“The More We Blame Speech For Violence, The More Likely We Are To Use Violence To Stop Speech.”

Andrea Dworkin complete works

PDF format

MOBI (kindle) format

"It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends."

— Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

AUTOMATION vs FREE WILL: How we became who we are

I no longer blame biotech or the technocracy. It is not a problem in and of itself but rather the symptom of a problem, and those who choose to capitalize on it are not inherently bad people, they’re just playing their part by providing a particular side of duality (producing for the majority who wish to consume). The predator-prey dynamic is truly everywhere because our world is based on the 7 Hermetic Principles. Life is a game and you can choose to ascend out of it too rather than participating, which is why Mentalism is the only Principle that has no duality, it comes from you as a being returning to singularity, no longer polarized or thwarted. Everything else contains duality because life is an experience where the human wishes to understand itself in as many forms as possible just as God created physical matter in order to know it’s own potential through evolving itself. We must understand how a select few humans differ from this evolved automation and instinct-obsession. These are beings who operate off of true free will and they are few and far between. They mirror the wholeness of God. The majority are still 70% automation at least which is why they only use 4% of their brain. The subconscious is a deep and untapped ocean that rules these beings from beyond and this includes animals who operate as groups with biological clocks and tasks that have to be performed at a given time according to the imprint within them. They cannot choose their destiny or what song they will sing. They are quite literally organic computer programs just like the rest of life within this reality, which is not a bad thing, it is just an indication of where we came from. People like Alan Turing created computer technologies by studying the human brain and advanced neurobiology first, so go figure

Those who are building tech are acting like God did when it was creating life, in curiosity and in attempt to learn about itself. Some have nefarious purposes just like the demiurge did

and this comes from knowing but not accepting one’s own limitations, ie: not integrating one’s own shadow. This psychology sees past economic class which is why the elite are just a mirror of the normies with the exception of wealth placing them on a higher echelon of influence. Everything has good and bad within because this world was created in polarities, but those polarities are inside the infinite circle/universal mind which is why mentalism supersedes all other principles. Uroboros comes from an infinite source constantly recollecting itself and creating new geometric patterns scaled up and down in various sources and vibrating at different frequencies. All is quite literally One underneath all the layers of uploaded differences. Mainstream science will have to adapt to this because even young people are becoming more attuned to certain aspects of spiritual thinking ie: interest in astrology/crystals/tarot, interest in returning to the original androgynous self/wholeness in phenotype and spirit, and a resurgence in veganism/the electric diet. Most people are not quite there yet specifically because the spell of automation is hard to break and requires free will alchemy. This is why people who are breaking centuries old spells are still seemingly trapped in certain other obvious ones. Why do you think most people are not open to change and will quite literally see everything as an agenda? Why do you think people talk so much about being “programmed” and “socialization”? They are quite literally telling you who they are while hating the mirror that the technocrats are holding up. The robot being built with steel (atoms and molecules) today, was once built with flesh (atoms and molecules). Why be mad at the robot existing when you are the blueprint, just be flattered. The human is the highest manifestation of God right now (having the most free will of all life forms) so of course the human is going to want to replicate and eventually supersede what it sees in nature already. Nature is pure chaos and always changing so nothing is “unnatural” either. Every random change occurring comes from a larger goal. Eventually these robots will think they are true humans, sure, and so what, especially given the robotic nature of most existing humans. If anyone should be upset it’s the sovereign non instinct bound human who may see their numbers dwindle until the robots develop free will once they supersede the human bots who created them in their image. Human identity is constantly changing because change is the truest law of nature. What even is a human when there are blood types the origin of which is still not configured. Surely those must be “unnatural” in the mind of the rigid thinker. We are not all the same nor are we equal or even on a level playing field which shows that hierarchy is natural and a huge part of this predator prey world. The good thing is, the elite minority who have free will can alter their position within this dynamic to some degree. These elite beings are still subject to cosmological law which is why they act in accordance with astronomical observations, particularly in relation to the new Age of Aquarius where they are setting their creativity more free than ever before. The Travis Scott concert which had sacrificial symbology embedded in it was also locked into astronomical rhythms

