Protests: Fifty Shades as Glamorizing Domestic Violence

[Pogo]

they are three different interpretations.

1. one is focusing on the RELATIONSHIP with God
moving from PARENTAL/AUTHORITARIAN to Equalitarian where people accept equal responsibility
for enforcing and upholding laws

2. one is focusing on the MALE/FEMALE dynamic in personal relations
and how this affects greater society when these dynamics or biases are projected

3. one is focusing on CLASS politics of the ownership/management
class dominating over the working class.
The reason this ties in with male/female roles or views in society
is the MALES were valued more and worshipped as the meat gatherers
while the FEMALES were valued less as gathering crops which weren't as valuable.

Females have done a LOT more than that throughout history. In fact, since we are the bearers of children, it only makes sense that WE should be the most valued members of any society.

We're very much on the same page here.

Females being tenders of the plants, ultimately invented agriculture and pharmacology -- you have to know that this plant will cool your fever and that one will kill you. It's theorized that females also invented language -- for communicating with babies -- and the concept of reckoning time, since the most regular thing that happens to human beings is menstruation.

That's kinda valuable.

I'd say the whole political turn setting up males as dominant is mostly based on jealousy of the female mystery and her power to procreate.

Yes, the "equal and opposite" reaction to the matriarchal stage
was to flip to the patriarchal stage. And the real point of Jesus is to establish Equal Justice
to Restore truth, justice and peace in relations and not have any more false control issues projected
to abuse and oppress people. Not women, not poor, not minorities, but to treat and respect all
people equally. That is the point and purpose of humanity's progress toward spiritual and social/political maturity.

Whoa -- Jesus? Really? We're talking waaaay before Jesus here.

I think it's time for STTAB to administer that spankin'....

I'm still wondering when there was ever a "matriarchal" society which needed to be "flipped" to a patriarchal one???

Aye, "needed" indeed -- there's the rub.

Emily's thinking of physics. But Isaac Newton really didn't write the blueprint for human evolution.

 

[ChrisL]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

 

[Pogo]

they are three different interpretations.

1. one is focusing on the RELATIONSHIP with God
moving from PARENTAL/AUTHORITARIAN to Equalitarian where people accept equal responsibility
for enforcing and upholding laws

2. one is focusing on the MALE/FEMALE dynamic in personal relations
and how this affects greater society when these dynamics or biases are projected

3. one is focusing on CLASS politics of the ownership/management
class dominating over the working class.
The reason this ties in with male/female roles or views in society
is the MALES were valued more and worshipped as the meat gatherers
while the FEMALES were valued less as gathering crops which weren't as valuable.

Females have done a LOT more than that throughout history. In fact, since we are the bearers of children, it only makes sense that WE should be the most valued members of any society.

We're very much on the same page here.

Females being tenders of the plants, ultimately invented agriculture and pharmacology -- you have to know that this plant will cool your fever and that one will kill you. It's theorized that females also invented language -- for communicating with babies -- and the concept of reckoning time, since the most regular thing that happens to human beings is menstruation.

That's kinda valuable.

I'd say the whole political turn setting up males as dominant is mostly based on jealousy of the female mystery and her power to procreate.

Yes, the "equal and opposite" reaction to the matriarchal stage
was to flip to the patriarchal stage. And the real point of Jesus is to establish Equal Justice
to Restore truth, justice and peace in relations and not have any more false control issues projected
to abuse and oppress people. Not women, not poor, not minorities, but to treat and respect all
people equally. That is the point and purpose of humanity's progress toward spiritual and social/political maturity.

Whoa -- Jesus? Really? We're talking waaaay before Jesus here.

I think it's time for STTAB to administer that spankin'....

The spirit of Justice, which Jesus represents, is eternal, always existent,
and has influenced the entire path and process of humanity,
all stages of ups and downs, to reach full maturity.

Not before his own time it isn't.

Are we suspending linear time here?

I don't know what part Jesus could possibly play in this. These are social structures in play way way way before he got here.

