Rational passion and passionate reason
who is chatting on SOLO ChatThe Free RadicalPopular contentWho's onlineThere are currently 4 users and 16 guests online.
Online usersPollElection 2008: Who Will Win? Obama by a landslide 13% McCain by a landslide 23% Obama comfortably 11% McCain comfortably 23% Either narrowly 30% Total votes: 47
 Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell
 Economics In One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt
|
Survival of the 'unfittest' Submitted by Elijah Lineberry on Thu, 2007-09-06 18:44.
We are not living in a World of Men, of chaps who get stuck in and create things, who get richly rewarded for their efforts and who gain respect from those efforts. Instead we are living in a World of wimps, of bureaucrats, of girly-men who demand and expect to be rewarded for failure, incompetence and stupidity. In recent days there have been a few examples of this... The CEO who turned a $15 Billion company into an $8 Billion company and was paid $20 million for doing so over the years... This disgraceful incompetence, along with her Affirmative Action counterpart at Hewlett Packard, has proven why Women should never be given something that valuable to run! Then there are the moaning farmers in Britain, complaining because their subsidies were late! The most shocking example, however, is the wicked Communist activities of the Postal Workers Association where they break the law in tampering with mail, sabotage their employer, inconvenience customers...and are patted on the back for it! Just shocking!
( categories: )
|
User loginFeatured BookNavigationSyndicate  The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
 Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
|
Wow. You learn something
Wow. You learn something every day - even when you didn't want to.
Male lactation...
Is that what caused Bob to get 'bitch tits' in Fight Club?
No thanks Reed.
Waaaay Off Topic
Claudia -
Of course it is. Men don't possess breasts...
For an educational surprise... Google "male lactation".
Kids having their own desires
I am trying to teach Livy to yell, "Damn, double damn, triple damn, hell!" It's my favorite. Funny how kids do as they please though. I love TaeKwonDo, and Livy thinks it's boring. She prefers ballet, which I hated. Right now, I am wearing long hippy looking jeans, Chuck Taylors, and a Firefly t-shirt that has a picture of Mal and the words "Big Damn Hero." Livy is wearing a yellow sundress, fancy white sandals, and a big butterfly clip in her hair. Hooray for your friend for letting her son be himself. I want Livy to do the things she wants to do (from rugby to fashion modeling) passionately. I have my own passions, thanks.
Oh gyod.
I can only imagine how nervous American mothers must be watching their children do gym these days. So where did all the feminism of the last 30 years get them??! Your approach is the best one... and if they hurt themselves, yelling "fuck!" at the top of their lungs always helps. (But then Mummy will disapprove!)
A dear friend of mine has recently had to let her gorgeous, sensitive, 7 year old son follow his little heart's desire to play rugby (hard-out NZ style). He gets tackled full on, dragged through the mud, black eyes and bruised ribs. He loves it! My friend had to harden up her motherly instincts by way of just gritting her teeth and seeing the sheer glee on her son's face - fortunately, she's the type that had to get hard herself at a young age and his father is one to always laugh adversity in the face. He's a great kid and wants to be an All Black one day, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he is.
Claudia, I totally agree. I
Claudia, I totally agree. I am the snuggler, the kisser of booboos, and the hair fixer. (Also I am the ignorer of minor injuries unless Livys actually comes to me with them. Thus, she will fall flat on her face and hop up and keep playing without a thought.) David is the physical one, who wrestles with her, throws her around, gets ridden like a horse, etc. Both things are so important. Having a loving Mama with milk and comfort who can also let you have a rowdy Daddy is the ideal thing.
It amazes me how many moms are terrified of the things I teach their kids at gymnastics. A child falls off the bars; I hear a chorus of gasps from the moms; I laugh loudly and say, "Hold on next time, you silly goose!" Then all the kids laugh and have a good time and learn at least for a minute that they aren't fragile china dolls.
Kelly
Amen, Claudia.
Regarding your first post in this thread, Claudia, I share your disdain for the wussy, collectivist females of this world. One of my fondest memories is the onslaught of hate mail I received upon taking on feminists in one of my first shows.
This is a bit of a tangent, but I'm fascinated by the interplay between most females, particularly in the workplace: The strong ones are always treated venomously by their (attempted) peers, but they are my favorite types of clients. They get things done, they don't mince words, and I invariably get along with them splendidly.
Now if we just had more of them. Thankfully, however, they *do* exist.
