The Promiscuous, Career Focused Single Woman -- An Exaggerated Scapegoat?

[MikeyFitz]

I’m just wondering if you ever thought that maybe your son was protected from the damage your daughters inherited because sons are not as sexualized as daughters?

Regarding needing to procreate, do you feel it’s more important for your daughters to get pregnant and imbue their own children with the drama of their childhood — or heal from their wounds and protect the promulgation of the same dynamic they experienced?

Personally i would love to be a mother, but not if it means recreating the culture I found myself growing up in.

So if women are sexualized, why don't the true feminists speak up?

I spoke up when my ex-wife came back from Glamour Shots with my 4 yr old daughters all painted up like red light district whores.

I would like to direct message with you because I have some VERY sad stories to tell you that I do not want on this forum.

For some reason I trust you.

 

[LUH 3417]

So if women are sexualized, why don't the true feminists speak up?

I spoke up when my ex-wife came back from Glamour Shots with my 4 yr old daughters all painted up like red light district whores.

I would like to direct message with you because I have some VERY sad stories to tell you that I do not want on this forum.

For some reason I trust you.

I don’t know what makes a true feminist, I think there was a thread of intelligent women speaking out against psychiatry as a tool of oppression and control, and media sexualization of women, and very much loudly criticizing transsexualism, surrogacy and trans rights in the 70s and 80s. They definitely weren’t telling women to get plastic surgery and make their daughters into sex dolls, or that empowerment came in cutting your breasts off.

I don’t think any one got anything perfectly right, just like you said about ray peat. But they seemed like they were trying to speak out against the way things were going and had better intentions than whatever liberal feminism seems to be spouting these days. There was a split in feminist thought around the 80s, the radical feminists vs liberal feminists, and just like every other movement, was co-opted, distorted and perverted by capitalism. The 90s were some of the worst times for kid, I remember being 5 and every pop song was so crazily sexualized, sex on TV, Britney Spears, I mean it was just really hard growing up with that and know what the right way to be is.

I do not for a moment disbelieve anything you are saying, I have had similar experiences in my life and rebelled and fought against it very much to figure out what it means to be a “real woman”. There’s a reactionary movement now where men are telling women, oh if you’re not married and don’t have kids it’s your fault, you were slutting around and not feminine enough. Like animalcule was saying, that hasn’t been my experience. You are welcome to message me.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

I can agree with the sentiment but I’m also talking being 12 years old and grown men stopping their cars to pick me up, harassing me on the train on my way home from school when I was clearly in a uniform, etc. as adults we are responsible for the people we get into relationships with and the kind of people we attract. As children and teenagers we are vulnerable to the sexual advances of perverted individuals. The underlying energy is probably related to upbringing and the way the child was treated at home.

I am sorry to hear that. In my defense, you did not bring up the context. There are issues in society and us men do know there is a predatory strain in male (and probably female too) sexuality. A lot of traditional mores are meant to protect women from predation and it is not obvious how we should arrange things to allow for open sexuality in society and protect the vulnerable.

 

[Panopticon]

why is no one talking about the things most influential to growing up ? skewls - home learning, peer imprinting - home safety, orbit altitude behavior modification directed energy weapons - no dopamine spikes from secure life and energy metabolism, smartphones - nature walks and animal observation like how peat said he observed ants

you never see people talking about these topics, I may even make a thread about hem in one place bu the cia ai will just slide it, make your own community or join the church in Belize like one poster said (they are around 10 000 westerners) and have avoided locals for 500 years, low waste too... but making your own energy community is the best way to use intelligently what we have already created...

 

[LUH 3417]

why is no one talking about the things most influential to growing up ? skewls - home learning, peer imprinting - home safety, orbit altitude behavior modification directed energy weapons - no dopamine spikes from secure life and energy metabolism, smartphones - nature walks and animal observation like how peat said he observed ants

you never see people talking about these topics, I may even make a thread about hem in one place bu the cia ai will just slide it, make your own community or join the church in Belize like one poster said (they are around 10 000 westerners) and have avoided locals for 500 years, low waste too... but making your own energy community is the best way to use intelligently what we have already created...

