Feminization of Man: A response

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I read Satyr’s Feminization of Man again. The first time I read it I wasn’t IQ-maxxed enough to comprehend it fully. Now after years of playing Valorant, I have gained higher level, and now comprehend it completely.

I read it, hoping to gain some epiphany, some cartharsis, some relief from the weight of existence. Instead, even after reading this, there is no catharsis. I gain no deeper knowledge of myself; no new knowledge can be extracted from it. The reading has provided no new revelations.

Essentially, what I gather from it is that, men are animals, and that is all men are. Even, later in thread, he proclaims that there is no good or bad. That it is merely is opinion and preference, that men “ought” to be like animals.

That is, the Feminization of Man, seems to be 100% correct, and without error. And Satyr appears to be some kind of genius, analogous to Adult Sheldon Cooper. The work is both prescriptive and descriptive: “If men don’t follow the rules of animal nature, modern men will lose their creativity and edge, and inceldom will spread across the lands”.

So, after all this, I can only offer my own take.

My wish is for a Futarani race, or a kind of Feminization of Man, except different from the type of feminization of the current day.

I will give an example. My new Futarani race will be the result of careful genetic engineering. The Futarani will have higher levels of blood testosterone, than standard human men, because they will be given less DHT receptors, resulting in more surplus testosterone. DHT receptors will be withheld from key areas, and importantly, genital and reproductive areas with have normal male DHT receptors. This will result in drastically enlarged genitals.

Personality-wise, we have to somehow engineer their brain DHT receptors, such that they have a personality that is unlike Putin, and are unlikely to start wars. The main threat to humanity, besides wars, is people making WMDs. The brains must be designed in such a way as to not make WMDs. If this means less creativity is given, then so be it, it is a price that must be paid.

This is a different philosophy than “males taking estrogen to feminize themself”. Notably, importantly, Futarani have high levels of testosterone, which I feel is a key ingredient to Divinity. Secondly, Futarani is self-propagating, and can and will reproduce with females. Thus I call them the “Futarani race”.

In terms of preferences, I view good and bad as true, morality as absolute, and I have a pros and cons view of reality.

There are pros and cons to Masculinity. Creativity, and conflict, are all very exciting. Physical strength as well. This is only scratching the surface, there are much more benefits about traditional masculinity that I’m not going to to mention. However, masculinity is also a threat to civilization and human existence. Wars, WMDs, etc. Or capitalist men enslaving people in factories, etc.

Futarani is my personal preference. This is because Futarani have 3 guarantees: Beauty, Prevention of Inceldom, Prevention of War/Calamity/WMDs.

Animal Masculinity offers no such guarantees, in fact offers high probabilities of the opposite.

2

Feminization is caused by inaccessible frontiers, necessitating self-deprecating ideologies…self-abnegating spiritual dogmas.
Feminization is a symptom of civilizational decline, and prolonged sheltering.
Nature is self-correcting.

Feminization is a diagnosis, not a prescription.

3

My diagnosis, alone, has made me a target of feeble-minded, brainwashed, cowardly spirits…
Imagine the reactions if I were to dare offer a prescription.

Best medicine is preventative…but if a disease takes hold then time is of the essence.
Unfortunately, this mental disease has infected western man for over two-thousand years, so any intervention, at this point, would be risky, to the patient, and drastic…like really drastic.

When a cancer has metastasized then the doctor has to determine how much he can surgically remove, without killing the patient.

This disease is psychological, and like all psychological ailments it exhibits physical manifestations, over time.
a dis-ease spread linguistically - a semiotic virus.
We see the symptoms in how the very feeble-minded, brainwashed cowards - desperate degenerates - that attack me for simply diagnosing them, use words…like in the case of free-will, and morality…and race…and sex…

4

I laugh at those who are ‘‘worried’’ about
the ‘‘Feminization’’ of men… it reveals
far more about them then it does about
anybody else… One who is afraid of
the ‘‘Feminization’’ of men are fearful
or worried about their own masculinity..
like those who are most fearful of gays are
the ones who are in fear of being gay themselves…

it is a classic attempt to pretend something one is not…
I would say, IQ45 always trying to be Masculine,
is actually quite fearful for his own masculinity…
he is most likely a closeted gay person trying to get out…
as are most people who are deathly afraid of being feminine…
they fear they are really gay… personally, I have no
fear of the masculine or feminine persona…
I just do whatever because I am not in fear
of being gay… I am simply not interested in
being gay… but I don’t fear it like super masculine
men… to buy the Tesla cybertank is simply a man
who is fearful of their being feminine… afraid of
not being masculine enough… they are also closet
gays… they simply don’t realize it yet…

to have great fear of something is to admit one
is afraid of doing or becoming that something…
the great femininization fear is simply those who are
unsure or afraid for their own masculinity…

Kropotkin

1 Like
5

I wont expose what your posts reveal about you, old man.

