At first glance, Alcuin’s blog would seem to be some sort of parody. The blog’s slogan – “Promoting the Intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy” – seems so over-the-top pretentious that even the smuggest of would-be intellectuals wouldn’t be able to post it with a straight face.
But if Alcuin is a troll, he’s a dedicated one, and one (at least based on my less-than-exhaustive survey of his blog) who never seems to break character. So I’m assuming he’s real. Which makes him a pompous ass with a lot of irritating ideas he’s somehow convinced himself are new and interesting. Take (please!) his recent post “Back Where They Belong.” And yes, “they” mean who you think, and “where they belong” means where you think.
Men should run the government, business, education, and religion. Women should stay at home. Young unmarried women can briefly work as kindergarten and elementary teachers, but there are no reasons why men can’t usually do this as well.
I’m not sure if Alcuin understands that women actually hold most of the jobs that currently exist, and that removing virtually all of them from the workplace would cause the economy to implode like, well, Alcuin, if you suddenly removed all of his idiocy. Also, how many kindergarten teachers do we really need?
As long as women run things, men will continue to be sidelined and slandered because feminism is a zero-sum movement.
Women … run things?
There can be no peace between the sexes until women are back where they belong. The sexes are meant to complement each other rather than compete and put one another down.
Yes, and the best way to show how the sexes “are meant to complement each other rather than … put one another down” is for one of the sexes to, er, put the other down by sending them back into the home.
Women have no business being lawyers, judges, educators, doctors, bureaucrats, writers, or religious leaders. Their attempted leadership in these areas, an illegitimate coup d’etat, is destroying our society.
I agree. Lady Pope is doing a terrible job of dealing with all those abuse cases!
Sadly, they prefer to enjoy their present situation, and let society rot, than go back where they belong and participate in building things again. Much like enjoying the concert on the sinking Titanic – though in this case, don’t expect chivalrous men to jump into the cold water so the ladies can have space on the lifeboats.
A little Titanic humor always enlivens a dull rant, eh?
Knock knock!
Who’s there!
An iceberg!
Damn, I guess we shouldn’t have kept going in zero visibility in a part of the ocean where icebergs had been recently sighted, in our ship that doesn’t have enough lifeboats for everyone!
I crack myself up sometimes. Back to Alcuin:
Feminism is a hate movement that brings out the worst in women.
Unlike the Men’s Rights movement, a hate movement that brings out the best in men!
It hates women because it hates femininity and motherhood, the chief characteristics of what it means to be a genuine woman. It brings out the worst in women by turning them into men, or trying to masculate them.
Damn you, feminism! Don’t go masculating those ladies! First they want to wear pants, and the next thing you know they’re growing ironic mustaches and using Axe Detailers instead of loofahs and subscribing to Bass Fishing Monthly.
It hates men because it blames everything on men, and regards masculinity in men to be evil. It emasculates men at the same time. Gays and, much more secondarily, manginas, are somewhat acceptable to the gynocracy, especially when the furniture needs moving or some bitch can’t pay her own bills.
Because when you need furniture moved, or some money, you call … the gays? Is this some new gay stereotype I’m not aware of? I mean, manginas, sure, manginas are furniture-movers and money-to-bitches conduits extraordinaire. That’s how they get access to pussy, after all.
But what’s the incentive for the gays? They don’t need pussy; they’d, presumably, prefer to spend their money on tiny dogs and gym memberships than on some bitch’s bills; and while gays may have strong opinions about where the furniture should go, are they really interested in carrying it there themselves?
Women generally use men, and feminism continues this grand tradition. A man’s value is defined according to his use to women. Deeper than that, feminism regards men in the same way that the Nazis regarded Jews – men are Untermensch and cannot be granted the same rights and privileges that women are.
And … now we’ve got Nazis.
Feminism aims to bring men down, as it is a zero-sum movement. It doesn’t simply aim to improve the lot of women through, for instance, education, but seeks to exclude men from education.
It does? Last I heard, colleges were actually lowering their standards in order to enroll more guys.
Thus the current propaganda about campus rape, and the attempt to make it easier to accuse a university male of rape in the USA. Thanks, government. You are, once again, the handmaiden of misandry.
And handmaidens are bad. Not like Shieldmaidens.
Feminist hate will never be satisfied, so men can’t keep avoiding the issue. We must avoid feminism as much as we can, and educate each other about it and about alternatives.
Generally it is advisable to actually know something about something before trying to “educating” other people about it.
This intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy business is a lot trickier than you might think.
“from” not “for!”
My fingers betray me!
