{from FB} Full masculine Shadowwork

[Keric Travis den Breeijen]

Shadow work can't stop at recognising and dialectically challenging the Shadow of singular masc/'yang' (Shadow masculinity). It's incomplete, and risks relapsing, until we challenge the /*collective/* Mascul*ism*'s Shadow:

Rageful &or resentful Antifeminism. And that shadow has more recent memes/re-codings, too.

　
Just like the singular fem/'yin' (femininity) and its collective counterpart, FeminISM, both have toxic (disintegrated) and beneficent (integrated) iterations, with the disintegrated tied inexorably to the integrated, the existence of a beneficent masculinity and Masculism presupposes the risk of a disintegrated version of both.

　
There's one thing that happens when men hyperfocus on the *toxic* collective Feminism and don't acknowledge the beneficent force-- and thus rage when they believe they've seen an instance of a toxic singular femin/*ity*\. This one thing is Shadow-Masculism's co-creation of a mutual Perpetrator and building an arbitration-point around which men bond with other men, feeling (cheap) "empowerment":

A coercive and abusive Matriarchy. {I personally like Matriarchs and Patriarchs, and believe that toxic 'Riarchy'ies aren't leadership material at all.} The next risk is projecting this nemesis onto singular instances of toxic feminity that in instance have no particular conspiracy with Big Bad FeminISM.

　
The final stage of a disintegrating Masculine is self-victimising singular masculinities adopted in resentment of a narrow view of Feminism and a conspiratorial view of femininity in general, eventually resenting healthy-and-powerful femininity, and further still leading to the Perpetrator'isation of a truly healthy masculinity's refusal to trash all of Feminism.

　

The absolute entrenchment of this toxic MasculISM reaches finality as thus:

More and more men take statements from "awake" women as license to blame things on Feminism-- nevermind how that assumes that women with agency somehow don't have the choice of stupidity-- and forward those statements as proof that, furthermore, **Pomo** Is The Worst Thing Ever And Nothing More.

　

　
Let's face it, the rage against Pomo is a facsimile and diversion of Shadow-Masculism's resentiment against Feminism, and now also merging into resentiment of feminine agency itself in the most disintegrated cases.

　
The knee-jerk reaction to Pomo (disintegrated feminine Archetype) is the same as the knee-jerk reaction to Feminism-- likewise, the same negative archetype.

Part of recognising *OUR* part in the mirrored self-victimisation is to recognise when we've simply displaced our rage onto a less contentious target.

Men will be chewed-out for putting anti-Feminism into words. Almost no one will become viciously offended if one puts anti-Postmodernism into words.

So, this is a cowardly function, that prevents 'recognising our part in self-victimisation'.

The pro-Pomo (but "awake" nonetheless) counterpart to this displacement is the recent in-vogue shift from "Patriarchy" as the Big Bad Nemesis, now moved on to indict "The Kyriarchy".

　
　
Both need to be resolved bc there's already mountains of rationalisations for Rage Against The Postmodernism as there are for Rage Against The Kyriarchy.

If we expect women to "step up" in order to be allies for egalitarianism, and recognise and speak with self-awareness of their rage, displacements, projections, rationalisations and manipulations, we have to do the same for ours.

Recognise when we're scapegoating (anti-Pomo) and self-handicapping (anti-Feminism), show up and recognise that "Pomo" is being used partially as code to transfer the meme from away from Feminism to another morphemic symbol-code.

　

Displacing rage is not "moving through it", no matter how substantiated the argument is for its own sake, no matter how many Smart People justify the unowned, unnoticed rage, no matter how many cognitive fallacies you can count from the Big Bad scapegoat collective.
　

Replace "The Patriarchy" with "Feminism" and they're identical self-victimisation complexes.

Add "All of Postmodernism" and suddenly Masculism becomes MORE SELF-VICTIMISING than toxic Feminism.

It becomes identical to "Anti-Kyriarchy". Which I think we can all agree is a step backward.

[Alexander Bard]

Dear Keric

I'm sorry but I find this whole pseudodialectical infinite division infantile at best and outright idiotic at worst.

Clumsily throwing loads of various opinions into one box and then attaching "a personality" onto that box that is then "toxic" or something else meaninglessly derogatory brings no benefits to any debate whatsoever. It is also not based on facts but rather on somebody's highly personal temporary feelings. That's not debating. That's just posturing at best and emty attention-seeking at worst.

What is real is 1. humanity and 2. humanity's two genders and 3. a small minority of androgynous acrchetypes in between these two genders (usually at their best helping the other two communicating).

Now let's debate that factual situation if we like. But skip this nonsense about "toxicity" back and forth. We must not let the Syntheism forum deteroriate into the ridiculous hyperlabeling that other forums like Metamodernism killed themselves doing. Labels in themselves have no factual truth to them, they can only at best represent. And labels are beyond good and evil. So if you want to get rid of "toxicity", then skip the pomo label "toxivity" in itself first. Then, seek and speak truth and not positioning. So as to serve humanity and not your attention-seeking ego. OK?

Best intentions

Alexander

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

[Fanny Norlin]

I liked your post Keric as it, just like the interview with Louise, shines light on important shadows. However I also agree with Alexander about the infinite loop. It becomes a bit comical realizing that you are angry at "angry women" who are teaming up with "angry men" who are angry at the "angry feminists".

