I Hate Women - Page 3

'Shazam! Shazam! Shazam!'
(Pvt. Gomer Pyle)

I'm amazed by the quantity of analysis regarding 'ihatewomen' situation(s) with women. I'm sure he appreciates it.

As for me, I'm content and happy with just me and my dog (Cairn Terrier).

Hey, that's an idea, get a dog.

I'm a dog lover (cats, ferrets, chinchillas, rabbits – okay you're right I'm an animal lover). But, having my pets allows me to express my emotions easily without the worry of incrimination for any of the words I use. Though sometimes my Cairn Terrier gives me looks of, 'Okay Bozo, what do you mean by that?'

And yes, even though it may be my imagination, I 'feel' love in return from my pets.

You have my apologies in advance 'ihatewomen' if you interpret my answer negatively. Offense wasn't my intent.

P.S.
Also, I don't have to worry about my pets leaving/divorcing me.

P.P.S.
A 'legal' professional escort service offers women who are very skilled in conversation and social interaction. Dinner out with her and your friends (female/male couple) would allow you to experience an intelligent woman who has compassion for the male situation. But, please keep in mind this is a professional relationship, not romance.

Haha i love it this girl recommends a hooker for this guy. The trick with women is not to get involved with their bullshit. Girls are just looking to create drama in their lives. Seriously that's why they watch soap opera's or read romantic novels. All those drama shows is porn for women.

I'm not saying all women are like this but sometimes their too emotional and do weird things because of it or try and make things more dramatic than they really are. Just don't get caught up in and just be like your fucking retarded.

quote:

---

I have not thoroughly read all of your posts although I have skimmed a lot of what you have read and still stand by my perspective.

---

Potentially insulting or indicitive of your lack of interest in us coming to an understanding as opposesed to this strongly sought dissagreement that I ironically dissagree with.

quote:

---

I feel the above quote is a brief introspective into the mentality I was suggesting you have adopted - that you are the foolish one for expecting a woman to devote herself to you and you alone. You have certainly suffered because of desiring, wanting, and expecting this type of commitment from a woman and now, rather than loathing those women that have abused you for seeking it, abuse this desire in you.

---

Again, I have not as of yet dissagreed with the notion that these are aspects I recognize due to my own internal struggles, quite the opposite.

I have yet to have it adequately shown that my relation was unwarrented, regardless of his denials and you perpensity for seeking and argument that does not exist.

quote:

---

I believe concluding that no female can ever truly love you (which is the undeniable conclusion to her not being "owned" by you)

---

I'll stop you here, because if I hold some potential dissagreement, it may be here.

I do not personally consider love and ownership equatable in any sense what so ever.

Call it cliche', but the old addage of, if you love someone, let them go, if it is meant to be, they will return or stick with you to begin with, makes sense to me, regardless of its romanticism.

I see love and commitment as two different things entirely.

quote:

---

your experiences have taught you to conclude something so grand about them.

---

My only conclusion about owning someone is quite simple and quite against your offerred perspective so far as I can interpret.

Perhaps it is you putting your words into my mouth as you are assuming I am doing with him, perhaps both at the same time to one degree or another.

quote:

---

In the end, my criticism about you prematurely judging that ihatewomen's intentions were to masturbate and not seek solutions or honest venting stands according to me.

---

Seeing as how I allow for both possibilities simultaneously, regardless of my previous statement and its apparent definitive nature, I will elaborate and state that both posistions are indeed true.

As I attempted to explain to him, and you decided was not worth bothering to read, my emphasis was on his denial of his own fault in his situation.

The point that made our agreement was so very evident, regardless of yours and his obfuscation of it.

You expressed how his, and others', hate drove his, and their, cycles, so did I.

Where is the confusion and argument here?

quote:

---

This is where we are in opposition because I do not believe there is anything wrong with it.

---

Again, as I clarified later, I never had a problem with his venting, it was his denial to his own part in his sufferring that I took issue with. His ignorant hypocricy that he defended, rather than acknowledge and learn and grow from.

