How can you possibly "not have" YouTube?
I don't have an account on either platform. You need an account to make a playlist.
How can you possibly "not have" YouTube?
You could do what most others have done and just post a bunch of videos with a brief bit of text under one, though.I don't have an account on either platform. You need an account to make a playlist.
The book is rated R for extensive talk about eating pussy without asking. Without the girl needing to ask I mean. Because no one wants to have to ask to get head. People want to censor me, to stop me from talking about eating pussy. But the drive for cunnilingus is irrepressible in our culture.
Non-rationality (NOT irrationality and not pre-rationality) is awesome and is in no way inferior to rationality. Rationality and non-rationality are two different ways of viewing the world, and both have their own strengths and weaknesses. Claiming that non-rationality is inferior to masculine rationality is just another way of hiding and repressing femininity.
What do you mean I equivocate? And there is a kind of rationality symbolically aligned with femininity, it's unconditional Kantian rationality, while masculine rationality is conditional and instrumental. Thus I never denied women their rationality.
Kantian rationality is not goal-oriented, thus unconditional. That's part of what it means to value humanity as an end-in-itself
no, that is Kantian ethics. And you're wrong. please stop embarrassing yourself.
Yes, I meant Kantian ethical rationality, as distinct from instrumental rationality. Plenty of Marxists, like Zygmunt Bauman, have drawn this distinction.
I'd love to know how I'm wrong though. I spent years studying Kant. Kant was my speciality in graduate school. Mind telling me what I got wrong?
Yes the kingdom of ends. Where everyone is valued as an end, meaning they are treated like beings that have value independent of their use for completing a goal. And I never denied that instrumental rationality exists! Are you denying that any sort of unconditional rationality exists?the categorical imperative is goal orientated, it doesn't literally mean that humans don't collaborate or utilise each others capacities for goals, it merely stipulates that one should act as if a legislative member in the kingdom of ends.
no, I'm not your servant. You can work it out yourself.
Yes the kingdom of ends. Where everyone is valued as an end, meaning they are treated like beings that have value independent of their use for completing a goal. And I never denied that instrumental rationality exists! Are you denying that any sort of unconditional rationality exists?
I did work it out myself! Over the course of many years! Don't be a pseudo-intellectual. If you don't want to engage me intellectually, don't post in my threads. And don't call me a racist.
Even if what I'm saying is inaccurate to Kant (which is highly unlikely), it still doesn't changed that a rationality exists distinct from instrumental rationality, which is my point. And I don't deny women their instrumental rationality. Everyone can access both types of rationality. What I'm saying is that unconditional rationality is symbolically aligned with femininity.
Unconditional rationality is frustrated by the capitalist mode of production, you should be aware of that. The productive forces exist to such an extent that people can be valued as ends in themselves, but the need for capitals self-valourisation by nature precludes that. This is not gendered, as much as it might be convenient to do so. In fact what is worrying is precisely that it is impersonal. Noone is in charge, not even the manosphere.