Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonkie
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
That's substantially different than asserting a natural hierarchy of the number 1 and calling yourself enlightened. I'm worried you're just name-dropping Jung for cred but I'm not versed enough to know.
Instead I'll do this: putting lipstick on the black pill is pandering, hun.
|
If I were to write at length about Jung, it would be absurdly long and probably dull to most, and distract from the topic. But Jung did not go about psychology in the usual buttoned-down labcoat manner later in life. It became experimental and creative, even to the extent of documenting his own psychosis and unconscious experiences in The Red Book. The images alone are fascinating to look at. He seemed preoccupied with dreams and finding a connection between the symbolism within them and our perceptual reality.
https://youtu.be/ZVgMgMsMCww
But I just scratch the surface, only a little square of it. My postcount and join date are what my self-worth is hinged upon. Credibility is Jung's, dropping his name should do nothing to anyone else's unless they manage to offer new thoughtful commentary to his own about the human being. And to talk about Jung's views would take too long; I only referenced him here because Peterson does in lectures semi-frequently, which is relevant not to BallzDeep's argument or Incel's, but Peterson's as he has researched, written, and spoken extensively on the subject and they have not (nor have I for that matter, at least by comparison). There are of course interviews and audiobooks of Jung's on YouTube as well. Why hear it described by someone who heard it? Though that argument could be used against Peterson and his interpretations.
Am I drinking the punch, or in the case of Peterson, eating the meat? Idk. That's for others to conclude. It's terribly difficult to see oneself as one actually is, rather than other more preferable alternatives. And, in saying that, if incels have somehow rallied around Peterson, I must have missed that headline which wouldn't be surprising since I had to google black pill. But this goes back to the whole deal with culture.
Incels blame everyone else it seems, as if the supposed unfairness of their circumstances was a bad thing. Bad has brought about of a lot of good, such as Blues music. Bad is part of life. To want only what we perceive to be good is a weakness we wouldn't even admit to ourselves because that wouldn't feel good. I haven't followed what people who call themselves proud boys, antifa, or incels are angry about. The incel argument is what exactly, that nice guys never get the girl? They don't and it's because they aren't nice. No one is that nice, not really, not without conditions. Getting laid was their condition. An awareness of that part of them beforehand could have helped to prevent whatever it is they think they're going to accomplish.
If a guy doesn't hesitate to be blunt or even rude, at least the woman knows what she's dealing with. Overly nice guys are nice because that is understood to gain favor and eventually have sex. Like a politician wanting your vote and saying all the right phrases, kissing the babies, and smiling for the photo ops. Bill Clinton using his thumb to point, rather than his finger. This social media behavior has been going on since before The Brady Bunch, but always the double life gets exposed. That YouTuber who hit and spit on her dog, for example. YouTuber (abuse) / dog. Nice guy (incel) / single girl. The shadow aspect of the self. This is oversimplifying things, but it's late.
But the point is, the nice guy wasn't especially nice to girls before puberty. Puberty arrived and television said, be a gentleman. So he's hiding primal intentions to be socially acceptable, making him a danger to others if he doesn't get what he wants. Or he is so groomed that he isn't even aware of his inherent capacity for violence, which makes him a danger not only to others but also to himself. That is some of what Jung was getting at. To be made aware of that dark, instinctual and aggressive part of the mind, because it's there. It's had ages and ages to develope. Chimpanzees display it. Our ancestors wrote about having participated in it. And if it isn't examined or allowed to be explored within reason, it will manifest in groups searching for an outlet to impose that aggression out onto society, in order to have one's own mental imbalance actualized there, creating a false sense of equilibrium in the process.
08-22-2019, 08:29 PM
Linear Mode