Feel free to address this notion or stop repeating a non argument, please.

quote:

---

If he gets the chance to pound the shit out of a supermodel, will he reject it in favour of avoiding the cycle? Or will he go for it and vent his own anger into her sexually, splurge all over her, and begin to create a lifelong addiction?

That I cannot say.

---

Just to attempt to further clarify my point, irrelevant, but will he acknowledge his decision to continue the cycle and his efforts to create and sustain it for his own perceived benefits?

Regardless of his paradoxical and hypocritical perceived detriment from it?

Will he own up to his part in his cycle?

So far...

No.

quote:

---

If you haven't disagreed with this, then shut up and admit that you have a personal bias that is influencing your ability to discuss this subject with an open mind.

---

Again, you make these notions are mutually exclusive, but they are nowhere near.

It is because I have seen through such eyes that I hold such insight.

It is not to say that such vision still blinds me.

The point of an open mind is to be able to see such potential influence without being clouded by it.

Just because I admit to having shared such struggles openly does not translate into my still being in that stage, an erroneous assumption you have made due to something you are stuck on here...

quote:

---

If you have adopted the mentality that women are inherently incapable of being "owned", you cannot contemplate that possibility when you are challenged with it

---

A slave is owned.

A woman can say, "I love him, I am his, he owns me" But this can easily change, unlike in ownership.

Yes, commitment and devotion are different than ownership, we know this, but those who struggle are the ones who confuse this.

And they do so by accepting a gift of love and then shackling it with expectations and demands.

Usually demands that are intended to shield insecurities that are basis of an unstable relationship to begin with.

I simply make a distinction between a person giving their devotion freely and a forced union with expectations attached.

I'm nit picking about a persons and a situations ability to change and for a true loving partnerships ability to accept that instead of forcing a commitment that has become insolvent.

The true challenge of love.

Because just as devotion and ownership are different, so are love and commitment or devotion.

quote:

---

that it is HIS actions in this circular exchange of abuse that is propagating his own abuse. I never said this

---

Oh but you did, whether you realize it or not.

I think I now see more clearly your issue here.

It was already evident that you were clouded by a bias I couldn't or chose not to attempt to pin point, as your continual accusations of my bias had shown.

This was shown moreso in how you were talking to yourself in terms of your own understanding and assuming he had any ability or desire to understand your posistion.

Which of course set you up for what I saw coming.

The notion that any expressed agreement or positive response to your post was indicitive of such understanding and actual gratitude rather then him just being happy you didn't forcefully make him look at his own fault in his issue.

But where I mention you did say what you say you have not comes from either my dire missinterpretation of, or your profound self contradictions made in, such statements as these.

quote:

---

men are, in their own ways, and at the core, just as unloving

---

quote:

---

People are the problem, not women

---

quote:

---

A person attacking another to prove their own reality true - this is something both women and men do.

---

quote:

---

Both women and men suffer from the same problem - abuse. When people are forced into abuse as children they find a way of living within that abuse. They find pleasure in certain endeavors to cope with this abuse. When they get older, they still pursue these endeavors for pleasure because it's all they know. There are lots of other psychological factors that weigh in

---

And then I think the disconnect may come with the next sentence after the last quote.

Because how you can possibly not see that HE TOO is creating and chasing this cycle of abuse, or that such cycles and your conintual point of aggressiveness in relationships or their formation are only SUDDENLY attributibal to women, and in no way to him, is quite beyond me.

quote:

---

I have not agreed to any such thing and do not in fact think this is the case.

---

The only way you can even not see how obvious it is the case, is indeed by your sudden ability to incorrectly unequally attribute all your above factors of cycles and aggressiveness to women alone.

All of which was the seed of my woman hater joke, apparently half joke.

I honestly had no idea that you could not see the blatant hypocricy in his assertions of women's cyclical abuse chasing in a post that stated he was doing the same thing.

Wow.

quote:

---

you think being vulnerable to a girl and expecting her to be undyingly loyal to you is propagating the abuse. That's ridiculous

---

Not just being vulnerable, but defensive and offensive in defense of the vulnerability/insecurity.

quote:

---

However, seeking love from a female without bad intentions and without abusing her or them is not propagating abuse. It is seeking love, affection or whatever.

---

But you assume to much of him in direct opposistion to his own provided evidence.

