Ye shall gather store of women .
-
It means for a woman that she ought to make sure that the right man stocks her up and that under his umbrella she can achieve her Feminine WILL, which is undoubtedly to use her "charms" to manipulate this man into providing her with base material comforts the sort of shallow pointless crap that women like. Shiny stones, fancy garments, new shoes etc. To shaw her off and breed from her a son, that is a continuation of his father's achievements, so than she can wallow in her material things and play her stupid little games of blackmail and envy with her sisters.
Men should store up women, because it is a sign that a man is powerful enough to waste his excess on lower planes, on base material nonsense, like females and the crass things they live for.
Also women can be useful for sex magick, I mean even the best quality ink pen needs something to smear itself on, if it expects to manifest visible signs.
Of course there are ritual formula that avoid contamination with the lower planes all together, if one is so inclined, Certain forms of Eucharist for example. Though some of these deal with the 2 of wands, a card that might give some men apprehension.
-
You've posted some off the wall stuff before Froclown, but I think this is one of them that takes the cake.
"providing her with base material comforts the sort of shallow pointless crap that women like. Shiny stones, fancy garments, new shoes etc."
Yes, because that's really what all women want. What a crock. If I had a woman like that I'd dump her like a dead weight off of a burning ship yet somehow I'm married...
-
By nature women only care about babies, being the center of attention and stirring up drama.
They always want shiny things and things others envy, only because it gives them the attention that they need because they will go into bouts of hysterical Mania cycled with depression if their continuous insecurities are not constantly appeased by a barrage of complements. (which she does not even care if these are sincere complements, she just must hear certain words and phrases constantly) No one is quite sure just why women are so neurotic, but some evidence points to the uterus as the cause, Since it's removal tends to counter the extremes of such behavior at menopause, also filling it with a child seems to be effective, in some cases. (to paraphrase Crowley "Woman will snatch the dog from it's basket or the child from it's crib, to prove the old adage, nature abhors a vacuum") Of course often the baby become yet another accessory to daunt over and show off as a means to get attention and stir up drama.
The female inferiority feeling is triggered especially in the presence of males, and is exasperated to a markedly high degree with the ingestion of alcohol. Her behaviors became the template for what has become known as historic personality disorder, engaging in inappropriate hyper-sexual behavior and making a scene of herself in public, all over the need of attention and compliments to assuage her inferiority. Her main interest in men is not sexual, rather it is that she envy's his power and this envy manifests in her as a desire to destroy that power. (This may come as a Castration desire, but is not always manifest in that physical symbol) It is rather her interest to humiliate him, or better yet to get him to share his secrets so that she might black male him, thus emasculating him, and taking from him the reins of power. (One needs only mention Delila of Biblical fame, but for the extremes of what untempered hysteria can mount up to, let us allude to Medea, who murdered her own children just to make a point about her feelings and how important it is that her vanity be acknowledged)
It is for this reason that Crowley's Advice is that Women be fed on their own food, lies, deception, intrigue and empty compliments.
(Ok have maybe we have had enough misogyny for today)
-
Well these things are true.
But only if you reduce a human being to the bare and most basic drives and instincts
If we were purely driven by Sexual instinct.
Men would be power hungry brutish Barbarians, which is true an the most base level of instinct.
But we are social beings. I have put forth what Crowley called "The WILL of her body"
But fortunately we are not Purely unrefined sexual instinct.Also I am basing what I have said here off of my own experiences with several women who are diagnosed Bipolar.
For one case, what I have written is an understatement of the behavior I have observed, not an exaggeration.
-
Socrastein on another forum points out, after Froclown was banned from that site, that:
"Froclown was infamous for jumping on the other side of the fence when everyone flocked to the other. I saw a lot of discussions result from Fro's candid use of Devilish advocation, as it were, and many conversations centered around Fro's ability to spark people's interest, passion, and even anger."
Devil's advocate can be useful, but isn't there a time and place when it just becomes wasteful noise, and instead of raising the level of conversation by offering a different point of view, it actually sinks the ship...so to speak?
He's just busting rocks...
sigh
-
Wow, froclown, how does that post-Victorian mindset work for your sex life? I have to disagree with your idea of all that women want... I happen to be married to someone who I have never bought jewelry for or anything of any substantial dollar amount for that matter. She pays for all of her own things has her own interests and could probably wipe the floor with you magically and intellectually. You seem to be a full blow misogynist, are you in the closet about your sexuallity or simply trolling this thread? I think you need to get some confidence in your wand. BTW trying out homosexuality can be really fun and enlightening!