I think what we need in general is to not be so fucking sensitive about anger ;) and just see it for what it is - a release and a call out of “shadows”. We are looking at polarities here, polarities always have "shadows" (depending on perspective) when unbalanced (and they always are, but can be more or less) - which anger usefully points is for us.

The point of debate is pointing out strengths and weaknesses - a useful process, so let's see through the emotions and look at what useful information we can find. Then I say leave the debate behind and start prototyping the truth you believe in. And if one has to release some anger before engaging in debate or prototyping, go for it, preferably screaming it out alone or with people who know that one is just releasing. 

/Fanny

[Jonatan Bäckelie]

”Prototyping the truth you believe in”

Now there’s a wonderfully inspiring imperative if I ever heard one!

/J

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

SUBSECULAR.COM - A Music & Philosophy Interface

[Tom Knox]

What does toxicisity even mean in this context? There's so many terms
thrown around. Something toxic is poisonous. What is it poisoning
what? How is it poisoning? When something has been poisoned how do we
know it is? Isn't something poisoned dead already? I think it's a
hopelessly vague metaphor here.

I have no problem with old timey 70'ies feminism. Back then women
where in a much too small box and (needlessly) socially prevented from
flourishing. It was good to tell women to stop being what they were
being back then, and dare to break free and do stuff women rarely did.
It was great what they did, and we (both men and women) have every
reason to be grateful.

But that was then. I think it's safe to say that 70'ies feminists won
that war. The sexists lost. But the old timey feminists are still
fighting a war that they've won. Using the same rhetoric. The problem
is of course that women (in the west) are today free to do pretty much
whatever they want. Nobody is in their way, except themselves (and the
basic realities of just making life work for anybody). What is keeping
back women today from being astronauts, firefighters and adventurers
is mostly their desires. A lot of women are fine with not being
astronauts or firefighters. Just like most men aren't too hot about it
either. So the miltant 70'ies feminists are increasingly coming across
as silly. We need a new type of feminism. One better adapted to the
new reality.

I don't really care what name we give it. I think feminism is a
perfectly fine label. We're today already qualifying what type of
feminism we mean today. when we talk about it. Anybody talking about
feminism in general terms while talking about specific things usually
have no clue what they're talking about.







Tom Knox
Tom Knox IT

Tel: +46 70 1800 999

>> email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

>> To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.
>
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Syntheism" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

[Alexander Bard]

Dear Fanny

100% agreement with you. You just expressed it more politely than myself. Well done.

The toxicity vocabulary is just toxic in itself and therefore self-contradictory. And feelings are not of interest in a public debate that desires to succeed and proceed. Which is at least what Syntheism is all about. Spiritual growth and development.

So let's discuss facts. But ignore feelings as feelings are ultimately every grown-up person's own responsibility. How other people react emotionally to my well intended pronouncements is after all their and not my nor anybody else's responsibility. Our only shared mission is to foster every one of us to move from intantility to adulthood. What we call "adultification" in men's work and women's work.

So instead of discussing toxicity in an infinite loop towards the bottom, let's discuss proper rites of passage cultures.

Here is a perfect starting point: https://ritesofpassageinstitute.org/

Best intentions

Alexander

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

I identify as a feminist Anthropologist.

A very controversial form of feminism among mainstream feminists.

Feminist Anthropology challenges the notion that women's oppression is universal. 

It also challenges the notion that feminine and masculine are cultural constructs.  Part of it is a cultural construct, but certain things are feminine and masculine across cultures, which entails there may be some biology to it.  There are also people who are in-between like the Berdache of the Navajo, who's job in the tribe is to give men advice in their marriages. 

As well mainstream Anthropology which is based much on Karl Marx will often define a division of labor as innately unequal.  While there are cultures such as the Ohlone whose ceremonies I frequent, who see themselves as maintaining equality through a division of labor.

To oversimplify something and say that different roles mean that the roles are unqual, is just childish and lazy thinking.  Equality does not mean the same, and in order to achieve equality, we must approach each individual differently according to their different wants and needs.  Otherwise, especially in an American context, why bother fighting for paid maternity leave?

Oh, but I am probably just mansplaining at this point!  I will go check my privilege.  😂

Kenneth

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

[竜虎風森]

 I'm not sure how my statement came across as advocating for gender neutrality or androgyny.

  We have 'camps' of ppl choosing to let resentful hostility get the best of them, so my addressing that is in no way "toxic". Which also means that the only people I was criticising were the ppl who self-victimise based on gender.

  These groups exist whether I like it or not. So they'll be irreconcilable (unnecessarily) until both groups actively address-- perhaps gingerly, sometimes firmly-- self-victimisation in all its forms, inside and out of their movements.

---------------------------------------*****

 Toxic, as I defined it, is hostile, self-victimising resentiment. I didn't state that definition discreetly, but I found it clear that I was using the phrase "self-victimising, resentful" interchangeably with "toxic".

It's clear that "toxic" is a buzzword.

  Because of this, my attempt was to use it agnosticly in the general at first.  Then to focus solely on anyone who self-victimises, and then focus specifically on resentful self-victimisers who fail to see their own self-victimisation/resentiment, yet are completely apt to seeing self-victimisation and resentiment in their arbitrarily-designated out-group.