You assume he does no wrong and is not abusive in his relationships or the seeking of them. (Yet you instantly take his word that he is abused and not deserving of it, interesting.)

Just as you seem to assume that he holds no responsibility for how he allows the outside world to affect him.

Poppycock.

quote:

---

You're saying "of course you're going to be abused you fucking idiot - you made yourself vulnerable

---

No, more like, "Of course you are going to be abused you fucking idiot, you are an abusive hypocritical asshole who seeks abusive women"

quote:

---

As i previously stated, his posts thus far have just proven to me that he is pissed off and can't figure out why chicks aren't just easy going and not so aggressive.

---

Than you missed his extremely blatant and evident ignorant hypocricy.

And if you think men are just easy going and not aggressive, then you share it.

quote:

---

This means you cannot get that innocent sort of soulmate partnership he is looking for. You state this as an impossibility

---

No, again, it cannot be forced or manipulated to suit one's desire to defend and deny one's insecurities rather than face them.

The innocense you speak of is formed by being truly open, yet not fearful and defensively offensive.

The latter being the key missed by both of you.

quote:

---

The confusion and argument is, as I stated, that you are not acknowledging that women are aggressive

---

Again, again, as noted above, and as noted even in the quote of mine that you cited, as I said I clarified this later, but will do so again.

Of course women are aggressive, and of course it is in direct response to their environment, upbringing, and developed defense mechanisms.

But this is no different, at its core, to use your words, than men.

Nor is it any different for Mr. I'm a blind hypocritical woman basher who ironically seeks their love.

What I clarified was that my EMPHASIS was on what mattered, HIS PART in all of this.

Let us not forget that regardless of our environment, upbringing, and walls, we are the masters of ourselves, no one else.

How the world around us affects us, and how we react to it is ultimately our choosing.

This is the first most basic rule to being a whole person, let alone a person worthy of a relationship.

Taking responsibility for yourself and your actions. Not blaming others and whining for all the pain you feel when they purposely or accidently step on your insecurities.

Pain that continues because instead of properly attending these sore spots, you either deny their existance, except when it suits your purpose, or become dependent upon them.

Ignorantly calling a relationship an attempt at a loving commitment when it is actually another attempt to squeeze salve for insecurities out of a forced abusive cyclic nightmare can indeed cause such confusion and blindness to this obviousness.

quote:

---

women are by far more competitive, aggressive and insecure

---

Absolutely not. Absurd even. It may manifest differently but this is sheer nonsense.

Besides, such a statement is going to run by a case by case basis and in regards to their respective point in development in further respect to the difference in how they develop and how society reacts to all of it.

Just because women become "less attractive" earlier and appear more aggressive at an age group you familiarize yourself with over others, or that men direct their aggressiveness towards obtaining the "things that attract a woman" or against potential rival suiters in a display to attract them rather then directly towards them untill domination is assured, by no means makes you correct in your assertion.

quote:

---

By that rational, it is impossible to assert from the get-go that he is just as at fault as the women he is complaining about are. Again, your very problem is you are suggesting that he is wrong for propagating the cycle - I do not see how he is doing so except expecting women to be amicable.

---

Then you don't see how his complaining, about everyone but himself, and his hypocritical notions, and his anger show that perhaps he is his own problem and is the source of his own cycle.

quote:

---

I wasn't talking about his venting. I was talking about his seeking love and affection and a partner that would want to be "owned" by him, that would love him, that would be eternally devoted to him. Him venting it is a non-issue.

---

The last part being part of what I said as well.

I see your point and agree, but my point was again mentioning his responsibility for his pain and his cycles.

quote:

---

You haven't given him a chance.

---

Untrue, I agreed with your initial point, that it takes balls to admit abuse.

But then I simply addressed another point. His part in his own cycles.

If you think I need to learn something about him to point out that he is responsible for his life, you are mistaken.

quote:

---

It's like yelling at someone who was hurt first to say sorry for punching out in retribution. You'll fail every time. First the initial onslaught must be acknowledged and then you move forward.