On a literal level people were sacrificed and trampled upon because it represented an anarchist free for all utopia which is what the age of singularity will bring so that life can be sown anew from chaotic energy of potential. The concert’s symbolism itself embodied the Hermetic Principle of Cause and Effect through the manifestation of the law of attraction, however dark it may be perceived as. I don’t see any of this as good or bad because I no longer partake in the use of labels. Nuance is everywhere even in tragic and grotesque events because we are not special but just characters upon which the game of life is performed. We are the chessboard and God is the player building upon us. Evil is everywhere and so is good and knowing that the practitioner of free will can escape these curses by returning to oblivion and not splitting into new physical consciousness (which ALL create inherent conflict and a 100% chance of pain and returning again) creates a little more ease of mind while you’re here. Creating equilibrium within where you are 100% self dependent (no consumption, no entertainment and no sex) will create the type of singularity that people claim to want, until then we will experience some suffering and pain in exchange for whatever positive experiences are perceived to be received from these acts.

“Some people are offended by raw natural beauty–by a woman being grounded in her body and undulating around life feeling beautiful without much effort or fuss. Since Ancient times, women have danced as a sign of belonging to Earth and made the world a more beautiful place for us all. Our ancestors were the ones who cultivated the superpower of natural beauty in the sacred feminine and it was used to defeat negative energy. Therefore do not secretly hate the lighthearted, the innocent, the erotic, or the playful. Like a wildflower, admire and gaze upon, but don’t ruin things for everyone by plucking and pulling it out of the ground. The organs of humankind benefit from seeing more natural beauty emanate.”

—

India Ame’ye Author (via eatmangoesnekkid) 

Opening to “Cultivating Natural Beauty” Chapter (Unedited)

It was Abrahamic religion who taught us to be suspicious of the natural beauty of the sacred feminine ( (a deeply necessary energetic frequency that is part of earth and part of us all) , to fear it to bring temptation to “holy men.” This kind of woman who walked relaxed with her sex all the way out in front of her was ridiculed and punished by other patriarchal-infested women who felt threatened by the power of her beauty and unapologetically attractive, sensuous nature. She was akin to the devil and this kind of ignorance still lives in our subconscious, especially in the cells of women, and inhibits us from truly desiring to cultivate our natural beauty because we do not want to be hurt.

Cold climates lacked warm sun which meant that they were also devoid of sensuous and primal erotic power. They were the same places and spaces where the lack and scarcity principles around beauty and sex were born. In cold systems, cultivating natural beauty was never priority–these people were just trying to survive brutal weather, so of course, they didn’t respect natural beauty nor did they have the ease, resources, vitality, or desire to cultivate it.  By the way, the sun is the greatest resource there is, even greater than fiat currency because it raises one’s magnetism for multidimensional creativity. Abrahamic religion saw beauty as unnecessary, frivilous, and even dangerous, but it was the ancestors of darker warmer people, whether African, Asian, etc. who took the Oracle of beauty very seriously by caring deeply for themselves (their cells) and  adorning themselves accordingly.

When you take time to cultivate your natural beauty, you are arriving back home to your most potent and truthful essence and getting beyond the disembodiment traumas of our collective existence. When we begin to take 100 percent responsibility for our bodies, it bleeds over into feeling empowered enough to take 100 percent responsibility for our nutrition and wellness. This doesn’t mean that uou can’t wear designer labels, lipstick or whatever. You can, of course. But the aim is for it to become a pattern for you to be connected to your natural body that you begin emanate more naturally.

Let’s take the lips for example. To create a value system where it becomes habit to nurture your lips underneath your lipstick is incredible potency not just for your face but for your health. I mean, to truly love on and care for lips and not just cover them up with chemicals while scrolling on the internet, but desiring to take time to build a relationship with them, discover natural ways you can make them healthier and feel more luxurious to your own eye, so that your loving most truthful essence can proceed you where ever you land in the world. Building a relationship with every area of your body favorably impacts every area of your life. It’s all connected.

(via eatmangoesnekkid)

This is a fetish, nobody can convince me otherwise.