Or else maybe I have no idea what the original question/postulation was. Actually that's certain -- I don't.

 

[emilynghiem]

Yes, like a guilt trip kind of. It was the stupid woman who bit the damned apple. And the man, he was just a victim of her feminine wiles.

C. the social class interpretation of this
was when humanity ate meat and started the politics over the value of meat making people unequal
and dividing society into management classes that could store and sell meat/products
versus working class people without ownership over the land or process

A. the spiritual interpretation is more about
women having the divine knowledge of creation and birth first,
then men trying to have equal power and control in relations
but needing to use LAWS to control their lineage,
marriage and property laws to make sure their own children were their heirs to their estates,
and this getting corrupted by greed for power and control.

So the whole point of the sacrifice of Christ is to break this cycle of
abuse and oppression and establish true equality and harmony.
To get away from the material conditions, and this whole habit of
making one person or group superior to another to have more control.

The point is to share equal knowledge, authority and responsibility
so there is no more power games, no more conflicts and politics over authority.

 

[ChrisL]

Yes, like a guilt trip kind of. It was the stupid woman who bit the damned apple. And the man, he was just a victim of her feminine wiles.

C. the social class interpretation of this
was when humanity ate meat and started the politics over the value of meat making people unequal
and dividing society into management classes that could store and sell meat/products
versus working class people without ownership over the land or process

A. the spiritual interpretation is more about
women having the divine knowledge of creation and birth first,
then men trying to have equal power and control in relations
but needing to use LAWS to control their lineage,
marriage and property laws to make sure their own children were their heirs to their estates,
and this getting corrupted by greed for power and control.

So the whole point of the sacrifice of Christ is to break this cycle of
abuse and oppression and establish true equality and harmony.
To get away from the material conditions, and this whole habit of
making one person or group superior to another to have more control.

The point is to share equal knowledge, authority and responsibility
so there is no more power games, no more conflicts and politics over authority.

Okay, I think I understand the point you are trying to make now. Men are AFRAID of women.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Yes, like a guilt trip kind of. It was the stupid woman who bit the damned apple. And the man, he was just a victim of her feminine wiles.

C. the social class interpretation of this
was when humanity ate meat and started the politics over the value of meat making people unequal
and dividing society into management classes that could store and sell meat/products
versus working class people without ownership over the land or process

A. the spiritual interpretation is more about
women having the divine knowledge of creation and birth first,
then men trying to have equal power and control in relations
but needing to use LAWS to control their lineage,
marriage and property laws to make sure their own children were their heirs to their estates,
and this getting corrupted by greed for power and control.

So the whole point of the sacrifice of Christ is to break this cycle of
abuse and oppression and establish true equality and harmony.
To get away from the material conditions, and this whole habit of
making one person or group superior to another to have more control.

The point is to share equal knowledge, authority and responsibility
so there is no more power games, no more conflicts and politics over authority.

Okay, I think I understand the point you are trying to make now. Men are AFRAID of women.

Only the insane ones, such as yourself.

 

[emilynghiem]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

What's wrong with the Jews Christians and Muslims uniting under the scriptural laws and authorities,
while the Gentiles unite under natural laws.

There is no need for division conflict or competition between these ways.

Buddhism focuses on WISDOM which is one of the oldest names of God.
Secular humanists and atheists may focus on TRUTH and good will or greater good for all humanity.
Christians may focus on love and grace, and Jesus as universal Justice uniting all tribes and nations as one.

Why can't all these ways work together and all describe the same source of life and laws in the world?
If people act selfish and try to outbully each other, that's THEIR political issues.
That isn't necessarily from the religion. The religions are like languages for the laws.

And just like civil laws of the state, these can be used correctly to establish truth and justice for all.
Or the laws can be abused for politics. If the people are abusive that's their problem.
Any religion or system can be used for either good or bad, so it is better to teach them correctly
rather than to avoid it, where the bigger bullies teach it wrong. Avoiding abuses doesn't correct them.
and the best way I've seen to correct any system is for the consistent followers to correct their own peers.
When all systems do that, we will have peace instead of war.