I'm not going to give credence to the Buzzword'ification of common adjectives like 'toxic'.

****---------------------------------------

I think we can agree that resentiment and self-victimisation are social, cultural poison/toxins. If I said the word "poisonous", I don't think I would've been misinterpreted.

  The "social poison" found within some adherents-- not all-- in the collective-Masculism{s}

 (anti-Pomo+ Pomo-skeptical+ anti-Feminism+ Feminism-skeptical dissenters) is that:

  Some adherents' good faith toward their own arguments are-- from my experience-- directly proportional to their *bad faith* toward anyone who highlights in-group self-victimising & resentiment.

  By calling it out, I'm already prototyping the change I believe is necessary in fraternal spaces: fostering in-group self-awareness of interior self-victimising, resentiment and hostility. Along with verbal accountability in those who are unawaredly hostile.

  As long as there are feminine ppl and masculine ppl who are still locked into mutual, agonised resentiment toward one another, they will poison the well of their respective movements.

  So these specific "bad apples" should at minimum be expected to turn the camera lens back on themselves to mitigate their damage and show accountability.

[竜虎風森]

  I said nothing about nature (biological) or nurture (social construction), so it's clear that everyone here other than Fanny transferred their pet peeves onto me.

Notice in each of the others' responses,  there are unsubstantiated conflations between my words and *their personal* notions of Pomo Baddies.

  It's become a witch-hunt. Whack-a(n)-(alleged)-Pomo.

Which is, in my estimation, a redirection of resentiment-charged Anti-(*Those*)-Feminists.

------------------------------------

I pointed out what some ppl are (unwittingly) doing and saying that can eventually delegitimise their allies.

Y'all interpreted it as fixative and Bad Pomo due to one word you misinterpreted.

I spoke only of extant groups who have actively structured themselves, and specific ppl in those groups.

Somehow, it was interpreted as a social-constructionist argument. I wasn't speaking ontologically, so that interpretation is impossible.

-----------------------------------

Whoever it was that made the facetious "jab" about male privilege and mansplaining:

That wasn't a joke. That came across as passive aggressive hostility in its worst form... "It was funny, not hostile."

I used the word "privilege" exactly Zero times, and was applying my critique equally to men and women.

You chose to see accusations in this situation. That is paranoia and agonism, which can only foster resentment and already comes from a place of Perpetrator vs Wrongly-accused.

Again, no one dare point out that infantile position. But assume the person pointing it out is infantile themself.

And look how those assumptions had no referents within my actual words.

Total double standard, total Kevlar against the suggestion of self-awareness.

Please don't use word-count to dismiss these last two emails.

There were so many sweeping, egregious mischaracterisations & misattributions necessary for me to unpack, of course it took a hot minute to respond.

On 10 Feb 2018 9.04 PM, "竜虎風森" <ryuu...@gmail.com> wrote:

 I'm not sure how my statement came across as advocating for gender neutrality or androgyny.

  We have 'camps' of ppl choosing to let resentful hostility get the best of them, so my addressing that is in no way "toxic". Which also means that the only people I was criticising were the ppl who self-victimise based on gender.

  These groups exist whether I like it or not. So they'll be irreconcilable (unnecessarily) until both groups actively address-- perhaps gingerly, sometimes firmly-- self-victimisation in all its forms, inside and out of their movements.

---------------------------------------*****

 Toxic, as I defined it, is hostile, self-victimising resentiment. I didn't state that definition discreetly, but I found it clear that I was using the phrase "self-victimising, resentful" interchangeably with "toxic".

It's clear that "toxic" is a buzzword.

  Because of this, my attempt was to use it agnosticly in the general at first.  Then to focus solely on anyone who self-victimises, and then focus specifically on resentful self-victimisers who fail to see their own self-victimisation/resentiment, yet are completely apt to seeing self-victimisation and resentiment in their arbitrarily-designated out-group.

I'm not going to give credence to the Buzzword'ification of common adjectives like 'toxic'.

****---------------------------------------

I think we can agree that resentiment and self-victimisation are social, cultural poison/toxins. If I said the word "poisonous", I don't think I would've been misinterpreted.

  The "social poison" found within some adherents-- not all-- in the collective-Masculism{s}

 (anti-Pomo+ Pomo-skeptical+ anti-Feminism+ Feminism-skeptical dissenters) is that:

  Some adherents' good faith toward their own arguments are-- from my experience-- directly proportional to their *bad faith* toward anyone who highlights in-group self-victimising & resentiment.

  By calling it out, I'm already prototyping the change I believe is necessary in fraternal spaces: fostering in-group self-awareness of interior self-victimising, resentiment and hostility. Along with verbal accountability in those who are unawaredly hostile.

  As long as there are feminine ppl and masculine ppl who are still locked into mutual, agonised resentiment toward one another, they will poison the well of their respective movements.

  So these specific "bad apples" should at minimum be expected to turn the camera lens back on themselves to mitigate their damage and show accountability.

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Keric.

I don't understand anything you are saying and my humor was not directed to you.  It was just a joke on the subject matter.

Try only saying what needs to be said, so that there is no confusion.  This is not a put down.  I'm just trying to help you so that People can get a better understanding of what you are trying to say.

