User Tag List

First 4567816 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 509

  1. #51
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    It's plain here that women not only want and need to hide the truth, they want to hide it from themselves.
    Your brand of feminism is a little too radical for this crowd, Vic.

    Quote Originally Posted by ICUP View Post
    I think alot of people wear makeup just because they think it's the thing to do, it makes them look better, or that they are supposed to. I don't think alot of people go much deeper than that.....
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  2. #52
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    This is very sad because it is group bullying and I ask you to stop.
    Well, my final comment on the matter with you, here in this thread (spoiled so that others can move on if they like), is this:



    As far as the topic of cosmetics:
    Please! When a woman becomes genuinely aroused her eyelids become engorged and turn purple, here cheeks become flushed and turn pink, and her lips become engorged and turn red.

    So to mimic arousal women wear purple eyelid makeup, and rouge to colour the cheeks pink, and lipstick to colour the lips red.

    The purpose of mimicking arousal is to arouse the male. For when the male is aroused, he can't think straight and is susceptible to manipulation and suggestion by a woman who is not aroused, but only mimicking arousal, and so can think straight, and so has the advantage over the male.

    All is fair, they tell me, in love and war.
    Yes, that is one use for cosmetics; but you conveniently ignore the more aesthetic uses. Women who wear makeup to work, for example, are not thinking about sexual conquest in the least, and in fact it is counterproductive to the workplace environment.

    I also think it's humorous that any male would admit to being unable to maintain self-control simply because a woman is wearing makeup. It seems like a tenuous domination at best.


    Of course it is not just make-up, we are affected at our deepest levels by brands, for brands tell us that they can take us from our real self to our ideal self. In fact brands are a form of secular religion.

    But notice, no matter how many brands we buy we never reach our ideal self, and of course they tell us the only solution is to buy more brands.

    And although they are selling us brands, we are the ones who are branded. Our psyches are branded. We are like cattle with a brand on our rump. And in fact some of us even put a tramp stamp, a tattoo, on our rump just to show how docile we are.
    I would agree that commercialism does try to comprise the individual as an assortment of brands, in order to instill product loyalty and continue the flow of cash from consumer to provider. However, it doesn't mean that the consumer is receiving no benefit whatsoever from the purchases they make; it just means that identity primarily needs to reside in the self and not in the brands of one's purchases.

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    For crying out loud, everyone, he's talking about personae. In other words, our MBTI types are not representatives of our actual selves, but brands of persona makeup that we wear in order to induce reactions from others, our motivations for which we're not even aware of most of the time.

    I happen to agree with him. Many, if not most of us are here because we want to find the perfect persona, that perfect brand of makeup, that will make others finally love and respect us, rather than face the cruel reality that we don't exactly love our true selves, and further more, believe that our true selves are utterly unlovable.
    I'm not sure you should be speaking for "many or most of us" here.

    Yes, the path you describe is an obvious typical route that we all explore at some point in our lives, to find ourselves, but I think a lot of people are just here to socialize, honestly. Despite our name, the focus of this site hasn't really been typology for some time now.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #53
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I'm not sure you should be speaking for "many or most of us" here.

    Yes, the path you describe is an obvious typical route that we all explore at some point in our lives, to find ourselves, but I think a lot of people are just here to socialize, honestly. Despite our name, the focus of this site hasn't really been typology for some time now.
    Still, we seem to focus pretty heavily on those four little letters under our names. It sort of goes to why I have noticed, and been guilty of, willing to ascribe different personality traits to different people based on their MBTI type. His point is no more than this habit being just like someone perceiving a woman as more attractive because of her makeup, even though that makeup is specifically designed to enhance signals of sexual arousal or neoteny in order to induce that effect in the perceiver. We simply think that the person is "prettier." I think that this is like the N bias, for example, where people assume that they must be intuitives because they're smart, and sensors are of course stupid.

    What Victor's been warning about is that we oftentimes begin to believe that we are the persona, we are the mask, or we are diminished without it. This is just as tragic as a woman who does not perceive herself to be beautiful without makeup on. The truth is that the beauty comes from the self, entirely unadorned, and that love is beauty and shame ugliness. Makeup can mask the cruel woman behind an artificially alluring mask, and our becoming accustomed to that mask can desensitize us to the actual beauty softly radiating from one who is physically homelier. We do the same sorts of things with type, I believe.

