture, which holds that men are the detesticularized victims of PC, rendered powerless by leftist thought bans that stymie them in all they do, all of which allows crazy bitches to attack them for no reason, destroy their lives and get away with it thanks to the feminist-dominated justice system. The very same victimology, in fact, which since the 1970s has been sold as heroic and maverick and rad and manly, in reaction to the social changes attributed to feminism, and that you and a few others here have espoused. So I don't know when you think it turned into a debate about some supposed dictate that women must always be viewed as victims, but you just keep beating that, um, straw there.

There is a larger discussion to be had here, too difficult perhaps, about how the parts of the big picture fit together, what's in all of us, what's biology and physical sex, what's gender and power and hegemony (of definition), what's family, culture or tradition, what's distortion and conditioning from a given society, what's manipulated or influenced from and through factors like capital and state and language and media. And at the end of that, what's just and injust, or right and wrong, if anything quite, and how do we become the best we are and live on from here.

Truth be told, if you were more sensitive to how this thread has actually gone, however, you'd know it's become a serial beatdown-for-sport on every stupid thing you say -- by the way, cut out the legalistic equivocations and just go straight to the dumb boners henceforth, save me some reading time -- without your ever seeming to comprehend a single point, but you just keep wading in there a la the Black Knight. Your sacrifice, which seems to have gone unnoticed by you, has paradoxically produced such spectacularly insightful, well-written and even inspiring posts from barracuda, c2w and others that I've felt reluctant to enter myself, as others here already said anything I thought (and quite a few things I hadn't thought of) with a grace and force I can only admire.

Never mind, I'm just a slave thanks to the pavlovian conditioning of women whose vagina I hope to rent in compensation, as your definition of love on the planet would have it. And here I thought I was a slave to the long-past yet-still-working-somewhere-in-there-twisted conditioning of my mom, my dad, 10,000 childhood TV hours and a moderately vicious parochial school, the culture of my ethnicity, my relentless and overwhelming sex-drive within a politeness culture, my clearly insane but irresistible empire-running country and city, and, after all that, a little bit of peer pressure to smell and look a certain way through, oh, grad school, plus a few poor drug choices; but certainly not of my lovers past or present, whether I today love or hate them! But again, never mind.

Which prompts a thought: In all this reactionary talk from your alternate reality, you ignore the best example of women's power over men: mothers and their little boys. There are many easy hits to score there, honey-dripping fat slow hanging curveballs, for the simple-minded anyway. You may even find yourself in the uncomfortable proximity of a feminist or two who agrees with what you may say on the subject of Mom. Perhaps you've missed this easy target because, in the reactionary world view that has been sold as maverick and rad, mothers are sacred (if not allowed to say a thing). But somehow I don't think you'd have a problem with slammin'em. You're made of different stuff. You don't seem to have such inhibitions. So I end up wondering if you've not gone there because you're simply obsessed with some past rejection or ugly episode involving a girlfriend or someone, which has come to stand in as a paradigm for how the whole world works. The latter would seem to cover at least one other poster on this board to a tee.

If you told us about any actual personal experiences, which I know must seem like insanity at this stage, my bet is you'd be surprised at how sweetly and authentically your thread antagonists would treat you. Try for a moment putting aside the talk of all human relations as war or contract, o Superman, o modern man, and get at the tragedy and pain that must be somewhere in there, for you to talk the trash you do.

Or maybe you're just a cold and limited fish, and this is really you. It's not like I've ever been inside anyone else's mind, except for a few flashes. While making love. Now barely recallable. Strange, that: seeing all, and then still living for another 10 and 80 years, as though it never happened.

Well then, have a nice day!


http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/v ... &start=150
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4978
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby brainpanhandler » Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:56 am

Baracuda wrote:Meek ones like myself seek light but take consolation from mere flashes through the darkness, for fear revelation may bring water to the mouths of beasts.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4978
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Seamus OBlimey » Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:14 pm

The one where Annie A. totally fucked off John Nemo. It was funny and frightening and a little bit enlightening. I'd love to read it again if anyone could find it.
User avatar
Seamus OBlimey
 
Posts: 3154
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Gods own country
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby brainpanhandler » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:40 pm

Sunny wrote:8bit, if you keep eliminating factions from the plot we'll be left with lizard people.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4978
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

bumpin it up with something from the _Sarah Palin_ thread:

Postby marmot » Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:12 pm

Col. Quisp wrote:She nearly "came" when she squealed "right here in Alaska!" when talking about how we're gonna be energy independent once we drill all of Alaska. God so richly blessed Alaska, she says. She's all about how being president will help out Alaska. You can just tell she can't wait for the old man to kick off and leave her in the driver's seat. She stiffens when he tries to play grab ass. She is putting up with it as long as she has to.

That fish stinks no matter how much newspaper you wrap it in.

Ick ick ick. I need a shower now.
marmot
 
Posts: 2354
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 11:52 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby vigilant » Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:42 pm

geogeo wrote:

I should know better to lurk on threads like that. I posted one ironic comment and fled.
The whole world is a stage...will somebody turn the lights on please?....I have to go bang my head against the wall for a while and assimilate....
vigilant
 
Posts: 2210
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Back stage...
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Original RI quotes only

Postby GM Citizen » Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:11 am

brainpanhandler wrote:
Jackriddler wrote:GM:

I thought, certainly based on thread title and OP, that the original subject was the, ahem, male victimology prevalent in our culture, which holds that men are the detesticularized victims of PC, rendered powerless by leftist thought bans that stymie them in all they do, all of which allows crazy bitches to attack them for no reason, destroy their lives and get away with it thanks to the feminist-dominated justice system. The very same victimology, in fact, which since the 1970s has been sold as heroic and maverick and rad and manly, in reaction to the social changes attributed to feminism, and that you and a few others here have espoused. So I don't know when you think it turned into a debate about some supposed dictate that women must always be viewed as victims, but you just keep beating that, um, straw there.