 

[Pogo]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

That's exactly what I keep saying about climate change.
And yet this message board is chock full of wags who jump up to tell me I believe something else. They're like ---- religious proselytizers.

 

[ChrisL]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

What's wrong with the Jews Christians and Muslims uniting under the scriptural laws and authorities,
while the Gentiles unite under natural laws.

There is no need for division conflict or competition between these ways.

Buddhism focuses on WISDOM which is one of the oldest names of God.
Secular humanists and atheists may focus on TRUTH and good will or greater good for all humanity.
Christians may focus on love and grace, and Jesus as universal Justice uniting all tribes and nations as one.

Why can't all these ways work together and all describe the same source of life and laws in the world?
If people act selfish and try to outbully each other, that's THEIR political issues.
That isn't necessarily from the religion. The religions are like languages for the laws.

And just like civil laws of the state, these can be used correctly to establish truth and justice for all.
Or the laws can be abused for politics. If the people are abusive that's their problem.
Any religion or system can be used for either good or bad, so it is better to teach them correctly
rather than to avoid it, where the bigger bullies teach it wrong. Avoiding abuses doesn't correct them.
and the best way I've seen to correct any system is for the consistent followers to correct their own peers.
When all systems do that, we will have peace instead of war.

That's my point. I don't get why they have to fight and think of one another as sinners when there are really few differences between them?

Yes, it is human nature to be selfish and to bully. It is a survival of the fittest type of instinct, IMHO. We are intelligent enough to realize that, nowadays, this is wrong. I believe things like greed, selfishness and jealousy are completely normal instinctual human traits though. THAT is what makes things so complicated. It takes intelligence to realize these things and to overcome them.

 

[emilynghiem]

Okay, I think I understand the point you are trying to make now. Men are AFRAID of women.

People in general are afraid of things we either don't understand or can't control.

* Fear of the unknown
* Fear of change or loss of control to an outside authority or competing interest
* Fear of conflict or confrontation, fear of not being able to resolve it

This isn't just men, women also. all people can be afraid when something threatens our
sense of security, peace and perspective.

Fear that another group has more knowledge or control is what fuels politics.
I think Men get more territorial about pecking order and being in control of their domain.
so they set each other off. A lot of times, women won't set them off who don't come across as threats.
many times men are more afraid of other men.

 

[ChrisL]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

That's exactly what I keep saying about climate change.
And yet this message board is chock full of wags who jump up to tell me I believe something else. They're like ---- religious proselytizers.

I don't hold it against you. Honestly, I'm not sure anyone knows enough to declare either way though.

Also, now that we've derailed the thread from BDSM to Jesus, do you really want to go there?

 

[ChrisL]

Okay, I think I understand the point you are trying to make now. Men are AFRAID of women.

People in general are afraid of things we either don't understand or can't control.

* Fear of the unknown
* Fear of change or loss of control to an outside authority or competing interest
* Fear of conflict or confrontation, fear of not being able to resolve it

This isn't just men, women also. all people can be afraid when something threatens our
sense of security, peace and perspective.

Fear that another group has more knowledge or control is what fuels politics.
I think Men get more territorial about pecking order and being in control of their domain.
so they set each other off. A lot of times, women won't set them off who don't come across as threats.
many times men are more afraid of other men.

A lot of men are intimidated by a strong independent and willful woman.

 

[emilynghiem]

That's my point. I don't get why they have to fight and think of one another as sinners when there are really few differences between them?

Yes, you hit the nail on the head.
When people don't forgive past conflicts or issues
they PROJECT these forward onto other people.

Look at the Bullring mess with me and Anonymous1977
because i triggered some fear of white racist manipulation
a lot of past garbage got projected and blamed on me.

that is a clear case of projection because past pains
and issues weren't forgiven and I triggered that fearful reaction.

clearly that wasn't about me. that was about past issues.

this process is supposed to be about releasing that fear,
forgiving and healing it. so this person vented it out,
and I happened to be the trigger or target that caused the verbal vomiting.