    It's nice that many community members have gone past this, but I think the greater point still stands - it's the struggling with the masks that brought us here in the first place. I think Victor just considered it interesting that the discussion had such a clear surface parallel. Seems like everyone's talking past one another.

    Yes, that is one use for cosmetics; but you conveniently ignore the more aesthetic uses. Women who wear makeup to work, for example, are not thinking about sexual conquest in the least, and in fact it is counterproductive to the workplace environment.
    It's a sad rule of our society that particularly attractive women get more favors from those around them than do other women. Our current cultural paradigm conflates neoteny and sexual arousal with feminine beauty; therefore, things that enhance these sorts of things will be to women's advantage. Of course, this has its limits - the line between professional and inappropriate is similar to that between sexy and slutty.

    So women may not be gearing for sexual conquest, but they sure as hell want to stand out, or at least have a high enough post on the attractiveness totem pole.

    I also think it's humorous that any male would admit to being unable to maintain self-control simply because a woman is wearing makeup. It seems like a tenuous domination at best.
    Just out of curiosity, where is the humor in this?

    I would agree that commercialism does try to comprise the individual as an assortment of brands, in order to instill product loyalty and continue the flow of cash from consumer to provider. However, it doesn't mean that the consumer is receiving no benefit whatsoever from the purchases they make; it just means that identity primarily needs to reside in the self and not in the brands of one's purchases.
    Product loyalty is an irrational manipulation of a person's identity, with only ephemeral benefits, if best (like a feeling of trustworthiness). This is the part of capitalism that Marxist and other critics call exploitation - whereby producers do not seek to satisfy consumer needs, but to create greater levels of demand by making the consumer feel unworthy or incomplete without a given product, which has little to no real value. It's through the manipulation of semiotics and how they relate to psychological processes that producers profit at consumer expense.

    The identity maybe ought to reside within the self, but American society as it currently stands does its very best to teach children otherwise.

  4. #54
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Still, we seem to focus pretty heavily on those four little letters under our names. It sort of goes to why I have noticed, and been guilty of, willing to ascribe different personality traits to different people based on their MBTI type. His point is no more than this habit being just like someone perceiving a woman as more attractive because of her makeup, even though that makeup is specifically designed to enhance signals of sexual arousal or neoteny in order to induce that effect in the perceiver. We simply think that the person is "prettier." I think that this is like the N bias, for example, where people assume that they must be intuitives because they're smart, and sensors are of course stupid.

    What Victor's been warning about is that we oftentimes begin to believe that we are the persona, we are the mask, or we are diminished without it. This is just as tragic as a woman who does not perceive herself to be beautiful without makeup on. The truth is that the beauty comes from the self, entirely unadorned, and that love is beauty and shame ugliness. Makeup can mask the cruel woman behind an artificially alluring mask, and our becoming accustomed to that mask can desensitize us to the actual beauty softly radiating from one who is physically homelier. We do the same sorts of things with type, I believe.

    It's nice that many community members have gone past this, but I think the greater point still stands - it's the struggling with the masks that brought us here in the first place. I think Victor just considered it interesting that the discussion had such a clear surface parallel. Seems like everyone's talking past one another.
    So was this explanation for our benefit or for Victor's? I'm a little lost on what your purpose is here.
    I don't think anyone is talking past anyone, honestly, but thanks for explaining what Victor thinks in case someone wasn't getting it.

    It's a sad rule of our society that particularly attractive women get more favors from those around them than do other women. Our current cultural paradigm conflates neoteny and sexual arousal with feminine beauty; therefore, things that enhance these sorts of things will be to women's advantage. Of course, this has its limits - the line between professional and inappropriate is similar to that between sexy and slutty.

    So women may not be gearing for sexual conquest, but they sure as hell want to stand out, or at least have a high enough post on the attractiveness totem pole.
    Maybe I'm reading this wrong, simply because you wrote it as a response to a comment of mine... so it comes off as trying to "correct" something I said.

    But my comment meant what it said, that not everything is about "winning a man" or "appealing to social standards of beauty" or whatever the hell else you guys would like it to mean.

    People are allowed to find beauty in the world and invest in creating beauty simply because they like it, as much as they would take a photograph or paint a picture or decorate a house in a way they found to resonate with themselves. Likewise, one reason women do use makeup is because they like how it makes them look, and it doesn't need to have anything to do with sex or power or some other ulterior motive. It CAN... but it doesn't need to.

    Just out of curiosity, where is the humor in this?
    If my comment was too impenetrable, substitute "ironic" for "humorous."