---

What you seem to have failed to take from his post is that what you regard to as the initial onslaught was expressed as a continual life long "abuse" that he then hypocritically derided others for while taking none of that derision for himself.

I simply helped him with that error.

But again, you confuse an initial onslaught with a cycle, HIS cycle, to which he holds all responsibility.

quote:

---

That's what he was looking for all the time - this acknowledgement that no one ever seems to want to give. That women are indeed aggressive, that men are indeed hurt by them, and that this is not just because they are pussies or homos but because society abuses women from the day they are born and that abuse carries over to the men who try to love them.

---

Again, the reason you both fail to understand the general stances against what you feel so obvious is that men are no less abused and most assuredly no more innocent than any women involved at any level in these equations.

You are the one attempting to tip the scales in an erroneous direction.

And you are doing so to deny facing the notion that we all have to face our equality as well as our need to take responsibility for ourselves in the face of it all.

quote:

---

you write a lot without actually listening, nit-picking points, sometimes erroneously.

---

Seeing as how I use quotes to the degree that I do and that my responses come due listening to others, I find this silly on the superficial level.

On a deeper level I find it a potential point that you perhaps don't listen to what I say, or don't understand what I hear and respond to.

You seem to think that what you extrapolate from a post is the only correct thing to hear, tsk tsk.

I can admit that I can do this to some degree at times, can you?

I think the disconnect in people's thought process is in understanding how women forced into a self-loathing state collect so much agression, yet often still play out a subserviant role. It's somewhat counter interuitive, especially for men who are oblivious to social constraints, standards and expectations for women.

Doesn't all the pain and conflict between men and women have something to do with each's desire to CONTROL the other, and the experience of the other? Wrestling with dominance and vulnerability, in an attempt to make them balance?

And isn't this control just an extension and expression of our fears at LETTING GO?

It is at first a horror that experiences are so transient.

This is where I am, I suppose. How to love, knowing that it's all on a meter, so to speak. This too will pass. So why bother.

Not a good space.

I too find myself hating women at times. I hate that aspects of a woman's ego slip continuously under the cultural radar, to the extent that it is virtually impossible to discuss it without them becoming confrontational, competitive and belittling, or at best remain silent. Tantrum behaviour, as of a child.

I feel that the daughters of the baby-boomer generation have saddled their contempory males with the sins of their baby-boomer fathers, as percieved by the mothers.

And I hate that what a man wants in a woman is somehow irrelevant in this day and age. Sometimes it feels as though women are literally telling us what to love about them. This is control and manipulation of the highest order.

What I love about women comes of what they are, and what else I would like them to be. The 'what else' is sexual spice. It is not a demand, it is an expression of desire, pursuiant to energy raising for astounding sex.

Both sexes behave this way. Or attempt to.

What is wrong in seeking phenomenal experiences in the other? I am not of the camp that has surrendered to 'what is', sifting through the charred remains of burnt out expectations to come to the erronious conclusion that love is a sort of hippy friendliness.

I want a woman to be a woman. Meaning, that femininity be paramount in her being.

I understand that not all women are like this.

But I hate the women who belittle the women who are.

I think the piont of the "differences" between male and female abuse and self loathing are unsubstantiated except in remarking on the difference of their manifestations, both in creation and expression.

And like ophion and myself have said, it is the expectations, or desired control, over others, for whatever reason, usually the perpetuation of denail of one's own issues, are indeed one of the far more relevant issues to be addressed in respect to anyones' cyclical abuse patterns.

Seen, understood, or not.

I'm a little shocked that your observations are so off base in respect to my posistion.

Just as I was with your take on the woman hater. At least with him your main theme was very valid, but simply lacking and skewed when you added your very one sided assertions.

And now that some of your points have been challenged, suddenly you are making rash assumptions of me and my posistion.

I want to end the discussion? Absurd.

I was merely following your lead.

quote:

---

That being said, my discussion with you need not continue as the points of disagreement have been found

---

And I was throwing in an, indeed simplified, summary response without bothering to elaborate for I was not aware anyone was interested in hearing any further detail, at least from me.

If someone wanted to know more, not just you, but you included, I assumed they might ask.

