Polarization
I'm feeling a bit mad today, so this has to go on the phantom site. It's not like I feel I'm going crazy as much as I feel I am being driven to extremes. I thought Topsy-Turvy explained everything to precision. It definitely freed something in my mind. I can't say it will catch anyone that hasn't been reading along thoroughly and accepting what I have been saying.
After further thought, I think I have to put this on LP. I need help and that seems the best place to get it. This holds some promise, like a loving song.
I have even gone so far as to say I finally feel like a real man.
I still remain boggled by the complexity of getting to the heart of the matter: Loving Coitus and what the absence of it does to the male gender. I have to shake my head.
It seems so simple to me, once a person accepts that the surface issues are camouflage that the race uses to avoid the realization that we are not Human until we really learn to love. Of course, that is not how the prehuman race looks at it. They see the act that creates life as dangerous to study closely and, thus, unalterable.
While I say it seems simple, that is poorly stated. I spent the last fifteen years convincing myself beyond the shadow of a doubt. I keep trying to get a handle on how to get everyone from here to there. Maybe I should say I keep trying to find a way to get anyone from here to there. I am still not certain I have gotten anyone there. Sometimes I think that no one believes it is that simple for us to rid ourselves of that which precludes us from becoming sane.
So, to polarization. I've started thinking that maybe a chart showing the connections stemming from the male gender's madness might do. Picture a chart with arrows pointing to various secondary effects from the starting point of a male gender in which the individuals feel an inferiority complex from everyone else, including their own gender.
My question, from this point, would be whether the other toxic characteristics should be before or after the the starting point. In other words, should the paranoia, stupour, misogyny and other toxic characteristics of the toxic gender be considered secondary or primary?
The polarization that is certainly the most significant result (at the pointy ends of the arrows). It leads to any distinguishable differences between humans becoming bones of contention. It is certainly a secondary effect. Would I put polarization itself as a secondary effect and examples (they are endless) of polarization as tertiary and quaternary effects? Is the polarization of the two genders a special case? Is misogyny a secondary effect or just the first and primary example of polarization? Is the male paranoia another secondary effect, though it is tied so closely to the polarization of humanity?
Race polarization is certainly a primary one. But, how do I convey that all of it is created by the paranoia of the male gender. Which leads to another issue. Polarization is accepted by many men and women. How do I convince anyone and everyone that it is the male gender's madness that causes it all? That the woman's insanity is derivative.
It is so clear to me because I learned to look for the big picture. To me, when I look at the general characteristics of the two genders, it is so clear. But, that is preceded by the premise that Loving Coitus is what drove the male gender mad. Not their desire for sex. Not testosterone. Not their greater strength. Not being the 'breadwinner'. They all contribute but they are secondary effects in a different dimension.
I think there are many women that don't like to consider the influence men have had on their existence for many millennia. They want to feel independent of it all. I guess the interconnectedness of it all is what stumps many.
Which leads to a further complication. Many millennia of being a race that is essentially sentient but still dragging the chain of the animal's stupour along with it.
Very frustrating to attempt to unravel it all on my own to the point where someone can comprehend and accept it all. Once again, I have to ask. Am I the only one thinking here? It is so easy to get caught up in the daily insanity. I have had to force myself to ignore it all in order to get here.
I hope I have more to say here, but I am not so sure.
Let me try a different tack. If you look closely at the most major split in humanity, that is, the conservatives and liberals, the most significant breach is between those that believe alternatives to coitus are essential and those that believe coitus is the only way to perform sex. That is the wedge that the conservatives can rely on. There is, of course, more to it, but that is the bone of contention we continue to fight about, first and foremost, for three millennia.
I just can't figure out why the human race is resisting attaining its sentient state of Humanity. I know it is so easy to block it out and continue with the antics of getting all involved with the surface issues. It is just so difficult for me to believe that everyone would rather distract themselves with the horrors of prehumanity rather than resolve them.
I have repeatedly made what I thought were conclusive arguments just to see them seemingly brushed aside. That is another bit piece of it. I don't even know if I am getting through to anyone or not. There are a number of hits from different sources that seem to maintain a presence but are they advocates or blind mice?
Maybe what is missing is tracking the insanity back to the male gender. It staggers me but maybe it's not clear to everyone just how toxic the male gender is. Or, maybe, it is just brushed off due to the deeply embedded fear of confronting the lack in coitus for a sentient race? Or, maybe, it's the instilled fear that there is nothing to be done about it that hits home?
It is just another big picture issue. I expect anyone that misses the toxicity of the male gender attributes it to specific, high profile individuals of the gender as compared to those that keep some semblance of their humanity. The remnants are always there. Some men intentionally mask them. Some have actually learned to cope with them in various ways. The best are those that find some way to share. But, the taint is always there and apparent, if one looks closely enough.
The one that is always present is men's inability to open themselves up completely. It is not natural for a sentient being to be so closed off. It is a taint that cannot be removed until Loving Coitus becomes real for anyone interested in coitus.
I guess there are some that are completely sane because they fulfill Loving Coitus. Even then, though, I wonder. Are the still tainted by the demented state of the rest of their gender/
AI
AI is really quite fascinating for unearthing the paradigms of nonsense that remain. If we ever become wholly Human, it may become a way in which to attempt to root out the nonsense that remains.
I had a conversation with an AI. I asked it why so many couple's sexual engagements did not include orgasms for both. It gave me some folderol about cultural biases and religious beliefs. Which may be the best evidence that we are lying to ourselves. It is directly from the mouths of humans that AI learns.
I really wish I had followed up and told it that it was wrong and asked it to correct itself. I expect I would have had to follow up with explaining the real situation.