Women's place in society (repost)

Tigersoap

The Living Force
This is a repost from the Rosie O'Donnell thread that started Here

Some of the replies are quite long so maybe each participant should repost his answer(s) here so we can keep track of the whole discussion ?

Or shall I copy the replies in here in full ?

I am unsure how to handle this.


It started with Erna discussing this

Erna said:
ScioAgapeOmnis said:
Rape I suspect is mostly done by psychopaths themselves.
Rape (or forced sex) is custom is many cultures, for example the Zulu culture here in South Africa. Judging by the fact that a woman is raped every 28 seconds here in SA (and that's the ones that are reported), then the whole argument (which I read somewhere on this site a while ago that only about 5% of the population is psychopaths) falls apart. Either rape is not only committed by psychopaths or a sifnificantly larger portion of the population are psychopaths...

The fact that the CIA sponsors and promotes the drug trade, is also largely irrelevant in this discussion, cause remember, we have already established that the current system and it's spokesmen isn't the solution. If an individual can be convinced that rape and murder is acceptable, then I think it is fair to say that that individual is seriously under suspicion.

Now religion, there you hit the nail on the head. I suspect most wartime killings have their root in religion, and of course territory and need of resources.
I replied this

Tigersoap said:
What do you think about the place of woman in society as a whole ?
How do you consider the idea that women have mostly been treated as "inferior" beings, possession or commodities ? (This is not true for all societies but has become predominant imho)

Ah my wife made me remember a Documentary we saw a few years ago about the situation in SA, maybe you'd be able to tell me if this is true : there was this rumour that made people "rape" virgins to either heal or get some protection from the HIV virus.
Is this correct ?
ScioAgapeOmnis replied to Erna, Erna to Tigersoap.
Lynn replied as well.

which leads to Ruth

Ruth said:
Tigersoap said:
What do you think about the place of woman in society as a whole ?
How do you consider the idea that women have mostly been treated as "inferior" beings, possession or commodities ? (This is not true for all societies but has become predominant imho)
I think you are incorrect here, Tigersoap. It is true for all societies. It is true for the whole planet. We are being lied to about the 'status' of women and I guess that is just to disguise reality.

It wasn't that long ago when women couldn't even vote. Not long ago at all.
 
Mra, if you could please use the search tab at the top of the forum page and search for previous threads on organic portals, it might clear up some of your concepts. Hypthetically, 50% of earth's population is composed of OPs - psychopaths are apparently failed OPs, although we've discussed to some length what this means and are still sort of closing in on it. OPs can and do feel compassion and concern, it is just that it can only go so far.
 
The problem is, Mra, that this thread was opened to discuss a specific topic that is not precisely what you jumped in with. Please move your post to the appropriate thread. It will be deleted from this one tomorrow.
 
Mra, I think you have just subjectively subjugated the subject, but it's may be only my subjective impression :D I mean, slow down a bit, for if you hurry, you may very probably waste the time you wanted to save by hurrying.
 
Tigersoap said:
What do you think about the place of woman in society as a whole ?
I was wondering if this question would apply to a normal non-ponerized world. I don't know if it would. The urge to place humans in segmented roles seems to me much of the reason why we're in the current situation. I don't know if genders should have some certain place.

Tigersoap said:
How do you consider the idea that women have mostly been treated as "inferior" beings, possession or commodities? (This is not true for all societies but has become predominant imho)
I think this is a product of ponerization. Both men and women have lost the connection their and others humanity. As such people become inhuman tools to reinforce beliefs of how 'things should be,' instead of allowing people to just discover and be who they are.

osit.
 
Ruth said:
I think you are incorrect here, Tigersoap. It is true for all societies. It is true for the whole planet. We are being lied to about the 'status' of women and I guess that is just to disguise reality.
It wasn't that long ago when women couldn't even vote. Not long ago at all.
Hi Ruth, I was incomplete in my answer.

I like to watch documentaries about tribes and I have seen very few tribes that retains some form of matriarchy.
Women have still a strong role in those tribes even though it seems to be the remains of much older form of social organization and it looked like they were patched up with superstitions, taboos and so on.

It is far from any true STO orientation but I think some of these tribes had some traces of going into that direction before they were contaminated (in the past or now).

But these tribes are disappearing fast due to the "modernized" world swallowing everything and everyone.
And it's necessary for the psychopathic agenda that they get ponerized fast osit.

Proselytism is playing an important part in this change of old ways into something more in line with the downgrading of women (In this context, the use of modern clothes to cover up the body because it is a "sin" to be half naked for example).

And I agree with you, all modern societies, although they may parade some egality between sexes, it seems a long way before there is a true respect from men and a shift of perception in the society as whole (thanks to psychopathy).
I may not be the best person to talk about it as I am a man, I don't want to sound like I know what it is to be a woman.
 