But instead, I get absurd assumptions, hmm.

quote:

---

you want to end the discussion with the answer that "everyone is selfish, including you" OR you want to believe that "everyone is selfish , including you, and once you accept that you yourself are selfish all the confusion and pain surrounding the cycle of abuse will magically dissolve".

---

Um no.

I can't correct your missinterpretation directly for you have not denoted where you got this notion.

quote:

---

Interesting. Unfortunately the cycle of abuse is a lot more complicated, as is everything in life, and it takes meticulous decoding to put a stop to it.

---

Hmm, more detail would be needed to address any specifics and potential correctness you may have.

But I've come to learn something that indeed both simplifies and solves, though over time, this cycle of abuse, quite simplistically.

Its called personal responsibility.

Take yourself out of the equation. Stop whining, stop being a dick, start being a better person, and wa la.

Sure others will attempt to perpetuate their personal cycle upon you, but you will no longer be susceptible as long as you remain vigilant to signs of pain and insecurity, well founded or not, manifesting as cyclical abuse and hate.

Stopping your own cycle takes breaking habits formed by life long engrained defense mechanisms, while reforming new healthier habits of understanding, forgiveness, and love, both for yourself and others.

quote:

---

the manifestations. You seem to acknowledge they are different, but think it is irrelevant.

---

It is.

Look, I hadn't asked for more detail from you because your premise was obviously skewed and based on some strange notion of imbalance you are trying so hard to validate.

So instead I addressed that and was told that our dissagreement was noted and no further conversation was needed.

Your very weak but heavily defended assertion, untill properly defined, which as of yet it has not been, that women are far more aggressive and vendictive, as you have shown no example of how they even show this nor in comparison to what, will be seen as likely erroneous.

Your point of the larger abuse of women, especially at a young age, is again, devoid of any example or explanation, but I can already tell you that it will be lacking a much bigger and more complicated picture, as you yourself have noted about such cycles.

A couple of points I will throw out there are...

1. The entire system of courtship, personal development, and subsequent reactionary symptoms is in constant flux through the influence of every known variable that exists, but ultimately culture, culture change, and culture mixing.

2. The effects of cyclical anythings, especially behaviors, are systemic and all pervasive, and only uniguely skewed by the culmination of experience of unique circumstances found within one's own lifetime and life experience.

What that means is that if women are abused at any and all ages it will filter through to all they encounter, perhaps especially boys they date or raise.

3. All of which allows for no concrete delineation between the effects of certain observed abuse over any other.

You cannot diagnose the whole by singling out one part.

The ultimate point of dissagreement and attempted correction to both the woman hater's and your own posistion.

You may say that women are abused worse and more, but you may only understand their abuse for all I know, you certainly haven't given any detail whatsoever nor explained how it differs from the abuse of males.

And certainly you can't tell me that you actually believe that all women suffer the exact same abuse in all the exact same ways and timeframes. And the same for men.

This is why I haven't even bothered to give your posistion the slightest bit of traction or acknowledgement as credible.

You seem to not be taking into account any sort of variance, but that is why you come across as showing assertions rather than understanding.

Your evident one sidedness is obvious to me, but I don't know if you understand where I'm coming from, nor do I know if anyone else sees it as I do. But I'm willing to listen if I am truly off base or incorrect.

quote:

---

And that's perhaps the exact thing you're complaining about with ihatewomen - someone who complains but doesn't take the time to examine within himself his own innability to be criticised and invest in a solution that will solve the problem.

---

How exactly am I showing an innability to be criticised?

quote:

---

And once again I state that you react so strongly to this behaviour because you yourself suffer from it and assume he is doing the same.

---

Nonsense.

I pointed out his hypocricy, I've long since taken stock on my ability to be hypocritical, especially when it is so obvious.

What urked me was his belligerantly ignorant hypocricy, something I have always loathed, especially if ever I catch myself doing it, which can happen.

I can be wrong, I can admit it, sometimes through clenched teeth, but so far I'm hearing no recipricol acknowledgement from two people in question.

Yet I'm hearing accusations that they may need to take a closer look at in themselves, as I keep hearing I may need to.

I'm willing to, are you?

Ironwood, it seems to me that you are implying that women might be bitches because particular male behaviours have made them so.