You’re right, but this thread is about women in mostly America who aren’t having kids and are scape goated for the fall of American society because they work their little graphic design jobs to pay rent and eat. Who wants to have their kid sacrificed as a vaccine pin cushion, or marry a dude who is going to take you to court if you get into a fight over what kind of tv everyone should be watching. The only people who should be having kids are those who are homesteading or able to provide an alternative community. The nuclear family living in a big city and going through the motions of what is fed to them as culture are just recreating the hellscape. The couple just relates through its consumer activities and fights over shared chores, with one side claiming only women should do certain things and the other claiming it’s a man’s job. Love is built through shared labor, mutual understanding and responsibility, and seeing the world through another persons eyes. There are hardly opportunities for that in the silo set up that is the current option for most people.

 

[LUH 3417]

I am sorry to hear that. In my defense, you did not bring up the context. There are issues in society and us men do know there is a predatory strain in male (and probably female too) sexuality. A lot of traditional mores are meant to protect women from predation and it is not obvious how we should arrange things to allow for open sexuality in society and protect the vulnerable.

I didn’t, you are right. I agree traditional mores protected women not just from predation but also from the unfair division of labor that happens in the nuclear family.

Ray replied to an email with the following, and I do think a clan structure would be much more conducive to healthy children. In clans not everyone reproduced, but everyone partook in the child’s development. This isn’t even that far back historically, my own father was breast fed by another woman in the village he was born in because his mother was quite old and weak when she gave birth to him. He has told me about how he felt he was raised by the village elders, who used jokes and games to teach children moral lessons. His parents were busy fishing/gardening and the rest of the town made sure he was taken care of.

[Dealing with grief of not having children]
“In small tribal villages, everyone functioned as family members, and the “extended family” function persisted longer in agricultural societies, but has disintegrated in recent times. The idea of wives and children as a man’s property blended with the doctrine of “genes,” so that ownership and inheritance of property/genes became a deep part of our culture’s ideology. I think the sense of sharing, participating in, contributing to social life is primary, and the sense of private ownership usually has harmful effects on the people involved.”

 

[MikeyFitz]

I didn’t, you are right. I agree traditional mores protected women not just from predation but also from the unfair division of labor that happens in the nuclear family.

Ray replied to an email with the following, and I do think a clan structure would be much more conducive to healthy children. In clans not everyone reproduced, but everyone partook in the child’s development. This isn’t even that far back historically, my own father was breast fed by another woman in the village he was born in because his mother was quite old and weak when she gave birth to him. He has told me about how he felt he was raised by the village elders, who used jokes and games to teach children moral lessons. His parents were busy fishing/gardening and the rest of the town made sure he was taken care of.

[Dealing with grief of not having children]
“In small tribal villages, everyone functioned as family members, and the “extended family” function persisted longer in agricultural societies, but has disintegrated in recent times. The idea of wives and children as a man’s property blended with the doctrine of “genes,” so that ownership and inheritance of property/genes became a deep part of our culture’s ideology. I think the sense of sharing, participating in, contributing to social life is primary, and the sense of private ownership usually has harmful effects on the people involved.”

Ray was historically and conceptually incorrect about agrarian societies raising children as a "village,"

Farms large enough to support families and communities are not tiny plots of ground in villages.

They are huge tracts of land outside of villages with relatively much smaller populations per square mile.

In other words, people lived relatively far apart from each other.

Farmers and their large families with many children worked those farms.

There was no "childhood" as we know it today

Children were just smaller, less capable versions of adults

Everyone, once old enough, worked at something as soon as they were able to walk.

They started with simpler, less physically demanding tasks.

Farmers and their wives did not drop their kids off at village "daycares" to have them watched for the day

Everyone in the family....mothers, grandmothers, older children, all helped to care for and teach the younger ones.

There was no "village" raising the children.

That is a myth and it's Ray's Communist utopian leanings coming out in his work.

He was dead wrong on that and I think he knew it was a fairy tale.

Care of the young was always done by extended nuclear families, not "villages."

That concept is difficult for us to envision today because we live in a world of small or nonexistent nuclear families.

Both of my parents were raised in homes with both sets of grandparents living in the home with them and assisted with the raising of children.

Because we live in a society that puts the elderly in homes and families move away from each other for the almighty dollar, we can't see this.

Nuclear families traditionally stayed together.

It is in this sick, industrial society where that concept seems so foreign that we imagine the "village" of relative strangers caring for our children.

That was not necessary in the past.. We had family for that.

ReplyForward

 

[LUH 3417]

Ray was historically and conceptually incorrect about agrarian societies raising children as a "village,"

Farms large enough to support families and communities are not tiny plots of ground in villages.

