h a l f b a k e r yWe have a low common denominator: 2
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
In this axiomatic system of thought, the
null set is deemed a "rape". From this
initial definition, all else is formally
deduced from 1st principles, resulting
in a framework within which any action
is deconstructable into some form of
rape, it also constructs its own
backdrop or setting
that might be deemed
the rape-cosmos. Thus everyone is
constantly raping everyone else all the
time; In the ear, in the mind,
physically, emotionally, geometrically
and and indeed in any other way the
reader may formally wish to calculate.
In doing so, the emotional content of
rape is transcended, rendering the
original term, and by extension
everything that follows from it,
meaningless.
Early converts will be attracted by the
half-understood continual repeat of
emotive and forceful mantras, resulting
in small groups of highly dependent
people looking to their local and
provincial leaders for spiritual and
intellectual guidance. Those leaders are
then free to groom and prey upon their
trusting and emotionally dependent
followers, hammering home the conceptual
rape that brought them there in the
first place. Thus a need/dependence/rape
cycle is set-up within which almost any
truth can be argued/cemented with the
rape-construct discussed in the earlier
paragraph (as will be demonstrated in
the annotations).
The beauty of all this is that it forms
an unassailable clot of tangled logic
while retaining a veneer of
respectability and occasionally,
government funding. Sadly any groups
that are actually keen on securing
equality, safety for all and an end to
sexual violence are drowned out in the
cacophony of self-aggrandising
promotion, the louder and most strident
of which is destined to gain the most
attention. Thus a small minority of
self-appointed leaders get to enrich
themselves both financially, politically
and sexually, albeit at the expense of
the mental, physical and sexual health
of those closest to them.
A different style of writing to consider
http://einsteinandreligion.com/index.html
This guy gets into some pretty heady concepts with real simple language. [doctorremulac3, Sep 23 2014]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
Reading this felt like picking my way through a room full of trip wires rigged to explosives. I got to the other end of the room but was none the wiser about what was in the room other than a network of trip wires rigged to explosives. |
|
| |
Define "1st principles"... Moreover, we could replace the word "rape" with any other, and make the secret interpretations of law based on sets in any way we want. Is that what you mean? |
|
| |
I'm saying if you build a philosophy on a particular set of axioms and if those
axioms are formed of some highly corrosive, deeply emotive ideas such as rape,
slavery, murder etc - The effect, if managed carefully within a self-consistent
philosophical framework (carefully managed, and traversed so as not, as [calum]
points out, to set off any explosives within the labyrinth of internal
tripwires) then you will have achieved that most perverse of human
constructions, a self-perpetuating irrational cult of radicalism that exists to
impose some idea upon the world, but in doing so destroys both its membership,
and the very ideal it was initially set up to promote. That kicking off any
such tightly orchestrated tailspins of evil, as evidenced by sqrt(feminism),
sqrt(socialism), sqrt(islam) and pretty-much sqrt(most-other-isms) where the
function sqrt(x) can be replaced by the radical sign we're more commonly used
to, a few dedicated individuals may profit a great deal from the fervent auto-
flagellation of those unfortunate enough to become involved. |
|
| |
Like Beanangel, but with Rohypnol. |
|
| |
I skipped to //Thus a small minority of self-appointed
leaders get to enrich themselves both financially,
politically and sexually, albeit at the expense of the
mental, physical and sexual health of those closest to
them.// |
|
| |
The neat thing about words is, with a little bit of
skill they can be strung together to convey a
concept. |
|
| |
Yes, conflating all unwanted sexualized interactions with
rape simply changes the meaning of the word rape which
works so long as "rape" still carries some emotional and
visceral weight. Welcome to movement mechanics. No
different from religion, movements are cults of personality
and personal aggrandizement. Present in all movements, all
ideologies attract people who become parasites sapping
energy and inertia from it. And people who do the same
thing mirroring them in opposition. This "friction zone"
achieves very little but noise, heat, and smoke. If you don't
want to be accused of the same self serving behavior it
might be best not to join the mud slinging. |
|
| |
I hesitate briefly to say anything about this.