Jennifer
-- Food Philosophy. Sensuality. Sass.
Hilton
Funny about Shopenhauer. He was a terrible misogynist.... and with good cause:
[Quoted from Wiki] While in Berlin, Schopenhauer was named as a defendant in an action at law initiated by a woman named Caroline Marquet. She asked for damages, alleging that Schopenhauer had pushed her. Knowing that he was a man of some means and that he disliked noise, she deliberately annoyed him by raising her voice while standing right outside his door. Marquet alleged that the philosopher had assaulted and battered her after she refused to leave his doorway. Her companion testified that she saw Marquet prostrate outside of his apartment. Because Marquet won the lawsuit, he made payments to her for the next twenty years. When she died, he wrote, "Obit anus, abit onus" (The old woman dies, the burden is lifted).
She deserved to be beaten within a millimeter of her life.
Reed:
I think a mother's care is especially important in the early years...
Of course it is. Men don't possess breasts and their peripheral vision is too limited.
I found the early years of influencing a vulnerable, little bundle of trusting, human potential, made from my own genes, profoundly life expanding. But after age seven, children just want to learn how to survive, and a father's objective practicality is so ideal if he has it - and if he has the patience to share it.
Observe these days, how many children of thirteen are still moping to Mummy to get sympathy over a little cut finger or bruised elbow, like they've got a god-given right to be immune from minor pain, and if they do experience it, they NEED attention from her. This unfortunate habit gets engrained very early. It's like a generation of children who are incapable of nurturing themselves through small disappointments.
from what I have seen men will not talk to babies until they can talk.
Maybe not, but if Mummies let them, they throw them in the air for sheer hijinx, whirl them around by one foot, sling them over a shoulder to the car in a sleeping bag, comfort them quickly in stronger, safer arms.
Women naturally talk to babies training them to speak and understand. If child raising were up to the men, we'd have a much less literate society.
No, we'd probably just have a society of young people who talked a lot less shit.
Linz, that was hilarious.
I betcha he'd find it funny too.
Hahaha!
Here's something funny too. And I'm Bush's cock-sucker.
Oh boy!
So representative. And so tragically American. Now let's wait for the DOHUTs to DOHUT.
This is what Ms S-Carolina really meant
Mitch, dont be such a mean SOB, this is what she actually meant.
I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the starless night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains.- - Robert Green Ingersoll
I'm with you Claudia,
"Feminine hypersensitivity makes me feel like beating them (how men can possibly find it "charming" is beyond me)"
Fuck yes!
Problem is, feminine hypersensitivity isn't confined to females. These god damn DOHUTs (Drop of the Hat Umbrage Takers) make me wild.
I read the stuff by Schopenhauer. Amusing, and while I don't agree with much/most of it, if he ever needed to back up his opinions, he could just show them this.
I
have actually been sipping Merlot...eagerly awaiting my dinner.
Apart from my dinner being a couple of hours late, it seems certain people have disappeared! ...(they all had a childish bunfight with each other earlier this evening, and are expecting me to take sides in the Samoan blood feud, gosh, fat chance of that!)
Gosh...it could turn out that I have to..ummmm...you know..ummmmmmm...make it myself
(and if that happens some people will be joining the diminishing ranks of the unemployed by tomorrow afternoon)
Um...
Elijah, how many olives have you had in your martinis tonight??
Reed...
Seconded, and I say that as a mamas boy.
Not to mention the argument is based on stereo type. You're discounting wussy fathers and butch mothers.
Claudia -I think on the
Claudia -
I think on the whole women can't even do mothering properly. If child raising were up to the men, we'd have a much more capable generation of children coming through, but alas, they're all micro-managed by super sensitive mummies who can't even let their offspring wander down to the dairy without coming close to a nervous collapse.
It's refreshing to see a lack of loyalty as opposed to the collectivism that I expect from Women
but I have to disagree with your point, I think a mothers care is especially important in the early years, from what I have seen men will not talk to babies until they can talk. Women naturally talk to babies training them to speak and understand. If child raising were up to the men, we'd have a much less literate society.
Oh
I am...any criticism should be directed towards me.
I said things I should not have...I am the villan, if anyone.
Me.
No one else...do not criticise others.
I didn't Elijah
Nor are you the villain any longer I think
Claudia actually admitted to some of her own kind being slightly edgy. For small victories like that we should thankfully say Amen.
Those kinds of admissions are priceless due to scarcity alone.