    Product loyalty is an irrational manipulation of a person's identity, with only ephemeral benefits, if best (like a feeling of trustworthiness). This is the part of capitalism that Marxist and other critics call exploitation - whereby producers do not seek to satisfy consumer needs, but to create greater levels of demand by making the consumer feel unworthy or incomplete without a given product, which has little to no real value. It's through the manipulation of semiotics and how they relate to psychological processes that producers profit at consumer expense.

    The identity maybe ought to reside within the self, but American society as it currently stands does its very best to teach children otherwise.
    I agree.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #55
    Senior Member LEGERdeMAIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Our actual self, plus a brand, gives us our ideal self.

    So brands serve the purpose of mediating between our real self and our ideal self.

    So brands diss our real self and valorise our ideal self.

    So brands poison us at our very core, and impose from the outside a phoney ideal self.

    It's true, and we all know it, that beauty comes from within. And we know that the imposition of beauty from the outside is an imposture.
    As far as clothing goes, the ideal would be some sort of minimal coverage of genitalia or complete nudity. I prefer wearing jeans, shorts and sandals with no brand marks on them. Plain t-shirts or shirts that I design myself. I don't want to be a living advertisement for clothing manufacturers. I also don't wear make-up because I don't want to look like a mannequin. Although I really do like mannequins.
    “Some people will tell you that slow is good – but I’m here to tell you that fast is better. I’ve always believed this, in spite of the trouble it’s caused me. Being shot out of a cannon will always be better than being squeezed out of a tube. That is why God made fast motorcycles, Bubba…”


  6. #56
    likes this gromit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,652

    Default

    Your kisses, sweeter than honey. But guess what, so is my money.

  7. #57
    Senior Member amerellis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4/9
    Socionics
    ???
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Yes, women are unconscious of why they wear makeup. In fact we only have to read below to see women have all kinds of flattering rationalisations as to why they wear makeup.

    And mimicking arousal to fool the male is not only not very flattering, but it must also be kept a secret from the male, lest he become angry at being manipulated.

    It's plain here that women not only want and need to hide the truth, they want to hide it from themselves.
    You edited out the part of my post that had the most compelling argument:
    "I mean very yong girls like to play with make up and it's not cause they are trying to turn people on."
    indicating that it is more of a cultural thing, and sometimes they are just doing it to look pretty.

  8. #58
    Starcrossed Seafarer Aquarelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Of course it is not just make-up, we are affected at our deepest levels by brands, for brands tell us that they can take us from our real self to our ideal self. In fact brands are a form of secular religion.

    But notice, no matter how many brands we buy we never reach our ideal self, and of course they tell us the only solution is to buy more brands.
    I had an epiphany about this a couple of years ago. Brands are nothing but status symbols. Since then, I have consciously tried to identify times when I am considering buying something because it will make me seem "classier" or "more professional" (both translate, basically, to "higher status"), versus when I want to buy something simply because I like it. I try to avoid the former as much as possible (though one does have to make concessions for professionalism in the workplace).
    Masquerading as a normal person day after day is exhausting.

    My blog:
    TypeC: Adventures of an Introvert
    Wordpress: http://introvertadventures.wordpress.com/

  9. #59
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    Victor,

    You come one here speaking of spirituality (which is really the difference you describe when you talk of 'true self' and 'ideal self'), which seems very noble, until you realize that your desire to enlighten the masses here is really driven by your ego's need for admiration, or, in this case, martyrdom (which is itself a form of admiration).
    Think about that for a moment.

  10. #60
    Senior Member amerellis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4/9
    Socionics
    ???
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    Victor, your ideas are not controversial, and they are not the reason for your perceived bullying. What? Makeup is a facade of some sort? Don't let that opinion out, the public isn't ready for it!!!1!
    Saying make up can be like a mask is not the only facet of his argument. And there's nothing new under the sun but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant.

    @nebbykoo : Wow that is really personal and presumptuous. Where do you get off saying stuff like that?

Similar Threads

  1. The Emerging Church - Thoughts on Postmodern Christianity
    By Apollonian in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-07-2007, 09:23 AM
  2. Has anyone heard of Global Dimming and if so what are your thoughts on it??
    By ladypinkington in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-16-2007, 06:13 AM
  3. Thoughts on Hybrid MBTI/Keirsey Types?
    By Usehername in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-09-2007, 03:52 PM
  4. My thoughts on the I phone
    By Opivy1980 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 06:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO