Page all of 7 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#11961 - 09/28/08 07:59 PM Father Of the Year!
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
Seriously, this guy did what a dad's supposed to do!

INDIANAPOLIS -- A man who police said broke into a home with the intention of sexually assaulting a 17-year-old girl in her bedroom died early Sunday morning after a struggle with the girl's father.

David Meyers (pictured), 52, was pronounced dead at the scene shortly after officers arrived following a report of a home invasion in the 3500 block of West 79th Street at about 3:20 a.m.

Officers said they found Robert McNally, 64, on the floor with his arm around the neck of Meyers, struggling to hold him down.

When officers told McNally he could let go, they found that Meyers was unresponsive. Medics who were called to the scene then pronounced Meyers dead.

Indianapolis police Sgt. Matt Mount said Meyers had come into the home naked, except for a mask and latex gloves.

"He had rope, had a knife, had condoms, had a gag," Mount said.

Police said Meyers had gotten into the home through a window next to the girl's bedroom and that he knew the home well because his uncle owns it and he was an acquaintance of the family.

The teen awoke to find a naked man in her room and began screaming, alerting McNally, police said.

During a protracted struggle in the hallway of the home, McNally was able to get his arm around Meyers' neck and subdue him while his wife called police, officers said.

Meyers was a registered sex offender and was released from prison two years ago after he had served 10 years of a 20-year sentence for criminal confinement and sexual deviate conduct stemming from a case in Hamilton County.

Meyers was also being sought in Boone County for failure to register as a sex offender.

Police said Meyers had been living with his mother down a gravel road from the home that the McNally family lived in and had recently lost his job.

"When they got the mask off, both the father and daughter recognized him," Mount said.

Police said Meyers had a history of heart problems. They were not immediately sure if he died as a result of heart failure or from being choked.

The results of the police investigation will be turned over to the Marion County Prosecutor's Office, but it is unlikely charges will be filed, police said.


Note that he didn't intend to kill the invader, but it happened from the dad restraining him until the cops got there.
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#11963 - 09/28/08 08:28 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Nemesis]
fakepropht Moderator Offline
Big Slick
active member


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 990
Loc: Texas
Awesome. The ultimate penalty was paid. And kudos to these seniors defending themselves. Seems a majority of these types of stories I see lately involve someone 60+. On the one hand, no guns were involved. So another statistic won't be skewed one way or the other. On the other hand, it would have been beneficial if the homeowner had used a gun. Another instance of a home owner using gun ownership to protect his property and his family. Please tell me the old man is an ex marine.
_________________________
Beer, the reason I get up every afternoon.

Top
#11964 - 09/28/08 08:32 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: fakepropht]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
I think it raises the level of badass-ness that he used his bare hands to kill that freak. However unintentionally ;\) I wouldn't doubt it if the dad was ex-military.
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#11968 - 09/28/08 09:51 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Nemesis]
DistroyA Offline
member


Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 478
Loc: Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, UK
I completely agree. Father of the year. He deserves a medal at the very least for taking care of that fucking nut-job.
_________________________
"A man chooses, a slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan of Ryan Industries (Bioshock)

Top
#12080 - 10/01/08 05:18 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: DistroyA]
ZephyrGirl Offline
R.I.P.
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 706
Loc: Adelaide Australia
Yes, bare handed just desserts! Thanks for posting this. I really hope he doesn't end up getting charged. It would be soooo wrong on so many levels if he did.

Probably lucky though, that he didn't shoot him instead.

Zeph
_________________________
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass -
It's about learning to dance in the rain.


Top
#16867 - 12/25/08 12:56 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: ZephyrGirl]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Even if it was unintentional, the father had every right to kill him- that perverted arsehole was about to irrevocably alter a persons outlook on life forever, not to mention the physical outrage inflicted on them;being his own daughter, I thought he showed remarkable restraint- I would have cut the dirty bastard's penis off at least!Good on him, he should be lauded for it in a public ceremony, not charged.
One less noxious human being darkening the planet.....
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16869 - 12/25/08 01:05 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
There are some people who deserve to die, and thankfully, some people who make sure they do.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16884 - 12/25/08 07:21 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
This might be a controversial question but if Satanism is about might is right and a predator and prey dichotomy then why do we mostly react rather moral when the same principle is applied in sexual matters.

Of course Satanism isn't promoting rape and child molestation but what philosophical grounds do we have to condemn it in the first place? We condemn every sort of sex that isn't voluntary by all participating?
Good, nice principle BUT what is the essential difference between a bodyfuck and a mindfuck or a financial fuck. Is reaping someone of his money or status or job in a philosopical sense less bad than reaping them of their self-worth, innocence or virginity?

D.

Top
#16885 - 12/25/08 08:12 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
I can quite happily condemn rape and child molestation - apart from totally reaping the victims of their self worth,innocence or virginity, it's totally violating one of the Satanic rules which states that you "shouldn't make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal"
Any other kind of sex between two (or more) consenting people, that's fine no matter how "kinky"it is as everyone involved is aware of what's going on to a greater or lesser extent, but the 6 year old kid in a dark room with Uncle Dick's hand in her panties- what mating signal did she give? What mating signal did that man's daughter give to the Dickwad that broke into their house intending to defile her totally?
Money, Status, and Jobs can always be reinstated, as can self worth, but innocence and virginity never can be- especially in the case of the raped, molested child.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16886 - 12/25/08 08:32 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
So it is against the satanic rules?
In the little niche of Laveyan Satanism it is a dogma, a taboo indeed but the SB served a purpose more than 40 years ago and nowadays, besides it maybe being a valuable source of discovery or self-identification for a novice on the LHP, how strongly should it be followed and how much of its dogma should be accepted because Anton said so?

I do understand the apologetic nature of modern Satanism in its day but nowadays, all those apologetic and proselytizing aspects are only valuable if you want to become, what I call, the housenigger of society. Do you really want to become a societal housenigger? Does it make anyone feel good about himself to adapt far enough to be allowed to be a little different?
It doesn't work for me, that's for sure.

If you travel the LHP far enough, you'll notice that when you close in on the limits of Modern Satanism, you don't close in on the limits of the LHP. Because Anton said so or because it is a rule is essentially as limiting as doing so because it's one of the ten commandments. At one point you'll have to realize that you're condemning, not because you think YOU are but because you are instructed to do so. Find the instruction and destroy it.

If the little girl is raped, we'll all think it is horrible but if she grows to become the founder of the Newborn Lutherian church, we do think someone should smack the shit out of her and stick a large dildo up her ass. 90% of the babies out there grow up to become something we despise but oh boy, if something bad happens to them before point x, we are horrified. Everything after point x is hailed.

Why? Because Anton said so? Because it is a rule? Because society indoctrinated us as such? Because it is some sort of genetic moral reaction?

What we encounter here are our own limitations.

D.

Top
#16887 - 12/25/08 09:11 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Due to circumstances that I won't enter in to here, my opinion on rape and molestation stands firm, and was forged long before I read LaVey's Satanic rules- call it a limitation if you will, but it is my opinion that the SB contains the kind of information that might be over 40 years old, but can still be quite relevant in the present- not to live your life by as if every word in it was gospel, but to use as a guideline if you so chose, not because "Anton said so".
And who knows, the little girl who was raped probably grew up to become the founder of the Newborn Lutherian church as a result of being raped- a traumatic event can sure have far-reaching consequences...
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16891 - 12/25/08 10:09 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I assume that behind your hint is some emotional experience, self or close and it doesn't need to be addressed. But why then was your answer not: experience told me instead of Anton said? And how come experience can contradict other opinions concerning predators and prey? If I become a victim of molestation, I will oppose it from that point on. If I become a victim of violence, will I oppose violence from then on too? Create another taboo?
How many bad things does a satanist have to suffer until he isn't intellectually fit to be one? What does not kill me makes me stronger? Does it really?

I think Jake said something along the lines; if a guy and a newborn christian can both make a peanut butter sandwich, being a newborn christian isn't of relevance in it. The same goes on here in these moral subjects. No matter where they are posted, the reactions are close to identical. So, concluding, being a satanist doesn't seem to be of any relevance in it. Then why oh why is there such a similarity in reactions between people with such a different outlook on things? It can't be religion, it can't be their philosophical position. So what else but the same set of instructions? The same pre-formatted reaction triggered by taboo words. Why does it bother us when predators play with their prey and not when they kill it?

I remember this tsunami thing a couple of years ago. The whole world was shocked. That week I went to the pub and all the talk was about how horrible it was, how unfortunate those people were and that we all must contribute our part (read cash) to help the poor sods. I asked them why they were suddenly so emotionally shocked. By the time I finish my beer, the same amount of people will have died on a global scale. Death happens all the time and only the timeframe and positioning seems to trigger automated reactions. 200.000 dead at one spot in 10 seconds and the world cries, 200.000 in 5 minutes all over the place and we shrug, don't even pay attention.
Instructions and automated reactions. We must feel, we must cry.

No, we don't have to.

D.

Top
#16892 - 12/25/08 10:17 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
You know, having been homosexually raped at knife point when I was a child gave me a pretty good sense of how I feel about child molesters at a pretty young age. And I believe in LaVeyan dictates that a child should not be harmed as well. Really, I could give a fuck about what happens to a child molester. And if I grew to be Pope of the Catholic Church, you could still damn me for my lack of common sense, but one has nothing at all to do with another. It's not a choice. It's not like I HAD a choice.

You know, that was when I was 12. I'm almost 60 now. Has it affected my life? I grew strong, and I grew wise and I made a success of myself for sure, but you know that that single incident is something I remember EVERY DAY? EVERY DAMNED DAY. It pops into my mind in the middle of coffee, or watching a movie, or in my sleep, or in the shower. Has it affected my life or have I gotten over it because it was just something that someone felt he had a right to do, and I was the body there that he decided to do it to. And would I even be typing this if he hadn't heard someone coming and run?

Has it affected my life? I got a vasectomy at 20. There has never been a time when I even thought about being a father. I've rationalized it over the years and said I just don't like kids... truth is probably more that I don't want that kind of responsibility, because I know that in the long run, while I might try, I couldn't REALLY protect him or her against that guy who just felt he had the right,

So in this case, FUCK Satanism, FUCK LaVeyan Philosophy, FUCK Society. If we hold only one thing in our lives as sacrosanct, it should be this right to be safe as a child from the utterly selfish whims of people of this sort. With fire, plague, war, starvation, random objects falling from space and a million other possibilities of harm in childhood, this is one bastion of safety we should be able to expect.

Now, in the case of the asshole who decided I was his personal playtoy, the State of Illinois executed his ass a long, long time ago after he got caught for a capitol crime. I learned about it when I saw his picture in the papers when I was a kid, and I felt CHEATED. To this day, I wish I had gotten to throw the switch. I'd volunteer to do it every day of my life and eat a snack while I watched a child molester fry.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16895 - 12/25/08 12:24 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I love it when I get to interject a 3rd side into a conversation. Looks like this will be one of those times.

Diavolo has a good point. Satanism is a religion/philosophy of predators. Where is the justification to stop at point x? Doesn't slapping an arbitrary line down between ok and not ok, just that - arbitrary?

To that I say Satanism is also a religion of human beings. Human beings generally act according to a fairly uniform set of parameters. Sure there is wiggle room but evolution has instilled certain instincts into us to ensure survival - ie the ones that ignored/did not possess these instincts died out long ago for obvious reasons, leaving just us.

One of those instincts, is the drive to protect those we care about. The human male is hard wired to do that. We are also capable and prone to empathy, which is another survival trait. Rape, and child molestation, are universally demonized for a reason.

Satanism is about embracing our humanity, in it's totality...right? Giving voice and expression to all things animal and more specifically human animal. Part of that is embracing our protective and empathetic nature towards women and children. (as long as it does not cross wires with a more personal interest)

People have been so trained to deny their humanity, mostly by religion, that people walk right by rapes in progress or child abuse, without even batting an eye.

Ever wonder why the most influential promoter of self-denying religion is also the biggest visible culprit when it comes to child rape?
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#16898 - 12/25/08 12:43 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Jake, thankyou for your searing honesty and for contributing to this thread - being someone's idea of a personal playtoy myself for many years, your post resonated with me strongly.
I also grew stronger and wiser, and moved on with my life- the friendships I've forged in my adult life are totally in the dark about my childhood, but like you Jake, I've never had the desire to have kids and never intend to, and those vermin that think they "have the right" will always find a way to get to get to the kid if they really want to.Contemplating that, I don't want the responsibility either.