-
@Froclown said
"
Also I am basing what I have said here off of my own experiences with several women who are diagnosed Bipolar.For one case, what I have written is an understatement of the behavior I have observed, not an exaggeration."
Why would it even cross one's mind to generalize a sex based on your interactions with a few of them with a diagnosed disorder. Do you have any interactions with...normal..women?
I have bought my wife a couple of pieces of jewelry, but none of which she asked for. When I took her into Tiffany's to get her a 10 year anniversary ring, I was having to talk her up in the price of what to spend - not down.
-
geeze one thing at a time man.
I am trying out misogyny right now.
Anyway, times have changed.
Of course I exaggerated a bit. But I think Freud would have
agreed with and been amused by my Characterization.
I did with words what those street artist do when they draw people with
big heads and exaggerated features.
Also what I said is not that far off from what Crowley wrote, If you read
the lest of his advice on Women from Liber Aleph. -
@Froclown said
"Also I am basing what I have said here off of my own experiences with several women who are diagnosed Bipolar.
For one case, what I have written is an understatement of the behavior I have observed, not an exaggeration."
Froclown, Your recitation of the female character according to your experience is noted.
In reply I will add;
Like most men, I have a mother. I also have a plurality of sisters. My wife of nearly 30 years is still my wife. She has even more sisters than I do. Then there is her mother....
Then there is my little brother's wife and his sisters in law... etc. etc. etc.
(edit: and as far as I know none of them are bipolar)
There is much observation in my daily life to corroborate your statements.
As Dennis Prager says, "stereotypes are usually true". His stories are hilarious.
-
@Froclown said
"Yes, but stereotypes are not the whole truth they "see the whack and don't see what is dope" as a wise man once said."
Of course they are not the whole truth. That is why they are called 'stereotypes' and not 'whole truth'.
I have no idea what "see the whack and don't see what is dope" means.
I did a google search and pulled up nada,zero,zip on that one.
-
@kuniggety said
"I have bought my wife a couple of pieces of jewelry, but none of which she asked for. When I took her into Tiffany's to get her a 10 year anniversary ring, I was having to talk her up in the price of what to spend - not down."
10 years...
A "couple" pieces...
Gird yer loins sonny boy... the best is yet to come....
what a freekin' joke!
I have bought my wife countless pieces... !!
(or so she told me so after the fact...
)... "normal"... sheesh....
is there such a thing?...
-
Yikes, this is not what I expected to have in my face his morn....
but since it is, I will share that I sometimes have misoginistic moments.
When I go to help the women and children at the abuse shelter,
or council the Ladies in Al-Non, or in my classes.Sometimes for a brief moment I think and feel the worst I have ever felt.....and mistakenly has directed that at a sex.
Thank the Gods I have been trained to watch myself, for these moment are brief
like a blink of the eye.I remind myself an adage my sister taught me years ago
"water seeks its own level"
So I will assert, that sure there are people of all sorts out in the world, with all sorts of nasty qualities that may appear to be a fair representation of the population. But in a heliocentric way, we bring every little thing to us, based on Laws, and the Laws will be true and just.
So if we are surrounded by people (or things for that matter) that we deem low, unworthy, yucky, slimly, beneath us, so to speak......well that will say alot about ones own true character, and where one is allowing ones thoughts to go.
I am fully aware of why I am friends with whom I am friends with, and why I have the relatives I have. And I am in complete agreement with that fact.
BTW-I do like shiny things, alot. But a silver and diamond necklace will always be valuable, where as a red convertable has a very limited exchange. Something that took a million or so years to create has a profound power, and to adorn oneself with the beauty of Gaian gifts is not something to be taken lightly.
-
Lately I'm finding New Scientist magazine to be major source of religious and mystical inspiration. Now, just as the TOT fora are hotting up with discussions of gender issues, New Scientist (17 July 2010) has an opinion article by neuroscientist Lise Eliot arguing that hard-wired, biological differences in male and female psychology are small and insignificant.
"Yes, boys and girls, man and women, are different. But most of those differences are far smaller than ... stereotypes suggest. Nor are reasoning, speaking, computing, empathising, navigating, and other cognitive differences fixed in the genetic architecture of our brains. All such skills are learned, and neuro-plasticity ... trumps hard-wiring every time." So any differences that may exist can be unlearned.
