It's attractive in women in its own right.. if vulnerable implies shy, modest and demure and not bitter, delusional and feminist. And she'll tolerate vulnerability in him if he's established prior masculine cred.
Yes, and it's because it's an exception for men to feel this way. Whereas women, being generally watery and touchy feely, don't actually succumb to romance when it appears.. to talk of emotion, feeling and love all the time is the way to devalue these things.
There are also many things a man may lay down his life for: his Queen, his country, his wife, his children, his community.. women would sacrifice everyone and everything to save herself with the exception of her children. They're less romantic and do not have noble aspirations and ideals and this is essentially because, being of higher reproductive value and the carrier of life, she values herself above all of creation(cue: reality-illiteracy, selfish subjectivity, solipsism etc..).
Anyway, a woman in pure love is about as romantic as a beta male dating a woman he quite likes.
Cilvisation is art in the truest sense. It is man's protest to be something above and beyond the nature of his environment.. and it never lasts. Civilisation is mans' greatest tragedy.
Civilisation comes about from shared ethics and shared ways of life(the external motivators)and the functional capacity for organisation that this allows. Over time the prosperity of the civilisation leads to diversity as it expands into ever more alien territories - of the mind and the physical - the diversity breaks the bonds of the civilisation and creates a novel decadence which ultimately destroys the civilisation's capacity to function and organise. This completes the tragedy.
I suppose to the rebellion against religion just means less to mm generation. All the Atheist critiques just sound incrediby cliche and hollow.
To believe is easier than to think? Sure, because today's people are a bunch of deeply-minded philosophers and are not just a collection of apathetic, shallow-thinking hedonists where all ethics are a relative matter of convenience.. Just open your eyes to what our Atheist society actually is. We're not deeper and more thoughtful than our ancestors - It is the absolute contrary - so yes, cliche and hollow.
They're born savage. And only through civilisation(which religion was an indispensable of)does humanity become greater than the sum of its parts. From the perspective of functional civilisation it is not incorrect to view people to be born sinners.
Within a week of the fiat currency going under we'll get to see how much better people in the west are for losing their religion. I think we'll resort to butchery and cannibalism before, and under less privation, than our Christian ancestors would have done.
Not really, religion anchors the ego by creating a perspective upon and sense of place in existence, and for all the flaws of Western society I would not say that one of these flaws is a lack of ego.
We have Liberalism, non-judgementalism and solipsism in abundance... We have all these modern beliefs that remove the individual from standards of merit, which is essentially because the wetsern individual views themselves as godlike and impervious to the criticism of others and immune to aspects of reality which clash with their own self-interest.
True, she is just a friend. However, if she wants to be more than friends she will, in open disregard of the facts, misremember every detail of any gesture you ever made if this supports her delusions of a committed relationship.
Of course, this flies in the face of the feminist malaise that was once glorious and bountiful civilisation where the norm is for Mr Herb to wine & dine her for weeks only for her to turn around and say that they're just friends - completely ignoring his displays of commitment whilst extracting the maximum resources - but I buy her a bag of skittles and she treats it like a wedding ring.
Remember, facts, objectivity, truth.. all mean nothing to women. Everything is emotional and subjective to her, every fact is a mere invention of her feeling.
He's not a patriot and he is a traitor.. technically. Although, I don't regard unblinking loyalty to the Liberal state as patriotism(most times the contrary), on this issue I agree with them. Security is not something to be lax over considering the context of the meltdown of civilisation.
And I don't appreciate the paranoid mewlings of the knownothing citizen that can't stand the idea of the government knowing what they do, just the thousands of people they continually beg for attention on facebook, myspace and twitter.
Obstinance_Works Forum Posts (3,514)
RE: So what do you want......
HotNot Fat
Not Feminist
Forgiving
Smart
Coordinated