Yes…I am gay.
That’s it.
I’m a flamer…
:squinting_face_with_tongue:

As if being gay, in America’s empire, is a disadvantage.
Sheesh, this dude is dumb.
:kissing_face:

Liberal Freaks
Liberal Freaks1200×675 308 KB

6

“It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers – out of unorthodoxy.”

[1984]
–Orwell, George

Feminization of Man : by indoctrinating young females you indoctrinate young males. In their hormonally intoxicated fervour to signal their ideological fitness, modern men become fervent proponents of emasculating ideologies.

What started as a movement to curb paternalism’s authoritarian excesses gradually became an attack on the very existence of the father figure, and on “toxic masculinity.” These days feminism dismisses the idea of manhood altogether, echoing modernism’s/postmodernism’s rejection of all biological identifiers.
4th Wave feminism is proving to be a nihilistic tsunami of postmodern reforms, and many men are jumping on the feminization life raft, hoping they’ll survive the deluge and remain the last men standing.

7

“The ultimate significance of modern feminism, however, is to be found in the realization that the entire biological human race is being emasculated. The larger scientific-technological basis of feminism is the progressive emasculation of the entire biological human race as technological evolution begins to outpace biological evolution.
The rise of women is correlated with the decline of biological human race because biological evolution has been subordinated to economic-technological evolution like a woman that has learned her place.”

–Heisman, Mitchell

9819935173_b547c34fc4
9819935173_b547c34fc4300×500 74.8 KB

Beta males = if you can’t beat them, join them.

Feminine malleability makes it ideal for modern multiracial, cultures-of-no-culture postmodern techno-utopian systems, such as Americanism.

Quote - James, Henry (1)
Quote - James, Henry (1)754×1024 229 KB

“After exposing the decadence of modern woman, he must not forget that man is mostly responsible for such decadence. Just like the plebeian masses would have never been able to make their way into all the domains of social life and of civilization if real kings and real aristocrats would have been in power, likewise, in a society run by real men, woman would never have yearned for or even been capable of taking the path she is following today.

The periods in which women have reached autonomy and pre-eminence almost always coincided with epochs marked by manifest decadence in ancient civilizations. Thus, the best and most authentic reaction against feminism and against every other female aberration should not be aimed at women as such, but at men instead.

It should not be expected of women that they return to what they really are and thus re-establish the necessary inner and outer conditions for reintegration of a superior race, when men themselves retain only the semblance of true virility.”

–Evola, Julius

The feminization of men, by men themselves, leads to the emancipation of females from their own femininity.

8

The end product of feminization - American individualism and feminism.

GtDh-DNaEAAEzpl
GtDh-DNaEAAEzpl635×680 69.9 KB

9

I wish I could have been born a lesbian. Unfortunately it was not in the cards of fate.

10

Reading Satyr’s feminization of man I view it less about him being insecure about his masculinity, and more of a complaint about society.

Specifically, the enshitification of society, and he tries to tie it all in with masculinity. For instance, if companies make low quality tools, its because there are not enough “real men” in the company to make higher quality tools. Or if a company tries to make a digital subscription fee, or scam people, they get away with it because society has too many beta cucks and not enough “real men” out protesting and demanding that the company play fair.

The overall vibe I get from it is that masculine men will bring about a new era of utopia and fix all the problems of society.

That and, various homophobic rants of his. His belief is that homosexuality is purely the result of human feminization, and that animal homosexuality isn’t genuine lust but domination. I don’t really agree on either points. It seems clear to me that some human homosexuals have genuine lust and some animals do as well. What’s also clear to me, is that most human males do not receive genuine lust from most human females, in any society, both ancient and modern.

Besides utopia, I also get the vibe from him that he sees nothing wrong with barbaric ancient societies and has nostalgia for the barbarian days. He of course glosses over everything wrong with masculinity and ancient societies such as the constant warfare, slavery and general lack of human rights. One of his objectives is to improve natural selection and things like modern egalitarian societies interfere with that.

