My Reasons to Distinguish Between Male Humans and Male Animals
A woman gave me this feedback in an email:
"I don’t know if you are aware that some of your entries give the impression that you despise or even hate men; ... but it may deter a good man to get in touch with you."
Indeed, to deter someone with a wrong impression is about the last thing I would ever want. The only purpose of this blog is to find a decent compatible partner.
Therefore I want to made it explicitly clear: I distinguish two kinds of men, those who are predominantly animals, and those who are predominantly humans. The humans to me are those of categories 3 and 4 in entry 54.
I declare, that I consider the true human men as very precious and I am longing and impatient to find one to share my life with. But I do loathe and despise the male animals.
My reason for this distinction are based upon personal experience, not quantified anecdotal evidence and scientific evidence.
1. Personal experience.
When I was younger, I travelled alone through Mediterranean countries. I was interested in the culture and in the life of the people. So I was interested to talk to people. But it was just not possible with any man. I just was prey to their instincts. I attempted as much as I could to avoid triggering instincts. In fact, I did everything possible to make myself as antisexy as possible, wearing jeans or bermudas at least down to the knee and t-shirts three sizes larger than the jeans, nontransparent and closed to the neck. In spite of all my efforts, it has even happened to me to walk in bright day light through a park, and one of those animals walked up to me and whispered a sum of money into my ear. I spat in front of the feet of that animal.
I felt so disheartened, that there was just nothing, I could do to protect my dignity against being treated as a mere body. I felt so helpless, that I could do nothing to avoid triggering instincts.
Now I am old enough that the young animals ignore me, and the animals of my own age have reached a phase in their life, when their worst urges usually have calmed down. But if someone would have hurt my pride at a younger age, he still is the same animal with the same disgusting attitude to consider it acceptable to use a woman's body as a utility for his instincts. I do not want to get involved with a calmed down animal without knowing it, I want a human man, who never had the attitude to use a woman's body. Just as I would not want a liar, who only does not lie, because he cannot lie any more after having lost his voice.
2. Not quantified anecdotal evidence.
On dating sites, there is a choice of what kind of relationship people are looking for. Some sites include an option for 'intimate encounters', 'no strings fun' and similar expressions. It is very discouraging to see, that on those sites, the majority of men choose such options at least as an additional option while also searching for a long term serious relationship, if it is not their only goal. After noticing this, I started to get suspicious about the decency of the men on the more serious matching sites, where such disgusting options where not available. But in the absence of such options, how could I know, if they would choose one if available?
3. Scientific evidence.
http://www.elainehatfield.com/79.pdf
Clark/Hatfield: Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers
In two studies, when a woman approaches a stranger saying "I have been noticing you around campus. I find you to be very attractive." and "Would you go to bed with me tonight?", the majority of men agreed. In 1978, 75% did, in 1982, 69%. And those were university students, those who had the best chance to develop their rationality and to learn to respect women as equal intellectual beings.
After having said all this, I think I better avoid to be misunderstood. I defend my dignity as a person with a mind with fervor against animals attempting to degrade me to be used as an object.
But once I know that I am respected, accepted and acknowledged as a person and an equal partner, then I consider integrated intimacy of intellectual, emotional and physical closeness as natural. Intimacy has to develop in a truly human sequence, first as mindmates, then as emotional mates and as the last step as bedmates.
A woman gave me this feedback in an email:
"I don’t know if you are aware that some of your entries give the impression that you despise or even hate men; ... but it may deter a good man to get in touch with you."
Indeed, to deter someone with a wrong impression is about the last thing I would ever want. The only purpose of this blog is to find a decent compatible partner.
Therefore I want to made it explicitly clear: I distinguish two kinds of men, those who are predominantly animals, and those who are predominantly humans. The humans to me are those of categories 3 and 4 in entry 54.
I declare, that I consider the true human men as very precious and I am longing and impatient to find one to share my life with. But I do loathe and despise the male animals.
My reason for this distinction are based upon personal experience, not quantified anecdotal evidence and scientific evidence.
1. Personal experience.
When I was younger, I travelled alone through Mediterranean countries. I was interested in the culture and in the life of the people. So I was interested to talk to people. But it was just not possible with any man. I just was prey to their instincts. I attempted as much as I could to avoid triggering instincts. In fact, I did everything possible to make myself as antisexy as possible, wearing jeans or bermudas at least down to the knee and t-shirts three sizes larger than the jeans, nontransparent and closed to the neck. In spite of all my efforts, it has even happened to me to walk in bright day light through a park, and one of those animals walked up to me and whispered a sum of money into my ear. I spat in front of the feet of that animal.