Diavolo, you are correct in pointing out that my post could have been worded differently,though it's an interesting idea that we can be systematically damaged by all the bad things that happen to us to the extent that it results in us putting a taboo on it all- I think that my personality/self is capable of picking myself up and moving on from a vast array of shitty experiences without it having any lingering,residual effect,but there are some things that knock us for six, hook deep into our psyche creating a personal taboo... and no matter how many years pass,it'll always come back to give you a good blast of instant recall when you least expect it.
I can see where your coming from D, but if being an "evolved" satanist means standing back and impassively accepting rape and child molestation as a acceptable human trait, because it gels with the "predator/prey instinct and not accepting it as such is un-satanic, then I'm totally behind Jake- Fuck the whole concept.
And Jake, I'd be there throwing that switch right along with you...
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16901 - 12/25/08 12:50 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
LaVey said that to believe that Satanism was a religion based soley on evil was "ridiculous."

There's no ambiguity in his feelings on preying on children. "9. Do not harm little children."

While I agree that anything goes between two or more consenting adults, We part ways when it comes to using children. Sorry if that offends anyone, but pray that I'm not on the jury, because it won't be pretty. And I do believe in Lex Talionis, which can indeed be used in proxy.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16909 - 12/25/08 03:05 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It's not about standing back and allowing things to happen and it's also not about promoting or not promoting.
What I am asking are valid questions in a philosophy that accepts man as just another animal and promotes a predatory manner of living and thinking.

If you look around in nature, you'll see that man behaves not different than animals. Society is not constructed to make human cooperation easier, it is a desperate attempt to control the dark side of human nature. This is what we are and this is what we are capable of. Not one part of the predator mentality or behavior is unsatanic. You can't walk with the devil but dislike his methods. The whole controversy is about trivialities, it's conditional. If factors A B and C are right, the act is promoted, if any of A B or C are wrong, the act is condemned. In reality, the act just is. Right and wrong are trivial concepts.
In reality nothing is sacred, nothing is free from harm and nothing is guaranteed. That might suck but such is the nature of the beast.

I see people adore, admire or elevate kinds like Ted Bundy. I see them promote eugenics, the law of the jungle, social darwinism. I see them glorify the Path of the Predator. Well, it leads into darkness. It isn't glorious, it isn't nice and it isn't safe. It's reality as is. And once you start walking it, you can't wish it only to be as you prefer.

D.

Top
#16945 - 12/25/08 10:19 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
We are all predatory to a greater/lesser extent, and I totally agree with your view "In reality nothing is sacred, nothing is free from harm, and nothing is guaranteed"That's the element that gives my existence an added zest- the thought that I could be a rooster one minute, and a feather duster the next just makes me get off on life more!

Yes, I look around and draw parallels with man and beast constantly, and it just goes without saying that stuff like rape/child abuse will always be an element in society being part of the Dark side of human nature - your right, that sort of shit "just is" and there will always be that element of repulsiveness in society whether we like it or not, but being Human, and an individual with my own thoughts and views on stuff like that, I revile it and will never accept those traits in anyone.

The path of the predator is indeed a dark one, but encountering something along the way that you don't like, and studying the reactions that come up in yourself and evaluating them is only natural, and all a part of advancing as an individual- isn't blindly accepting something as "just is" placing limitations on ourselves as human Satanists? Yes, there are many similarities between man and beast, but out of the two, humans are capable of choice and rational,selective thought processes, and Beast isn't- not in the same process a human is anyway. It might be "just is" in the grand scheme of things, but it sure doesn't have to be in my environment.

Maybe I am "walking with the devil and disliking his method" and twisting a viewpoint to fit my own- I think a lot of Satanists would on the subject of preying on children and rape. I can hate paedophiles with all my heart, but would not think twice about literally butchering one in the most violent way possible, I fantasized about killing the toerag that fucked me over for years, Lex Talionis is a good creed to live by in my book. Double standard here maybe, but I'm a human animal, so it "just is".

"Do not Harm little Children"
It might have been written well over 40 years ago, but in my opinion it is a simple,straightforward statement that will never go out of style.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16955 - 12/26/08 04:19 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
When I look at Bonobos or Chimpanzees I see humans in action. They might not be as smart and not be as rational but everything a human is, is present in them. The agression, lust to murder and power struggles of Chimps, the sexual nature of the Bonobo. Homosexuality, random sexuality, masturbation, pedophilia, it's all present there. A human could get off rubbing himself against a dead cow. We're a super ape and combine the worst of them. Evolution advanced our brains, made us smart and rational but at no point got rid of that very dark side. It just made us meaner and leaner and nastier. It gave us incredibly more options to follow that dark and at times forbidden drive.

Again, I'm not promoting and to a degree it's a shame I need to include this disclaimer, especially here, but how society looks upon sex and what it defines as ok, tolerated and totally not done, is a product of culture. Things people get hung with the balls for nowadays was totally fine not too long ago or in other cultures. Of course, this isn't an excuse for relativism but the way some things are anticipated is influenced by the way society looks upon them. Most people just repeat societies instructions without knowing why or ever questioning them. In Iran people get hung in public for poking into forbidden holes. We call them barbarians for that. We lock people up for having an affair with a 12 year old. Iranians call us barbarians for that. It's all so trivial.

There are a lot of bad things happening out there and no matter what one does, they will keep on happening. But in how much does it affect ME? Not. If it isn't happening close enough, it just doesn't do anything to me. It's the way of the predator and I can't waste one second feeling regret, remorse, shock or shame for it. That is just how things are. Of course, I do know the expected reaction and I can pretend to tune in with society, shake my head, get puppy eyes and say, it's a shame, the horror, the horror. But in reality, I don't feel anything about it. It's not close enough and that's why it doesn't matter. It's the same thing as someone stepping on my toes or on another ones. And even if it was close, no matter how I'd react, I'd still accept it as the nature of the beast, so would be my reaction.

Do not harm little children doesn't do much for me because I realize it's one of those feel-good commands that have essentially no value. We do harm little children quite a lot, maybe not direct but all too often indirect. I could give a rat's ass about what is happening in Africa and if it was up to me, they'd put a fence around it until they solved their shit on themselves. Very true most would say but at the same time, this promotes the death, rape, mutilation and abuse of millions of innocent kids. The same for war everywhere. The same for promoting eugenics or 'kill the poor'.
I could care less. Seriously, life sucks if you're living life at the wrong spot or wrong moment. This is the way things function.

That's why it puzzles me that satanists have those strong emotional reactions to things they at the same time promote. We promote doing harm to little children, we just don't mention it in public and cover it up with bogus rules.

D.

Top
#16959 - 12/26/08 05:32 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Your post made so much sense to me until the last part.

I won't go on ad nauseum about the similarities between man and chimps except to say that I do agree that it is very relevant to why the human race is the way it is, and why paedophiles and Rapists etc will always be a part of the human race.

Unfortunately, you totally lost me on the "We promote harm to little children" part.
How do "we" do that? And how do we cover it up and clothe it in bogus rules?
I just sat back and wracked my brains trying to come up with one instance or occasion that I've ever knowingly promoted harming children in any way, and I can't.
I freely admit that I'm extremely predatory, and quite savage in my outlook concerning a plethora of people and situations, but harming children has never been a part of my hard-wiring.

Your comment about all the bad shit happening everywhere, and you not being affected by it because it isn't happening in close proximity to you I can fully relate to. I deliberately refrain from watching tv or reading the news so I can keep it all out of my environment, call it sticking my head in the sand,but I'm just happier that way. I know every conceivable wretched thing that can happen to everything and everyone is happening somewhere out there, but as long as it's not happening in my immediate environment, I can block it out.

The attitude to sex varies from culture to culture= what's acceptable to one may be abhorrent to another, but you could look at that as a product od herd mentality and social conditioning, which my personal attitude towards the whole subject surely stems from as well, but looking from a personal perspective all of my own, I just can't STAND kid-fuckers.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16962 - 12/26/08 05:56 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Maybe I didn't explain it good enough, it's understandable to me but I'm Eurotrash so let me try again.

To me there is no difference in harming little children directly or indirectly. The differences are trivial. Let me give an example.
If I promote the removal of all degenerated people out there, I do at the same time promote the removal of all degenerated kids out there. Of course, that last part doesn't make me look good because I am actually promoting the culling of those poor and cuddly creatures that trigger so much awe into people. But fact is, they are part of the degenerated. By covering them up in a generalized statement, I do not have to feel bad about it BUT it does not change the fact that I actually DO promote it.

I can't say bomb Iraq and then act as if they'll not bomb little kids at the same time. They do have smart bombs but they're not THAT smart. A lot of things we stand for, when broken down, do include little children and we do promote harming them too. We just don't break things down until it gets unpleasant for most. It's like doing a body count, adding the numbers of hostiles killed and acting as if the kids died of a flu. They aren't collateral damage, they are intentional damage. In the past, people realized much better that what you don't kill, can grow into something that can kill you. Rationally it's so obvious you better do it correct the first time. I know, we're civilized now but civilization is nothing but a new blanket on the same old beast.

It's the same with might is right. If you really promote that idea (let's not think of it as a title), ALL might is right. Not SOME might is right and SOME isn't. And some of this might contradicts what I call feel-good rules to make people think we're a pretty nice bunch. Every act has consequences and all change is at the same time the destruction of something else. If we act upon our will, we at the same time change and thus destroy things.

The real question would be; in how much do we let our will be affected by the consequences?

The path of the predator would imply that the end always justifies the means. Sometimes the means just aren't pleasant but that doesn't imply they aren't part of the path, or the nature of the predator.

D.

Top
#16963 - 12/26/08 06:16 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Thanks for explaining that D , it's a lot clearer to me now.

In your view, does my perspective on this subject automatically class me as null and void in the satanic sense? I really don't think it does , though I'd be interested to read what you think about it.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16964 - 12/26/08 06:32 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I don't class people as null and void because they disagree with me or not. I do use other criteria, so don't worry.

What I do here, and what seemed appropriate for Christmas -which is essentially all about rape and child abuse-, is address some issues that are seldom addressed and see how people react or what they have to say. They do NOT have to agree with me, as long as they make up their OWN mind about things, I consider it ok. After all, it is not because I am on a path that leads (or gets lost as some might think) into darker areas, that others need to do the same.

D.

Top
#16965 - 12/26/08 07:17 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I seem to have missed this reply.

I do agree that human nature is hard wired to protect those we care about but I disagree that it is universal. It is indeed universal when it comes to someone protecting them HE cares about but not when it comes to ones he doesn't give a damn about.
If you'd look at certain areas in Africa, you'd see that they do have NO problem at all with raping, abusing and mutilating the other. Of course, other = us vs them. That's also an inherit part of human nature; our genes are more important than their genes. Due to the fact that we live closer together in society, we confuse the drive to protect OUR genes, which are essentially only our offspring, with our genes, in the sense of what we consider our people in society. We tend to call that being civilized.

But due to the fact that the predator is highly egocentric, he decreases the environment and population he considers ours and expands the "them" in the us vs them. His care is decreasing because his care is subject to whom he cares about, which is rather limited and, in extremes, only him.

In the predator's mind, this is why he can act as he acts without feeling remorse.

D.

Top
#16966 - 12/26/08 07:19 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Your answer was exactly the kind I was hoping for... intelligent and not boorishly dismissive - thanks, I appreciate it. You've been very patient with getting your point of view across , a lot of people wouldn't have been so obliging.

Christmas holds many negative connotations for me - you hit the nail on the head when you noted that it is essentially all about rape and child abuse. That's why I felt it was also necessary to discuss this element of human nature on xmas day.

As for that path that meanders off into darker areas- it's a necessary path, one that's been there since the beginning of existence as we know it.... if it gets too dark, we can always take a torch with us.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#16969 - 12/26/08 12:22 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
One word. Empathy.

Humans have the ability to feel emotion by proxy. For example, if a man sees a girl being raped, he is far more likely to be effected if he has a daughter around that age.

You seem to have overlooked that part of my post. Mans protective nature AS WELL AS his ability to feel empathy, makes it only natural and human, predatory human or otherwise, to be naturally opposed to the harm of children (and in some instances women).

That child rape/harm/abuse happens is only evidence of a lot of sick fucks out there, not that these acts are natural. If they were natural human acts they wouldn't be A)rare and B)horrifying

If this behavior was natural people would be raping babies in the streets and nobody would care. We would also be extinct.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#16970 - 12/26/08 12:59 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
One word. Empathy.

That child rape/harm/abuse happens is only evidence of a lot of sick fucks out there, not that these acts are natural. If they were natural human acts they wouldn't be A)rare and B)horrifying

If this behavior was natural people would be raping babies in the streets and nobody would care. We would also be extinct.


Simple and succinct. Abberations occur and they are only abberations, and not indicative of any sense of "normalcy" of the event or act that they entail. It could be normal for one person to drive nails through their penis... while we might accept it as normal for HIM, we could only see it as an abberation of the greater whole. Is it good or bad? It just is. Child molestation is an abberation and specific to a statistical abnormality of mankind. It has nothing to do with left-hand ideology or dark ways. It's simply abberant of the whole. Natural... proboably not.