11

Homosexual behavior has many causes…from demographic imbalances (penguins), to mere displays of dominance (wolves, canines) - among canines inferior males experience a testosterone decrease to help them integrate within the pack dominated by one alpha pair - to methods of non-violently maintaining social hierarchies - stress relief (bonobo) AND unfit mutations, reinforced by hormonal imbalances during gestation and weening (humans).
It is an unfit and parasitical mutation sine it cannot reproduce without contradicting itself.

Only in humans does ti become a lifestyle choice…
Why?
Sheltering human environments propagating and compounding said unfit mutations.
In other words, human meddling produces pollutants, of the genetic type…the herd is sick.

12

Like we said earlier about race. Genetic buildup and then release.

Evolution didn’t occur in 50 years. Yet we see all the gays only in 50 years time. Why. Genetic buildup and then release.

Anti-gay ideology has been the norm in society for more than 2,000 years. Promotion of heterosexual reproduction has caused gays and bisexuals to propagate into the gene pool unfettered and undetected. Had you allowed homosexuality free reign in the 1500s, the homosexual gene would have died off naturally. But now with sperm donation, turkey basting, cloning, artificial insemination… you are now stuck with gays in the gene pool, probably forever…

Even your Fuhrer, was said to be bisexual, along with his general Rohm…

This seems to contradict your other opinion, that human homosexuality is not a lifestyle choice, but an adaptation to sexual austerity (hypergamy.) So it seems you have two different opinions, that it is a lifestyle choice, or it is forced on people as a result of hypergamy.

What I find interesting is that you are concerned if male homosexuals experience true lust, or if it is merely a display of dominance more similar to the animal kingdom. But if whether or not women experience true lust, is of lower or of no priority, as you believe in Patriarchal society and forced monogamy.

You view women as a means to an end. I am not saying this from a position of moral superiority or holier than thou, though. My Futarani plans may require this to a certain extent… in the beginning, some or many women may lack attraction to the Futarani form, and these women will be left behind. However, the female brain is flexible, naturally sexually flexible. After some generations they will come to terms with the Futarani and begin to prefer the Futarani over other men. This is founded on my belief that Beauty is objective - Greeks called Beauty a “Force”.

Now it is my belief that most women do not genuinely lust towards most men because most men lack genuine beauty. Millenia of a lack of true sexual selection has led to this. Only now with recent feminism do we see true sexual selection taking place. Before then, man has had to shelter other men from the hypergamous reality, preventing sexual selection from taking place, and as a side effect this has led to the continuation of ugliness in society. Patriarchal forced monogamy has no real endgame, it is an attempt to control Nature and delay the inevitable until She eventually gains independence. It is understandable why Natural Selection would be preferred to this, in so many ways. But I ask, what is Natural Selection, how do you define Natural Selection? An asteroid hitting the planet is Natural Selection. Ai obliterating humanity is Natural Selection. Anything that is Natural is Natural Selection. Natural Selection does not always lead to a good result (good and bad is objective and absolute.) Natural Selection does not always create strength or health - for example, rats are naturally selected to be unclean and unhealthy, selecting for high quantity of low quality offspring that live in their own poop. Similarly, ancient societies, notably Sparta as one of the worst offenders, offers Natural Selection, but a very low quality of life for its constituents, 7 slaves for every Spartan…

13

Why can’t it be both, explaining the upsurge in recent years?
Sheltering allows unfit mutations to propagate, and with every reproductive cycle they can compound, producing unforeseeable psychosomatic effects..

Mutations occur randomly, with every reproduction…many factors, even cosmological, such as cosmic particles affected a foetus, or the mother.
Hormonal imbalances.
Consequences of two DNA sequences merging, triggering unexpected consequences.

Add to this nutrition, wealth…etc.
Estrogen imitating foods can be included in the category of man-made interventions. causing pollutants.

So a beta male, who has innate feminine traits, may be pushed to adopt homosexuality by envirnmetnal circusmtnaces…others are born with pronounced feminine traits, due to hormones or how the parental DNA helix merged…all sorts of causes can explain it.
Another cause may be overpopulation…nature’s way of re-balancing.
Another reason is empire decline…when empires collapse - worldview ends - degeneracy increases. Latent impulses seek expression as a product of their subconsciuos distress.