Best intentions,

Kenneth

[竜虎風森]

Kenneth,

 I'm not buying that it's just a joke.  I've frequently seen and heard men tangentially mention that, when no one presently in discussion accused them of "mansplaining".

It shows that it's on your mind frequently, especially when it's reflexive and impertinent. It can become antipathic quickly, and it's redundant because enough ppl who say it will admit to their hostility toward current {insert minority here}s' Autonomy Movement.

Hopefully my read on you is wrong, but even if it b was just a joke, without context, it can stand as encouragement for people who aren't kidding/joking.

Trying to shift into giving you the benefit of the doubt now, just over the course of typing this.

--KdB

[Alexander Bard]

Dear Keric

What do you want to achieve with your recent postings on this forum?

Can you summarise your main points in say one or two sentences max?

And what do these points have to do with Syntheism and spiritual work? What are the practical implications?

Because I frankly don't understand most of what you write and who you're addressing your messages to.

So a clarification would be most helpful. Or else we move on. OK?

Best intentions

Alexander

2018-02-11 9:58 GMT+01:00 竜虎風森 <ryuu...@gmail.com>:

Kenneth,

 I'm not buying that it's just a joke.  I've frequently seen and heard men tangentially mention that, when no one presently in discussion accused them of "mansplaining".

It shows that it's on your mind frequently, especially when it's reflexive and impertinent. It can become antipathic quickly, and it's redundant because enough ppl who say it will admit to their hostility toward current {insert minority here}s' Autonomy Movement.

Hopefully my read on you is wrong, but even if it b was just a joke, without context, it can stand as encouragement for people who aren't kidding/joking.

Trying to shift into giving you the benefit of the doubt now, just over the course of typing this.

--KdB

[竜虎風森]

Alex,

Someone on Facebook suggested I write about it-- resentiment within the periphery of men's movements leaking closer toward the center-- on this email list.

I just assumed he knew the dynamic here better than I do, so I took his suggestion seriously.

I think his name is Andreas. His last name starts with H and has a few M's in it. He's on the Syntheist Facebook group

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Keric,

You don't get to determine what I meant by what I said.  Mind reading is a indicator of mental illness.  That is a Psychological fact.

So why do you speak to me as if you know what is going on in my mind better than I do, yet you throw a tissy accusing others of doing the same?  Perhaps stop being a victim.

This is not the first time you have tried to tell me what goes on in my mind.

Learn from example of how Alexander and I are communicating in this thread when there is a misunderstanding.  When we correct each other, it is not taken as an attack.  Just a conversation. 

Kenneth

[Alexander Bard]

Agreed, Kenneth!

And I frankly don't understand what would be the constructive use of any "report on ressentiment from the periphery of any men's movement".

Syntheism is all about empowerment culture and not about the thriving in victimhood or ressentiment. or the attempt to invent any such ressentiment where there is none.

That just smacks social justice warfare attempts even from a long distance. So what good is that?

So what exactly are you after, Keric? What is your involvement in this forum all about? I really would like to know.

Best intentions

Alexander

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Alexander,

I perhaps should let you know that after Kal Viani was kicked off the Zoroastrianism list for threatening me, there have been a barrage of trolls cyber stalking me and cyber bullying me.  It is a common pattern of them turning what I say into insults, assumptions, or trying to find a way to turn my words into something bigoted.  As well it has been a common theme of accusing me of having some mean intent, and trying to convince me that I am a bully and an evil person.  I am not sure if Keric is part of that crowd or not, and I believe in innocent until proven guilty, but I find it interesting how he showed up on the Syntheist facebook group, right after Kal was removed from the Z list by our friend KO (may he rest in peace), saying negative comments about my youtube video about SJWs which did not make any sense, and then playing this gaslighting thing that I am the one doing the attacking.

I am just letting you know this has been happening to me often since then.  You even saw on the Zoroastrianism Gmail list how someone was passive aggressively attacking me. 

Since I am against victim hood.  I realized I had some social difficulty as one on the Autistic spectrum.  I got a degree in the Social Sciences and have field work research under my belt, because I was working to overcome that difficulty.  As a result, I have developed an uncanny ability to pick up on manipulative language.  Linguistic Anthropology became my strong suit. 

All the best,

Kenneth

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

I would like to add for the record;

That MGTOWs and Alt-Righters are just as guilty as SJWs for playing victim.  So in my view both SJWs and MGTOWs or Alt-Righters are the antithesis of Syntheism. 

Rather than blame women for your problems like the MGTOWs do, why not start looking at your own short comings to see how your life can improve.  Rather than blame immigrants like those of the Alt-Right, try looking at what you can do to improve your situation and community.

As for SJWs, rather than blame white men for all the problems, try seeing the bigger picture, and realize that there is bigger things at play which are more connected with corporate greed, and hierarchy in general, and not limited to white men.  It is also global. 

Kenneth

[Alexander Bard]

Agreed, gentlemen, and let's leave the issue at that.

Endlessly discussing who is an authentic victim or not has no constructive benefits. Let's get back to discussing or planning for Syntheist activities on this forum instead.

And none of you guys, Kenneth and Keric, are trolls or have ill intent. towards anybody else here. You just both happen to be on the autism spectrum. That's all.

Best intentions

Alexander

2018-02-12 5:08 GMT+01:00 Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com>:

I would like to add for the record;

That MGTOWs and Alt-Righters are just as guilty as SJWs for playing victim.  So in my view both SJWs and MGTOWs or Alt-Righters are the antithesis of Syntheism. 