Shane said:
Tigersoap said:
How do you consider the idea that women have mostly been treated as "inferior" beings, possession or commodities? (This is not true for all societies but has become predominant imho)
I think this is a product of ponerization. Both men and women have lost the connection their and others humanity. As such people become inhuman tools to reinforce beliefs of how 'things should be,' instead of allowing people to just discover and be who they are.
I think this is a product/tool of the control system, which is created/maintained by both 3D and 4D STSs. The idea that women are inferior is mostly planted in our heads by the monotheistic religions for millenniums. This is true for both ponerized societies and normal ones. Of course, one could make the case that the monotheistic religions were invented/perpetuated by deviant people and are thus a product of ponerization in the 3th density alone. But deviant people alone could not have done it without the help of 4D STSs.
 
Shane said:
I was wondering if this question would apply to a normal non-ponerized world. I don't know if it would. The urge to place humans in segmented roles seems to me much of the reason why we're in the current situation. I don't know if genders should have some certain place...
I have the impression that there would be a segmentation but it would be natural, in the sense of doing what's more fitting to the individual, not from strict conceptions enforced by force or taboos.

Unless men grow a womb there is still something that men can't do and it somehow shapes the roles we have to play osit.

I do think that you cannot have a non-ponerized world (3dSTO) without a strong spiritual connection that would probably place men and woman in a totally different dynamic than what we know of.

Shane said:
I think this is a product of ponerization. Both men and women have lost the connection their and others humanity. As such people become inhuman tools to reinforce beliefs of how 'things should be,' instead of allowing people to just discover and be who they are.
Yup, I think you can never stress enough the role psychopathy is playing into shaping our very souls.
 
hoangmphung said:
I think this is a product/tool of the control system, which is created/maintained by both 3D and 4D STSs. The idea that women are inferior is mostly planted in our heads by the monotheistic religions for millenniums. This is true for both ponerized societies and normal ones. Of course, one could make the case that the monotheistic religions were invented/perpetuated by deviant people and are thus a product of ponerization in the 3th density alone. But deviant people alone could not have done it without the help of 4D STSs.
I disagree with that remark. I do not think it works like that in a normal society, since a normal society would had the ponerogenic processes under control, hence, the denomination "normal". In such a society, where the other is not the inferior one (the other: the alien, the opposite sex, the 3rd world countries, the non-native-speackers,the different razes... the different, aka "them"), in such a society, the discussion would be about the continuous integration of the differents: It would be about calling the others to join efforts towards common goals, in orther to overcome common problems.
It is my conviction such is the place of women in society. I mean, not of women (as "them"), but for the members of a society. For all its members. So the premise for cohexistance is not differenciated (like in man/woman), but inclusive (as in "members", that is, as in "us").
That is a normal situation. That is a situation that follows the common sence. In a society of normal men (and women; that is, of humans), the ponerization processes do not operate in a macrosicial level. So the idea as women as inferior would definetelly not had any presence since in such society women would had been there to supply input.
It is the work of the ignorance, and simply retarded, to think or perceive women as being "inferior", since the data for their relevance is there, in all its evidence, since ever: A woman's heart. A woman's intuition. A woman's emotionality. A woman's intelligence. A woman's sensibility. A woman's insight, to name but a few. All this data regarding the value of women has been there, has been evident, since ever. Therefore, the actitude that attacks women, most be artificial, induced, teached and learned.
Planned even.
This does not comes from a normal society. This "tendency" to consider women inferior is not natural. What is natural, is to defend women from the physical strenght of the antropids (thats about all the defence they need!). What is natural, is to learn about love and caring from women. What is natural, is to be a "togethers".
In this days, in the world, it is considered as advanced a society where woman is appreciated... and where now men are inferior, cualitative and cuantitatively speacking. This is also planned. And it is the same problem. It is a strategy to dominate, yes. But that is not the worst part of it: That is not its paramount characteristic. Its paramount characteristic is that there are normal men and woman who abandon the normal world and step into the plateau where the point is to demonstrate who is more worthy to be more appreciated.
I mean, the worst part of the strategy is not that is comes from monotheism or from 4dSTS overlords, but that there are those humans who participate, rendering it effectivelly operational.
In the future (long or short term), the problem of the "inferiorization of males" will be solved. It will be then when another aspect of the strategy will be presented, to perpetuate the strategy of domination. Well, meanwhile, it will be preciselly this subject of the normal cooperation what will had NOT been discussed.
 
Art, I have to disagree with you and stand by my remark. The idea that women are inferior is at the core of the patriarchal value system, which is the basis of almost every societies on Earth today. I'm talking about fact here, not conviction. It is a fact and has been since the matriarchal value system was destroyed millenniums ago. You can't say that every societies since then are ponerized.