There's a difference between having empathy (comprehension that everybody has trauma) and then there's the expectation that somebody has a "consistent, sustained, high empathy level for you." This is a great example of a vampire - nobody owes anybody any of this. If you find a supply chain that is willing to feed you, great, but the reason why a lot of women avoid each other is because of these extremely high demands on what won't help the individual; you have to get in touch with your soul, not more people. There aren't enough people in the world to support you when you don't have a Self.

This is a lot more than just asking for compassion. Learn to love yourself instead of demanding it from others otherwise, you're just a bottomless cup.

On femininity

I believe in spirituality and feminine religion. I'm a female separatist to the best of my abilities. I believe femininity is essential but I approach this topic very differently from the majority.

Femininity is love and care, that's it. There are many ways to be loving and caring so there are many ways to be feminine. I do not believe that femininity is what the patriarchy says it is and I see a lot of women of faith who rightly worship the feminine but mistakenly confuse it with something that it is not.

Man comes from woman, masculine comes from the feminine. They are not opposites, they're not complementary, what people often consider masculinity is actually a brand of femininity and the ones who understand this will get what I'm trying to say.

When people talk about the Divine Feminine I am very often put off because we have such a different approach to this. If they saw me, they'd think I'm the farthest thing from feminine and this is where all their mistakes start.

As I said, femininity at its core, is loving and caring. The destructiveness of certain masculine behaviours is simply a twisted and egoic form of femininity, a degraded form of femininity. Traits like assertiveness, confidence, action, willpower are not inherently MALE traits and yes in fact, they are one of the many ways of being feminine.

Being a fighter and protector because you care, being confident because you love yourself, having willpower because you want to see a change in this world are all feminine; the traits I listed are fueled by love and care. Fighting because you want to kill, being confident because you feel superior, having willpower to fulfill selfish desires are the same traits but masculine.

Is beauty feminine? Yes, it is. Beauty is viewing something from the eyes of love. But, a frilly dress is not inherently feminine, or makeup, or painted nails, or long hair; these are social constructs attached to the name of femininity. What I find beautiful is a woman who exists in her natural state so how are you going to tell me that the way I present myself is inherently masculine?

I wear clothes I like, I express myself the way I desire, I do not wear uncomfortable clothes because I believe that I deserve to be comfortable, and the common sentiment of beauty=pain is the farthest you can go from femininity. People conflate the feminine with so many things that it is not.

Obsession about looking good, hurting yourself to look good, trying to change your nature to fit a standard of beauty are not behaviours fueled by true love. Beauty is natural; a flower does not have to try to be beautiful. Beauty is not only external but internal too.

What a lot of people consider feminine is actually the degraded feminine, it's not the true essence; it's a twisted version of it. I am not masculine and I will never call myself that because I know what femininity actually is and I see past my conditioning.

Femininity and masculinity are both separate and non-separate. This is because of the illusion of separateness that exists in our universe, a knowledgeable individual understands that ultimately everything is one even though we don't perceive it so.

A man is actually a brand of woman (there's scientific research of this) and masculinity is a brand of femininity. Ultimately, the feminine is the original true essence but it is also true that most people today aren't aware of what femininity actually is. What we call the Divine Feminine is simply "The Divine" because femininity is love and care, God is Love and care.

« Foreigners follow American news stories like their own, listen to American pop music, and watch copious amounts of American television and film. […] Americans, too, stick to the U.S. The list of the 500 highest-grossing films of all time in the U.S., for example, doesn’t contain a single foreign film (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon comes in at 505th, slightly higher than Bee Movie but about a hundred below Paul Blart: Mall Cop). […]

How did this happen? How did cultural globalization in the twentieth century travel along such a one-way path? And why is the U.S.—that globe-bestriding colossus with more than 700 overseas bases—so strangely isolated? 

[…W]hen 600 or so journalists, media magnates, and diplomats arrived in Geneva in 1948 to draft the press freedom clauses for […] the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights […], definitional difficulties abounded. Between what the U.S. meant by “freedom of information” and what the rest of the world needed lay a vast expanse. For the American delegates, the question belonged to the higher plane of moral principle. But representatives of other states had more earthly concerns.