I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the starless night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains.- - Robert Green Ingersoll
No
No, No Hilton, do not get criticise Claudia.
I am the villan here...so it is me to have a beef with.
Funny you should say that
Claudia, have you ever read Schopenhauers take on woman?
By some coincidence a friend sent me this excerpt from some of Schopenhauers work recently. Now if that were Elijah I cant even imagine what "a chap" would have ended up looking like once you and Jennifer were done.
Personally I think the reason why so many woman fit your description can be traced to religious stereotyping, both Christian and Islamic...others say its just PMT.
If you have to look at historical evidence from the Celtic woman warriors right through to the asian cultures of today, one notes that many cultures spawn women who are strong independent proud and capable humans, rather than the throngs of whining simpering neurotics or asexual matriarchal bull dykes that are so prevalent today.
Now please remember ladies...the following was Schopenhauers work and I am not even vaguely connected to it in any way form or fashion, but as Ayn rand used to love saying," If the shoe fits you can wear it with compliments".
An abridged version of Arthur Schopenhauer's famous essay
On Women
Updated translation
The nature of the female
One needs only to see the way she is built to realize that woman is not intended for great mental or for great physical labor. She expiates the guilt of life not through activity but through suffering, through the pains of childbirth, caring for the child and subjection to the man, to whom she should be a patient and cheering companion. Great suffering, joy, exertion, is not for her: her life should flow by more quietly, trivially, gently than the man's without being essentially happier or unhappier.
Women are suited to being the nurses and teachers of our earliest childhood precisely because they themselves are childish, silly and short-sighted, in a word big children, their whole lives long: a kind of intermediate stage between the child and the man, who is the actual human being, ‘man.’ One has only to watch a girl playing with a child, dancing and singing with it the whole day, and then ask oneself what, with the best will in the world, a man could do in her place.
Natural weapons
In the girl nature has had in view what could in theatrical terms be called a stage-effect: it has provided her with superabundant beauty and charm for a few years at the expense of the whole remainder of her life, so that during these years she may so capture the imagination of a man that he is carried away into undertaking to support her honorably in some form or another for the rest of her life, a step he would seem hardly likely to take for purely rational considerations. Thus nature has equipped women, as it has all its creatures, with the tools and weapons she needs for securing her existence, and at just the time she needs them; in doing which nature has acted with its usual economy. For just as the female ant loses its wings after mating, since they are then superfluous, indeed harmful to the business of raising the family, so the woman usually loses her beauty after one or two childbeds, and probably for the same reason.
Female truth
The fundamental defect of the female character is a lack of a sense of justice. This originates first and foremost in their want of rationality and capacity for reflexion but it is strengthened by the fact that, as the weaker sex, they are driven to rely not on force but on cunning: hence their instinctive subtlety and their ineradicable tendency to tell lies: for, as nature has equipped the lion with claws and teeth, the elephant with tusks, the wild boar with fangs, the bull with horns and the cuttlefish with ink, so it has equipped woman with the power of dissimulation as her means of attack and defence, and has transformed into this gift all the strength it has bestowed on man in the form of physical strength and the power of reasoning. Dissimulation is thus inborn in her and consequently to be found in the stupid woman almost as often as in the clever one. To make use of it at every opportunity is as natural to her as it is for an animal to employ its means of defence whenever it is attacked, and when she does so she feels that to some extent she is only exercising her rights. A completely truthful woman who does not practice dissimulation is perhaps an impossibility, which is why women see through the dissimulation of others so easily it is inadvisable to attempt it with them. – But this fundamental defect which I have said they possess, together with all that is associated with it, gives rise to falsity, unfaithfulness, treachery, ingratitude, etc. Women are guilty of perjury far more often than men. It is questionable whether they ought to be allowed to take an oath at all.
Feminine charms
Only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex: for it is with this drive that all its beauty is bound up. More fittingly than the fair sex, women could be called the unaesthetic sex. Neither for music, nor poetry, nor the plastic arts do they possess any real feeling or receptivity: if they affect to do so, it is merely mimicry in service of their effort to please. This comes from the fact that they are incapable of taking a purely objective interest in anything whatever, and the reason for this is, I think, as follows. Man strives in everything for a direct domination over things, either by comprehending or by subduing them. But woman is everywhere and always relegated to a merely indirect domination, which is achieved by means of man, who is consequently the only thing she has to dominate directly. Thus it lies in the nature of women to regard everything simply as a means of capturing a man, and their interest in anything else is only simulated, is no more than a detour, i.e. amounts to coquetry and mimicry.
