4 Replies to “Meanwhile, in the People’s Democratic Republic of Victoria formerly in Australia…”
This is the message of the soul destroyers, the civilization destroyers, and the haters of mankind:
1) emasculate men — homosexuality (make pansies of them all)
Make women their superiors, in business, gov’t and marriage
2) ridicule and demean, shame and mock them for their inborn nature to protect and defend
3) I know that Jordan Peterson comes near to tears when he relates how our culture is intent on dehumanizing men, and I would say with the sole purpose of crushing their very souls, demoralizing them, confusing them about who and what they are — thereby undermining their will to be what God designed them to be: Protectors, defenders, and providers.
Feminism, in all its ugly garb, is a doctrine from Hell. And teachers who preach feminism are the most odious of all prevaricators.
There’s a book written about 1960-ish, titled The Mark of a Man, written by Elisabeth Eliott (or Elliot; I can never remember).
She’s a godly woman, and this book is based on her talks with her grandson.
She presents the godly standard of what a man is, mostly in the temporal sphere, how his faith is worked out in society.
If you’re blessed to get your hands on this book, give it a good read — for already in her day the incursions by the evil one into the thinking of young men and women especially, had borne some nasty and poisonous fruit.
Psychology experiments that tried to teach psychopaths empathy produced only psychopaths with better skills at FAKING empathy. They made them into more efficient predators.
Oz would do better by teaching people how to psychologically defend themselves against the manipulative behaviors of psychopaths and other disagreeable types.
For one thing, teach methods for counteracting and resolving the cognitive dissonance that sets in when the psychopath’s charming, kind behavior is juxtaposed with nastiness.
For example,
Strategy step 1.
Instead of trying to decide if the person is good or bad, you tell yourself that the person is good AND bad, and then the decision is simply about, ‘do I want to have a relationship with such a person?’
But the government won’t arrange to teach people this strategy for resolving cognitive dissonance because then people could apply it to their government.
Perhaps all of Leftist ideology is nothing more than a maladaptive response to cognitive dissonance?
Did they frame the question as, “decide whether mankind is good or mankind is bad?”
If they start with this question then they establish the seeds of cognitive dissonance.
It looks as if third wave feminism is a maladaptive response to cognitive dissonance.
This is the message of the soul destroyers, the civilization destroyers, and the haters of mankind:
1) emasculate men — homosexuality (make pansies of them all)
Make women their superiors, in business, gov’t and marriage
2) ridicule and demean, shame and mock them for their inborn nature to protect and defend
3) I know that Jordan Peterson comes near to tears when he relates how our culture is intent on dehumanizing men, and I would say with the sole purpose of crushing their very souls, demoralizing them, confusing them about who and what they are — thereby undermining their will to be what God designed them to be: Protectors, defenders, and providers.
Feminism, in all its ugly garb, is a doctrine from Hell. And teachers who preach feminism are the most odious of all prevaricators.
There’s a book written about 1960-ish, titled The Mark of a Man, written by Elisabeth Eliott (or Elliot; I can never remember).
She’s a godly woman, and this book is based on her talks with her grandson.
She presents the godly standard of what a man is, mostly in the temporal sphere, how his faith is worked out in society.
If you’re blessed to get your hands on this book, give it a good read — for already in her day the incursions by the evil one into the thinking of young men and women especially, had borne some nasty and poisonous fruit.
The problem is caused by psychopaths, not all men. http://www.hare.org/charming.html
Psychology experiments that tried to teach psychopaths empathy produced only psychopaths with better skills at FAKING empathy. They made them into more efficient predators.
Oz would do better by teaching people how to psychologically defend themselves against the manipulative behaviors of psychopaths and other disagreeable types.
For one thing, teach methods for counteracting and resolving the cognitive dissonance that sets in when the psychopath’s charming, kind behavior is juxtaposed with nastiness.
For example,
Strategy step 1.
Instead of trying to decide if the person is good or bad, you tell yourself that the person is good AND bad, and then the decision is simply about, ‘do I want to have a relationship with such a person?’
But the government won’t arrange to teach people this strategy for resolving cognitive dissonance because then people could apply it to their government.
Perhaps all of Leftist ideology is nothing more than a maladaptive response to cognitive dissonance?
Did they frame the question as, “decide whether mankind is good or mankind is bad?”
If they start with this question then they establish the seeds of cognitive dissonance.
It looks as if third wave feminism is a maladaptive response to cognitive dissonance.
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-dissonance-2795012