I felt so disheartened, that there was just nothing, I could do to protect my dignity against being treated as a mere body. I felt so helpless, that I could do nothing to avoid triggering instincts.
Now I am old enough that the young animals ignore me, and the animals of my own age have reached a phase in their life, when their worst urges usually have calmed down. But if someone would have hurt my pride at a younger age, he still is the same animal with the same disgusting attitude to consider it acceptable to use a woman's body as a utility for his instincts. I do not want to get involved with a calmed down animal without knowing it, I want a human man, who never had the attitude to use a woman's body. Just as I would not want a liar, who only does not lie, because he cannot lie any more after having lost his voice.
2. Not quantified anecdotal evidence.
On dating sites, there is a choice of what kind of relationship people are looking for. Some sites include an option for 'intimate encounters', 'no strings fun' and similar expressions. It is very discouraging to see, that on those sites, the majority of men choose such options at least as an additional option while also searching for a long term serious relationship, if it is not their only goal. After noticing this, I started to get suspicious about the decency of the men on the more serious matching sites, where such disgusting options where not available. But in the absence of such options, how could I know, if they would choose one if available?
3. Scientific evidence.
http://www.elainehatfield.com/79.pdf
Clark/Hatfield: Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers
In two studies, when a woman approaches a stranger saying "I have been noticing you around campus. I find you to be very attractive." and "Would you go to bed with me tonight?", the majority of men agreed. In 1978, 75% did, in 1982, 69%. And those were university students, those who had the best chance to develop their rationality and to learn to respect women as equal intellectual beings.
After having said all this, I think I better avoid to be misunderstood. I defend my dignity as a person with a mind with fervor against animals attempting to degrade me to be used as an object.
But once I know that I am respected, accepted and acknowledged as a person and an equal partner, then I consider integrated intimacy of intellectual, emotional and physical closeness as natural. Intimacy has to develop in a truly human sequence, first as mindmates, then as emotional mates and as the last step as bedmates.
8 comments:
Your constant equation of "bad men" to animals is distressing. Men - and women - can be wicked, neurotic, sadistic, they can use sex to gain power; animals never do.
Their instincts are aimed at the survival of the species and their own. They mate and kill for that purpose only : to breed and to eat. No male animal will rape, belittle, deceit, the female of its species.
Your comparisons, whether they must be taken litterally or figuratively, induce a false and undeserved impression of the animal world.
Carnivorous animals are brainless killing machines. For the victim, it makes no difference, why she/he gets killed or wounded. I am sure that the mutilated victims of bear attacks when hiking in the mountains of the USA will readily agree. And if you have ever watched a cat play with a half wounded mouse killing it slowly and playfully over half an hour, this can well compete in instinctive cruelty with sadistic cruelty of humans.
Every hungry lion would kill and eat a potential prey, when it gets near him at the wrong moment.
The younger and stronger lion attacks and kills the alpha lion, takes over his harem and kills all the cubs of his predesessor.
Doing this by mere instinct does not make animals saint innocents, but robots for causing suffering to the victims.
Only the instinct driven men with no rational restraint kill and rape, while the more evolved, more human, would not. Rape, deceit, belittling of females is nothing more than a more complex and elaborated way of the instinct of men in their attempt to breed.
Human men in civilized countries at least know the rules and the punishment in the case of transgression.
About Humans and Animals :
Il est bien loin le temps ou l’on comparait les animaux à des machines sans esprit. Intelligence, pensées, émotions, conscience sont bien présents dans le monde animal. La plupart des scientifiques s’accordent sur le fait qu’il n’y a entre le monde animal et l’homme que des différences d’expression. L’équipement fondamental est partagé mais s’exprime différemment selon le degré d’évolution. J’ajouterais que c’est sans doute le cas au sein de chaque espèce : il y a des hommes chez qui « l’animalité » s’exprime davantage, comme des animaux qui montrent beaucoup « d’humanité »… Les dernières études des éthologues les plus renommés, J Goodall, Franz de Waal vont toutes dans ce sens. Il ne s’agit pas de dire ici que tout est rose dans le monde animal. Mais plutôt de dire que tout est là et que parfois, l’homme pourrait d’ailleurs s’en inspirer. C’est notamment ce que met en évidence Franz De Waal dans son dernier ouvrage, « l’âge de l’empathie : leçons de la nature pour une société plus solidaire ». En montrant que la compassion est une caractéristique fondamentale du comportement dans de nombreuses espèces, Franz De Waal remet en cause les théories du gène égoïste qui ont poussé les néodarwinistes a présenter la compétition comme le moteur essentiel de l’évolution. Si la compétition est un outil, utile dans certains cas, l’empathie est une base pour le développement de la société animale et …. Humaine.