You get the same logic from dopers who say, "Marijuana is NATURAL, so it's ok to smoke it." Ok. I agree. It's natural. So is dog shit. So is Ebola. Smoke 'em if you got 'em but don't expect people to think YOU'RE normal.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16974 - 12/26/08 01:28 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
So following that logic, being a satanist is an abberation too and not indicative of any sense of normalcy of their thinking? So why do we not get emotionally distressed by that?

Everything that happens out there is natural. If it wasn't natural, what would it be then? Supernatural? Do you really think Bonobos have long ethical debates about Uhuru having jumped his niece under the banana tree? No, that shit just happens but what just happened in their troop is highly immoral in ours. Because we are moral creatures? Maybe.

But aren't we the ones telling people they have to define their own morals? Aren't we the ones telling good and bad is just a way of defining things and not static. I think we are no? So why would we throw universal values on the table.

And Dan, empathy? All nice and well, but aren't we on the same track as being good? After all, who's level of empathy is the correct one? Will we draw a line too, to divide the good and bad, sinners and saints?

D.

Top
#16978 - 12/26/08 01:51 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Sorry, D, but it's the same argument as "I'm theistic, so I'm the same as..." no. There are indeed taboos that are broken all of the time in the "animal kingdom" as part of the survival imperative. For that segment of the world's phylum, it's natural and normal.

However, there are differences between the rest of the animal kingdom and the human animal. We know, for instance, that while we are physically capable of inbreeding, it's not a great idea because of the physical deteriorations of limited gene pools. A simple trip through parts of the rural south will show you what happens... whole communities "look very similar," and there is an overall "dimness" in affect. Specialized diseases like hemophelia , Sickle Cell Anemia and Tay-Sacs develop. This happens much less frequently in the animal kingdom... why? Because we are SIMILAR, not equal.

If you wish to think that child molestation is a normally occuring thing, great. Let your son or daughter loose with a note pinned to their chest that reads, "Do what thou wilt. It's normal." But you then give up your right to outrage when a sick bastard puts a knife to their throat and spends the next several hours doing his thing. He might let them survive. It's natural. It's natural. It's natural.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16979 - 12/26/08 02:05 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
No Jake, what I am debating is that nothing man does isn't happening in nature and that if man is just another animal, that also is a part of that animal. We can't call that aspect of us inhuman because we don't like it too much. It would imply we start to construct some metaphysical human or a "human as he should be" and that is exactly what happens on the RHP; totally ignoring parts of human nature and dividing him into the good and evil person. Shaped as his creator. It's not how I see humans.

It doesn't imply we can't put values on these acts but as with everything, all values placed on something are personal. What happens with most is that they place religious or societal values on things. What we do, or what we should do, is take distance from those values and define our own. Destroy the taboo and make up our own minds.
My value, as I have stated before, is that I can't care at all when it isn't close enough and even when it is close, and I might react, I don't see it as inhuman in the world perspective I have.

D.

Top
#16981 - 12/26/08 02:55 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
This is one that you and I will never be able to see eye to eye on because unless it's happened to you, there's no real frame of reference. And I can't get that fabled "10,000 foot elevation" on the subect because I'm anchored at ground zero where it actually has long-lasting physical and emotional scars.

Unless you're willing to have a guy twice your size and physical strength with a knife ram his cock in your ass and go from there to what can REALLY give you nightmares, all the while pressing a knife into your neck, (hell, we'll even let go of the fact that you'd have to be a child and have no real idea why or what the hell is going on, much less "philosophical opinions")... well, like we always told our parents when they nodded and said, "you'll grow out of it," you just can't get it.

When you get down to it in this thread, it all becomes mental masturbation over what's natural, what's out there... that's all smoke and mirrors. Try rationalizing it with stitches in your ass. Or being the parent who can say nothing that's really comforting, only run their hand through your hair and tell you. "It'll be ok." Yep. Philosophy's a real comfort.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16982 - 12/26/08 03:01 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
We'll probably won't come to a conclusion on this and maybe better end the argument indeed.
I personally don't think the experience/opinion is very valid because if that would be the case, there is a lot we can't talk about.

So be it.

D.

Top
#16983 - 12/26/08 03:28 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Well... in every thing humans talk about, experience colors opinion. That's just natural... like smoking shit and snorting Ebola?

But no hard feelings, D. I appreciate your passion, and hope you don't go out and get the experience to see what I'm talking about. (Strange visions in my head about some little freak reading these post, and yelling, "I WILL, I WILL!!!"
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#16984 - 12/26/08 03:36 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It isn't passion Jake, you can accuse me of much but I'm so much about control, passion almost seems offensive to me. ;\)

Experience probably always colors opinion and some debates probably can go only that far. I think most was said anyways, so no harm in ending it until some genius jumps in and astonishes us all.

D.

Top
#17006 - 12/27/08 12:57 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
However, I truly do understand what Diavolo is posting...

And, trying to be as unemotional as possible, I kinda agree. Not that I don't agree with "Ms. Spider" and Jake999, there has been no "real" argument here, as I see it.

But... on the lighter and lightest note I can think of... "Might WAS Right" in this case, and that sorry ass Rapist/Pedophile done and got hisself strangled to death by a sixty-odd year old man...

If only things could always work so well.

My skeletons will hide another day, sorry (too much sharing these days)... otherwise... thank you all very much, this has given me much to absorb.

Please continue...
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#17012 - 12/27/08 05:26 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: daevid777]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
You are very correct in this; might WAS right in this case. But as I was pointing out, might IS right in all cases. And that seems to be the controversy.

The predator rapes the victim = might is right.
The predator kills the rapist = might is right.

Everyone can be a predator or prey. I can bash someone's skull and feel good about it because I subscribe to might IS right. If the brother of my prey tracks me down and bashes my skull, I sure won't feel good about THAT but I will still subscribe to might IS right. Predator and prey can be interchangable, the principle isn't.

D.

Top
#17041 - 12/27/08 10:50 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
Indeed. I gotcha the first time...

And in that light, perhaps I should've posted:

If only things always worked out so well... for the ones that really matter... ourselves.

But you certainly can appreciate the knowledge that each one of us, once in a while, deserves a good ass-kicking.
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#17060 - 12/28/08 09:02 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: daevid777]
ceruleansteel Offline
active member


Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 784
Loc: Behind you
There is no moral boundary. A human chooses his actions and society chooses whether they are "right" or "wrong". To a degree, D, your and the rest of the argument is pointless because if there were always a naturally occurring moral conflict, the predator would NEVER choose to rape/molest/destroy an innocent.

However, survival of the fittest includes ensuring the physical/emotional safety of the offspring. This does occur in nature, even if the beginning and end of that protection is to lay an egg 80 feet off the ground instead of right on the dirt. In humans, murdering healthy children obviously goes against this but since we are intellectually advanced and "think" more when compared to other animals, we also have to consider the children's mental health because - as Jake's posts have proven - when traumatic things happen to a child whether they be physical, psychological, emotional, or any combination thereof, it can affect the perpetuation of the species as a whole. Jake's experience caused him to go against what truly is natural and prevent himself reproducing. If people such as his attacker were allowed to roam free and do as they pleased, the odds that more people would react as Jake did would increase, thus causing real damage to the human race.

So the idea that child-harmers and such should be punished doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what is and is not moral. All predators make their decisions and the retalitory actions of society - though morally based - essentially are in place to ensure that children reach adulthood with their physical and mental health intact so that they can continue the cycle of reproducing and prevent the extinction of our species.

Top
#17062 - 12/28/08 12:51 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: ceruleansteel]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Of course the argument could have been as simple as: compassion is wasted if it isn't concerning you, because that's what it actually is all about. But emotionally this seems to be not as simple.

I know nature included a "protection of the offspring" routine in our and other instincts but the very fact that this protection routine is there is evidence of the predators offspring have to deal with. If there weren't predators, protection was not needed. Now we can argue whether predators were exclusively an outer-species phenomena or if they had to protect against their own species too. I think it served both purposes. Infanticide is a natural phenomena in many species, including humans. It's not the behavior of the majority, which would lead inevitably to extinction but it is behavior that is natural to us. Spartan law and newborns as an example are cultural evidence of infanticide.

I agree that punishment of child-abusers is a naturally occurring phenomena -to a degree- but it is only because society triggers some different manner of thinking and the concerns of the few suddenly are forced to become the concerns of the many. In reality, your genes are not my genes. We stopped thinking in replicating our genes long ago and now consider us part of a race, culture, nation or even at its broadest, humankind. The satanic thinking should not go that far, to us there are only subspecies and the majority of them we don't care about. This is what I address; why bother about them we don't care about? Why do we feel compassion at all for unknown.

If I'm executing my will, by whatever act, I'm not thinking about the perpetuation of the species as a whole. No my concern is how I can accomplish my goal at the best cost/pay-off rate. And this happens at any level. Else I should wonder if a guy I kicked out at work will not result in his kids not being able to go to a good school and never becoming the Einsteins they might have destined to be, robbing us of a cure against cancer, interstellar travel and darn delicious new brownies. Things don't work like that, people are egocentric when it comes to their will, especially stained souls like us. To hell with society, we want our thing now and pretty fast please.

I can't imagine any sexual deviant to wonder about the species, no, their concern is to execute their will under the best conditions. Keep the risk low, the pay-off high. Predators compassion isn't all-embracing.

So why should ours be?

D.

Top
#17064 - 12/28/08 01:17 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I was thinking about this predator/prey might is right dichotomy last night. It occurred to me that is comes down to a matter of scale.

Everyone has to plant their moral flag somewhere, and it usually begins and ends with ones own self interest. What I mean by this is if might is truly right all the time in all instances, you would be wheeling cartloads of groceries out of the store without paying, and smashing that little old lady that tries to take your parking spot with a hammer.

I would imagine because you are not dead or in jail, Diavolo, that you do not conduct yourself that way. Why not?

What it comes down to is being a part of the society in which we live is a matter of self interest by proxy. Might is right is always true 'in theory', but the real world is not always so black and white.

The balance factor is always a matter of consideration.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#17070 - 12/28/08 02:15 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Might is always right but not always the desired approach.
The end always justifies the means but the means which you will apply will depend on a cost/pay-off scale. This cost is not only the energy you invest but also the payback for eventual acts.

If I go to the grocery and want some food, I have a number of options but only if I'd be an idiot or without any other option, I'd be so stupid to grab and run. Grab and run might work but if it doesn't, would 10$ worth of stuff be worth getting either shot or arrested? No it wouldn't. So, the best approach is to put down 10$ and buy the stuff. It's all situational and conditional.

If I'm horny and desire an orgasm, I have different approaches.
I can:

A) have a wank
B) dress up, go out, smooth talk, and try to get a chick laid
C) visit a hooker and flip out some cash
D) rape someone

All approaches are ok to get my orgasm but ultimately I will have to decide which one is the best for my need. My moral flag will be defined by the very cost/pay-off level. Not by the morality of the act itself because that's not necessarily my moral position.

D.

Top
#17073 - 12/28/08 02:22 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Well, exactly. Thanks for fleshing out my point. It seems we agree on this one.

The cost/payoff level is really what keeps society from degenerating into 'mad max'
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#17081 - 12/28/08 02:56 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Of course, the cost level is what keeps us from ending in chaos. That's why not only the law has punishment but also religion. Punishment is a very simple, cost-effective strategy to control humans. It is much easier than reward-based strategies.

It's also why anarchy doesn't work. ;\)

D.

Top
#17082 - 12/28/08 03:05 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

It's also why anarchy doesn't work. ;\)


Actually, I would see it as evidence of the reverse. The natural state of things entails consequences for actions, and most state activity only serves to lessen that. What the state gives us is a mockery of justice in which the victims are the ones on trial, and the guilty are ridiculously protected.

But, I do think we have danced to this song before.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#17115 - 12/29/08 02:39 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
And, to go back a few squares...

There is "might", and then there is "Might" - and I mean the "Might" of a bunch of people that will mightily come down on your ass for knocking down that old lady. If only out of their own "moral principles"...

Now, if you had 50 like minded individuals with automatic rifles, and say, two tanks... go ahead, take whatever you'd like from the store.

This kinda shit happens all the time - we just call it "progress" or "war"...

I don't even want to get into the Israeli-Palestine thing here... oops.
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#17137 - 12/29/08 09:19 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: daevid777]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
My perspective where abuse, rape etc will never change, but I have to say I've found all the differing views here food for thought.

Reading all of this has given me a different way of looking at situations that I find totally abhorrent- I still percieve them as utterly revolting traits in the human race, but gaining a deeper perspective of the machinations of such behaviours has been beneficial to me on a personal level, and I'm thankful for that.

I'm sure that the last thing all of you who have contributed to this thread is to have me pissing in your pocket, but what you all had to say, (especially Jake and Diavolo) held far more credence and clarity than most of the "kiddy head shrinks"out there.

If I had more understanding about the predator/prey aspect when I was a kid, It might not have changed anything outwardly, but inwardly? Maybe...