On the other hand, I certainly agree with you that it is not a healthy idea to have (a big understatement) and is the work of ignorance, etc. I also agree that the worst part of it is the participation by humans that perpetuates the idea until now. It is my conviction that women should be treated as complementary partners/members in a society and valued for their strength and weakness. This is not the same as the feminism movement nowadays that seeks to make women identical to men in every aspects.
 
hoangmphung said:
The idea that women are inferior is at the core of the patriarchal value system, which is the basis of almost every societies on Earth today. I'm talking about fact here, not conviction. It is a fact and has been since the matriarchal value system was destroyed millenniums ago. You can't say that every societies since then are ponerized.
I was not saying woman's suposed inferiority is not due to patrialcal system. It is due to patrialcal system indeed (plus other factors). I was not saying that this fact, or the opposite, is either my or a conviction: It is a fact indeed. I cannot say that every society since the disolution of matrialcal system is ponerized? It was you who said that ("The idea that women are inferior is at the core of the patriarchal value system, which is the basis of almost every societies on Earth today"; "It is a fact and has been since the matriarchal value system was destroyed millenniums ago"; "The idea that women are inferior is mostly planted in our heads by the monotheistic religions for millenniums. This is true for both ponerized societies and normal ones"). And I am agree on that. Patrialcal system has exploted, abused and consumed femenineity, and to me that is a ponerogenic activity. I did extend that to the other, the different, the foreign -and this too is a fact, not a conviction.
Yes, I can say that every society is ponerized, and, with you, that this has happened since the disolution of matrialcal system. If there has been exceptions, I am not aware of those few. It seems only groups has been able to achieve "normality" state of being.

hoangmphung said:
On the other hand, I certainly agree with you that it is not a healthy idea to have (a big understatement) and is the work of ignorance, etc.
I fail to see the understatement. Actually, I dont quite understand what you mean with "understatement". You mean it is not necesary to mention it? And if it is a "big" understatement, does it means it is extreemly useless to mention it? Or?

***

A normal society is not a utopy (and I am not saying that hoangmphung said it is a utopy). A utopy is what could be dreamed from a normal society -and not what can be dreamed from a ponerized society; what can be dreamed from a ponerized society has a name and a name only: Justice.
From a ponerized society, only the conditions for the posibility of existance is what can be "dreamed".
What can be dreamed from a normal society, well... we cannot reach those dreams because we ignore what is it like, to be in a normal society (I do ignore it); we, so inmersed in the ilussion, which is a thing to dissolve, only have the reazon to work with, beguining with one's participation on the ponerogenic processes: One is to improve one's participation.
Not to increase it.
To improve means to divert from the ponerogenic process. That would be a improvement of one's participation. As big an understatement as this can be, the realization of the other as a similar is the fact to achieve on one's construct in order to realize normality: The Other is me.
I am a woman. I am a man. I am an african. I am iraki. I am korean, and black, and gay, and muslim and latino... but there is something that i am not: I am not an American.
And that is not a fact: It is a conviction.
I'll be damned if this is "idealism": It is just NOT idealism!
Normality is NOT a utopy.
 
Art said:
Yes, I can say that every society is ponerized, and, with you, that this has happened since the disolution of matrialcal system. If there has been exceptions, I am not aware of those few. It seems only groups has been able to achieve "normality" state of being.
I can see that our disagreement stems from the definition of a ponerized society. You seems to imply that a society is ponerized if there are ponerogenic processes within it. This is obviously the case with all societies since there are always deviant people within any society. With your definition, a normal society can only be achieved when Lobaczewski's vision becomes true. That is, everyone has knowledge of ponerology and deviant people are recognized and segregated. This is the only way to eliminate all ponerogenic processes. The problem is: although you emphasized that a normal society is not utopia, your definition makes it vanishingly rare.

My currently used definition of a ponerized society is narrower. I consider a society as ponerized only if it has been affected by ponerogenic processes to a large degree. This is just like in biological pathology: Even though there are always virus/bacteria in a body, the body is considered diseased only if it is affected by the virus/bacteria to a large degree. With this definition, there are a large number of normal societies both in the past and present. IMO, it is only right that normality is the state of the majority.

Art said:
hoangmphung said:
On the other hand, I certainly agree with you that it is not a healthy idea to have (a big understatement) and is the work of ignorance, etc.
I fail to see the understatement. Actually, I dont quite understand what you mean with "understatement". You mean it is not necesary to mention it? And if it is a "big" understatement, does it means it is extreemly useless to mention it? Or?
Here I just meant that the idea that women are inferior is not just unhealthy but a very bad one. So to say that it is unhealthy is a big understatement. Sorry for the confusion.
 
Back
Top Bottom