Rather than blame women for your problems like the MGTOWs do, why not start looking at your own short comings to see how your life can improve.  Rather than blame immigrants like those of the Alt-Right, try looking at what you can do to improve your situation and community.

As for SJWs, rather than blame white men for all the problems, try seeing the bigger picture, and realize that there is bigger things at play which are more connected with corporate greed, and hierarchy in general, and not limited to white men.  It is also global. 

Kenneth

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 7:26 PM, Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristensen11235813@gmail.com> wrote:

Alexander,

I perhaps should let you know that after Kal Viani was kicked off the Zoroastrianism list for threatening me, there have been a barrage of trolls cyber stalking me and cyber bullying me.  It is a common pattern of them turning what I say into insults, assumptions, or trying to find a way to turn my words into something bigoted.  As well it has been a common theme of accusing me of having some mean intent, and trying to convince me that I am a bully and an evil person.  I am not sure if Keric is part of that crowd or not, and I believe in innocent until proven guilty, but I find it interesting how he showed up on the Syntheist facebook group, right after Kal was removed from the Z list by our friend KO (may he rest in peace), saying negative comments about my youtube video about SJWs which did not make any sense, and then playing this gaslighting thing that I am the one doing the attacking.

I am just letting you know this has been happening to me often since then.  You even saw on the Zoroastrianism Gmail list how someone was passive aggressively attacking me. 

Since I am against victim hood.  I realized I had some social difficulty as one on the Autistic spectrum.  I got a degree in the Social Sciences and have field work research under my belt, because I was working to overcome that difficulty.  As a result, I have developed an uncanny ability to pick up on manipulative language.  Linguistic Anthropology became my strong suit. 

All the best,

Kenneth

--

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

--

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

You are right Alexander,

Just been a bit on edge online, do to trolls and cyberbullies being a regular thing since last summer. 

If you say Keric is good, I have no reason to disbelieve you.

Best intentions

Kenneth

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Alexander Bard <bardi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Agreed, gentlemen, and let's leave the issue at that.

Endlessly discussing who is an authentic victim or not has no constructive benefits. Let's get back to discussing or planning for Syntheist activities on this forum instead.

And none of you guys, Kenneth and Keric, are trolls or have ill intent. towards anybody else here. You just both happen to be on the autism spectrum. That's all.

Best intentions

Alexander

2018-02-12 5:08 GMT+01:00 Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristensen11235813@gmail.com>:

I would like to add for the record;

That MGTOWs and Alt-Righters are just as guilty as SJWs for playing victim.  So in my view both SJWs and MGTOWs or Alt-Righters are the antithesis of Syntheism. 

Rather than blame women for your problems like the MGTOWs do, why not start looking at your own short comings to see how your life can improve.  Rather than blame immigrants like those of the Alt-Right, try looking at what you can do to improve your situation and community.

As for SJWs, rather than blame white men for all the problems, try seeing the bigger picture, and realize that there is bigger things at play which are more connected with corporate greed, and hierarchy in general, and not limited to white men.  It is also global. 

Kenneth

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 7:26 PM, Kenneth Morningstar99 <kchristens...@gmail.com> wrote:

Alexander,

I perhaps should let you know that after Kal Viani was kicked off the Zoroastrianism list for threatening me, there have been a barrage of trolls cyber stalking me and cyber bullying me.  It is a common pattern of them turning what I say into insults, assumptions, or trying to find a way to turn my words into something bigoted.  As well it has been a common theme of accusing me of having some mean intent, and trying to convince me that I am a bully and an evil person.  I am not sure if Keric is part of that crowd or not, and I believe in innocent until proven guilty, but I find it interesting how he showed up on the Syntheist facebook group, right after Kal was removed from the Z list by our friend KO (may he rest in peace), saying negative comments about my youtube video about SJWs which did not make any sense, and then playing this gaslighting thing that I am the one doing the attacking.

I am just letting you know this has been happening to me often since then.  You even saw on the Zoroastrianism Gmail list how someone was passive aggressively attacking me. 

Since I am against victim hood.  I realized I had some social difficulty as one on the Autistic spectrum.  I got a degree in the Social Sciences and have field work research under my belt, because I was working to overcome that difficulty.  As a result, I have developed an uncanny ability to pick up on manipulative language.  Linguistic Anthropology became my strong suit. 

All the best,

Kenneth

--

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

[Keric Travis den Breeijen]

Kenneth,

I told you I didn't believe you. I then told you my interpretation of your words. It's your choice to speculate determinative weight, or ascribe an indictment against you, to my transitory statements that I've clearly marked as opinions. It's also your choice to view my opinions as binding and non-negotiable.

Or to even worry about negotiating them in the first place.

"I perhaps should let you know that after Kal Viani was kicked off the Zoroastrianism list for threatening me, there have been a barrage of trolls cyber stalking me and cyber bullying me.  It is a common pattern of them turning what I say into insults, assumptions, or trying to find a way to turn my words into something bigoted."

Exhibit A: Person in the in-group self-victimising. Everyone turns to look away. As if it were pure coincidence that this person has affiliation with several of Alex's interest groups.