They are huge tracts of land outside of villages with relatively much smaller populations per square mile.

In other words, people lived relatively far apart from each other.

Farmers and their large families with many children worked those farms.

There was no "childhood" as we know it today

Children were just smaller, less capable versions of adults

Everyone, once old enough, worked at something as soon as they were able to walk.

They started with simpler, less physically demanding tasks.

Farmers and their wives did not drop their kids off at village "daycares" to have them watched for the day

Everyone in the family....mothers, grandmothers, older children, all helped to care for and teach the younger ones.

There was no "village" raising the children.

That is a myth and it's Ray's Communist utopian leanings coming out in his work.

He was dead wrong on that and I think he knew it was a fairy tale.

Care of the young was always done by extended nuclear families, not "villages."

That concept is difficult for us to envision today because we live in a world of small or nonexistent nuclear families.

Both of my parents were raised in homes with both sets of grandparents living in the home with them and assisted with the raising of children.

Because we live in a society that puts the elderly in homes and families move away from each other for the almighty dollar, we can't see this.

Nuclear families traditionally stayed together.

It is in this sick, industrial society where that concept seems so foreign that we imagine the "village" of relative strangers caring for our children.

That was not necessary in the past.. We had family for that.

ReplyForward

It seems to me you’re focusing on the difference between an extended family and genetic family. In your paradigm how do people living collectively avoid the incest taboo (and mental retardation that comes with reproducing with your tribe)

 

[MikeyFitz]

It seems to me you’re focusing on the difference between an extended family and genetic family. In your paradigm how do people living collectively avoid the incest taboo (and mental retardation that comes with reproducing with your tribe)

No, I'm focusing on the reality of an extended nuclear family rearing their own children.

Families still had lots of contact with other families such as at market, church, etc.

There was still plenty of interaction with other people where the traditional courting and marriage rituals took place.

 

[LUH 3417]

No, I'm focusing on the reality of an extended nuclear family rearing their own children.

Families still had lots of contact with other families such as at market, church, etc.

There was still plenty of interaction with other people where the traditional courting and marriage rituals took place.

It sounds like the medieval peasant culture which yes I agree is a lot better than whatever we have now

 

[MikeyFitz]

It sounds like the medieval peasant culture which yes I agree is a lot better than whatever we have now

You raise an excellent point about that system.

Were self-sufficient people actually peasants?

If they lived hand to mouth as tenant farmers or serfs then, yes, that could be less than a tick above slavery.

But maybe the powers that be who control the production of movies and TV and school text books want us to believe that living a self-sufficient agrarian lifestyle is a bad thing.

Maybe they want us to think that being their wage slaves in soul crushing desk jobs, herded into these cities, is paradise?

 

[LUH 3417]

You raise an excellent point about that system.

Were self-sufficient people actually peasants?

If they lived hand to mouth as tenant farmers or serfs then, yes, that could be less than a tick above slavery.

But maybe the powers that be who control the production of movies and TV and school text books want us to believe that living a self-sufficient agrarian lifestyle is a bad thing.

Maybe they want us to think that being their wage slaves in soul crushing desk jobs, herded into these cities, is paradise?

They lived a lot better because the land wasn’t sanctioned off yet and there were plenty of pasture raised pigs, people had small businesses like textiles and apothecaries (women too) where they bartered. Sylvia federici writes about this in Caliban and the witch.

 

[MikeyFitz]

They lived a lot better because the land wasn’t sanctioned off yet and there were plenty of pasture raised pigs, people had small businesses like textiles and apothecaries (women too) where they bartered. Sylvia federici writes about this in Caliban and the witch.

Excellent points.

Yes, living as a free person on the land may have had its stressors but it was probably a lot less stressful than the way most live today in the West.

The craftsmanship and creative abilities of the average person also must have been extraordinary.

I need to pick up that book by Syliva Federici.

 

[schultz]

Ray was historically and conceptually incorrect about agrarian societies raising children as a "village,"

Maybe he was wrong about that (I don't know enough about it) but it seems that hunter/gatherers and pastoral, or a combination of those things, lived more as communities. It seems to be a healthy way to live. Pygmies, Hadza, Maasai come to mind. Maybe Mongolian nomadic herding communities as well, and many other cultures around the world.