Absence of genius
Nor can one expect anything else from women if one considers that the most eminent heads of the entire sex have proved incapable of a single truly great, genuine and original achievement in art, or indeed of creating anything at all of lasting value: this strikes one most forcibly in regard to painting, since they are just as capable of mastering its technique as we are, and indeed paint very busily, yet cannot point to a single great painting; the reason being precisely that they lack all objectivity of mind, which is what painting demands above all else. Isolated and partial exceptions do not alter the case: women, taken as a whole, are and remain thorough and incurable philistines: so that, with the extremely absurd arrangement by which they share the rank and title of their husband, they are a continual spur to his ignoble ambitions. They are sexus sequior, the inferior second sex in every respect: one should be indulgent toward their weaknesses, but to pay them honour is ridiculous beyond measure and demeans us even in their eyes.
Insipid women-veneration
This is how the peoples of antiquity and of the Orient have regarded women; they have recognized what is the proper position for women far better than we have, we with our Old French gallantry and insipid women-veneration, that highest flower of Christian-Germanic stupidity which has served only to make women so rude and arrogant that one is sometimes reminded of the sacred apes of Benares which, conscious of their own sanctity and inviolability, thought themselves at liberty to do whatever they pleased.
Monogamy and 'filles de joie'
In our monogamous part of the world, to marry means to halve one's rights and double one's duties. But when the law conceded women equal rights with men it should at the same time have endowed them with masculine reasoning powers. What is actually the case is that the more those rights and privileges the law accords to women exceed those which are natural to them, the more it reduces the number of women who actually participate in these benefits; and then the remainder are deprived of their natural rights by just the amount these few receive in excess of theirs: for, because of the unnaturally privileged position enjoyed by women as a consequence of monogamy and the marriage laws accompanying it, which regard women as entirely equal to men (which they are in no respect), prudent and cautious men very often hesitate before making so great a sacrifice as is involved in entering into so inequitable a contract; so that while among polygamous peoples every woman gets taken care of, among the monogamous the number of married women is limited and there remains over a quantity of unsupported women who, in the upper classes, vegetate on as useless old maids, and in the lower are obligated to undertake laborious work they are constitutionally unfitted for or become filles de joie, whose lives are as devoid of joie as they are of honour but who, given the prevailing circumstances, are necessary for the gratification of the male sex and therefore come to constitute a recognized class, with the specific task of preserving the virtue of those women more favoured by fate who have found a man to support them or may reasonably hope to find one. There are 80,000 prostitutes in London alone: and what are they if not sacrifices on the altar of monogamy? These poor women are the inevitable counterpart and natural complement to the European lady, with all her arrogance and pretension. For the female sex viewed as a whole polygamy is therefore a real benefit; on the other hand there appears no rational ground why a man whose wife suffers from a chronic illness, or has remained unfruitful, or has gradually grown too old for him, should not take a second.
No argument about polygamy
There can be no argument about polygamy: it is a fact to be met with everywhere and the only question is how to regulate it. For who is really a monogamist? We all live in polygamy, at least for a time and usually for good. Since every man needs many women, there could be nothing more just than that he should be free, indeed obliged, to support many women. This would also mean the restoration of woman to her rightful and natural position, the subordinate one, and the abolition from the world of the lady, with her ridiculous claims to respect and veneration; there would then be only women, and no longer unhappy women, of which Europe is at present full.
Property and inheritance
In India, no woman is ever independent, but in accordance with the law of Manu, she stands under the control of her father, her husband, her brother or her son. It is, to be sure, a revolting thing that a widow should immolate herself upon her husband's funeral pyre; but it is also revolting that she should spend her husband's money with her paramours – the money for which he toiled his whole life long, in the consoling belief that he was providing for his children. Happy are those who have kept the middle course – medium tenuere beati.
In almost all nations, whether of the ancient or the modern world, even amongst the Hottentots, property is inherited by the male descendants alone; it is only in Europe that a departure has taken place; but not amongst the nobility, however.