And Daevid777? Go on, Launch yourself wholeheartedly into the Israeli-palestine thing, I know you want to!! \:D


Edited by spiderbreeder (12/29/08 09:36 AM)
Edit Reason: grammar.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#17154 - 12/29/08 05:09 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
ZephyrGirl Offline
R.I.P.
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 706
Loc: Adelaide Australia
Thanks for a great read guys.

I really enjoyed this debate and think I too have learned much from it.

My biggest challange with Satanism is getting over my own moral values. Always has been. I am instinctively on the side of the underdog. I realise this is not a Satanic thing but a personal one. Might is Right, although something I recognise as true and valid and right, at the same time, my instincts and personal experiences have always been to protect and help those that are getting the worst end of it. Even strangers. This can even propel me to become involved, even to my detriment, it's one of the reasons I beleive that altruism DOES exist, but that is another thread and is still available to argue.

Some of the coolest, toughest mofos around are like that for the same reasons as Jake. Obviously it's not all that uncommon.

 Quote:
We do harm little children quite a lot, maybe not direct but all too often indirect.


Ain't that the truth. Hell, we've all got hung ups we blame on childhood. Still most parents wouldn't see the harm they do to their kids mentally because they expect them to feel that natural urges are 'Sins', but in reality IS IT ANY DIFFERENT TO THE DAMAGE DONE BY MOLESTERS? Case in point that priest I put the story up about, that blamed his porn addiction for pretending to have cancer. If he hadn't been brought up to beleive that looking at porn was a sin, he probably wouldn't have gotten an addiction to it, felt guilty about it and made himself sick to the core. So much damage is done to children in those types of ways, yet society doesn't get all butt hurt about it.

I'm in no way advocating molestation of a child, but a Satanist must at least acknowledge their own hypocrisies in this particular instance. It is the same with fucking animals etc. We advocate it subliminallly, but most of us wouldn't actually do it, (except our mate Cody, wonder where he wondered off to?) or admit to it, or publicise it.

Zeph
_________________________
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass -
It's about learning to dance in the rain.


Top
#17182 - 12/30/08 03:21 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: ZephyrGirl]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
Right on...

And... I think it would be a good idea for us all to re-read Ceruleansteel's post... just thinking to myself out loud....

Perhaps this is one of the reasons it is ingrained in men to have sons, I personally never thought of this... until this colleague of mine was expressing how he had three daughters, and "didn't stop" until he had his son. Perpetuation of the "name" - a much more personal developement of "perpetuation of the species"...

I never much cared whether I had a boy or a girl, until I had them both... at the same time. Now, if we get this ugly thing called "love" out of the equation, I'll fight like hell and bite someones nose off if it would protect them... is that "my gift" to humanity? Or is this a personal "property" argument? I mean, I might do the same if someone was attacking my dog, or trying to kill my cat(s) - perhaps with less vigor... maybe not. And, can I really separate what I call "love" from this?

A total digression, perhaps, and I don't necessarily want to lead the conversation away... (like I have that power!).

(Hell no, SpiderBreeeder, that's opening a new can that doesn't belong here... it's probably somewhere else anyway!)
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#17205 - 12/30/08 04:48 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: daevid777]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Some call it love, other call it hormones.

 Quote:
There's also preliminary but tantalizing evidence that fatherhood can change the brain. A 2006 study found enhancements in the prefrontal cortex of the father marmoset. After childbirth, the neurons in this region showed greater connectivity, suggesting that having young children could boost the part of the brain responsible for planning and memory, skills parents need when having kids gives them more to keep track of. The neurons also had more receptors for vasopressin, a hormone that has been shown to prompt animal fathers to bond with offspring. (Receiving an injection of vasopressin, for instance, prompts a male prairie vole to cuddle and groom a youngster.)


You don't even wanna know the rest what happens to your body when a partner is being pregnant or having a kid. Testosterone levels drop, cortisol and prolactin shoots up. That's all happening in the father. Hell, one should be glad one doesn't start to lactate.

D.

Top
#17207 - 12/30/08 04:52 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
LOL! Of course fatherhood can change the brain! I can't begin to tell you how many times my father told me that kids had driven him crazy.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#17244 - 12/30/08 11:08 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
It definitely changed my mother's brain activity.
She's been on a slow, mental decline since the day she had me I think!
Lactating males, now THAT'S an interesting idea... didn't the male used to lactate many thousands of years ago?
A hot topic for the google bar when I sign off from here methinks.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#17249 - 12/30/08 11:54 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: spiderbreeder
Lactating males, now THAT'S an interesting idea... didn't the male used to lactate many thousands of years ago?


I remember OG did, but then we realized he had a vagina, so we renamed him Sally.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#17260 - 12/31/08 12:42 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Jake999]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Lol! I was asking for that one...

I'm starting to think "Hermaphrodites"
Now that has the potential to be a pretty eye-opening thread don't you think?
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#17296 - 12/31/08 06:03 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: spiderbreeder]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
 Quote:
Some call it love, other call it hormones.


I don't think so, but let someone try and test my hormones... see if they don't "feel the love".
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#17593 - 01/04/09 08:56 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: daevid777]
Woland Moderator Offline
Seasoned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 763
Loc: Oslo, Norway
Embracing the Predator are we?

Well, not my cup of tea.
And I have never been to big on that "Might is Right" biz either.

Parts of the argument in this thread strikes me as over-simplified with pseudo-badazz references to chimps, baboons and what not.

If the animal kingdom is our reference (?!) you can find thousands and thousands of examples on what ever you want to prove to be true "nature".
Utter bullshit, much like the Xian bible in its oh so practical practicality.

For me; Satanism is not about Bestiality or Predation.
It is about pride and dignity.
It is about bettering myself, not wallowing in the dark.
I see it as the brightest of lights...

When I see "weakness", (which btw. is in the eye of the beholder), I see potential.
Three-hugging S.O.B as I might (is right) be, I simply cannot find it in my self to succumb to the negativity and collective deathwish which seems to torment our philosophy.

I wholeheartedly believe in the existence of a, (naturally somewhat vague), collective ethos amongst humans.
Over-rationalist arguments aside;
how we choose to look at the world, will shape the reality of your world.
(Nietsche for dummies?)

Well; here is a man that think industrialized warfare sucks bigtime.
Who thinks Africa has been buggered into starvation for centuries?
Who is not charmed by sexual predators at all, and would like to see them fry for their actions.
Who feels truly sorry for the victims of warfare, and consider it a terrible waste.
And; who doesn't seem to be ashamed about it at all...

But then; I am probably a re-incarnation of:



Or maybe just:


_________________________
Regards

Woland

Contra Mundum!

Top
#17612 - 01/05/09 12:25 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Woland]
Bacchae Offline
Satan's White Trash Neighbor
member


Registered: 05/13/08
Posts: 438
Loc: los angeles
you are my favorite hippy Woland.
Top
#17617 - 01/05/09 02:24 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Bacchae]
Woland Moderator Offline
Seasoned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 763
Loc: Oslo, Norway
 Originally Posted By: Bacchae
you are my favorite hippy Woland.


All you need is love, Bacchae!
_________________________
Regards

Woland

Contra Mundum!

Top
#17634 - 01/05/09 10:31 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Woland]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
So if the animal kingdom is no reference, what actually is? Literature or poetry or "Suleiman's great distinction between good and bad"? Should we take a humans word for our nature or maybe look at it biologically and see why we behave like we do and what our roots are? Humans are apes, if we like it or not.

Some might call that over-simplified or bad-ass but then I ask, what do you have to offer at the other side? What possible argument is there to counter it that doesn't tap into the same pool of evidence. And in doing that, admit it is all part of nature and that calling it right or wrong, good or bad is the same as call a tree evil because he grows higher than the bushes.

I see no human ethos, humans are biological machines, just like all other forms of life and in reality, there might be nothing but instructions.

D.

Top
#17635 - 01/05/09 11:17 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Woland Moderator Offline
Seasoned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 763
Loc: Oslo, Norway
The animal kingdom can be used as a reference.
You can in fact reference your heart out of everything.
I can show you reptiles who goes to the trouble of protecting and taking care of its own offspring, as well as others offspring.

I can show you primates who will systematically kill & eat their own offspring.

My point, (which may or may not have gotten through) is that nature is incredibly multifaceted, and that one is able to reference/prove the existence of close to any behavior if one was inclined to use nature as a "bible".

Natural does not enter the equation, less to say that everything is natural...

Embracing the beast does not equal succumbing to bestiality.
There is the matter of choice...

If we are to break everything down to behavioral science, social-anthropology, rationalism and hyperbiology, we will ultimately succeed in eradicating philosophy, literature, poetry and for that matters the collected works of Mr. Suleiman...

We are apes, but evolved...
We do art, we do music, we do spirituality.
By means of our consciousness, we filter our everyday experience into the collective for enrichment.


Human ethos:

We avoid eating our own species for nourishment.
We avoid inbreeding.
We avoid sexual relationships with children.
We appreciate and elevate artists.
_________________________
Regards

Woland

Contra Mundum!

Top
#17646 - 01/05/09 04:19 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Woland]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
But that was exactly the point: everything is natural.
Protecting babies or ripping them apart; none of them is unnatural even when in a society we tend to be forced to embrace the unnatural aspect of killing them.

I don't think we do have as much choice as people assume we have. If you have the choice between oranges and apples but don't like apples, how much choice do you really have?
It's the same for sexual deviants; if you brain is wired in such a manner that you prefer young girls and your pleasure center finds much fun in raping them, well, you're pretty much fucked then. You don't have a choice to begin with. Sure, you might act or not act upon it but you're still a sexual deviant, and for us who think that following ones own will is one of the highest goods, things get suddenly a bit difficult. So, what is one to do? Play a role and submit to societal demands or be what one is and pay the price if needed?

Yes we do art and we do music and we do spirituality but at the same time we kill for an i-pod, rape for pleasure and mass murder for ideas. So what is human ethos else but behaving under a rule of thumb?

D.

Top
#17672 - 01/06/09 01:52 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
 Quote:
I wholeheartedly believe in the existence of a, (naturally somewhat vague), collective ethos amongst humans.


Good way to say it, and I agree, but we are then again on this delicate balance between the "Ethics and Morality" thread, which may or may not be here... my memory evades me on which "Satanistic Incarnation" of this site still exists, forgive my ignorance - it's hard to keep track, damnit.

Otherwise, I know so-called "devious acts on 'society'" exist, and I think they will always "be", and have always been - but if what I'm getting from Diavolo is an absence of said "Societal rules" - then there is much more unexplored territory. Perhaps hard to grasp, but worthy of speculation, for "speculation's" sake.
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#17710 - 01/06/09 09:05 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: daevid777]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I once made a post detailing how I think a sort of 'universal' (within the context of human beings) morality could and does exist.

HERE
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#17747 - 01/07/09 12:41 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
daevid777 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
Right on Dan, I remember reading your thread (I'm not that out of it!), but I do think the one I was referring to was on an older version of this place... now gone the way of the Dodo.

Not that, from what I remember, it was much different than what you were talking about.



Edited by daevid777 (01/07/09 12:42 AM)
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.

Top
#25258 - 06/03/09 12:24 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Nemesis]
napalm Offline
Banned
pledge


Registered: 08/21/08
Posts: 61
Riddle me this?er something!Whats black and white and flame all over?mih hsamhs mih,hsams.Let me see......................................................
Top
#25259 - 06/03/09 12:36 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: napalm]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Have you been dipping into the stash very recently Napalm, like about two seconds before you "replied" to this Topic?

Or did you really mean to post this in the Joke thread?

Please elaborate?
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#29040 - 08/29/09 12:06 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
Master Magick Offline
pledge


Registered: 01/06/09
Posts: 63
Loc: New York, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
But that was exactly the point: everything is natural.
Protecting babies or ripping them apart; none of them is unnatural even when in a society we tend to be forced to embrace the unnatural aspect of killing them.

I don't think we do have as much choice as people assume we have. If you have the choice between oranges and apples but don't like apples, how much choice do you really have?
It's the same for sexual deviants; if you brain is wired in such a manner that you prefer young girls and your pleasure center finds much fun in raping them, well, you're pretty much fucked then. You don't have a choice to begin with. Sure, you might act or not act upon it but you're still a sexual deviant, and for us who think that following ones own will is one of the highest goods, things get suddenly a bit difficult. So, what is one to do? Play a role and submit to societal demands or be what one is and pay the price if needed?

Yes we do art and we do music and we do spirituality but at the same time we kill for an i-pod, rape for pleasure and mass murder for ideas. So what is human ethos else but behaving under a rule of thumb?

D.


Come on, it's time to admit it. Being a predator or a predatory creature does not make you a chaotic nutbag mindless sack of sh!t.

Predators do not have to be predatory without law, reason or morality. If you are truly deviant (and not just a societal deviant) then you are a deviant human being in total. Not just a sexual deviant. If someone is single-mindedly wired to rape and focused unerringly on that, then they are not just a sexual deviant but a deviant as a human being. That individual needs to be removed from the herd.