 

[Herbie]

The men in this thread are asking the burden of stopping overt sexualization of children and young girls to be placed on women, when it is men that sexualize girls and the unconscious patterning is imprinted from day one.

As mikey throwing fitz has illustrated, most men don’t love women (not even their daughters). Instead they see women as status symbols they can post pics of and show off. They don’t desire the actual person, they get ego gratification from other people approving or wanting that person, and of course the throw in massage and domestic slavery that comes along with inflating tiny fragile egos.

Did it ever occur to any of you that women don’t want to have children because they are connected to Mother Nature and nature being the cruel terrible unbiased force it is, realizes how awful the circumstances for reproducing are? Men blame women for ruining the species and not serving as baby dispensers and fornication devices. Perhaps we’ve just decided that skeevy creepy porn obsessed old men who immediately mention penis girth at any opportunity are not worthy fathers for our daughters.

I've witnessed this attempted possession of a women. It's true the man doesn't like the women at all, but is using aggression, highly exited emotions, delusion, fantacy, manipulation, cohersion, threats etc to possess her. They are either psychopathic, mentally ill, in denial homosexual or a combination of all imo.

 

[MikeyFitz]

I've witnessed this attempted possession of a women. It's true the man doesn't like the women at all, but is using aggression, highly exited emotions, delusion, fantacy, manipulation, cohersion, threats etc to possess her. They are either psychopathic, mentally ill, in denial homosexual or a combination of all imo.

I hate what's happened to you and other women.

It's sad and awful.

What has actually happened is a very free civilization was created with the goal of protecting women from the ancient dangers of capture, invasion, etc.

With all of that freedom and safety, some have used that as a vehicle for selfish individualistic endeavors, instead of concern for the tribe.

The tribe starts with families.

If you don't have families, you have no tribe and no nation.

Radical individualism is the problem.

 

[LUH 3417]

I hate what's happened to you and other women.

It's sad and awful.

What has actually happened is a very free civilization was created with the goal of protecting women from the ancient dangers of capture, invasion, etc.

With all of that freedom and safety, some have used that as a vehicle for selfish individualistic endeavors, instead of concern for the tribe.

The tribe starts with families.

If you don't have families, you have no tribe and no nation.

Radical individualism is the problem.

family (n.)​

early 15c., "servants of a household," from Latin familia "family servants, domestics collectively, the servants in a household," thus also "members of a household, the estate, property; the household, including relatives and servants," abstract noun formed from famulus "servant, slave," which is of unknown origin.

 

[LUH 3417]

I've witnessed this attempted possession of a women. It's true the man doesn't like the women at all, but is using aggression, highly exited emotions, delusion, fantacy, manipulation, cohersion, threats etc to possess her. They are either psychopathic, mentally ill, in denial homosexual or a combination of all imo.

Homosexuality is rampant in cultures where status is important. Most men with wives and children also have gay lovers in places like Saudi Arabia and Dubai. The ancient greeks (“birth of civilization”) were notoriously gay.

 

[MikeyFitz]

Homosexuality is rampant in cultures where status is important. Most men with wives and children also have gay lovers in places like Saudi Arabia and Dubai. The ancient greeks (“birth of civilization”) were notoriously gay.

I appreciate your opinions and you make a lot of good points.

However, when you make statements like these....."Homosexuality is rampant in cultures where status is important. Most men with wives and children also have gay lovers in places like Saudi Arabia and Dubai. The ancient greeks (“birth of civilization”) were notoriously gay." could you please provide links to studies or historical writings?

Without evidence, it's just all opinion, conjecture and gossip.

Let's keep this objective and factual so we can come up with solutions.

 

[LUH 3417]

I appreciate your opinions and you make a lot of good points.

However, when you make statements like these....."Homosexuality is rampant in cultures where status is important. Most men with wives and children also have gay lovers in places like Saudi Arabia and Dubai. The ancient greeks (“birth of civilization”) were notoriously gay." could you please provide links to studies or historical writings?

Without evidence, it's just all opinion, conjecture and gossip.

Let's keep this objective and factual so we can come up with solutions.

What a power play. It’s like asking the NIH to produce vaccine and autism studies. That’s the entire point, power functions subliminally, secretly, and in a way that isn’t explicit. There are plenty of sources on a huge portion of the population being gay in ancient Greece, if you’re interested you can look it up. Same goes for middle eastern men being gay, make some friends with rich people in dubai.