Differences are also statistical rather than absolute. So, "By around 8 or 9, the average boy is more active than about two-thirds of girls, meaning that a third of girls are more active than the average boy."
And gender differences are sometimes just in the eyes of the beholder. When male infants were dressed as girls and females as boys, observers unaware of the switch reported more stereotypically masculine behavior in the blue-clad girls and more feminine behavior in the pink-clad boys.
Although she doesn't use Thelemic terminology, her conclusion is that by teaching a child to conform to sexual stereotypes, we are interfering with his or her opportunity to discover his or her unique true will.
-
@gmugmble said
"When male infants were dressed as girls and females as boys, observers unaware of the switch reported more stereotypically masculine behavior in the blue-clad girls and more feminine behavior in the pink-clad boys."
And I'll bet kids tied up in a straightjacket and hog tied will be less active than those by the kiddie pool in a bathing suit.
Men and women are very different creatures. One report tells us that the male human has more genetic similarity to a male gorilla than he does the female human.
I think the political correctness about what it is okay to say about the female has gotten ridiculous. How is it misogynistic to observe a group of moody women and say those are moody women. Answer: It isn't (misogyny). The Age of Stupidity that started in the 1960's and spawned groups like NOW is coming to an end. Why is it okay for women to generalize about the negative side of the male all day long but when men comment accurately about some negative characteristic of the female population in general it is misogyny?
One of my sisters is a definite casualty of that era. She went into academia and chose the career path and did cancer research all her life. Now at 60 she looks back and says, "I wish I had gotten married and had kids".
-
@Labyrinthus said
"Men and women are very different creatures. One report tells us that the male human has more genetic similarity to a male gorilla than he does the female human.
"I just don't agree with you on that. The line is so arbitrary and artificial.
"I think the political correctness about what it is okay to say about the female has gotten ridiculous. How is it misogynistic to observe a group of moody women and say those are moody women. Answer: It isn't (misogyny)."
I agree. But it would be if you generalized that to all or most women. (I think I gave my own example recently: Walking through Harlem for the first time, I noticed [no surprise] that nearly everyone on the street was Black. But, in some circles, my observing that out loud would be met with a frown or tongue-lashing for my insensitivity. That's nuts.)
"The Age of Stupidity that started in the 1960's and spawned groups like NOW is coming to an end."
Yup, back to disagreeing with you, since I hold most of what emerged from the '60s (and NOW in particular) in very high regard.
"Why is it okay for women to generalize about the negative side of the male all day long but when men comment accurately about some negative characteristic of the female population in general it is misogyny?"
The words that fall short, and therefore become technically bigoted, are "female population in general." It's the generalization that is offensive (and usually grossly inaccurate).
"One of my sisters is a definite casualty of that era. She went into academia and chose the career path and did cancer research all her life. Now at 60 she looks back and says, "I wish I had gotten married and had kids".
"And, who knows, if it had gone the other way she might have looked back and said, "I wish I'd done that cancer research I'd wanted."
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"And, who knows, if it had gone the other way she might have looked back and said, "I wish I'd done that cancer research I'd wanted.""
She probably would have. I still think she would have been MUCH happier as a mom and she does too.
She now realizes the fact that she has a uterus and it is a more compelling reality to her than some contrived career path.@Jim Eshelman said
"The words that fall short, and therefore become technically bigoted, are "female population in general." It's the generalization that is offensive (and usually grossly inaccurate)."
Nope. There is nothing bigoted about making a generalization. Accurate generalizations can be made. It is only offensive or seems inaccurate to those in denial. Inaccurate ones can be made too. But to label all generalizations as bigoted is illogical.
-
@Froclown said
"
Also I am basing what I have said here off of my own experiences with several women who are diagnosed Bipolar.
"well that's a biased opinion if I ever saw one.
You don't need to summon devils, they are always calling you, all you need to do is step down and fraternise with them on their level, (and by devils i don't mean women, more like disordered nephesh). -
@Labyrinthus said
"Nope. There is nothing bigoted about making a generalization. Accurate generalizations can be made. It is only offensive or seems inaccurate to those in denial. Inaccurate ones can be made too. But to label all generalizations as bigoted is illogical."
Agreed with the first sentence as written. It's not in the making of the generalization, but in its application to those outside of the original observation group, that the problem lies.
The basic nature of bigotry, its defining characteristic, is the presumptive applying to Person X characterizations that may or may not be true of X, but are believed to be true of some set that shares some other characteristic of X. That is, it leads to enthymemes.