Many people with 'vanilla' sexual lives, Satanists included might classify me and people with my sexual appetite deviants. Do I break any laws? Harm anyone? Involve myself in nonconsensual activities? No, but even with the "mainstreaming" of BDSM and fetish costumes and lifestyles in pop culture the label would still remain.

I get the feeling you are asking Why, just to ask Why and that you already know this stuff to be true. Unless of course you yourself are a rapist or child molestor. The real 'nature' of it is that we Human beings are the most evolved animals on Earth, (though most of us never really show it) and in our animal kingdom things work a certain way because we choose them to be so. Not because we're a lion and we're hungry, we've gotten past that Quest for Fire stage ;\) The apples and oranges example doesn't work, because if I like oranges but only apples are available, I will go buy some oranges or move to Florida and plant a fucking orange tree.

Everything is not natural. Everything may be possible, but it sure ain't natural. A person can convince themselves that it's natural, but that doesn't make it so.

 Originally Posted By: Woland
Embracing the beast does not equal succumbing to bestiality.


Back on topic: On the guy who choked the psycho rapist to death. Major props to Pops! Choke hold for the win \:\)



Edited by Master Magick (08/29/09 12:11 PM)
Edit Reason: added quotes
_________________________
Magick

Top
#78011 - 07/13/13 08:29 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Dan_Dread]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
Satanism is about embracing our humanity, in it's totality...right? Giving voice and expression to all things animal and more specifically human animal. Part of that is embracing our protective and empathetic nature towards women and children. (as long as it does not cross wires with a more personal interest)


Your own children, fine. What about other people's children? If we are to embrace the totality of our humanity, why are there so few people that empathize with the raper/molester? If we took a trot down memory lane, perhaps we would find that the perp was molested/raped himself. No sympathy for the Devil's Humanity?

I suppose, it's a two-fold analysis. If you're an outsider of the situation, you judge the act then the person committing the act.

What if you were dead-smack in it? As noted from previous posts on this thread, this touches a very delicate spot in the psyche. To those adults that have some kind of molestation/rape in their past, they are attached to those emotional limitations: "I can not accept this." "I will not accept this." "This is my story." "This is who I am.", just some examples.

It doesn't mean that a person has to waive the flag of rape/molestation as something honorable, however there's a pathology there and it's often disregarded completely in favor of demonizing villains.

If a child is systematically molested to the point where it becomes normalized, as they grow and mature in a society where this is a shame, and the shaming is a moral platitude, how can that child break-free of their chains?

Then there's the eras to consider. Times when even speaking of such things was a moral taboo, that it becomes that dirty little secret one keeps hidden, it shapes their impulses. The serpent coiled in the bowels of their humanity.


It would be like riding on the back of an alligator across the river to then act shocked when it snaps its jaw and takes you for a death roll.

Some are so emotionally attached that it would seem like a logical conclusion to just start killing off kids that were raped/molested...Just in case.

We protect our own, but there's also an apathy displayed towards children because of another pathology hidden deep within. You hear countless stories of children that were molested by one parent while the other turned a blind eye to it (knowing it was going on the whole time), in favor of a romanticized ideal that the love they have for their partner is far more important than protecting your off-spring from misdeeds.

The Father in the story acted accordingly to protect his child but what about those parents that do nothing at all, and let it go on for years? In that case, which is worse? The molester or the enabler?

Some parents form no real emotional bond with their children and thus they become 'other'.

Thoughts?


Edited by SIN3 (07/13/13 08:30 AM)
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78014 - 07/13/13 09:29 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Azrael999 Offline
pledge


Registered: 05/20/13
Posts: 59
Beautifully elaborated, and I can tell that you know what you are talking about. It's the same type of studies and understanding about children that being abused left unnoticed begin to turn. Without therapy some sort of support system or reassurance that whatever happened to them in their youth, their understanding about the reason behind whatever traumatic event that happened to them wasn't their fault. That the blame is not on them but the predator. Putting blame on the responsible not the (psychic vampire) victim. These being that embrace their inner beast, I can't use that expression on this topic exactly, it's different. The (Social Cancer) or just moral degenerates of society may not even understand their sickness. Just the same that's when society has to deicide how to deal with these people.
Dig up the weeds, cast down to a systems moral code of ethical judgement that will help alleviate the victim and the families hardships.
When left untreated the victim has the potential capacity to become the predator, in turn falling victim to a societies lack of empathy. In their mind they may find themselves repeating the traumatic event, reliving the event in their own minds. "Hurt people, Hurt people," does that make sense.
Apathy by society to the victim will just cause more pain. Sweeping it under the rug does nothing more than prolong and makes the abuse worse. Power through survival of the self, and if you can't get proper treatment for these hardships that weigh you down invest some time into research, psychiatry, sociology to help understand why these things happened and find a support system. Survival through power of the self. Create yourself, you are your master isn't that what Satanism thrives to hold sacred by.....If your reading this I hope that it will help you if you were in a situation like that. Your life isn't over. Else the predator already won....
_________________________






Top
#78016 - 07/13/13 02:30 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Azrael999]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
It's the same type of studies and understanding about children that being abused left unnoticed begin to turn.


Which studies? Do you have a citation you are willing to share?

Culturally speaking, what constitutes rape/pedophilia varies from culture to culture, and time-period to time-period.

I covered the Documentary Are all men pedophiles? on my podcast a few months ago. The feedback has been up and down the scale. I've even been called a pedophile for simply discussing it and exploring the topic.

I think, people imagine a completely violent act in all cases, when in reality, it may not be violent at all. Child-marriages for example, are often arranged by the child's parents.

Marriage is a way to dowery a child to lessen the burden to the family and has been in practice for thousands of years. The child is typically considered capital, and plotting ensues from birth. The marriage is typically arranged for female children when they approach menstruation for child bearing.

Age of consent laws have changed dramatically in the U.S. and its typically to protect children from exploitation and abuse. Though, statutory rape is often exercised as a way to prevent grooming, and children getting in over their heads. It's often called 'Daddy's Law'. i.e. Dad utilized the law to prevent his daughter from running off with an older man.

It's not restricted to female gender, it applies to males as well. There was a time when it was thought that male children could not be molested by female parents. Some of the more High-profile criminal cases involve student/teacher relationships. If you remember the Pamela Smart case, sex was thought to be the weapon of choice to manipulate a young man into killing her husband.

Back to the O.P. ...

As far as a perp breaking in for the purpose of committing a crime, chances are he stalked the girl for a while before deciding to commit the deed. The pre-meditation of stalking is telling of the man's impulses.

These cases are worthy of close-examination, though the filtering through the field of Psychology can be problematic. Subject profiling has become a diabolic device unto itself.


Edited by SIN3 (07/13/13 02:32 PM)
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78017 - 07/13/13 03:33 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Diavolo]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
And Dan, empathy? All nice and well, but aren't we on the same track as being good? After all, who's level of empathy is the correct one? Will we draw a line too, to divide the good and bad, sinners and saints?



I think that empathy is often nurtured as a carrier for moral platitudes. For example, one can be considered immoral for feeling empathy towards the 'wrong' person. Often times, it's just identification and attachment issue, nothing more, nothing less. Or else, why don't people feel the same exact empathy for animals? There's a small inkling of it with the domesticated types but I think its because it conveys a human quality in them. Man and his dog, Man's best friend, etc. If it were purely banal instinct, there appears to be a design component beyond survival (Fight/Flight).

Instead, I would prefer to understand the nature of the modeling, to the best of my ability, and leave room for understanding my own preferences. When the impulse rises, I'm aware of it, even while it's being played out however what prevents me from playing it through?

A recent example:
I was sitting in my bedroom one afternoon and out of the corner of my eye I saw a Feral Cat nab an infant Rabbit. I walked out to the yard to investigate the incident further. The moment the Cat saw me it tucked tail and ran off. It left behind the mangled Rabbit, barely alive but it was still alive. I watched as it struggled for its last few breaths and finally died. I felt empathy for it but I also felt equal empathy for the Cat. I had just robbed it of a decent meal. I left the Rabbit where it laid, and watched out my window to see if the Cat would return. It didn't. I wondered if it recognized me as a larger predator, or perhaps it was accustomed to Humans chasing it off, who can say? I found the reaction to the whole scenario fascinating. What compelled me to get up and go have a look? Was it curiosity or did I unconsciously want to chase off the Cat? Did I think it would save the Rabbit from imminent death and if so, then what? Was I watching for the Cat secretly hoping it would enjoy its meal thereby excusing me for the interruption? Why didn't I just turn around and go back to what I was doing without a second thought?


One can identify with the 'victim' as the target of an injustice, or the 'predator' for having allowed his compulsions to take down a 'gazelle'.

If a strong person recognizes a weakness, is it a weak-point in the framework to kick down or a place that could use some reinforcement? In other words, why do we care?

In either case, the observer is busy indentifying and projecting human values onto animals of every sort. We identify with other human beings but we are also in the habit of identifying other animals that seem to have human traits. For any insect lovers out there, the same applies. If we were naturally apathetic, we wouldn't care either way. There would be no vectors for attachment.

A victim is more likely to identify with another victim and the perpetrator is more likely to identify with another perp. There's lots of gray areas too, as in the case where a stronger person identifies with their sense of honor and then acts to protect the weak. Other examples are the cases of Stockholm syndrome where a victim identifies with his capture, or Bystander Syndrome when people don't act when its believed that they should.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78019 - 07/13/13 04:05 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: SIN3
I think that empathy is often nurtured as a carrier for moral platitudes. For example, one can be considered immoral for feeling empathy towards the 'wrong' person. Often times, it's just identification and attachment issue, nothing more, nothing less. Or else, why don't people feel the same exact empathy for animals? There's a small inkling of it with the domesticated types but I think its because it conveys a human quality in them. Man and his dog, Man's best friend, etc. If it were purely banal instinct, there appears to be a design component beyond survival (Fight/Flight).


Empathy can be a precursor to sympathy or compassion. Yet, it often is neither. One also has to break it up into cognitive and emotional empathy. I view it as just having the capacity to recognize thoughts or emotions in other people (to a reasonable degree). I don't know that I would interpret it in terms of right or wrong people. It is really just a sensory precept I either have or lack when presented a given situation.

Animals bring forth an interesting conundrum. I'm definitely a lover of my companion animals. There is no question that the bond overrides the differences in consciousness/cognition. There is definitely an attachment. At the same time, I've never conflated this into a rule of general application. I will generally prefer non-human animals, but some will also serve as nourishment.

_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#78020 - 07/13/13 04:36 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Le Deluge]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
To clarify, I was using 'wrong person' in the context of identifying with either victim or predator.

Isn't cognitive the path to emotional?

The dissassociations usually come from the field of Psychology, which is why I stated in a previous comment it can be problematic as a filter.

See: Recent Studies

 Quote:
Recent evidence suggests that there are two possible systems for empathy: a basic emotional contagion system and a more advanced cognitive perspective-taking system. However, it is not clear whether these two systems are part of a single interacting empathy system or whether they are independent.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78021 - 07/13/13 04:42 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
I wouldn't view cognitive and emotional empathy as completely separate. I do believe there can be a variance in how one interprets sensory precepts. I would only see it as dissociative if they were truly mutually exclusive. I guess I would view it more as a spectrum (if that makes sense).

Noted on predator and victim. The real misfortune there is just the cycle of abuse. You could plug in either at a given point of time and render empathy, sympathy, or hatred depending on what role they play at a given point in the cycle.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#78022 - 07/13/13 04:57 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Le Deluge]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
Yes, that makes sense.

 Quote:
The real misfortune there is just the cycle of abuse. You could plug in either at a given point of time and render empathy, sympathy, or hatred depending on what role they play at a given point in the cycle.


Indeed. From a more personal stand-point, I have often been considered 'other', alien even because I am neither attached to past experiences, nor do they affect my ability to discern my own correlations from a subjective stand-point. I.e. identifying with victim/predator and gray areas. I often see things from all sides, like holding a crystal ball in my hand and turning it round and round to discern its nature.

I see a constant core in myself, and often take the stance that people don't change - events change. If I'm wrong about this (and I might be) this would mean that people are nothing more than byproducts of events.

So, in terms of those events, in the moment you are experiencing them, when they are over they are merely past events. At best, they are points of reference to analyze and perhaps chart where you've been but I'm not certain how much they define what we are or how much they really affect our empathy.

Would it then be a futile effort to change your core?

For example, it could be argued that I am strong-willed due to events but from my own vantage point I have 'always been' and events were just happenings where my will was best demonstrated vs. just some byproduct of. From the earliest age I can remember, that seems to remain constant. It begs to question why some are weak-willed and broken down by events. Is it their core or something else?

Comparatively, Sociopaths/Psychopaths are considered to have their levels of empathy affected by events, and often considered the absence of empathy in a specific context, i.e. lacking of compassion.