Could you clarify?

It seems as though, also, that you are saying that because ihatewomen somehow magnetises on-going abuse to himself, the whole attempt at resolution should be laid soley at his feet.

His situation did not happen in a vacuum. His 'attatchment' is all his own certainly, and this I think is your stance, which I agree with. But, though a prisoner may realise he is in prison, he will nevertheless still have a tough time getting out, if the guards have yet to realise their role and culpability.

And, to add, just for my own bemusement............isn't it perculiar that no women have yet posted on this thread?

quote:

---

But, though a prisoner may realise he is in prison, he will nevertheless still have a tough time getting out, if the guards have yet to realise their role and culpability.

---

So true! I think we have all imprisoned ourselves and each act as each other's guards. There are guardians at every door that brings us closer to our freedom.

quote:

---

Ironwood, it seems to me that you are implying that women might be bitches because particular male behaviours have made them so.

Could you clarify?

---

Really?

Please excuse my frustration here, but I'm getting the serious impression that people only read what they want or are stuck comprehending only that which they have already decided to be the case.

We're talking about pervasive world wide cycles of abuse, caused by women and men.

Yes, bitches are created by dicks, IN PART! Please note the significance of the big words.

Ultimately it is all people's own decisions to remain weak and victimised that it perpetuates and they take their part in perpetuating it.

Everybody who chooses to live and perpetuate this cycle is guilty of its existance and deserving of its consequences.

quote:

---

It seems as though, also, that you are saying that because ihatewomen somehow magnetises on-going abuse to himself, the whole attempt at resolution should be laid soley at his feet.

---

Somehow magnetises?

Did you not read his hateful abusive post? He is abusive, of course he will perpetuate this cycle of abuse upon himself and others untill he owns up to HIS PART!

He can attempt to justify his abusive hate as the fault of other abusive people in his life untill he is blue in the face, it will never change the fact that untill he sees he has become an abusive asshole that this cycle will remain.

Just like with anyone else, he must stop being a whiney dick to do his part to break the cycle.

The next part, which seems to allude so many here, is he has to stop chasing insecure abusive women, which will happen naturally we he stops being run by his insecurities.

His resolution, not everyone elses, lies at his feet. Stop mixing the faults of the entire world with his responsibility for his own faults.

If we all took these little measures of personal responsibility, then the entire cycle would break, but we can only fix ourselves and hope to be examples and guides for others who have to choose for themselves their own path.

Which addresses this...

quote:

---

But, though a prisoner may realise he is in prison, he will nevertheless still have a tough time getting out, if the guards have yet to realise their role and culpability.

---

The analogy is almost sufficient, but not quite. In respect to the cyclical abuse we speak of, all the guards and prisoners are prisoners and guards.

They could all leave, but because they are afraid they hold themselves and eachother in for comfort.

They are afraid of change, of potentially being alone, and of facing up to their own weaknesses and insecurities, as well of facing the wrath of those that when they inevitably see you becoming free begin to ridicule you to protect their own personally manufactured abusive reality.

quote:

---

And, to add, just for my own bemusement............isn't it perculiar that no women have yet posted on this thread?

---

Seriously?

Well, at least you prove my above point, two women have posted in this thread. Pay attention.

Ironwood.

We are all each other's gaoler, I get it. What's not to get?

But this is a concept. Something of the mind. It doesn't help.

It helps you explain your perceptions. But solves nothing. It is a head game. Correct application of any method that mind has come up with will lead nowhere. The head will not win over the heart.

ihatewomen needs an exit. What do you suggest?

Otherwise, what are we discussing here? It's bizarre. There's like this undercurrent of probing whether it's ok to hate women or not. And some of us are alright with it, and accept that it probably is a healthy part of life to hate women now and then, you know, getting it off your chest, venting, as Decius said much earlier. And some of us, well...

You seem to favour what comes across as tough love. He should just get a grip and be happy.

Or get a grip, trawl through all the basic rotteness of his existence until the self made clouds dissipate and he is born anew in a world filled with only the loving.

Where is that world exactly?

quote:

---

We are all each other's gaoler, I get it. What's not to get?

