Israeli or Palestinian?
No idea. It appeard on some right wing feed that popped up randomly on my Facebook. (Well I might have commented on some buzz lightyear threads)
So i imagine neither. And that the threat of Nazis to that particular individual is less than the flu.
" As its title suggests, “Man Rampant” promotes an extremely muscular Christianity. Forget Jesus as well-meaning, meek and mild; the first episode condemned the “sin of empathy.” Empathy, says Wilson, “is not a good thing.”
Speaking of masculinity.
If Jesus lived, not that there is much historical evidence to suggest that he did,
He was probably either gay or banging Mary Magdalene.
It was extremely unusual for a Jewish man his alleged age, not to have been married.
Viewed with a modern lens, he also would have been a long haired hippie, with dirty feet, and progressive politics.
Sure, maybe, who knows?
Point being, the Christian Reconstruction movement, as revived/started by Rushdoony, is alive and well, and is (intimately) connected to the ongoing efforts to transform the USA into a quasi if not fully theocratic state. Theonomic at the very least.
Efforts at grass roots level are continual and growing, and not only in Moscow, ID.
Levantine man 2000 years ago
progressive politics
Yes, I’m sure the guy who ran the Hebrew money changers out of the temple with violence would agree with bail reform leading to ROR of murderers and land acknowledgements lol.
You mean I should not have devoted my life to esoteric martial arts because I read as gospel the Doug Moench run of THE DEADLY HANDS OF SHANG-CHI MASTER OF KUNG FU?
Well if Shang Chi in a panel said that MMA was fake and sucked and pro MMA fighters couldn’t fight and the ultimate martial art was Seven Mountains Fist and it was too deadly to spar, you should probably realize that fictional characters can be made to say anything they want by the author.
Come on! You cannot tell me that my entire understanding of the universe was wrong!
What’s next? That I should have never taken up after this guy as the ideal model for the techniques of onanism?
id argue masculinity and femininity are flexible in terms of societal situations, as expectations vary across cultures, and that makes the idea of a concrete ‘existence’ of them no harder to confirm than the existence of language. Concept to communicate idea, not a hard, objective thing. Malleable to it’s needed use.
When people talk about toxic masculinity in the spaces I see it discussed at length (and not insecure men on the internet thinking it’s an attack on all of them) it’s more about how certain brands of it can be a problem. For example ‘men are aggressive and more prone to violence than women’ being interpreted as ‘men SHOULD be aggressive and act violently.’ Men ‘should’ be pursuing women relentlessly and not take no because ‘that’s what dominant alpha men do’. Some would write this off as being an asshole but to these people, this can be what they think they have to do BECAUSE they are trying to live up to an image of ‘being a man.’ At that point their idea of masculinity is why they are being an asshole, a further corrupt notion of ‘boys will be boys’ as an excuse for unacceptable behaviour.
‘Men don’t cry’ is another one, if you can’t vent your frustrations and pain in healthy ways, and you’re expected to be an expressionless unfeeling stone, then that is going to come out in less healthy ways. These ideas end up perpetuating themselves indefinitely if a parent is shitty to their kid out of expectations of ‘manliness’ and the cycle continues. And yes I expect to be told ‘lol pussy’ or ‘lol gay’ as I was told back in my pre-transition years but the longer I’ve been on my position the more I’m seeing the point that some people’s ideas of masculine/feminine is, in part, playing up to ideals and some people have very stupid ideals that have consequences outside of a vaccuum.
On a lighter, more contemplative note, the question is ‘what is reason for masculinity and femininity?’ because i often see it described as a yin-yang balance in very binary ways of ‘men provide, women nurture’ but both can and do fill and swap the roles. ‘Masculinity at it’ best is virtue’ can women, the feminine, not be virtuous too? Does that make them masculine?’ When I ask, I don’t get answers that don’t inspire more questions… Humans are interesting in their need for dichotomy, labels, classifications. Even the yin-yang have parts of each other in themselves. Maybe the split between masculinity and femininity is merely illusion, relics from times long gone where women were property to men and we divided them as a class to maintain power and these notions are left overs? Perhaps we simply don’t have an answer as to why femininity and masculinity are even a thing? If its desirable as a trait in a person, why should it be only for one sex and not in another?