Jesus jumping Christ on a matzoh, are you really that stupid? I don’t think Judaism has any special lock on truth or being chosen. For anything except virulent hatred for nothing much in particular, that is. You’re conflating what you think and what other people think again.
Not that is matters, but no. I’m not a princess of any kind, nor a queen – my husband doesn’t fight heavy, so I’ve never had a chance to try for Crown. And I’m an omnitheistic pagan. So is my husband. But hey, why let reality get in the way of assuming things?
And Juan: I called you racist, not anti-semetic. You ripped on Chinese folk there, too.
KathleenB,
Yeah, I’ve heard that being King, in the SCA sense, isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
Captain: Depends on the King, I suppose. Or Queen – some (naming no names) get really into it and actually post long rants on their webpage about how they’re just really into being Royal, and if we’re assholes to you, it’s because we’re being Royal. Not because we’re actually, you know, assholes.
And now that I think about it, that was the same king who once declared that while those who have reigned once are Counts/esses, those who have reigned twice are Dukes/Duchesses, those who have reigned more that three times are Assholes.
That’s Royal Assholes to you and me. 🙂
That particular king has had… christ, more reigns that I can count. He went through a period in the late nineties/early 2000s when he felt he simply had to give every girlfriend a pretty brass hat.
Captain: Yeah, they were pretty particular about titles and the ‘reverence due the Crown.’ Always thought they took it too serious. We once had a King who gave his squire brother a court Barony because he was ‘really, really awesome.’ I think there may have been some booze involved in that one, though the Baron in question is pretty damned awesome.
*rolls eyes*
I don’t care if it’s a positive stereotype, Orientalism is still a racefail.
Spanish….uses the same……OMG, that made my day. What was his point,again?
Pecunium, I’m apparently having a brain fart. The second word just doesn’t ring any bells.
After “Go to Stormfront! I’m not bad compared to them!” I’m afraid words in many languages cease to be possible.
It’s also a bit hackneyed.
1: The Mystic and Mysterious East.
2: Everyone thinks their religion is the one that makes the most sense.
3: Christianity isn’t dying.
Gimar, I have a cold, and I could use a couple of tablets of that for my head.
I hate cognates, they look wrong, and feel wrong.
In order to even parse the theological meaning of transubstiation you need to be a fucking philosopher. It’s complex enough that most Catholics AND Catholic autority figures fail at understanding it (as evidenced by the whole debacle when that Catholic girl requested gluten-free hosts for her communion).
See, the transubstiation is not a symbol. The host IS transformed into the body of Christ. But not its mere physical manifestation. It is the *essence* of the host that becomes the body of Christ. To even parse this you have to be heavily into Platonicism and to understand the world via an explicitly dualist mindset, which is mostly non-existent in modern society. As much as people claim they are spiritual, most people nowadays are de facto philosophical materialists. If the material substance of the host is not transformed, we immediately interpret that as symbolism rather than think of it as a transformation on that other ‘plane’ of existence, which Catholics (and Christians in general) consider to be the true nature of things.
The opposite, though, is true. Philosophical materialism is so ingrained in modern culture that most nuns or Catholic teachers (who should be the most opposed to that mindset) still interpret the idea that the transubstiation is not a symbol to mean that the actual physical substance must be transformed as well.
A lot of Catholic and Christian teachings can only be understood by reverting to modes of thoughts that have been obsolete for centuries. (Ironically, the greatest defenders of Platonicism in the modern era are themselves mostly atheists… they’re Ayn Rand followers.)
TLDR:
Symbolism implies that nothing happens to the Host, but we are sending a message by repeating a pattern. The Eucharist is thus purely something that happens within the mind of followers.
Physical Transubstiation would mean that the material nature of the Host changes. You could theoretically take the Host and analyze it with scientific instruments and flag it as a piece of human flesh or organ (possibly even extract Christ’s DNA from it).
The Mystery of the Transubstiation is that it occurs, but only in that the spiritual essence is transformed to the body of Christ. The difference with symbolism is that symbolism is a relativist concept where Transubstiation occurs in an objective manner, though it is undetectable by science as it is purely a spiritual change.
That can only occur if you assume that existence and the nature of things is separate from their physical characteristics, and rest in some Platonic realm of pure ideas.
BlackBloc, the term “orientalism” became known and popularized amongst post-modern Western University students after Edward Said wrote his 1978 book by the same name. The focus of that book though was largely the “Muslim world”.
He and the Muslim world he writes about would do better to examine how they themselves have “orientalized” the idolatrous infidel kafr lands futher East of them.
Well, if they left it at just “orientalizing” us, that would have been ok. But noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo rape, plunder, murder and conversion by sword was the order of the day.
Orientalism, my ass.