 

[Pogo]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

That's exactly what I keep saying about climate change.
And yet this message board is chock full of wags who jump up to tell me I believe something else. They're like ---- religious proselytizers.

I don't hold it against you. Honestly, I'm not sure anyone knows enough to declare either way though.

Also, now that we've derailed the thread from BDSM to Jesus, do you really want to go there?

Not really. Actually I know more about Jesus than BDSM though...

 

[emilynghiem]

What is most confusing about all of the strife amongst the religious people is that the three major religions pretty much all believe in the same one God. It seems to be their prophets which they fight about. Silly. This is why I could not ever consider myself a "religious" person. Nobody KNOWS anything. Period.

That's exactly what I keep saying about climate change.
And yet this message board is chock full of wags who jump up to tell me I believe something else. They're like ---- religious proselytizers.

I don't hold it against you. Honestly, I'm not sure anyone knows enough to declare either way though.

Also, now that we've derailed the thread from BDSM to Jesus, do you really want to go there?

Go ahead ChrisL and Pogo
I'm glad you are both bringing all this up. Go ahead and use the thread to say whatever comes to mind.
To me it is all on topic about ending abuses specifically "relationship abuse." Thanks, I LOVE your posts
and will go back and thank some more of them. All this is very helpful and relates directly or indirectly.
You're good!

 

[ChrisL]

Well, I'm heading out now. Nightie night Pogo and Emily! It was nice talking with you both and being able to have a nice civil discussion.

 

[Pogo]

Okay, I think I understand the point you are trying to make now. Men are AFRAID of women.

People in general are afraid of things we either don't understand or can't control.

* Fear of the unknown
* Fear of change or loss of control to an outside authority or competing interest
* Fear of conflict or confrontation, fear of not being able to resolve it

This isn't just men, women also. all people can be afraid when something threatens our
sense of security, peace and perspective.

Fear that another group has more knowledge or control is what fuels politics.
I think Men get more territorial about pecking order and being in control of their domain.
so they set each other off. A lot of times, women won't set them off who don't come across as threats.
many times men are more afraid of other men.

A lot of men are intimidated by a strong independent and willful woman.

Men have always been intimidated by women. I'm probably not supposed to tell you this...
That's why they had to invent the whole Adam&Eve/male "God" thing -- it''s entirely socio-political -- to take power and dominate that mysterious gender that has all that power we will never have.

Throughout human history on I believe every continent there have been male rituals wherein the penis is slit along the underside to emulate a vagina. If that doesn't demonstrate that it's all based on jealousy of women's power I don't know what does.

 

[ChrisL]

Okay, I think I understand the point you are trying to make now. Men are AFRAID of women.

People in general are afraid of things we either don't understand or can't control.

* Fear of the unknown
* Fear of change or loss of control to an outside authority or competing interest
* Fear of conflict or confrontation, fear of not being able to resolve it

This isn't just men, women also. all people can be afraid when something threatens our
sense of security, peace and perspective.

Fear that another group has more knowledge or control is what fuels politics.
I think Men get more territorial about pecking order and being in control of their domain.
so they set each other off. A lot of times, women won't set them off who don't come across as threats.
many times men are more afraid of other men.

A lot of men are intimidated by a strong independent and willful woman.

Men have always been intimidated by women. I'm probably not supposed to tell you this...
That's why they had to invent the whole Adam&Eve/male "God" thing -- it''s entirely socio-political -- to take power and dominate that mysterious gender that has all that power we will never have.

Throughout human history on I believe every continent there have been male rituals wherein the penis is slit along the underside to emulate a vagina. If that doesn't demonstrate that it's all based on jealousy of women's power I don't know what does.