Just a ramble on my part.
2 Likes
Ah, a reply to drunk poetry from earlier.
Patronizing statement, with a loaded assumption, but proceed.
It is a myth that men are more violent than women.
However, males do get caught more when they are violent, and are prosecuted more when they are violent.
Not quite the same thing, but one can see why the misinterpretation and popular myth exist.
Ah, you haven’t met women, I see.
There are two things that make women in Saudi Arabia angry:
(1) When non-relative males look at them, lustfully,
and
(2) When they don’t.
Males may cry while watching military movies, or when listening to country western music, or while watching the scene from Toy Story 3 when all the toys are about to be melted.
Otherwise, keep a stiff upper lip…
Humans are incredibly weird in their need for labels.
Also, humans are irrational, and often behave irrationally.
Which is one of the two reasons that economists cannot predict well using theories that rely on assumptions that the agents and actors in an economic situation will behave rationally.
No, females of the species, except those too old, or with biological defect, are biologically present in the species to:
- Carry children
- Care for children
- Encourage genetic merges as one half of the mating coupling
Just like males of the species are present to:
- Encourage genetic merges as one half of the mating coupling
- Do the majority of the dying, and early dying, getting eaten, and getting killed off by almost every cause, so the females and juveniles can live, and not do the dying when possible.
If the point of Males #2 that I listed is not the biological reason of males, it sure is still highly correlated, to an extreme degree.
1 Like
I don’t think that is a relevant argument where male and female roles are so removed from that example.
A male can be a provider by being successful at tik tok.
A female can pay someone to look after their kids.
We can’t judge a biological role by an environment we are not in. So to say some savanah full of indigenous tribes is a more correct version of biology is a somehow more correct version that a modern completely manufactured setting isn’t even right from biology standards.
@gregaquaman, a wide variety of economic, and/or natural disaster, shocks, as well as states of war, often cause temporary, and sometimes prolonged reversions back to more base states.
Thats fine. But that isn’t really the situation here and now.
You are making the streetz argument. So you go to a gym and get mauled. And make the case that yes you got owned in this actual real environment. But in this other environment which we are not in bit is somehow more valid. You definitely would not have been owned.
You make the weirdest analogies.
Another poster made this point:
And I responded that the sex types have biological foundation.
You responded, correctly, that in rich, modern situations, the biological sex type roles may become blurred,
And I retorted, correctly, that rich, modern situations can be disrupted temporarily, or for prolonged periods by certain shocks, including economic ones, wars, natural disasters, etc, and then a reversion to sex type roles often come into play again more prevalently.
That is not a “streetz” argument.
If we wanted to make a weird, not really relevant martial arts analogy of the kind you made, it would be more akin to me saying that everybody has a plan until they actually get hit, and hit for real, by someone who is not play acting.
And further, even in the rich, modern situations you describe, men still tend to die earlier than women, from disease, suicide, murder, accident, almost every cause, except of course, from child birth, because only women can give birth to children.
In a lot of circumstances it is an illusion. We have male and female doctors. The distinction has quite a real effect. Some people will only see doctors of the same gender.
But the distinction is completely made up. Male and female is a biological thing. Male and female doctor is a societal creation.
When we suggest biology determines which toilets to take a piss in. We are not really using biology well.
The streez argumet bases itself that a lot of real environments are not real because of rules or pads and other societal creations. And what is more real is a hypothetical environment that may or may not happen.
Like geneder roles. Biology and modern society.
Interestingly, most college students in the U.S. are female.
Most medical students in the U.S. are female.
Most pharmacists and most pharmacy students in the US are female.
Leandro Lo did get shot and killed.
Reality is a bitch.