One thing is for certain…it is disadvantageous from a biological perspective. A genetic dead end.

Female promiscuity - lust - had to be controlled to harness male lust to social conventions.

As I’ve said, and you msut know, if you read my pots, females are genetic and memetic filters…so indoctrinating females indoctrinates males.
This is crucial in racially heterogeneous societies, like moderns ones…like the US.

Control female filtering, by indoctrinating them into an ideology or a culture, and you gain control of a population’s destiny.
Natural selection is replaced by social sectional - by adjusting female filters…or their judgments on what they consider ‘desirable’ masculine traits.

Now there’s an issue with this…amnbifesting female confusions…their d desire to “fined themselves” later in life…mind/body dissonance.

This happens to the degree that a woman is indoctrinate into an ideology that is nihilistic. The degree of its nihilism determines the degree of the ensuring dissonance.

What do I mean?
A woman can be raised, indoctrinated, into an ideology or a religious dogma, that contradicts her naturally selected impulses.
The more severe the contradiction the more problematic things become…because a female can find herself instinctively attracted to males she is educated to consider undesirable and to consider socially ideal males socially desirable even if she is not physically attract d to them.

Add to this the ethical rules enforcing monogamy and you get modern women.
A case of gene/meme disharmony, manifesting psychosomatic effects.

Natural selection = advantageous mutations propagate. Disadvantageous mutations inhibit propagation.
These traits spread within a population.
Those with the advantageous mutation live longer and so have a higher probability of passing no their genes, and/or they dominate those of their own kind.

Social selection = ideologically determined social advantages propagate within society, even if they may contradict naturally selected traits, such as symmetry/proportionality , i.e., beauty, attractiveness, indicating fertility and health, higher resistance to entropy and viruses etc.

14

:face_with_raised_eyebrow:

Wow…
Whomever goes against the postmodern sacred triad…Jews, Blacks, women…must be a Nazi.

And what if he was bisexual…how does this disprove anything I’ve said?
What if he were a closeted flamer…and?

Incredible…simple minds…simple dichotomies.

Recovering Abrahamics…they think they’ve transcended Abrahamic good vs evil, but they haven’t. they’ve only changed the jargon.
Now evil is replaced by Nazi…Christ’s sacrifice has been replaced by the holocaust…salvation has been replaced by the term ‘freedom’ which, ironically, most postmodern Americanized simpletons reject, implying that absolute cosmic order is the one-God of Abraham…and determinism is their way of saying God’s will.

They seek salvation from nature’ evil, inhumane…injustices…Satanic.
Nature = Satan…trickster. He makes them believe they are free, i.e., saved, but they remain enslaved to their totalitarian authoritarian singularity, they’ve renamed UNIVERSE…saved from themselves…eternally innocent.

15

Good and evil is absolute. Only simple minds deny this.

You said in other threads you were a National Socialist, and you frequently complain about Jews. You contradict yourself again, and use the word Nazi instead of National Socialist, which you complained the word Nazi was made by Jews.

My view of reality is good and evil is absolute. There are pros and cons to everything. Some things are good, other things evil. For example, the Holocaust was evil, and WW2 was evil, but Hitler wanted to do some good in the world and make a utopia, and improve beauty and genetics, which is good. Hitler offered more gun rights than most modern countries, but restricted other freedoms. Some of the restrictions were good, other restrictions bad. If Ai destroys humanity and causes human extinction, Hitler would have redeemed himself, but there would be noone to write it in the history books, and an Ai would have to decide to go back in time, to save humanity.

Most moral relativists make the fallacy of Abrahamic world view response - that is, those of a Western world view decide an entire object is good or it is bad. They don’t divide the object into components and label the components as good or bad. Then the atheist moral relativist responds to the Western fallacy and declares good or bad doesn’t exist.

As for nature it is good and bad. There is a Satanic energy which is like a Halloween energy which is like a positive energy. The opposite end of the spectrum which is Protestant energy which is like a sterile and calculative energy. There are all different energies with different functions. Sort of like Apollo and Dionysus energy but Dionysus energy is not the same as Satanic energy. Protestant energy is not the same as Catholic energy and so forth. Right now society is mostly about Sisyphus energy.

16

Yeah but I’m not convinced that you’re not just a homophobe and this is all a polemics to justify your homophobia. That the homophobia came first and then you invented a explanation to rationalize it. But I’m not sure.

