I rocks with Magma though! That counts as RIO!
This zeuhl stuff seems pretty popping.
The Feminine Perspective against the Manosphere
- Thread starter ?!..!?
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a bunch of trolls trolling each other aesthetic jihad chicks dig guys with money cia lesbian david lesbian do you tongue punch the dirt star? dolezal1977 eating pussy without asking everyone on this board is a troll extraterrestrial bisexual feminist travis bickle justified ancients of noncing lesbian separatism luka's crop top malelesbian: english rp boy toy malethespian mansplaining feminism mr tea confirmed pegging freak mrs tea eaten out 24/7 prevent prevent! sarlacc pit taking the filth the art of trolling the feminonce massive the perils of self-publishing the viper of cunnilingus undisciplined lockerroom pussy eating unimaginable anguish version's throbbing penis
I rocks with Magma though! That counts as RIO!
This zeuhl stuff seems pretty popping.
william_kent
Well-known member
yeah, we can reach a consensus here...
bridging the gap
reaching common ground
i will concede that
even though they are really ZEUHL they may be counted as RIO
When it comes to prog, "Another Green World" by Brian Eno is one of the best albums ever, and it has Fripp and Peter Gabriel on it.
Not to mention this banger:
But what is the ultimate prog rock album? I want to know
william_kent
Well-known member
k, i'm being a total rum soaked dick at this point in time
but the ultimate prog album is
Robert Wyatt - Rock Bottom
Robert Wyatt - Rock Bottom
When you're drunk you're terrific
When you're drunk
I like you mostly late at night
You're quite alright
But I can't understand the different you
In the morning, when it's time
To play at being human for a while
subvert47
I don't fight, I run away
except that could just mean dykes with strap-ons
or pre-op trans dykes
or if the dick is on someone else, maybe dyke/faggot queer sex
or even possibly sex worker dykes
or...
william_kent
Well-known member
at least you didn't engage with it IRL
As for me, on friday night I drunkenly swapped prog rock tips with the AI that is named @malelesbian (in a one sided exchange; to be fair I'd destroy "them" in a prog rock sound clash, but all i did was add to their "training" data set, and only added "weights" to the bot )
this was against my better nature, especially after I thought I had learnt a lesson from a year or so ago when I stupidly engaged with a devious troll post from the entity who currently goes by the name @sus
two lessons I have never learned:
1: never post on the internet when drunk
2: never post on any internet forum that is titled dissensus when drunk, this is similar to top tip number 1, on the surface it looks the same, but the ramifications are miniscule in comparison.... touch wood
like, last saturday night /sunday morning , according to @luka, while I was typing up my detailed review of 93 psychic tv "deep cuts" from my lovingly curated collection of musty and mildewed blood and cum stained vinyl, aka "thee gray zone", I may have confessed to a string of hideous pyscho sexual crimes, but so far the police have not excavated my 'kill pit' where I sweep away and bury the shattered vessels of filth that once contaminated the streets of chorlton-cum-hardy
fortunately there is a delete function on this forum that can be employed for a few hours after a misguided and self snitching post
i may be ashamed, but at least I'm still free to delete the disgusting detritus from the streets
Quote Reply
To hell with good sentences. To hell with good writing. I support bad writing like the kind that Judith Butler writes (allegedly).
I write badly because I deal in ideas not easily understood. Too many writers use their technical skill to cover up a lack of good ideas. Just look at the critiques of my writing: my presentation is the problem, my argument is unrefined and unpersuasive. These critiques have nothing to with my ideas. Most of you fetishize arguments and technique and ignore actual content because you're afraid to engage my ideas. I'm surprised to see the worst tendencies of analytic philosophy show up on a forum like this.
you think too highly of yourself. The question is not about being persuasive it's about the suspension of disbelief, basically what hermeneutics experts are good at. Occultism, in other words.