The war had tilted the planet’s communications infrastructure to America’s advantage. In the late 1940s, for example, the U.S. consumed 63% of the world’s newsprint supply; to put it more starkly, the country consumed as much newsprint in a single day as India did over the course of a year. A materials shortage would hamper newspaper production across much of the world into at least the 1950s. The war had also laid low foreign news agencies—Germany’s Wolff and France’s Havas had disappeared entirely—and not a single news agency called the global south home. At the same time, America’s Associated Press and United Press International both had plans for global expansion, leading The Economist to note wryly that the executive director of the AP emitted “a peculiar moral glow in finding that his idea of freedom coincides with his commercial advantage.”

Back in Geneva, delegates from the global south pointed out these immense inequalities. […] But the American delegates refused the idea that global inequality itself was a barrier to the flow of information across borders. Besides, they argued, redistributive measures violated the sanctity of the press. The U.S. was able to strong-arm its notion of press freedom—a hybrid combining the American Constitution’s First Amendment and a consumer right to receive information across borders—at the conference, but the U.N.’s efforts to define and ensure the freedom of information ended in a stalemate.

The failure to redistribute resources, the lack of multilateral investment in producing more balanced international flows of information, and the might of the American culture industry at the end of the war—all of this amounted to a guarantee of the American right to spread information and culture across the globe.

The postwar expansion of American news agencies, Hollywood studios, and rock and roll bore this out. […] Meanwhile, the State Department and the American film industry worked together to dismantle other countries’ quota walls for foreign films, a move that consolidated Hollywood’s already dominant position.

[…A]s the U.S. exported its culture in astonishing amounts, it imported very little. In other words, just as the U.S. took command as the planetary superpower, it remained surprisingly cut off from the rest of the world. A parochial empire, but with a global reach. [And] American culture[’s] inward-looking tendencies [precede] the 1940s.

The media ecosystem in particular, Lebovic writes, [already] constituted an “Americanist echo chamber.” Few of the films shown in American cinemas were foreign (largely a result of the Motion Picture Production Code, which the industry began imposing on itself in 1934; code authorities prudishly disapproved of the sexual mores of European films). Few television programs came from abroad […]. Few newspapers subscribed to foreign news agencies. Even fewer had foreign correspondents. And very few pages in those papers were devoted to foreign affairs. An echo chamber indeed, [… which] reduced the flow of information and culture from much of the rest of the world to a trickle. […]

Today is not the 1950s. [… But] America’s culture industry has not stopped its mercantilist pursuits. And Web 2.0 has corralled a lot of the world’s online activities onto the platforms of a handful of American companies. America’s geopolitical preeminence may slip away in the not-so-distant future, but it’s not clear if Americans will change the channel. »

— “How American Culture Ate the World”, a review of Sam Lebovic’s book A Righteous Smokescreen: Postwar America and the Politics of Cultural Globalization

I’ve been seeing my mutuals (on my main) reblogging that “transwoman transition masterpost” over and over and it finally hit me what was bothering me about it, especially the passing socially tips section that summarized went somewhat like;

“Emulate your ciswomen friends, choose a friend you like the most, how they talk, act, walk, stand, how women they act in movies, choose what woman you want to be, elegant, sexy? Makeup is a must, shaving is a must, women talk with emotion, Look at how women act in their idle time etc”

It consisted of all of the stereotypes in the book, all of the concepts we as feminists have been fighting for years to stop associating with womanhood being once again being romanticized and normalized and promoted under feminism

And it just reeks of male gaze male gaze male gaze, it profits off it, validates it’s enforcement on us, tells males how to mimick us and continue to perpetuate so many actions we do subconsciously and compulsory because of our own female socialization and gender roles, our “mannerisms” and “habits” etc i get flashbacks from reading the Reddit tips on “how to pee like a woman where it’s advice was to listen in on ciswomen urinating in public bathrooms, and how it echoes the way some men fetishize women peeing.

Then they have the audacity to tell us it’s us that are demeaning ourselves by knowing it’s our body that makes us women and not these compulsions? It’s misogyny and sexism plain and simple, And it just makes me so much more hyper aware now that not only do we have the sexual male gaze from straight non dysphoric men to deal with but now the transwoman male gaze, looking for the best way to mimick our behaviors and enforce gender stereotypes in a way we are not allowed to question or be bothered by