It's so transparent, I'm sure anyone can pull direct quotes from Syntheists and Men's Movement participants shamelessly blaming Feminism and Postmodernism for some or all of their misfortune. Including self-appointed leaders.

Nearly every instance included them charging (alleged) Feminists and (alleged) Postmodernists with *SELF-VICTIMISATION*. Met with enthusiastic agreement.

For some reason, that enthusiasm dampens-- or turns into enthusiastic paranoia-- the moment someone points out the self-victimisation of a Syntheist or anyone in the Men's Movement.

---------------------------------------------------------

[Keric Travis den Breeijen]

Alex, you've had ample opportunity to discuss my misgivings in private.

You've several times reframed my posts and opinions as coming from a place of resentiment and self-victimising.

You literally and explicitly condemned entire groups of people in this very thread, by saying their ideas and behaviours are rooted in Rousseau. I can pull several quotes of you describing Rousseau as a manifestation of self-victimisation and resentiment.

Since you asked, I'm pointing this out bc you've over the last few months, nearly a couple years, turning the groups you frequent into fortresses against anyone who puts your credibility into question.

You constantly play like you're a victim of SJW Free Speech Killers, even though you've got the biggest platform and microphone out of any of your allies.

You've more and more frequently asserted the futility and immaturity of pointing out (within your own groups) most of the very same shit you've built your public career around calling out.

When you've decided certain call-outs aren't interesting anymore, you randomly and publicly switch to considering those very same call-outs as superfluous and vain.

Without describing your usage of these very same charges as superfluous and vain.

And the more people who publicly describe you as immature, needlessly aggressive, rude and even unstable, the more swiftly you've converted all your active groups into ppl willing to play apologist for you even as you blatantly behave the same way as the people and behaviours you criticise.

I value to a great degree what your associates used to stand for. You've managed to condense all of their purposes into a kind of "self-empowerment" that flatters all possible excuses one could make for all the negative traits your critics have been ascribing to you for decades.

"Asshole" becomes "self-ownership"

Your "Lacking self-control" is deflected onto anyone who expresses displeasure with your statements and behaviours

Being "bothered by other people" is now an offense punished by losing one's claim to adulthood, unless you're the one who's bothered

Your "rudeness" redefined as a glorious reclamation of free speech

Reflexive "reactivity" reframed as Masculine self-actualisation... unless someone's reaction is against you

Considering I have the most amount of self-involved reasons to seek your favour and pressing circumstances to keep myself in that favour, I could very easily be seen as having the most to lose from publicly criticising you.

Especially since the greatest need is to maintain good standing within the very few collectives that contain people (dividuals, ideally) I believe have enormous, near-unfeterred potential as co-creators of a better world. When most of those groups have, or at one point did have, strong affiliation with you.

In spite of that, I still point them out. I couldn't even afford to go on the trip you furnished overseas for me, when that kind of travel is indispensable to my life in a fundamental, life-altering manner. Sometimes feeling like a manner that stands between me and suicidal ideation.

Outside of attention-seeking celebrities, I'm one of the only people implicating you in anything destructive, and I don't even believe you're doing anything to the level your detractors moan and complain about.

You aren't living up to the standards you set within groups I believe to be pivotal players in making at least the English-speaking world into a transparent place where we all actually get what we deserve (and deserve what we get).

Without the credibility of these groups (some of them authored by you yourself) , and without the integrity of their co-[re]constructed philosophies-- definitely co-authored by your labour & vocation-- I can't in the slightest justify diverting my attention away from the Hell-Hole my nation of residence has become.

...If you contribute to the complete conversion and unraveling of these groups into your own vessels of vain self-protection and apologism (and they keep taking the bait or risk you publicly retaliating), you're putting my avenues for meaningful fellowship into ethical jeopardy.

Because my only other ethical option is to default to confronting the object-level bullshit pandemic to my own politicians and faux-heroic "culture" (culture converted into entertainment-politics via bystander citizens).

I don't believe the investments I could make in this country can be justified bc they require so many "necessary evils" to partake in. Which renders my life net-meaningless and net-painful if the foreign "leaders of tomorrow" like yourself systematically discredit your own works and allies.

Especially since these post-postmodern spaces are tenuous in the court of public opinion anyway.

That's why I'm so sensitive to the conduct of your affiliates, especially what I see as hypocrisy, and discouragement of self-examination, replaced with dime-store Self-Help theatrics.

On a trivial, last straw-that-broke-the-camel's-back note:

You attribute more things to Autism than any credible clinical psychologist would ever sanction. And you started undermining me via "Autism" only after the first time I ever publicly put your views into question.

You really ramped it up and took the lowest personal blows at me immediately after I kept speaking my mind amidst your refutations, in the same manner as you had done moments before at lecture's length, in front of your associates at Studentafton.

So, I guess there's a tinge of pettiness in my message here.

--KdB

You really shouldn't be so hot-and-cold w struggling people who still care more about the longterm than they do their own short-term difficulties

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

Keric drop it.

Why don't you just accept that online, you may be misinterpreting what I say, and online I may be misinterpreting what you say? 

Look further down the thread.  I took back what I said.  I also said I believe in innocent till proven guilty.  What are you trying to get at?  Nothing you say is making sense.

Truth is, we all want to understand what you are saying, but you are being dismissive of our advice to narrow down the focus of your posts to the point you want to get across.