What do you think?
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78024 - 07/13/13 05:19 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
Well, you certainly raise a good question. In terms of sociopaths, the evidence seems to be inconclusive. A sociopath is in a unique state. They would appear, on some level, to sense thoughts and emotions in others. Yet, they do not seem to have a quantifiable spectrum of emotion.

I believe a person has an essence. Yet, I believe a person is in a state of both being and becoming. I would be remiss to say I even knew if external events would "change" this essence. I would tend to view a person's core as dynamic as opposed to static. The essence itself is in motion. It doesn't change per se, but I view the human condition as "incomplete". Lacking a better term, I believe in self-development. This is a dangerous process. The second one goes against one's nature (true will if you favor Crowley), they fall into delusion.

A bit off-the-cuff here, but I do believe one forms a synthesis (or allows it to be formed for them). The latter, again, being dangerous for obvious reasons.


Edited by Le Deluge (07/13/13 05:21 PM)
Edit Reason: grammatical torture
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#78025 - 07/13/13 05:41 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Le Deluge]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
but I view the human condition as "incomplete"


Interesting...

So you believe that there's is a next step in the condition of being human? If so, what do you think it is?

 Quote:
I would tend to view a person's core as dynamic as opposed to static.


If that were true, what are we all working so damn hard to contend with? The design (core) or the programming (behavior)?

If say we treated the brain like software, wouldn't there need to be core components that would remain constant in order for the dynamic behavior to impart human experience? Otherwise, wouldn't dynamic take-over and thus start writing its own program?

It may sound like gobbeldy gook here, let me break it down like this:

The Matrix Film Model is as good as any to use here.

Say, Morpheus represents the Core and Neo the Dynamic. How would Neo realize his full potential without the constant of Morpheus holding him firm in objective reality?

Morpheus dangles subjective reality like a carrot but he snatches it away each time Neo finds it favorable to the way things are. The design of his own core.

Morpheus is preparing Neo for the Agents (influence). The more Neo hacks his own programming, he gets to the full realization of his core and thus defeats the Agents with little to no effort. He sees the machines for what they are, and destroys them until only the core remains.

Does that make sense or am I talking out of my ass here?


Edited by SIN3 (07/13/13 05:45 PM)
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78026 - 07/13/13 06:10 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
It makes sense (in a sense). I believe we may struggle with both. It begs the question: What is objective reality? We are met in The Matrix with a consensual reality which is negated. It is, as if, both Neo and the "world" suffer from a lack of self-awareness. The consensual reality is not the true reality. In terms of Neo finding his core or a dynamic core creating its own programming, I wouldn't place it in those terms. I wouldn't quite view it through a logical syllogism.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#78027 - 07/13/13 06:28 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Le Deluge]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
Ahhh but isn't the nature of reality at the core of human experience? It can be rendered irrelevant in some contexts, i.e. how much does it matter if we fully understand it (subjective experience vs. objective reality)? It's more or less how we experience it.

Some prefer the subjective such as "If I just believe, I can fly...I'll fly some day!" To the harsh reality of... "If I jump of this building, I'm going to hit the ground and hard."


Some live being fed by the gloss over their eyes, while others are impelled to see more clearly by wiping the gloss away and killing off the machine that pours it over your eyes. Attaining knowledge is somehow more progressive (dynamic) vs. Static, though the core (and its Empathy) drive forward the will to attain it or else why bother at all? Why not just wallow in ignorance and delusion?

When was the last time you met a person that had completely changed to something else? Say, they stop being a true believer in something like Deity, often times I just see a trading off vs. a complete disbelief.

I don't think its quite pure logic. I mean, human beings are irrational, compulsive and personality isn't necessarily the constant. Personality is dynamic, where as the nature of the being is static.

If you've read Dan's recent ADM update, it reminds me of some of the analogies he used.

Core is bedrock, while the dynamic is dirt.

I went digging around (pun!) and found this paper, it might enhance the discussion of dynamic vs. static: Computer Programming: Static vs. Dynamic


Edited by SIN3 (07/13/13 06:33 PM)
Edit Reason: added link
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78028 - 07/13/13 07:41 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: SIN3
Some live being fed by the gloss over their eyes, while others are impelled to see more clearly by wiping the gloss away and killing off the machine that pours it over your eyes. Attaining knowledge is somehow more progressive (dynamic) vs. Static, though the core (and its Empathy) drive forward the will to attain it or else why bother at all? Why not just wallow in ignorance and delusion?


This is kind of how I would see. It is a difficult concept to put into words. It is experience itself.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#78060 - 07/14/13 10:19 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Le Deluge]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
The OP reminded me of this case: Texas Man Beats His 4-Year-Old Daughter's Rapist, Killing Him.

"Your own children, fine. What about other people's children?"

Simple question, simple answer: your children might be next. Most people go on watching The Walking Dead after they hear about some guy raping an infant in Africa in an attempt to cure his AIDS. But the closer the child molester gets to home, the greater the concerns. I don't believe in universal love for all humanity, but I think it's prudent to care for those with whom you share common interests, since you can colloborate to get what you want and reciprocate favors.

"If we took a trot down memory lane, perhaps we would find that the perp was molested/raped himself."

It's unlikely. I think most molesters who say, "Oh, I was molested as a child" are pulling some bullshit in an attempt to elicit sympathy. I know many people who were molested as children, and none of them are child molesters.

"The Father in the story acted accordingly to protect his child but what about those parents that do nothing at all, and let it go on for years? In that case, which is worse? The molester or the enabler?"

To me, it's a question of which is a general threat. Most often, it's not that the enabler doesn't care. It's that the enabler is torn between concern for the molester (who is also her husband/ son/ brother/ friend) and concern for her child. The molester is taking advantage of that care and hurting both. If he gets cocky about being able to get away with it, he may move on to other victims, making him a general threat. The enabler is only endangering her own offpsing.

"I think that empathy is often nurtured as a carrier for moral platitudes. For example, one can be considered immoral for feeling empathy towards the 'wrong' person."

True, but there's a practical reason for those moral platitudes. If you're in combat, empathy with enemy forces could weaken you strategically. If you care a lot about some foreign "other," you may not have enough care about the people to whom you actually have an obligation. It's called "moral balancing." In short, it's a sign your loyalties lie elsewhere, and the in-group has a pragmatic need for loyalty among its members.

That being said, I wouldn't write off empathy for the bad guy, not because I care about him, but because my philosophy is "Know thy enemy." Some people recoil at "understanding" the enemy, as though that's tantamount to sedition, but to me a threat can be more effectively handled if you grasp what's making it tick.

As for "Are All Men Pedophiles," as you know, I gave that its own thread.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#78065 - 07/14/13 10:48 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: XiaoGui17]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
That being said, I wouldn't write off empathy for the bad guy, not because I care about him, but because my philosophy is "Know thy enemy." Some people recoil at "understanding" the enemy, as though that's tantamount to sedition, but to me a threat can be more effectively handled if you grasp what's making it tick.


I couldn't agree more.

As for Rapists/Molesters using it to cop a plea or excuse their behavior, there are far too many clinical cases to dismiss it entirely as a factor.

In terms of experiential knowledge, the attempted rape of my person wasn't about sex, nor was it about power. It was about punishment, and I was a very bad girl. The guy was just an ass, and had a hang-up with race and seeing white women with black men because it was in his pathology. He was going to fix it so I couldn't be with any man. Satanic Witchery has its place, and on that day, the first mistake he made was removing my gag, the second was allowing me to speak. I was hog-tied and basically a meat-stick with a bobbing head, and I got him to abandon the idea and leave. I didn't even have to go to trial, he confessed the whole event on audio/video, and was convicted. It didn't end there either, it was a rival biker-family's kid, and I got all the death threats, and bullshit that only a Lifetime Movie could portray. Aside from a few nicks and bruises, I slithered out of that one basically unscathed because I know his type. And as a Biker's kid, I also knew theirs. The rest as they say, is history. It wasn't the first time, nor will it be the last that some whackadoo believes himself to be armed to the T, and prepared for me. The next guy better just shoot me in the head. A double-tap to be sure. I study people like insects under-glass. There's all these little tells, and people tell a lot about themselves without saying much.


So, I can't say without a doubt that some of these people that have a penchant for children, dominating women, or ass-raping men for that matter weren't themselves victims of some sorted event in their past. There's always exceptions to the rule but with all the layers of influence and environmental factors, no two people are destined to come out the same.


Who knows really, why some people turn out the way they do. All the analysis in the world by the so-called experts can not provide us with absolutes about the human condition, at best they are educated guesses and worse... Profiling.

I know a quite a few women that went through events that don't even measure up to my own, and they are a hot-shitty mess, and they may never recover from it. In my case, it was just another event in my past and perhaps a bit of food for thought and not much else.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78202 - 07/18/13 05:15 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
I don't think there's anything anti-Satanic about having a problem with child molestation. The whole idea of freedom is choosing your own morality, there aren't codes you have to follow, but it doesn't say you can't have any moral views either. It is up to each individual. It becomes hypocritical however, if you are always saying 'morality is for sheep', and things of that theme, then play moral cards when it comes to something you have an issue with. If you do that, then by the philosophy you always advocate, there is nothing wrong with child molestation, or anything for that matter.

Personally, I don't like child rapists/molesters very much. If they have the fetish and don't act on it, I have no issue, I only have issue with those who act on it, as their actions hurt others. The actions are a choice, the fetish is not. Of course, it's hard to say what the age of consent really should be, in most states it is 16 or 17, which sounds about right. It seems pretty naïve to think someone of that age is actually incapable of choosing whether or not to have sex.

This brings me to something I've always wondered. Why does it seem as though adults attracted to children are so much more compulsive than the average person? The majority of people don't have an urge to rape every person they find attractive, but these people seem to have such a strong urge that they are willing to risk everything to follow it. I've seen Dateline episodes with people who were caught, and then went back online the next day looking for partners. Is their something about a pedophile's psychology that makes them highly compulsive compared to people with other attractions, or do those who actually molest children represent a small portion of people who are attracted to them? If anyone knows about this subject, I'd be interested in any information.

As far as offenders being abused as children, I don't think anyone can deny the link between being victims and abusers. You could very well argue that it doesn't excuse their actions, which is something I agree with, but it likely does have something to do with them having the fetish. From what I know, a significant portion of offenders were sexually abused as children.


Edited by 334forwardspin (07/18/13 05:16 AM)

Top
#78206 - 07/18/13 10:42 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: 334forwardspin]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
It's a highly complex issue. A person's pathology shapes their impulses and compulsions. Technically speaking the nature of a true 'fetish' is a psychosis. Specific elements have to be in place for the person to find release.

So, in the cases of being slapped by the moral stick only to return to the same behavior deals directly with the person's internal morality, and natural impulses. Obviously, the morality of a Serial Rapist is going to differ greatly than that of his victims. So when dismissing morality, I think it has more to do with its varying degree, rather than considering it to be 'universal'. This is why Morality is often Nurtured with a set of Ethics.

In cases of Hebephilia, it's commonly a two-way street (more than people care to admit). Age of Consent has fluctuated in an effort to regulate natural human behavior.

The adolescent that engages in a relationship with an adult often pursues it. Adults attracted to pubescent children are often called a Pedophiles but that's not clinically accurate, in Pedophilia the attraction is for pre-pubescent children. To 'molest' in a legal sense can be something as trivial as touching a person, so you have to get real specific in legal cases.

Pubescent children take on attributes of young-adults, so the attraction isn't that far out there when you think about it. Some people may keep their attractions secret because of the social stigma while others say fuck it and act upon them.

Most children that are systematically groomed and molested for years are typically violated by a family member, friend of the family, or person of authority (teachers, baby-sitters, clergy, etc.) that parents entrust their children to. In those cases, parents and care-givers play a pinnacle role (authoritarian). So, from an early age this behavior is conducted in private, secret, and shapes the child being molested. It's not always violent either. It usually goes in stages as the child is nurtured into a model, just as they themselves were groomed.

How people react to being groomed is highly subjective.

This discussion reminds me of a recent film called Hard-Candy, if you haven't seen it, I can highly recommend it.

For me to sit here and say to myself: "I don't like molesters, rapists, murderers, etc." Wouldn't be intellectually honest. Even if the behavior is abhorrent, i.e. "I don't want to be murdered, raped, etc." I just see the animal for what it is.

Instead, I examine each case and imagine what elements would have to be in place for 'me' to commit the act. Could I murder a person? Could I do it with or without a 'safe' weapon? I very well could if the situation calls for it but I wouldn't know for sure until I'm in the moment. I can say from past experiences, I could have but didn't because I was reasoning and rationalizing the outcome (Jail, leaving my son behind, etc.) but at the risk of losing my own life (often called 'moral self-defense'), those past-experiences will shape my actions should a situation arise in my future. Rage violence is reactionary and compulsory. What would it take to put me into that much rage where I Stalk, Hunt and ultimately Murder my prey?