Well, I don't know if it means they want to emulate having a vagina (although apparently some men do - cue Bruce Jenner - Lol)

It is funny though when men talk about penis envy. The penis is too unpredictable. Who knows what it will do next? Lol. Like Elaine from Seinfeld said, who would want to walk around with one of those things?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Oh, and Emily. I did find an article about how BDSM is a way to get away with abusing women. I'm not sure if I want to post it though, because it talks a lot about feminism. I don't REALLY consider myself a feminist as I enjoy my femininity, and I know that women cannot do EVERYTHING that men can do, and vice versa. But the article does make some valid points. Should I post it? I'm sure I'll get attacked as being a feminazi if I do. Lol.

You have free speech, feel free to share.
If anyone responds, we can have a nice conversation.
Floor is yours.

I Dated Christian Grey How Women Are Groomed For Abuse The Mary Sue

Thanks for this article. I think the writer made very clear points about not accepting domineering behavior as the norm, so that anything naturally considerate of others is no longer normal but seen as a sign of something special. while taking women for granted who are expected to be nice and agreeable all the time, and anything less is seen as deficient.

I couldn't believe the times I ran into this.
I would donate rent to help volunteers with nonprofits sharing a duplex for office space.
And when I couldn't pay it any longer I got blamed with demands for "how were they were expected to pay the costs."
And I said why didn't they push that hard and demand help when I was struggling to pay the costs.
Why was my labor taken for granted and yet they weren't expected to work to pay for their volunteer costs.

And the same thing happened when I had worked extra hours to pay for some media work to
cover the community plans for a press conference.

The volunteer I had gone out of my way to pay expenses for in order to free up their time to work on this
complained I was treating them like a slave. I said well I'm paying for this work and cannot afford this.
They claimed they normally charge xyz per hour, and they had worked so many hours and deserved
the thousands of dollars I covered for just a single project that they didn't even finish. the work was lost.
but supposedly this person had put in enough hours to justify covering thousands of dollars of debts I covered.

So then I pointed out that I had worked at less than 15.00 an hour to earn that money minus the taxes I had to pay.
so the hours that I had put into this project to cover the costs were far more than the hours this person had put in.
there was NO comparison.

But those hours didn't count. Once the money "magically came out of nowhere"
then this person swore they earned it by charging their usual rates per hour.

And that is what happens with people who think govt needs to take care of them
because they think they pay for it. they think that any taxes that businesses pay
belong to govt and th epublic, this isn't the business people earning it and having to pay their labor to govt.
they think that is owed to govt and owed to them.

so this becomes the NORM
and anything less is seen as GREED

so that's how they say rich people are greedy and need to pay more taxes to pay their share
because the only way they earned their money was because govt "allowed them to"

and poor people are either blamed or made dependent on govt or both.

so that is like keeping women dependent on men, where that is the norm.
everything is supposed to go through the men, just like people think everything has to be done through govt

you cannot trust people to act independently on their own. very similar setting up these norms to feel safe.

Well, okay, I guess that is KIND OF related. Lol. I am sticking to the topic of BDSM though and it shows, IMO, that it is no different than any other abusive relationship.

Why do you think a person would agree to be abused and actually enjoy the act of being abused by another, whether that be a man, a woman, or even a business partner?

Why do you think a person would enjoy abusing another person and gain some kind of sexual satisfaction from such abuse?

Just because the people involved have found a fancy name and have made abuse into some type of sexual game makes it more acceptable?

I don't find anything normal or healthy about, regardless of any "safe words" or "trust." Plenty of people trust the wrong kinds of people all the time, every day.

And again, what if the "dominant" person in the game cannot find a willing participant? Does his or her proclivity to violence during sex just go away? Do you think a person who enjoys these kinds of activities would need more and more to become satisfied with his or her sex life? Or do you think they reach some kind of plateau and just keep it there?

These are just some of the questions a person should probably ask him or herself before getting involved in such a game. I mean, I really can't even refer to this as a Relationship. Lol.

A dominant has as much right to have what kind of sex they enjoy as anyone else. If a dominant cannot find a willing submissive society has an obligation to satisfy the dominant's sexual desires by increasing the number of submissives. BDSM is normal and desirable. It's glamorized as preferable. Someone who rejects being beaten is a bigot.

Are you on LSD?