Why do you insist? 

Best intentions.

Kenneth

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

[Kenneth Morningstar99]

I will just let you know Keric,

Most of the time when someone says "I don't believe you."  It entails that you are calling that person a liar.  Perhaps that is not what you meant.  Just keep in mind that language is not only what the person is saying.  It is also how the message is received.  It appeared you were calling me a liar with the "I don't believe you." 

You are correct that there are tons of legitimate concerns in terms of inequality that people sweep under the rug and accuse the person speaking up of playing victim.  However after 2011, there has been an overwhelming amount of student activists claiming victimhood over rediculous things, like a sushi bar on campus being culturally insensitive, or closing a reggae fest because white students listening to reggae is cultural appropriation.  This ends of delegitimazing the legitimate problems dealing with inequality today.  I believe that this is what Alexander Bard was talking about.  Not being Anti-feminist or in support of MGTOW.

Correct me if I am interpreting you wrong Alexander.

Best intentions.

Kenneth

[竜虎風森]

I don't know you enough to say you're a liar or not. You're not entitled to the trust of another.

I may not trust you, but I didn't put words in your mouth. "MGTOW" isn't the men's movement, and you probably already know that.

You've already proved you're willing to reduce your mistakes to stereotypes of autism, and it's clear that you base your opinion of others on how Alexander thinks, including how you view your own actions.

Coming to terms with someone should not require you reinforce your own diagnosis, and if he has to close the conversation by pathologising you, you seem like you are likely mistaking fellowship with sycophancy.

If you don't understand my emails, that's probably because you're still distracted by the words you read that don't even exist.

My comprehension and writing levels have been college level since I was 10 years old. I'm pretty sure I'm comprehensible when I compose myself, and I debateably have savantism in social intelligence bc it obscured my diagnosis until I could afford objective testing. They both reported my social capacity to me alongside my diagnosis bc they were helping me understand why I'd been put through the ringer of 20ish medications.

You both would have to be trying to misunderstand me.  Nothing I stated to Alex hasn't already been said by his critics.  My latest response to you, Kenneth, was a few sentences long. You're not so "autistic"-- or not autistic at all, possibly-- to be vacant enough to misunderstand.

You don't have to reduce yourself and shrink your voice in order to speak alongside people you respect.  You're not even diagnosed. Not to mention the amount of stereotypes you're lending credence to.

--K

[竜虎風森]

Kenneth, dude. You've switched your signature to a literal copy of Alexander's.

This is part of why I don't trust you. You need his approval to feel a sense of conviction.

Dude.

On 12 Feb 2018 11.02 PM, "竜虎風森" <ryuu...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't know you enough to say you're a liar or not. You're not entitled to the trust of another.

I may not trust you, but I didn't put words in your mouth. "MGTOW" isn't the men's movement, and you probably already know that.

You've already proved you're willing to reduce your mistakes to stereotypes of autism, and it's clear that you base your opinion of others on how Alexander thinks, including how you view your own actions.

Coming to terms with someone should not require you reinforce your own diagnosis, and if he has to close the conversation by pathologising you, you seem like you are likely mistaking fellowship with sycophancy.

If you don't understand my emails, that's probably because you're still distracted by the words you read that don't even exist.

My comprehension and writing levels have been college level since I was 10 years old. I'm pretty sure I'm comprehensible when I compose myself, and I debateably have savantism in social intelligence bc it obscured my diagnosis until I could afford objective testing. They both reported my social capacity to me alongside my diagnosis bc they were helping me understand why I'd been put through the ringer of 20ish medications.

You both would have to be trying to misunderstand me.  Nothing I stated to Alex hasn't already been said by his critics.  My latest response to you, Kenneth, was a few sentences long. You're not so "autistic"-- or not autistic at all, possibly-- to be vacant enough to misunderstand.

You don't have to reduce yourself and shrink your voice in order to speak alongside people you respect.  You're not even diagnosed. Not to mention the amount of stereotypes you're lending credence to.

--K

[Jonatan Bäckelie]

Dear Keric,

I feel you have reached a point in your argumentation where no one can be perceived to be on your side anylonger if they a) do not denounce Alexander Bard b) do not agree with your philosophical reasoning and c) perceive your style of writing to be clear as day. 

To ask all this of anyone, I believe, is simply too much.

Without getting bogged down in the details ... I have been at university for about 10 years and I am doing the last year of finishing my ph d thesis working with both political philosophy and empirical material. Still it is _often_ the case that I don’t follow your line of reasoning or what point you are trying to get across.

It has nothing to do with intelligence or ’not wanting to understand’. Rather in my experience with fellow doctoral students, there are a lot of brilliant ideas flying around, but a lot of people get the feedback that they haven’t expressed their ideas clearly enough. They may write _a lot_ but it’s not the amount of words, but rather that the basic premises are not expressed clearly enough (or that the basic premises doesn’t seem fully connected to the finer points drawn from them). Looking back at a lot of what you have written, this problem (common among highly intelligent and capable thinkers, spectrum or no spectrum alike) is recurring.

I am not going to comment on yours or anyone’s personality, back story or where they come from, so I’ll leave this to be a textual analysis.