But this is a concept. Something of the mind. It doesn't help.

It helps you explain your perceptions. But solves nothing. It is a head game. Correct application of any method that mind has come up with will lead nowhere. The head will not win over the heart.

---

You think there some inherent disconnect between the mind and the heart. From what I have come to understand, you would be mightily mistaken.

The heart, or emotion, is evidencing itself as a symbolic signaling of the minds and body's accordance with that which benefits or harms the whole of one's self, and indeed the mind or head.

The mind being a physical tool of the spirit to create vibrational frequency within the "physical" realm to co-create reality as we perceive and experience it, either possitively or negatively.

quote:

---

ihatewomen needs an exit. What do you suggest?

---

An exit? From what? Life? If so, then I suggest suicide.

Otherwise, if you mean cycles beyond his contol, I suggest taking control of himself around or even within those cycles.

Because those cycles are there to control people, both the originators and others, if he is in control of himself, he will be free of their control and influence.

quote:

---

There's like this undercurrent of probing whether it's ok to hate women or not. And some of us are alright with it, and accept that it probably is a healthy part of life to hate women now and then, you know, getting it off your chest, venting

---

Venting and truly hating are two very different things.

He is welcome to admit that he is just venting. But if his pain and misery, and hatred, persist, he must face something deeper and SELF perpetuated.

quote:

---

You seem to favour what comes across as tough love. He should just get a grip and be happy.

---

You are obviously struggling with this concept of one's own personal responsibility, influence, and power over one's own state of being, happy, sad, hateful, etc.

Just as I did for about 30 years of my life.

Its not so much tough love, as facing reality, taking responsibility for himself, OURSELVES.

And it is far more freeing than it is "tough".

Actually, the toughest part is our own fear and resistance to such blissful yet at times challenging and responsibility laden freedom.

Vigilance is a concept and need that never expires.

quote:

---

Or get a grip, trawl through all the basic rotteness of his existence until the self made clouds dissipate and he is born anew in a world filled with only the loving.

Where is that world exactly?

---

Sadly, generally locked within ourselves, for no one to enjoy.

But ONLY the loving would be unlikely, a concept I still struggle to understand, between balance and some sort of viable existance that is so one sided and blissful.

For how can we know happiness without knowing pain?

Tell me, how can a loving relationship realistically occur without truly feeling, experiencing, and embracing love within and of one's self?

If you cannot see yourself as worthy of love, of yourself or others, and hold that notion ABOVE others' reactionary descriptions of or reatctions to you, then what will result?

ihatewomen........

I would turn and face your hate. Confront it. Look it in the eye. And be aware of everything that crosses your mind. Watch every thought and image, and acknowledge them. Try not to run away with any anger, or fear, or frustration, desperation or depression. Don't let those feelings consume you. Let them happen, but don't let them eat you.

And do this each time you find hate rising in you.

Don't get lost in blaming others. Blame them to bring the anger up, but then see the futility of it - that you are angry all on your own...on your own time...nobody gives a shit about your anger...and why should they?

After you hit the feeling of futility, sadness should happen. Enjoy it. Seems strange maybe, but sadness is a very complete feeling, and a massive let go.

Then and only then, after a good cry, if it happens, and a good sleep, flickers and intimations will appear in your mind. Tiny glimmers of the way out, or the way through.

Some women are cunts. Fuck why they are like that. It's not your business to sort them out. That's their business. You getting angry about them indirectly legitimises their behaviour. You make it an ongoing part of your life while continuing to witness it.

There are foul whores out there, for sure. Study them if you wish to crusade the issue. If you do then good for you. But I suspect not.

Something has intimidated you away from wondering what the very best in a woman might be like. Her very best being an uncluttered love for you. Which you deserve.

Don't get lost in your incredulity. This is a MAJOR snare for consciousness. It is a fractal that leads nowhere but into more incredulity.

And, don't listen to Puritans. There is no warmth in them. Life isn't always a spiritual assault course. Only now and then. Only when you've forgotten to have fun.

I wish you well.

to the poster of this thread: all i can say is that you are asking for it...just go and keep on believing about the things you say and you will get some more. Perfect masochist