Societal K:
Wasn’t there a time in history when a small penis was a sign of superiority?
Slavey:
So is it men who aren’t allowed to teach, or non-feminist men? Or men, until someone proves you wrong, whereupon it suddenly changes?
Slavey:
Yes, the idea that when you say you’re leaving you leave is, as you say, priceless.
I’d like to point out, folks, that Slavey’s idiosyncratic view of the idea of a Jewish ethnicity is not just random fail, it underlies a particular political position I have no doubt he holds, though it’s possible that’s a coincidence.
But not likely.
Jesus. I went to sleep and NWO doubled down on stupid. Spanish and Russian using the same alphabet?
Sigh.
I don’t know why I’m surprised. This is the same person who didn’t understand that Japanese words are different from English words. Or that the term “suffrage” is not derived from “suffering”.
True story.
@Jewish Atheist guy or gal,
“In my experience it’s through delicious yummy bagels and french toast made from challah.”
What is “challah”? Is it vegan? I’m looking for a good vegan french toast recipe.
@Juan,
“heh, what an ignoramus you are. the poster i replied to expressly referred to herself as “oriental” in her own post. furthermore, she implied that she was buddhist (“lotus”)”
Juan, since when do Buddhists have the monopoly on lotuses cornered? You obviously know NOTHING about South Asia (not Southeast Asia, mind you), its religions and its cultures from which Buddhism sprang.
@Percunium,
”It’s also a bit hackneyed.
1: The Mystic and Mysterious East.
2: Everyone thinks their religion is the one that makes the most sense.
3: Christianity isn’t dying.”
Nope. The “selling point” for me of the “Eastern” traditions is not the mystic and mysterious, but rather their non aggressive proslytization and their lack of a claim to be “the only way to God”. They don’t think they have to take over entire cultures and convert them.
As far as everyone thinking their religion is the one that makes the most sense, true. However IT DOES make the most sense to NOT think your way is the “only way and everyone else is going to hell”. IT DOES make the most sense to understand that everyone has a different approach to spirituality and thus people can be left alone to worship or not worship as they please without having to convert to my religion.
As far as “christinatiy dying”…. as the world has known it up until now, yes it is.
Putting on my 19th century Discredited Pseudo-Anthropoly Hat:
A large penis means you’re an oversexualized animal. A smaller penis means you’re more rational. Which is why Blacks are nothing more than animals while Asians are sneaky, amoral manipulative thinkers who can’t be trusted because they’ll trick you with their overdevelopped minds.
Through *complete happenstance*, it was discovered by European pseudo-anthropologists that the Caucasian male has the exact right penis size that makes him a rational human being without being a godless amoral overthinker. *Pure coincidence*.
You know, Pecunium, that stuff doesn’t get its due. It really is awfully effective for many things that doctors prescribe more serious drugs for.
“Wasn’t there a time in history when a small penis was a sign of superiority?”
Hershele, which culture are you talking about? I have read some old South Asian religious literature that attributed a small penis to a noble character.
It’s a type of bread (very fluffy and kind of sweet), but I believe it has egg in it. But… so does french toast? So I’m not sure how you’d vegan-ize that. :p
Societal Contract:
What was the point of saying that the Eastern Religions were, “High IQ? Because the flip side of that is that all other religions are “Lower IQ”. which is to discount vast swathes of detailed, and intellectual thinking, from the actual Alcuin, to some of the Encyclicals of the present day.
It dismisses Kabbala, talmudic disputation, Sufic thinking, Quaker minutes, and everything else.
The explanation that, “Christianity as the world knows it is dying” is true. It’s true because it’s a tautology. All religions are changing, and becoming not as the world knew them. The Christianities of today are nothing like the Christianities of 300 years ago. The Christianity of the First and Second crusades was nothing like the Christianity of the Third and Fourth (which is why crusading died out).
Modern Zen is nothing like 16th century Zen, and the same is true of Hinduism, and the various Buddhisms.
And when you say that the Higher IQ religions are supplanting the “dying Christianity” you are not, actually, understanding that everyone has a different approach to spirituality.
Not least because, apart from a minority, most Christians don’t care to preach the need of the heathen to convert. That minority is vocal, but small.
Kind of like Hare Krishnas.
I begin to think you may not be so versed in the understanding of Christianity as you think, though I won’t go so far as you did to Juan, and say you know nothing of it, I do think the areas of your lack are vast.
There is literature online that seems to indicate that jews, at least some jews, believe themselves to be the chosen or “treasured” people of god. Of course there is literature to indicate that the christians, catholics, mormons, and muslims believe that, too. Which is why I try to equally spread around my pointing and laughing, and more importantly, my serious criticism.