An as a textual analysis, what seem to have happened here - in your texts - is ever more indignation, personal attacks and (probably as a result of it) much more incoherent texts than they were at the outset, now also ripe with some kind of conspiratorial overtones (like ’i dont trust you because you use the words best intentions which proves you are in league with Bard’).

So when Alex asks ’can you summarise what you are saying in a couple of sentences’ the texts you then send are not only as long as ever, you don’t try to explain/answer, _and_ the texts become more full of personal attacks and attempts at character assasination.

Regarding diagnoses: I’m with Foucault on that one, where diagnoses should be used carefully not to map out some ’normality’ and outliers from that. So on that note I feel it entirely unnecessary to throw in ’autism’ as an attempt to explain anything when urging to move on, as Alex did. (But a continuatiom will follow at the end.)

And I sometimes have problems with Alexander’s texts when he uses things like ’exactly like Marx’ or saying that he or something or someone is ’Nietzschean’ without first explaining in what capacity something is Nietzschean. It becomes too much of an empty signifer for me (as no one but Nietzsche is 100% Nietzschean, but that signifier always points to something specific, a terminology, a certain book, an important theme in his thinking). But when he does, I typically ask questions in the style Alexander asks you; ’what do you mean by Nietzschean in this case? Can you unpack your thoughts?’

This doesn’t mean the neither Alexander or you are obligated to unpack things upon request. But when I’ve posted ’please unpack’-requests, it has never resulted in personal attacks.

Coming back to the issue of being a/typical:

I think there’s something very tricky at work when people reference themselves in a public debate or multiple recipient mailing list as neuroatypical. What is the purpose? Is it to create understanding? And what does understanding then mean? In certain settings (school/uni/work) you have that conversation behind closed doors with someone who is able to provide tools that are helpful, in order to expedite college or the workplace. But. When you do the same in public it may be construed in two ways:

A) it may express the idea that some behaviour is excused and/or that NT people should show special considerations (which is not how public fora works, there is no such obligation). Secondly:

B) If you bring in a diagnosis into a public or semipublic setting, then _you_ have opened up for that to be a point which people are entitled to reference as well.

So that’s the tricky part. In a forum where no one _have_ to show special considerations you bring in an aspect that is now up for debate/reference for everyone.

I am not saying this in a way where I try to point out what everyone has to do, but I am trying to give some feedback on the back off the texts, and tie them into experiences based on _my_ life. I have tried my best to discuss this without resorting to personal attacks or degrading anyone. I don’t want any member of our community to feel excluded, I have no interest or stake in that. Thus I really write this with the best possible intentions, and so it really does seem fitting to end with that phrase.

/Jonatan 

tis 13 feb. 2018 kl. 05:06 skrev 竜虎風森 <ryuu...@gmail.com>:

Kenneth, dude. You've switched your signature to a literal copy of Alexander's.

This is part of why I don't trust you. You need his approval to feel a sense of conviction.

Dude.

On 12 Feb 2018 11.02 PM, "竜虎風森" <ryuu...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't know you enough to say you're a liar or not. You're not entitled to the trust of another.

I may not trust you, but I didn't put words in your mouth. "MGTOW" isn't the men's movement, and you probably already know that.

You've already proved you're willing to reduce your mistakes to stereotypes of autism, and it's clear that you base your opinion of others on how Alexander thinks, including how you view your own actions.

Coming to terms with someone should not require you reinforce your own diagnosis, and if he has to close the conversation by pathologising you, you seem like you are likely mistaking fellowship with sycophancy.

If you don't understand my emails, that's probably because you're still distracted by the words you read that don't even exist.

My comprehension and writing levels have been college level since I was 10 years old. I'm pretty sure I'm comprehensible when I compose myself, and I debateably have savantism in social intelligence bc it obscured my diagnosis until I could afford objective testing. They both reported my social capacity to me alongside my diagnosis bc they were helping me understand why I'd been put through the ringer of 20ish medications.

You both would have to be trying to misunderstand me.  Nothing I stated to Alex hasn't already been said by his critics.  My latest response to you, Kenneth, was a few sentences long. You're not so "autistic"-- or not autistic at all, possibly-- to be vacant enough to misunderstand.

You don't have to reduce yourself and shrink your voice in order to speak alongside people you respect.  You're not even diagnosed. Not to mention the amount of stereotypes you're lending credence to.

--K

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

--

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

[Hugi Ásgeirsson]

Please take this to private emails. I don’t subscribe to this list to listen to incessant complaining and playground he-said-she-said.

Have some respect for people’s inboxes and time.

With well meaning,

Hugi

[Alexander Bard]

Exactly, Hugi!

And thanks for pointing this out.

I will take relevant persons off the list for now and invite them for offlist conversations instead.

This is a forum for Syntheism, not for endless personal vendettas or for that matter clarifications of such matters.

Best intentions

Alexander

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

--

"Life... The opposite of life is not death, but non-existence.  To die means having lived, but to not exist means being... NOTHING!  To live means to influence the cosmos!  One's actions.  One's presence, changes every being he meets!  The cosmos is everything!  To affect any part of the cosmos is to affect the totality!  Life is the most precious gift the cosmos can bestow." --Steve Englehart; Marvel Premier Featuring: Dr. Strange #12

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--

SUBSECULAR.COM - A Music & Philosophy Interface

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to synt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/syntheism.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Syntheism" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syntheism+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.