In role-playing scenarios, I've been the Rapist, some people enjoy being demeaned and forced to act against their will, the more you enjoy it (as the Rapist) the more you understand your nature and the pleasure derived from imposing yourself upon another. As you mature and grow, those pleasure centers also evolve, and you lose the taste for it. It doesn't appeal to me like it once did. A person who enjoys being demeaned in such a way is assuredly a pathetic creature best left to their own devices.

As a Mother, I can't relate to a sexual attraction to Infants or Pre-pubescent children, but you can't help but wonder what that little trigger would be, and what would flip it on, if ever. Some people consider the person with such attractions to be monsters, 'broken', or not worthy of life. If I'm to use my 'internal morality' as a guide, that premise could be rationalized to meaninglessness thus, I consider 'morality' to be too flightly and fickle to be relied upon. I do not trust it.

Abusers were often the Abused it's that old adage "Be careful of hunting monsters, you may become a monster yourself."

In the cases of adults that had relatively normal and happy childhoods, there's something else there that flipped the switch. It could be a single incident or personal revelation through rationalizing. See: Jeffrey Dalmer Interview
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78217 - 07/18/13 08:16 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
jim haines Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/08/13
Posts: 28
First of all that father is a true hero for that child! And the outcome of that incident is the IDEAL outcome for any and all cases of child molestation and rape CERTAIN DEATH.

I have the same reaction towards molesters,that I have towards bastards that torture cats for pleasure. I think of entertaining epic ways to publicly execute them.

I could describe one way. But I'm new. And this is a private site. I don't think the people in charge would appreciate such a morbid post!

I don't consider myself a moral absolutist. I'm very liberal with sexual matters. And I'm a staunch supporter of sexual freedom. Indeed if the ADULTS in question are all CONSENTING,and LOVE EACH OTHER TO DEATH I have no problem with what they do.

As far as fetishes? I realize that there can be a fine line between FETISH,and PSYCHOPATH.

Hell I myself have several thrilling fetishes! They involve quicksand,leather,and submission.

They are all shared with my loving and supportive boyfriend.

We and the folks we are in contact with have a NO TOLERANCE policy towards bad eggs,that don't follow the rules.

Sex fetishes can be a great way to explore your feral,animal nature.

If someone gave me a red button and said. "Pushing this will cause all child molesters and rapists to die horrible deaths."
Would I push it? No. Because more than likely one of them is riding a school bus full of kids!

Hence one of our great moral problems. How far are we willing to go to protect our den,from those who don't deserve to live?

My answer is easy.
_________________________
I
WILL
HAVE
THAT
POWER!!!!

Top
#78223 - 07/18/13 11:40 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: jim haines]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
I stated previously that 'I' believe the Father acted accordingly, did you read previous comments before posting Caps ablaze?

 Quote:
As far as fetishes? I realize that there can be a fine line between FETISH,and PSYCHOPATH.


I was addressing the nature of a true Fetish, and there's a big difference between that and a kink.

BDSM groups have a ton of 'rules' and 'regs' for the safety of others, those provisions are usually for those people that are forced to comply to be part of said group. A hell of a lot different than a dynamic between consenting adults.

Have a few Kinks myself and have no issues managing the activity just fine without rules dictated beforehand.

 Quote:
If someone gave me a red button and said. "Pushing this will cause all child molesters and rapists to die horrible deaths."
Would I push it? No. Because more than likely one of them is riding a school bus full of kids!

Hence one of our great moral problems. How far are we willing to go to protect our den,from those who don't deserve to live?

My answer is easy.


All for the children, I get it. Sure. Kids are all precious and innocent until they grow up, right? Then you decide which are worthy of life, waive your morality stick around from behind the safety of pushing a button?

As stated previously, many of the Molesters were once those kids that got molested. Why stop there? Kill all the kids, just to be sure.

That's what the Joker would do.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78232 - 07/19/13 05:35 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: jim haines]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
Welcome to the board first of all. I can't speak for others, but I doubt anyone would feel your post is too graphic. Satanists, myself included are disturbed far less easier than the average person, at least from what I've seen.

As I stated previously, I'm not a big fan of child molesters or rapists. I believe in sexual freedom as well, as long as it's between consenting parties. However, I have noticed a 'moral platitude' in many who think this way regarding more taboo matters.

What are your views on say, necrophilia? Or to be more accurate sex with corpses since necrophilia is just the name for the attraction. Intercourse with a corpse is very taboo, but who does it really hurt? For me, I have no issues with it, I really could care less if people are going around fucking the dead.

In my experience, most people(aside from extreme RHPers)seem to be pretty tolerant of things like S&M, orgies, and similar things. I'll see many who are tolerant of just about everything, but not necrophilia, but why not if there theme is 'as long as your not hurting anybody'(well, unless they want to be hurt lol).

Perhaps they do tolerate it but wont admit it for fear of disgusted looks, perhaps they think everyone should seek a sexual relationship instead of 'self-sufficiency', perhaps they don't even know why they think the way they do and just think 'well this is EXTREMELY taboo so it must be bad'.


Edited by 334forwardspin (07/19/13 05:37 AM)

Top
#78234 - 07/19/13 07:44 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
I do imagine it's a highly complex issue, with several factors going into it. It is often made to seem though, that people with pedophilic urges have far less impulse control than people with other sexual attractions. I mainly wonder what causes of pedophilic attractions may also cause low impulse control.

In essence, ideas about impulse control relate to the perception that rapists and child molesters can't be 'fixed'. However, it likely has more to do with the idea that you can't fix someone who doesn't want to be fixed. It's not as if it's impossible to resist a sexual urge, it's just the simple fact that if you don't put effort into something, it will fail. That's why criticizing therapy programs for 'not working' is stupid, it would be like criticizing the workout plan of a personal trainer because it didn't work on a client who didn't show up to half the sessions, and put forth a half-assed effort during the ones they came to. It's up to the individual.

You will often see teenagers seek out the relationships with adults, which obviously contradicts the idea of the older person being the 'predator'. I actually had a chance at sex with a woman in her 30s when I was still 17, very close to 18. I declined, because I had just gotten into a relationship with the person I'm now with. The older woman was someone I had friended beforehand, I won't go into the irrelevant details, but the main point is, had I actually gone to go and do that, it would have been fully consensual, absolutely not 'rape'. By the thinking many have, I would have suffered psychological issues doing so at 17, but not at 18, which is maybe the most asinine thing about it.

There is a double standard regarding this matter as well, some have no problem with older woman/teenage guy and have major problems with the reverse. Of course, a teenage girl is just as capable of making that decision as a teenage guy is. It is often argued that the guy always wants it, but the girl often wants it as well, there’s really no logical basis for this thinking. In a sense, people don’t like to admit it because they’d rather see a teenage girl as vulnerable. Some men like viewing women as the weaker sex, for whatever reason.

Top
#78235 - 07/19/13 08:14 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: 334forwardspin]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
Some clinicians lean towards genetic factors, though it would be damn near impossible to narrow down which specific 'genes' affect behavior in that manner. It would be like finding a 'gay gene', 'alcoholic gene', or 'dare-devil gene'.

If you frame it in the same way as 'addiction', it may put it into context with regard to impulses.

Say for example you were raised in a household that framed something as normal/healthy as masturbation as the most vile behavior imaginable... Well, this plays a role in habitual masturbators. Add a few other elements to the mix, and it turns into something else. Perhaps even something more extreme like genital mutilation.

There's certainly a double-standard with young women vs. young men. Look at NAMBLA for example. This little taboo organization causes hysterics for just existing, let alone the men that affiliate. I can tell you, some of my male homosexual friends pursued Older Men when they were teens, and they talk about how difficult it was to find a suitable partner because of the social stigma. They are thankful that NAMBLA exists. People tend to see it as a Pedo-club, and I'm fairly certain there's plenty among the membership but there's also older men that are not much different than those older Women that seek out younger partners, most likely for similar reasons.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78250 - 07/19/13 06:52 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
jim haines Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/08/13
Posts: 28
First of all SIN3 my previous post was not an attack on yours. It was a general statement on the whole comment thread. I am well aware of your thoughts on that father acting accordingly. MY BAD for not specifying this! I'm SORRY for any hurt feelings you had from that post. It was not my intention whatsoever.

I do have a tendency to be a bit opinionated and brash. But that's one of my charms. And You also owned me about the JOKER and the red button comment! I really shouldn't type when I'm heated! So I'll choose another avatar. One that reflects my personality better.
So as far as that goes SIN3=1 Me=0

now 34forwardspin your comments about necrophilia? To me personally this is disgusting. People who have that fetish probably have very unusual ways of exploring this,without getting caught. A person doing this would have to realize the life threatening risk this is. But then not always.Of course if someone would fuck my corpse? I would hope I returned and clawed their face off! LOL!That would make a great X rated horror movie!

Actually when it comes to adult sexual fetishes I really cant judge anyone harshly! They should know their physical,and emotional limits.

But here's where I'm an bit old fashioned! The participants should all LOVE EACH OTHER! I know how unrealistic that sounds! I know a lot of sex fetishists are often casual friends. Or more often than not paid prostitutes.But one of my personal fetish rules is. Can you trust your life with this person? If not than you have no business doing it! That's just my opinion. I'm not saying that that is set in stone. That's just fetishism in my world.

Consider some of the more popular fetishes that I think are silly,and weird. Furries. Sex dressed up like a unicorn or a wolf is just out of the question! When I first discovered this fetish,I laughed my ass off! BUT. If my boyfriend were dressed as a werewolf in tight leather? I probably would like that greatly.And the vore crowd? Getting eaten alive by vegetables? Really? No thanks.

I've been STUNNED however in the amount of people that share my fave fetish however. It turns out there are many who enjoy the prospect,of being sucked slowly into a quicksand pit.When I was very young I always thought I was a sicko for having that fantasy. But thanks to the internet I learned how common,and how safely handled this fetish is. And as I made friends who are into quicksand. I discovered all the wonderful gay fun,and diversity you can create with this. My boy friend enjoys playing the inescapable mud,and I play the hapless struggling victim. Great foreplay.

I've also learned a valuable truth. The more CREATIVE you are,the more likely you will have some form of fetish.All great creative people probably have some intense fetish of some sort.
_________________________
I
WILL
HAVE
THAT
POWER!!!!

Top
#78270 - 07/20/13 10:15 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: jim haines]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
First of all SIN3 my previous post was not an attack on yours. It was a general statement on the whole comment thread. I am well aware of your thoughts on that father acting accordingly. MY BAD for not specifying this! I'm SORRY for any hurt feelings you had from that post. It was not my intention whatsoever.

I do have a tendency to be a bit opinionated and brash. But that's one of my charms. And You also owned me about the JOKER and the red button comment! I really shouldn't type when I'm heated! So I'll choose another avatar. One that reflects my personality better.
So as far as that goes SIN3=1 Me=0


Ha, fair enough. I didn't perceive it as an 'attack' for the record. Just a premature ejaculation.

As to the myriad of 'fetishes' out there, there's tons that are really strange and it begs to question the person's psyche, like crushing. A mix of the foot-fetish and the act of squishing small animals to death. As it gained popularity and public outcry it changed into crushing fruits and veggies, then cycled up to the extreme where men would pay women hundreds of dollars for clips of crushing glass to see the bleed, so it then starts to cycle back up to the feet/destruction buzz.

 Quote:
According to the DSM-IV-TR, fetishism is the use of nonliving objects as a stimulus to achieve sexual arousal or satisfaction. (This only applies if the objects are not specifically designed for sexual stimulation (e.g., a vibrator).) The corresponding DSM-code for fetishism is 302.81; the diagnostic criteria are basically the same as those of the ICD. In the DSM manual, all diagnostic criteria are given in the corresponding section of the text book, i. e., here no hierarchical processing is needed.


The reason I mentioned a 'true fetish' in a clinical sense deals with the mental/emotional distress it causes the person, vs. a Kink where it may be a specific activity to spice up the relationship dynamic. It's the reason why many go through great pains in labeling themselves Kinksters vs. Fetishists.

Clinicians use the DSM to trouble-shoot, then offer management tools to the patient to alleviate said distress.





Edited by SIN3 (07/20/13 10:15 AM)
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78287 - 07/20/13 02:42 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
jim haines Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/08/13
Posts: 28
Yeah there are a few fetishes that go beyond the pale of strange. You mentioned crushing. The act of crushing small animals for pleasure is thoroughly abominable in my view. Those people would receive my rage for sure. It's good that was toned down. But I'm sure a lot of bastards still do this in private. And I have to question the sanity,of anyone that would walk on broken glass for someones sex thrill.I would suspect someone paying to view this is probably psychotic. And probably treats women like dirt.
_________________________
I
WILL
HAVE
THAT
POWER!!!!

Top
#78290 - 07/20/13 02:54 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: jim haines]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
Some of the crushing videos on Youtube are pretty tame, the restrictions on content probably help too.