That the property which has cost men long years of toil and effort, and been won with so much difficulty, should afterwards come into the hands of women, who then, in their lack of reason, squander it in a short time, or otherwise fool it away, is a grievance and a wrong as serious as it is common, which should be prevented by limiting the right of women to inherit. In my opinion, the best arrangement would be that by which women, whether widows or daughters, should never receive anything beyond the interest for life on property secured by mortgage, and in no case the property itself, or the capital, except when there cease to be male descendants. The people who make money are men, not women; and it follows from this that women are neither justified in having unconditional possession of it, nor fit persons to be entrusted with its administration. When wealth, in any true sense of the word, that is to say, funds, houses or land, is to go to them as an inheritance they should never be allowed the free disposition of it. In their case a guardian should always be appointed; and hence they should never be given the free control of their own children, wherever it can be avoided.
Up to 'Property and inheritance' the translation is by R. J. Hollingdale, from Arthur Schopenhauer: Essays and Aphorisms (Penguin 1970), then by T. Bailey Saunders.
I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the starless night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains.- - Robert Green Ingersoll
HWH.
I've never met a homosexual yet who isn't a misogynist to some degree.
Actually, it's no use asking me to defend my own sex. Feminine hypersensitivity makes me feel like beating them (how men can possibly find it "charming" is beyond me). By and large, I find them far too sensitive to be tolerated. Except a small few.
I think on the whole women can't even do mothering properly. If child raising were up to the men, we'd have a much more capable generation of children coming through, but alas, they're all micro-managed by super sensitive mummies who can't even let their offspring wander down to the dairy without coming close to a nervous collapse.
Ha
Yes, well...I have been told
My beef with that Gattung female is she snubbed me in the Christchurch Airport Koru Club once, despite her slobbering behaviour a couple of weeks earlier when I had been introduced to her as a professional share trader (and thereby helping to support the share price) ...b**ch!
The facts of Telecom do speak for themselves, however, with a substantial drop in the company value during her tenure.
(I once reduced a room of market analysts to raucous laughter by describing her as "the greatest destroyer of wealth since the bubonic plague!")
So, yes...apologies for any offence caused.
Now, as for those farm subsidies...
Just pulling your chain Jennifer
Judging from his previous posts I think I can safely suggest that you give a chap the benefit of the doubt.
He's obviously too smart to actually mean that...I hope, but should it become obvious a chap is a misogynist I suspect that Linz would put Jameson onto him, or better yet Claudia.
BTW, loved your promo vid...very professional and classy.
Hilton
I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the starless night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains.- - Robert Green Ingersoll
Actually ...
By and large, it's the women who inspire. Rand herself, for instance. They are the real men. Where has Elijah been through the trials and tumult? Jerking off, social-climbing in Remuera while others have been fighting the battle. 'Nuff said.
Get the blankets.
HWH, people who post things like this -- making blanket statements about "feral masses" and "Women" (with a capital "w") -- have forgotten about those tedious little things called facts. Each person should be judged by those, and those alone. That is how people of reason go about evaluating life; if she made a mess of the company, let's look at why and how.
By Mr. Lineberry's definition, one could extrapolate and thus say Kenneth Lay of Enron must have been a great CEO, because he was a man (!). Such ridiculousness, while it should probably be ignored, will not be tolerated -- at least as long as I'm breathing. And it sure as hell will not be invoked in the name of Rand.
Jennifer
-- Food Philosophy. Sensuality. Sass.
Elijah, I was gonna warn you I swear
Last night when reading this I thought of warning you lest Jennifer or Claudia read your comments. Too late it seems.
Give a chap a solid pasting ladies...he deserves it.
I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the starless night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains.- - Robert Green Ingersoll
Go, girl!
But I think he's just winding you up. Don't be a Joe-girl! Just deck him.
Bring on the cavemen.
This disgraceful incompetence...has proven why Women should never be given something that valuable to run!
You have something beyond nerve to post such a thing and claim any sort of respect for Ayn Rand. What happened to your worship of Leona Helmsley?
In a phrase: Fuck you.
Jennifer Iannolo, CEO
-- Food Philosophy. Sensuality. Sass.
Don't mention it, I was just
Don't mention it, I was just saving myself the effort of copy and paste
Edit: Maybe you can tell me how to do all the fancy smileys.
Oh
thanks for that! Reed,
I find some of these things confusing and had been wondering how to do that..so..yes, thank you
Elijah - To make your links
Elijah -
To make your links work you have to do them like this ...
<a href='http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=189&objectid=10461945'> Link is here </a>
Then it will be like this...
Link is here
Subsidy: When the government
Subsidy: When the government uses stolen money to pay for something that almost nobody wants.