There are many situations where oppression and
ill-treatment come home to roost when the people
oppressed unwittingly visit that oppression and
bad behaviour on another group of people. This
has been claimed for child abuse of course, also
bullying and the situation in certain countries. It
seems to make sense to me and I imagine it
applies to this. However, we also need to be
aware that that ill-treatment must have been
pretty bad if it has that effect. So yes they are
wrong and of course I have seriously considered
suicide many times because of their belief system,
but although I am their immediate victim I am also
the indirect victim of the people who attacked
them in the first place. |
|
| |
It doesn't help to extend a rape metaphor too far
of course. |
|
| |
Did you mean rap? This would make a lot more sense. |
|
| |
That last paragraph in the description did resemble a kind of profundity. Then again, is there a suggestion that feminists are complaining about rape just so they can debauch themselves? |
|
| |
On the one hand, [Zeuxis], some recent feminism is as you describe it. |
|
| |
On the other hand, it doesn't have to be, and it used not to be. I would urge you to read Betty Friedan. Also, let's say, Antonia Byatt, Iris Murdoch, Dorothy Parker and Vita Sackville West. Not necessarily all at once. |
|
| |
[Marked-for-deletion] widely known to exist. |
|
| |
Can we save the /half-understood continual repeat of emotive and forceful mantras/ for the rap version? |
|
| |
//Like Beanangel, but with Rohypnol// You're too kind! |
|
| |
//On the other hand, it doesn't have to be// What I
wanted to do here was draw a line between positive and
negative philosophies - or at least posit a method by
which a line can be drawn. On one side are the
positive, affirming ideas from Islam, Feminism,
Christianity, whatever - and on the other, are the
negative, hate-led ideas that have somehow developed
under the same respective banners. I'm advocating we
recognise these for what they are, and as gardeners of
our own mental allotments (sorry, I know we started on
a mathematical metaphor, just switching to gardening
briefly) consider uprooting these negative and
unpleasant thought-weeds that have until now grown
under the protective canopy of otherwise well-meaning
and kind 'isms. Unfortunately, it's normally to the
benefit of leaders to highlight the divisive and
negative aspects of a belief system in order to
polarise and strengthen a congregation's fealty to
themselves - and over many years, this has generated
lots and lots of evil. We sometimes think this is
something limited to religious thought, but even
Feminism hasn't escaped this ugly process. |
|
| |
Within the parameters set forth by aggrandized
academic accolade accented discourse it is possible
to eschew a priori data conveyance composition
modus,
deconstructing as such that which might be used in
fundamental determination of essence towards the
ulterior construction of nominal conclusion based,
periphrasis utilizing illuminescent implementation of
maximal loquacity. |
|
| |
[doctorremulac3] that's all very well and good, perhaps
if you made the same point a 3rd time it would become
more relevant then? |
|
| |
Words are like a map to get to an idea. This is the
equivalent of giving directions to a destination
located 5 miles to the west by telling them to drive
25,000 miles
due east. Or even 49,995 miles due
east. |
|
| |
Excellent! Thankyou very much :) |
|
| |
You're right of course, the important point being that
the thing represented in the map is undoubtedly there.
You can turn a map upside down, even cut it up and
restitch it back-together, it's still a map - and
ought to remain topologically appropriate - Driving
49,995 thought-miles may be better than driving only
5, if you spend the time soaking up the sights and
enjoying the journey. The scenery can be grim
sometimes, but it's no-less an experience for that. |
|
| |
Thant's fine Zeu, just bustin' your balls. I didn't bone
this by the way, I know you're having fun so I don't
want to spit in the punch bowl. Just making some
armpit fart noises at the poetry reading, don't mind
me. ;) |
|
| |
You are of course, very welcome. I confess, this idea
was my only way of
venting a certain amount of frustration at some of the
things that seemed
to be going on in my corner of the world at the time
of posting. I find it
frustrating sometimes that voicing certain opinions or
points of view is
deemed taboo - There exist well defended memes, with
near impenetrable logical/rhetorical defences, that
are very difficult to challenge. What's needed is a
clear
way to examine some of the ideas that have become
conflated with say,
radical feminism, and point out the negative, hate-
based logic that
underpins them - in a way that isn't (in this case)
misogynistic. The
same goes for other
cases where a hate-based philosophy has infected some
otherwise laudable
thought or ideal. e.g. Socialism, Christianity, Islam,
etc - by the paths
and vectors described in the idea proper. |
|
| |
I think a
new way of talking
about these hate-infections needs to be developed so
we can unhook, clean-
off, or otherwise descab the good parts from the bad.
I'd like to find a
clearer way of saying that - I really sincerely would. |
|
| |
So the concept here is to raise consciousness of the
logic behind the hate - so that we may safely
criticise the hatred, while leaving the main body
intact. |
|
| |
The link to the square-root function is tenuous, but by trying to
define precise, mathematical terms, I'm trying to convey some of
that precise, specific, targeted criticism - Also, it speaks
something of positivity and negativity - the square-root of a
negative being imaginary - but by the bun/bone count (0,-5)
currently, it would appear, I'm not conveying that very well. |
|
| |
Well my friend, speaking only for myself, you lost me
somewhere after the R in "Radical" and I'm a pretty
good word-wrangler. I got the basic idea, but it
required more decoding that I care to do. As a fair to
middling word slinger myself, I'd suggest opting for
clarity over pizzaz. |
|
| |
Put it this way, if you read some of the writings of
Einstein you can get a good example of clear
communication with minimal verbiage. Did you know
he was a writer by the way? He didn't just stand in
front of a chalkboard smoking a pipe with a horrible
hairdo. Some pretty heavy stuff written in very
simple and easy to understand language, and I don't
think anybody would accuse him of being a dullard. |
|
| |
That being said, I understand the appeal of playing
around with language skills, which is why I'm
teasing more than seriously criticizing. |
|
| |