There is a larger discussion to be had here, too difficult perhaps, about how the parts of the big picture fit together, what's in all of us, what's biology and physical sex, what's gender and power and hegemony (of definition), what's family, culture or tradition, what's distortion and conditioning from a given society, what's manipulated or influenced from and through factors like capital and state and language and media. And at the end of that, what's just and injust, or right and wrong, if anything quite, and how do we become the best we are and live on from here.

Truth be told, if you were more sensitive to how this thread has actually gone, however, you'd know it's become a serial beatdown-for-sport on every stupid thing you say -- by the way, cut out the legalistic equivocations and just go straight to the dumb boners henceforth, save me some reading time -- without your ever seeming to comprehend a single point, but you just keep wading in there a la the Black Knight. Your sacrifice, which seems to have gone unnoticed by you, has paradoxically produced such spectacularly insightful, well-written and even inspiring posts from barracuda, c2w and others that I've felt reluctant to enter myself, as others here already said anything I thought (and quite a few things I hadn't thought of) with a grace and force I can only admire.

Never mind, I'm just a slave thanks to the pavlovian conditioning of women whose vagina I hope to rent in compensation, as your definition of love on the planet would have it. And here I thought I was a slave to the long-past yet-still-working-somewhere-in-there-twisted conditioning of my mom, my dad, 10,000 childhood TV hours and a moderately vicious parochial school, the culture of my ethnicity, my relentless and overwhelming sex-drive within a politeness culture, my clearly insane but irresistible empire-running country and city, and, after all that, a little bit of peer pressure to smell and look a certain way through, oh, grad school, plus a few poor drug choices; but certainly not of my lovers past or present, whether I today love or hate them! But again, never mind.

Which prompts a thought: In all this reactionary talk from your alternate reality, you ignore the best example of women's power over men: mothers and their little boys. There are many easy hits to score there, honey-dripping fat slow hanging curveballs, for the simple-minded anyway. You may even find yourself in the uncomfortable proximity of a feminist or two who agrees with what you may say on the subject of Mom. Perhaps you've missed this easy target because, in the reactionary world view that has been sold as maverick and rad, mothers are sacred (if not allowed to say a thing). But somehow I don't think you'd have a problem with slammin'em. You're made of different stuff. You don't seem to have such inhibitions. So I end up wondering if you've not gone there because you're simply obsessed with some past rejection or ugly episode involving a girlfriend or someone, which has come to stand in as a paradigm for how the whole world works. The latter would seem to cover at least one other poster on this board to a tee.

If you told us about any actual personal experiences, which I know must seem like insanity at this stage, my bet is you'd be surprised at how sweetly and authentically your thread antagonists would treat you. Try for a moment putting aside the talk of all human relations as war or contract, o Superman, o modern man, and get at the tragedy and pain that must be somewhere in there, for you to talk the trash you do.

Or maybe you're just a cold and limited fish, and this is really you. It's not like I've ever been inside anyone else's mind, except for a few flashes. While making love. Now barely recallable. Strange, that: seeing all, and then still living for another 10 and 80 years, as though it never happened.

Well then, have a nice day!


http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/v ... &start=150


More of the same tactics really. Building a life for me that fits his/her assumptions. Attributing words to me that are not mine, and so on. A good read, but off the mark. Nice quoting job though, BPH.
Veni, Vidi, Velcro - I came, I saw, I stuck around
GM Citizen
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:02 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby brainpanhandler » Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:41 am

Nice quoting job though


The thread is titled Original RI Quotes Only, numbnuts.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4978
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jeff » Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:50 am

brainpanhandler wrote:The thread is titled Original RI Quotes Only, numbnuts.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

meta

Postby compared2what? » Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:30 am

Jeff wrote:
brainpanhandler wrote:The thread is titled Original RI Quotes Only, numbnuts.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: meta

Postby Avalon » Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:34 am

compared2what? wrote:
Jeff wrote:
brainpanhandler wrote:The thread is titled Original RI Quotes Only, numbnuts.
User avatar
Avalon
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 2:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: meta

Postby Seamus OBlimey » Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:48 pm

Then there was the one where eiae accused jeff of cooking the books. That was funny and scary too. I needed a rest after that.

Blowing my own trumpet here I think the best of my own was the eggs and basket thing.
User avatar
Seamus OBlimey
 
Posts: 3154
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:14 pm
Location: Gods own country
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby sunny » Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:54 pm

From the Final WTC7 Report thread:

JackRiddler wrote:The usual paradox.

Failure of one or two columns due to fire and irregular damage causes the whole building to neatly implode in a fashion that at least visually mimics a near-perfect controlled demolition.

But:

A planned demolition would have required massive placements of explosives and pre-cuttings of every single column in the building. Otherwise it would have been impossible!

(Like, you can't just put explosives next to the one magic column the failure of which collapses the whole building. Only a fire could cause that!)
Choose love
sunny
 
Posts: 5220
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Alabama
Blog: View Blog (1)

Postby barracuda » Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:08 pm

compared2what?, from the dance thread in the lounge:


Word to the wise.
Last edited by barracuda on Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12887
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby barracuda » Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:25 pm

Hugh Manatee Wins:
    "Psy-ops is more like humidity than a douche. And TV plus movies are the moist fog that most Americans stand in and breath deeply."
and,
    "I've noticed this board has been monitored for counterpropaganda ideas that have then been virally marketed."
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12887
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests