🐈

There's a tension between the wielder of consciousness and the method of consciousness projection (the weapon).

A heroic warrior who spends a lifetime facing his fears and being the best he can be will still be shot to death if he only has a sword. The best fighter in the world will still lose his company in a board room fight if he doesn't know how to wield words.

You could say that masculinity is about "living up to your weapon". Zuckerburg feels like a 'weak' leader because his weapon is incredibly powerful and far reaching, but he doesn't feel like he has the personal mastery over himself to use it in non-hamfisted ways.

A (stereotypical) blue-collar worker has more respect for other blue-collar workers because they haven't over-reached for weapons beyond their understanding. They're not using giant prosthetic dicks to swing at other people and have fights over.

"Being a man" then is about increasing your ability to project your real consciousness vs upgrading your weapons. E.g. in a weight lifting or running competition, drug use muddies this consciousness battle.

Measuring pure consciousness pressure is impossible though. Even in a drug free environment you have factors like genetics and luck. Our weapons our integrated into our lives. Did your colleague who got that promotion play fair? Were they better at communicating? Politics?

There hard to fake signals though like female attention. The stereotypical 'jock' or 'chad' gets all the girls while the 'nerds' seem to phallically project themselves via something like a robot or vibrator. It feels more 'cold'. "Optimizing for orgasm."

"Revenge of the nerds" is like using a nuclear powered chainsaw dick to force all the jocks to take menial jobs and creating a world of status and money based on nuclear chainsaw dick competitions.

It's a corruption of the truth of. "That which cuts the best is the most conscious."

One of reason society doesn't like 'gold diggers' is b/c it's a corruption of the (traditional) female role, identifying the greatest consciousness. The more women 'sell out' for money or power, the less societies ability to recognize consciousness.

So... the traditional yang/yin roles were to project consciousness, and to select for it. Great consciousness cannot identify itself, it needs a great mirror. The greatest consciousnesses are confidence because they aren't SELF conscious.

Being self-conscious means to merge the yin/yang aspects in yourself. It's not necessarily bad... but taken to the extreme, it means that the 'couple' as a unit isn't strictly necessary. You can become an androgynous enlightened monk all by yourself.

One of the pros of enlightenment seems to be the immunity to insanity even in absolute loneliness. Most require complex setups for this stability. E.g a partner, family, friends, etc.. Like a giant tripod vs the monk balancing perfectly still on the one pinky toe of self.

Most self-consciousness is impotent in nature because yin/yang is very difficult to balance in one person. Trying to make love to yourself ends up as masturbation for the most part. "But I'm practicing for love." Yeah... but you're improving... the wrong skill....

Relationships are much easier when the individuals play specific roles, e.g. one Yin and one Yang. More complex relationships are possible but you have to at least know how the basic one works to understand the more complex interactions.

Looping back to the consciousness as phallic sword analogy, there is also the opposite skill of combining atoms into molecules. Let's call it... the yonic manifestation of consciousness. It's more creative and birth-giving.

The Yang aspect says "This and this don't belong together." The Yin aspect says "This and this should belong together."

There's a whole set of analogies and pros and cons to this 'merging' energy as well. E.g. while the insatiability of Yang manifests as blood thirst, the insatiability of Yin manifests as gluttony.

What I think conservatives are trying to get at is that this 'creative' energy traditionally and culturally IS the more important one. Because it is so important, it ends up being taken for granted. E.g. the family structure and its ability to prolong the human race.

So.. their argument against feminists is that feminists are anti-yin, pro-yang in the same way single males w/o a girlfriend are.

Many women probably don't actually want to pick up a sword and kill dragons in order to be appreciated. Many women probably don't want to learn programming in order to not be considered dumb. Many men in fact don't want to do either of these 2 things.

It's easier to watch the king/queen/prince/princess play out the extremes of each archetype rather than try to live up to them fully ourselves.

It's hard to criticize a giant balloon dick swinging contest because you have to strap one on yourself and squeeze yourself to a podium. (Popping the balloons creates a LOT of anger and closes the ears the of crowd from hearing your message)

The key weakness of the contest though is that every contestant is mildly unsatisfied with how they're projecting themselves indirectly into life.

Providing a "Safe Space" doesn't work because many are in denial of how impotent they actually are. They're not looking for a safe space to reveal themselves but a stronger form of super glue to merge with their weapon.

War is nature's self-correcting mechanism that pops all the balloons by rubbing them against each other.

The main tension in the world now I think is that yin want's to say "I don't like this game anymore." but yang replies "But this balloon is gonna be sooo big."

So feminism is right in that yin's message needs to be LOUDER but is wrong in that thinking the problem is with yang's ears not receiving the message.

The issue is that in the emptiness of the universe... there's really not much to do except have these balloon battles. Everyone would go insane. The Direction of the Majority (sanity) cannot be maintained w/o a border against an 'enemy'.

There is nothing that can be Center if nothing needs protecting from outskirts. Yet forcing people to always be in the center makes them prisoners. Imprisoning the sacred doesn't honor it.