Signé Dr Beck vétérinaire, éthologue.
There is one crucial, fundamental difference between animals and those humans, who deserve to be truly called human: Humans can consciously perceive themselves as individuals, for whom to breed would be detrimental, and they are capable to consciously decide not to breed.
Animals breed by instinctive compulsion without an option to choose. If they do not breed themselves, then they at least help to raise the offspring of bearers of closely related genes.
Luckily enough, I am backed up in this by Leroi, (source in entry 58):
"We alone among the animals can step beyond our biology. Perhaps it is this, that truly makes us human."
Since I PERSONALLY value non-breeding as superior to breeding, I logically also value a brain with the capacity to rationally refrain from breeding as superior to a brain, that is automatically driven by instinct to breed. Since humans have the superior brain, therefore I value humans are superior to animals.
These are my personal opinions in my personal attempt to find a likeminded partner with a non-breeder's brain.
In the past 50 years, human population has increased from more or less 2,5 billions to (soon to come) 7 billions. It doesn't look as if that famous brain has been much at work in that department ...
In nature,many animals curb their fecondity to the state of their environment. I agree that they probably don't do it after careful consideration of the circumstances but that they obey their clever instinct. Men, on the other hand, is not even capable of that - I suspect because their brain interferes with their instincts.
Conapol, this debate is a dead end and futile. You are attempting to refute my personal world view, as if I were attempting to preach to the world and convince anybody. There just is no general right or wrong about a person's identity and basic attitudes.
Again, this is a personal blog written for the only purpose to find a partner, a mindmate, who has a brain wired in a way, that he by his own identity and basic attitudes agrees with me and wants to get to know me.
I make no claims that anything in this personal blog is absolutely or generally true.
But there is a man somewhere, who has a brain wired like mine and this blog it for him, I write it to find him.
Metaphorically, in the lottery of life, I was lucky to have a brain, which is so little driven by instincts, that it spared me the folly to breed. I am grateful for this. I am grateful to have a brain, that allowed me to perceive myself as an individual and not as a particle of something more important than myself, no matter, if that something is called nature, the eternal genes or a religious system.
My perception of myself as an individual determines my basic attitudes and values, like the one to value rationality more than instincts and to consider the freedom from being driven by instinct as the ultimate humanity. I am not generalizing my own values as being valid for others.
As an analogy, I love Mariachi music, but I perceive Opera as acustic torture. This is my personal taste, and I do not generalize it. For people, who like it, Opera is great art. There is no right or wrong, any debate, if Opera or Mariachi were bettter, is futile. But that does not stop me from personally considering a CD with Opera as a piece of garbage, while I would get angry, if someone would carelessly scratch my precious Mariachi CDs.
It is precisely my identity as an individual and not as a particle, that causes me to feel no mission to convince anybody of anything. I reserve convincing to finding an agreement with a committed partner in the case of conflict. Even if I had knowledge and wisdom to preach, I have not the least reason to do it. My goal is to find the happiness with a mindmate, I have no intention to save or improve the world. I want to live in this world in a way, that I can justify to my own values. I want a fair exchange of giving and receiving. Beyond this, I have nothing to give to the world.
I thought you wanted comments on your blog. But you are right to declare this discussion closed : I intended to write you in that sense but you were quicker. Not that I find it futile at all, but it developed from a first comment arising from your entry n°55 into something which is not linked to it any longer.
Maybe I sounded a bit harsh. I do appreciate comments, as long as they are in the framework of the purpose of this blog, that means as long as they supply me with food for thoughts about aspects to refine, enlarge, improve in the explanation of my world view. But I am not inclined to defend it, and this is, were this particular discussion was leading to.
Being more rational then driven by instinct is a part of my core identity. I perceive the praise of the superiority of instincts over reason indirectly as a devaluation of what is my personality. It certainly was not meant to have this effect.
People, who are incompatibly different from me, are everywhere. It is a special kind of deep loneliness to be lost between mental aliens. Christians can go to church and find likeminded believers. Breeders can go to the playground to find other breeders. Likeminded people for me are scarce. Therefore this blog is meant to find a mindmate and maybe likeminded friends, I was attempting to keep away from mental aliens.
Post a Comment