If you continue to pursue this analytic vs continental framing, something which has zero relevance outside of the academy, then you will regretably subject your fait to tilting at windmills and will be unable to recover.
If you continue to pursue this analytic vs continental framing, something which has zero relevance outside of the academy, then you will regretably subject your fait to tilting at windmills and will be unable to recover.
How is suspension of disbelief relevant to this discussion?
It's actually the main integument undergirding the analytical continental split. If Spinoza freed man from the witchery of religion, then Marx freed man from the superstition of philosophy, because philosophy is, as such, religion in its most intellectualised and abstract form. Truly atheist or secular philosophy is impossible, then you just get historical materialism.
Guess I'm a historical materialist then. But your digression about religion is a non-sequitur. What in the world does religion have to do with gender identity?
Also, the analytic-continental distinction is plenty relevant here. People keep complaining about my arguments, my premises, you complained about my "presentation" and say I have no argument, even when I spell out my argument for you. There are people who care about arguments and technique. Then there are people who care about ideas and relevance to social issues like me. The analytic-continental distinction matters as long as people keep pretending that because an idea lacks a strong, persuasive argument, then the idea isn't worth engaging. And people are clearly pretending that arguments matter more than ideas in this thread.
Open your heart and mind to romance, then you will see the loving community I lay the groundwork for. Internet culture fears romance just like it fears community because it likes to pretend we're all atomistic individuals. Embrace romance. Admit you have an (unrequited) crush on me.
Also, the analytic-continental distinction is plenty relevant here. People keep complaining about my arguments, my premises, you complained about my "presentation" and say I have no argument, even when I spell out my argument for you. There are people who care about arguments and technique. Then there are people who care about ideas and relevance to social issues like me. The analytic-continental distinction matters as long as people keep pretending that because an idea lacks a strong, persuasive argument, then the idea isn't worth engaging. And people are clearly pretending that arguments matter more than ideas in this thread.
Open your heart and mind to romance, then you will see the loving community I lay the groundwork for. Internet culture fears romance just like it fears community because it likes to pretend we're all atomistic individuals. Embrace romance. Admit you have an (unrequited) crush on me.
the analytics think that they can use formal logic and conditional statements to justify what is ideology.
the continentals elevate the world of ideas to supreme determinant. Even if they are materialists, they are only in a mechanical form. They refuse to historicise ethics and history, because they want to remain cultural relativists. If as Butler claims, democracy is foundational to gender, then how do they take a consistent position against honour killings and femicide? This is a war! the views of men, or even many women who support these practices don't matter, we have to side with the avant-garde.
In this sense, the continentals through their very existence serve as reciprocal determinant to analytics.
Both are degenerated from bourgeois liberalism, a very serious matter in the 18th century, no doubt.
Another way to think of this is to consider social contract theory, which has now regressed to human rights law, which is both a degeneration from the enlightenment and a resurrection of primitive superstitious natural law.
The intelligentsia can only regress from now on. The future is not theirs.
the continentals elevate the world of ideas to supreme determinant. Even if they are materialists, they are only in a mechanical form. They refuse to historicise ethics and history, because they want to remain cultural relativists. If as Butler claims, democracy is foundational to gender, then how do they take a consistent position against honour killings and femicide? This is a war! the views of men, or even many women who support these practices don't matter, we have to side with the avant-garde.
In this sense, the continentals through their very existence serve as reciprocal determinant to analytics.
Both are degenerated from bourgeois liberalism, a very serious matter in the 18th century, no doubt.
Another way to think of this is to consider social contract theory, which has now regressed to human rights law, which is both a degeneration from the enlightenment and a resurrection of primitive superstitious natural law.
The intelligentsia can only regress from now on. The future is not theirs.
Not a bad interpretation, per se, but an anti-intellectual one for sure. I oppose anti-intellectualism in all its forms. I aim to promote intellectual culture, which would be easier if certain people didn't turn every discussion into a debate.