The new trend is 'bug crushing', so instead of puppies, kittens, gerbils and the like, it's insects. Sample clip. She talks a lot of shit, so you might need to scoot the player along a bit to get to the actual crushing.

There's also an appeal for watching Dad's go to work on the would-be Pedo. Father PWND by Mr. Touchy Feely.



Edited by SIN3 (07/20/13 02:56 PM)
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#78300 - 07/20/13 06:53 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: jim haines]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: jim haines
The act of crushing small animals for pleasure is thoroughly abominable in my view. Those people would receive my rage for sure. It's good that was toned down. But I'm sure a lot of bastards still do this in private. And I have to question the sanity,of anyone that would walk on broken glass for someones sex thrill.I would suspect someone paying to view this is probably psychotic. And probably treats women like dirt.

Crushing, from what I've seen, is quite similar to the common macrophile fantasy of having a giant woman step on them. It's a blend of two pretty common fetishes: "feet" and "female domination." The safe, two-person version is a woman in heels stomping on a guy. And yes, they sometimes simulate by crush eggs, rotting pumpkins, etc.

The animals make it more visceral, a more "realistic" depiction of a person being crushed. Most men who are into the crushing fetish are visualizing themselves in the mouse/ kitten/ frog/ bug/ pumpkin/ egg's place. (Check out the comments on the video SIN3 linked.) I doubt they treat women like dirt anymore than the typical male submissive.

I don't really see a problem with crushing a bug or mouse. People use bugs as bait, feed live mice to their pet snakes, and accidentally run over pigeons, squirrels, etc. while driving. Everything dies.

A few of my friends and I got together once to mock Rick Santorum for his anti-porn rhetoric, by making some fetish "porn" that was "safe for work." It was a fan video to Lily Allen's "Fuck You," featuring us putting out cigarettes and spitting on Santorum's picture, crushing a doll-likeness of Santorum that was stop-motion animated in some killer heels, etc. The lyric "can't tie my laces" featured me tightening another girl's corset (she was an impressive tightlacer, with a 22" waist). I think editing took too long and Santorum was irrelevant by the time it was completed, because so far as I know it was never released.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#78304 - 07/20/13 07:48 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
jim haines Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/08/13
Posts: 28
Crushing bugs is pretty tame. But about a year ago I remember reports about a soulless bitch,that actually videotaped a cat being eaten by a snake. And another where someone microwaved a kitten. I'm not sure if they did this for a sex kick. But I suspect a lot of detritus humans got a thrill from that. Me? It made me bawl my eyes out. And it takes A GREAT FUCKING DEAL to upset me that badly. They each received a destruction rite from me.

I also watched the video about the dad and the drunk pedo. I left a comment on the vid. I think he acted correctly. Even if he wasn't a pedophile. That drunk overstepped his bounds,and deserved to be thrashed.

BTW what do you think of the STUCK WOMAN fetish? I've heard some men get into that too. Basically they get off watching someone struggling on a giant piece of fly paper.
_________________________
I
WILL
HAVE
THAT
POWER!!!!

Top
#78305 - 07/20/13 07:50 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: XiaoGui17]
jim haines Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/08/13
Posts: 28
It sounds like that video about Rick Santorum would have been fun to watch. Do you have any other YouTube videos? Actually what you guys did could have been a magic rite. I always think of Rick Santorum as mister man dog sex politician!

Edited by jim haines (07/20/13 07:56 PM)
Edit Reason: Realized later he said the vid was not released!
_________________________
I
WILL
HAVE
THAT
POWER!!!!

Top
#79020 - 08/05/13 06:03 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
I suppose a multiple amount of factors would go into it, future research they found on it would be interesting to me.

Your homosexual friends are a good example of how teenagers are far more capable of making those decisions than people think. My perception is that a lot of people don't really know why they think an adult with a 16/17 year old is such a horrible thing, they just go by what society says. I just have a very hard time believing that causes the degree of trauma that it is believed to cause. If I say this, most of the time I'll just get the typical response about how I'm not a psychologist and etc., but it just simply doesn't make sense.

Cultures all around the world have had this in common practice, did they all suffer trauma? From my own experience, I was fully capable of making that choice when I did have it. My grandma was 17 when she had my father, and my grandfather was 25 at the time, she never suffered trauma from it. I don't buy into ideas that defy what makes sense just because they are believed in a profession, especially one who's opinions change constantly. Plus, any psychologist who brought up controversial ideas like that would be at risk of losing their license, so they'd stay away from it anyway.

Environment probably does play a role in what causes someone to become a pedophile, given patterns of victims becoming pedophiles. People like to use labels like creep, sicko and etc. but the more you look at it the more it makes you just take the animal for what they are, as you said. You can fault someone for acting on the urge, but you really can't fault someone for whatever sexual preference they have, it wasn't chosen.

Top
#79021 - 08/05/13 07:47 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: 334forwardspin]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
THIS video discussion ties in to this subject.

When addressing abnormalities in behavior, the research 'they' do gets rather convoluted doesn't it? The why of it all tends to be rendered moot in criminal cases and a hell of a lot more is becoming criminal these days.

It's the extreme cases that both write these 'Laws' and create the villains. Example: Ohio vs. Castro.

We should be protecting our own children but there's always people among us that give the appearance of being benign but in reality are malevolent. Even if we share common interests for reciprocity, (whether we watch over our own kids, or other people's kids) the boogeyman operates in shadow and can bend the light to provide camouflage.

Even if teens are capable, the older party will be treated as the Monster regardless. I think most people are just terrified of degradation of their own society to the likes of scary bedtime stories and what they see on TV. Consensual situations are quite different than a violation by force, no matter the age or gender. The trouble is, there are agencies at work deciding whom can and cannot consent. Familial intervention has always been the case but that 'family' extends to too far and wide because of those common interests.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#81273 - 10/18/13 05:07 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
Kei Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/16/13
Posts: 12
Loc: BC, Canada
Fucking A+ parent.

I'm childfree and am getting my ovaries ripped out as soon as a doctor is willing to do it. But even though I don't want kids myself, I fucking loathe anyone who tries to fuck with a minor. I'd do the same thing the father here did if I saw someone trying to hurt a kid, even if I'd never seen the kid before in my life. Fucker would get my cane slamming into the side of his head.
_________________________

Top
#81274 - 10/18/13 05:57 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Kei]
JTF Offline
member


Registered: 06/02/13
Posts: 110
Loc: United Kingdom of Great Britai...
Sex beasts and monsters? Horrible horrible creatures was just reading a few of the older posts there. Don't think i could ever see it from their point of view they should all be hung that would be the best solution.

In prison they are kept apart from mainstream for their own protection. I think they shouldn't be offered protection and have to mingle like the old days ha ha they would get their punishment proper :-)

When i was in you couldnt get to them i was surprised at how many there was. Halls full of them you could only shout abuse at them like monsters ,hang your self etc they would shout back and call us junkies or were going to rape your family...lovley people eh :-)
_________________________
AVE SATANAS

Top
#82164 - 11/10/13 06:07 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: JTF]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
 Originally Posted By: JTF
Sex beasts and monsters? Horrible horrible creatures was just reading a few of the older posts there. Don't think i could ever see it from their point of view they should all be hung that would be the best solution.

In prison they are kept apart from mainstream for their own protection. I think they shouldn't be offered protection and have to mingle like the old days ha ha they would get their punishment proper :-)

When i was in you couldnt get to them i was surprised at how many there was. Halls full of them you could only shout abuse at them like monsters ,hang your self etc they would shout back and call us junkies or were going to rape your family...lovley people eh :-)


When you look at it from the perspective of dismissing morality completely, you wouldn't see a reason to condemn sex offenders, just due to dismissing morality in general. Personally, I don't like rapists/child molesters. I don't care much for say, people who kill others who have never harmed them either, and other things that are just part of my personal moral views.

However, despite how I feel about them morality is still a subjective matter, and my views are only my own. If you dismiss morality in general, it would make sense that you have no issue with sex offenders, not because you necessarily defend their actions particularly, but just because you take the 'do what thou will, anything goes' mentality.

There's nothing wrong with having moral views, but if you do in fact advocate do what thou will, that means ANYTHING goes. It seems quite hypocritical for those who are always talking about how morality is for sheep/the weak, how it's useless and etc. to then take issue with sex offenders, and talk about how fucked up they are, an imperative to protect the victims, and how anyone who isn't on the same page is an ass hole.

As I've previously stated, there's nothing wrong with finding the actions of sex offenders to be fucked up, but if you advocate 'no morality' and then go and say that, it's a complete crock of shit.

I find that many who advocate the 'do what thou will' mentality seem to think there should be a special exception when it's them/their loved ones being hurt, however they simply can not take what they dish out, and are simply victims of their own philosophies. The perp did what they will, disregarding who they hurt.

Top
#82185 - 11/10/13 12:32 PM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: 334forwardspin]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6664
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
There's nothing wrong with having moral views, but if you do in fact advocate do what thou will, that means ANYTHING goes. It seems quite hypocritical for those who are always talking about how morality is for sheep/the weak, how it's useless and etc. to then take issue with sex offenders, and talk about how fucked up they are, an imperative to protect the victims, and how anyone who isn't on the same page is an ass hole.



I can see both sides of the argument. You can't very well advocate not having morals while being moral and not be called on it. At the same time having morals doesn't always mean a person hasn't thought it all through and decided what is correct and incorrect action in relation to how they personally live. It also deals in internal compulsions. If you don't have the inclination towards molesting children, it is necessarily morality that prevents you from doing it.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#82236 - 11/11/13 01:55 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: SIN3]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
I agree with what you have said here, I was mainly just arguing the first point, that it is inconsistent/hypocritical if you say anything goes, but in fact think that certain things are unacceptable.

I agree though, that having morals doesn't necessarily mean you haven't thought them through. I have my own as I've mentioned, and use my own criteria. Emotion will generally play somewhat of a role, but if something is inconsistent and flawed, and based on little more than an emotion I tend to try and ignore it.

Naturally, if you don't feel a compulsion or any desire to do something you won't do it. However, there is a difference between having no desire to do something, and having a moral problem with those who do. I mentioned necrophilia earlier in the thread, which is something I have no desire to do myself and would thus not do, but I honestly don't have a moral problem with people who do those actions.

Top
#82246 - 11/11/13 11:44 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: 334forwardspin]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
The term morality seems to have been narrowed from its descriptive to its normative definition. This is to say that one may have one's own code of morality regardless of whether one calls it such. Normative morality tends to drop the distinction of an "I" or even "We" code of morality. Thus, one is left with society or others defining one's morality with no qualifiers. The term itself is often used in this manner.

Regarding children, I believe consistency is key (as it with adults for that matter). I may wish to instill in my nephew my own code of character, honor, integrity. etc. They generally will differ from society at large. The key, for me, is to apply the principles consistently and by example. Ultimately, he will decide for himself as to a code of conduct. It may range from deontology to utilitarian to a strict sense of rational self-interest.

The study of morality is simply that of ethics. I think we descriptive morality with societal morality. I will rarely use the word for this reason, but I would not consider myself amoral when the word is being used in an accurate and descriptive as opposed to a normative one.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#82274 - 11/12/13 07:14 AM Re: Father Of the Year! [Re: Le Deluge]
334forwardspin Offline
member


Registered: 03/04/13
Posts: 509
Loc: Las Vegas,NV United States
Recognizing the difference morality determined by personal reasons versus morality one is taught or conditioned to believe by others/society is the key in figuring out one's personal ethics. The difference is of course, is in who is doing the deciding, you or someone/something else.

It is not always society doing the conditioning, but at times another source one uses to determine their code of ethics who's codes differ from society's. In a gang culture for instance, ethics are more centered around always backing your brothers/sisters, don't 'snitch' and similar things. Having a gang, individual or whatever else decide your ethical codes for you is no less of a slave mentality than using society to do so, it is just replacing one master with another.

There is nothing wrong with agreeing with a generally accepted code, so long as it is actually you by your own free mind agreeing with it.

Like you, consistency is important to me as well, along with having a basis and criteria that I actually understand, and that makes sense. Consistency is necessary for the reasoning and basis to be valid, as without consistency in applying the reasoning and criteria you use, you are following the code for a different reason, and not acknowledging it.

You'll find many who do not follow a consistent basis for their moral views, and either have no real reasoning for their view or have reasoning that they do not apply equally to all situations, or base on any actual facts. When you point out these flaws and lay it out for them, it is usually one of two things usually happen. It either causes them to rethink their take, or when they resort to a personal attack to take the focus off of their reasoning, and put it on you instead.

In instilling a code of honor in a child, I would agree that leading by example is the best way. In the end, to raise a free thinker you have to allow free thinking. You can, and should in my opinion punish disrespectful behavior, but it is the behavior that should be punished rather than the thinking.

Top
Page all of 7 12345>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.108 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 117 queries. Zlib compression disabled.