For example most lions don’t reproduce, most male lions become gay. Most wolves don’t reproduce, only an alpha male and alpha female does. So most of them are genetic dead ends. It is a form of Natural Selection though, just not one that you or I, or other rational beings, would approve of.

Like I said earlier, rats also have natural selection, but they select for lack of health, living in their own feces, living short lifespans full of disease, having very poor eyesight, etc. Natural Selection does not automatically create a good or bad result.

Like with the Flood and Halo, the Flood are a form of Natural Selection that spreads misery throughout the galaxy, Natural Selection doesn’t automatically result in good outcomes.

Xenoestrogens mimick estrogen but block estrogen receptors, resulting in incomplete feminization. Modern men lack sex appeal because they give off a vibe of “too feminized to be attractive, not feminized enough to have femboy or kpop appeal.” And when you look at them you generally assume they have a 5" or smaller penis.

Natural selection is a set of all things, sexual selection is a subset of natural selection just as an asteroid wiping out the dinosaurs is. Females are attracted to badboys until they reach age 21 then they want to marry rich beta males. Society has other forms of artificial selection as well such as sperm banks demanding males have full-time employment and university degrees, which automatically rejects bad boys, masculine males, or social rebels from the gene pool.

As for homosexuality I think the lust is real. I like penis but I am not gay. I couldn’t have sexual relations with a man, unless I look feminine. Otherwise it would feel awkward and cringe, and shameful. It would make me feel the opposite of pride. Second thing is most males faces look ugly to me, so there’s that as well. When I was younger and had higher levels of testosterone, I disliked penis, wanted SRS because I disliked penis so much. Couldn’t understand why gays wanted penis so much. As I grew older and wiser I grew out of my disdain for penis, I now realize the ultimate form of lifeform is a tall woman with a penis, this is my utopian vision for humanity, this will result in world peace and salvation. I realize penis is a mathematical objectivity, lesbians lack any real penis, and so their relationships lack any stability. We see this reflected in tools and electronics. Male tools entering female tools, male cables and chords entering female plugs and cables.

17

Does it matter?
From a mind that believes this…

All value judgments, including moral/ethical, have an objective, a standard of evaluating.
What is the standard when a mind uses good/evil, alluding to an Abrahamic totalitarian authoritarian singularity?
Absolute safety; eternal life.
The desperate projections of a cowering spirit.

Why do social species, including humans, share certain moral values - objectives?
Because cooperation is a survival strategy, necessitating the limitation of individual options.

But you have yet to break free from herd psychology…

I covered this…

Nature is unjust…and so spirits as your own seek relief in delusions…of good v evil and absolutism.
It’s a matter of inherited endurance - an individuals inherited constitution.
Not all can be true philosophers…most needs comforting lies to help them cope.

To conceal their motives and what motivates them they project fear into those who make them feel insecure…ergo homophobia is a typical accusation…concealing their own anxieties.

Actually, a more accurate description would be disgust.
Conservatives have a lower tolerance for toxicity. The gag reflex.
Usually conservatives have a higher pain tolerance.
They do not fear gays, they are disgusted by them…and what they do in their bedrooms.
Liberals have a higher disgust tolerance, but a lower pain tolerance.
Pain as in psychological pain.

Liberals cannot stop projecting themselves in another’s circusmtnaces - sympathy.
They are incapable of being objective…they are imemrsed in inter-subjectivity. Herd consciousness.

Liberals ignore the demographic implications…they never think of the negative…so they easily spend wealth and tolerate all sorts of weird lifestyles…never thinking of the long-term consequences.

18

You mean what goes on in conservative imaginations. They can’t stop thinking about it, that is the problem.

19

I’m giving you a correct analysis of the biological roots…not fear…fear is what governs the left…but disgust.
Fear underlies collectives…and this is why fear is the first thing lefties use to accuse their adversaries…those that make them feel fear.
Homo-phobia…xeno-phobia…trans-phobia…all projections.

That is not what underlies the conservative reaction…it is disgust…a desire to keep clean…free from toxicity…

Left = low fear threshold.
Right = low disgust threshold.

Lesfties are easier to make afraid…righties are easily made to feel disgust.

20

You mean a kind of mysophobia, by which feelings of disgust find contamination repulsive. When disgust becomes pathological, it is characterised by a disproportionate, persistent, and irrational reaction to stimuli that most people would consider harmless or normal.