Random political thought thread.

[The Cat]

A man who loves to torture will *always* find an excuse to indulge...
One doesn't live on bread alone.​

 

[The Cat]

 

[Lark]

I wonder what post-Putin Russia will look like and if they'll just put another KGB in his place, like is Russia capable of change or is it like Nazis after WW2?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I wonder what post-Putin Russia will look like and if they'll just put another KGB in his place, like is Russia capable of change or is it like Nazis after WW2?

I think Putin's success suggests they are not capable of change.

 

[The Cat]

I cannot fathom how it is that this kid has grown up and not had the absolute shit kicked out of him on several non consecutive occasions.

Ezekiel 25:17​

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

The top of the ticket did their best, including Biden when he was the candidate.

In a way, people hate the Democratic Party "Machine," especially the legacy media. They pushed against Sanders in 2016. They coalesced around Biden in 2020 when Sanders was winning. After forcing out Biden, Harris was all but coronated.

Being anti-populist is unpopular. Who would have thought?

I remember how hostile they were to Sanders in 2020. They didn't even try to hide it. I don't understand how people couldn't see that. They were constantly fawning over Biden.

Perhaps the viewers didn't care because they thought it was necessary to defeat Trump, only, we got Trump again anyway!

 

[Red Herring]

I cannot fathom how it is that this kid has grown up and not had the absolute shit kicked out of him on several non consecutive occasions.

Ezekiel 25:17​

He does vibe like a teenage edgelord though more than a grown up adult man and grins in a similar way to Trump (sort of half joking and utterly pleased with how clever he believes he is right there). Nothing manly about him in my eyes, so how this person could be a role model to anyone is beyond me.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

That's Nick Fuentes?!

I'm always surprised when one of these right-wing gurus and experts on masculinity turn out to be these really twerpy guys. I see them and I go, oh, that's it? I feel more masculine than them. Ben Shapiro is also in this category.

 

[Coriolis]

That's Nick Fuentes?!

I'm always surprised when one of these right-wing gurus and experts on masculinity turn out to be these really twerpy guys. I see them and I go, oh, that's it? I feel more masculine than them. Ben Shapiro is also in this category.

The whole idea of considering someone an expert on masculinity is presumptuous. Who is anyone to tell other people how to be a man, or a woman? Better to focus on encouraging qualities that are virtuous in anyone: honesty, compassion, courage, trustworthyness, resilience, etc.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

The whole idea of considering someone an expert on masculinity is presumptuous. Who is anyone to tell other people how to be a man, or a woman? Better to focus on encouraging qualities that are virtuous in anyone: honesty, compassion, courage, trustworthyness, resilience, etc.

I think it can be hard to figure out how to be yourself. We have so many disparate parts of ourselves (or at least I did), and we're often told that we can't combine them, that we can only pick one, and we have to stick with that, and suppress everything else. Or at least, that is the message I got when I was young, that you had no choice but to let society peg you down as this thing, or that other thing. It was refreshing when, thanks to help from others, I learned that I didn't have to play that game. If I had anyone else with me at the time, male or female, I could have resisted that much earlier, but I didn't.

Many people don't even think about "becoming who they are" like this and the struggle involved and just worry about how masculine or feminine they appear. That's certainly a limited mindset.

 

[Coriolis]

I think it can be hard to figure out how to be yourself. We have so many disparate parts of ourselves (or at least I did), and we're often told that we can't combine them, that we can only pick one, and we have to stick with that, and suppress everything else. Or at least, that is the message I got when I was young, that you had no choice but to let society peg you down as this thing, or that other thing. It was refreshing when, thanks to help from others, I learned that I didn't have to play that game. If I had anyone else with me at the time, male or female, I could have resisted that much earlier, but I didn't.

Many people don't even think about "becoming who they are" like this and the struggle involved and just worry about how masculine or feminine they appear. That's certainly a limited mindset.

It took me decades to learn some important things about myself, but I was able to learn about and develop the most important things in my youth, and managed not to get sucked into that game. I think it was because I grew up with open-minded and supportive parents, and good educational opportunities.

 

[Lark]

I think Putin's success suggests they are not capable of change.

I am thinking that too, I always had a grudge against Russia when I realised the extent to which they betrayed socialism, that was a set back for the world and not just Russia, but they've always practiced Czarism in one shape or another with whatever flag of convenience was at hand. The anti-semitism, or other conspiracies, isnt new either, its years and years old. Its just all got traction globally at the minute, for reasons not altogether to do with Russia but they'll take advantage where they can.

The real surprise is the extent to which the US has faltered from its former self and is just ready to capitulate to a Russian lead world order. I mean not even China seems to be cracked up about that, other than it possibly satisfying their weird obsession with Taiwan.

The supidity of it all is that the EU has demonstrated that if you can make a success of things no conquest, coercion or compulsion will ever be necessary to have people join in an alliance or effective federation with you but if you cant make a success of things and cant appeal to others no amount of conquest, coercion or compulsion will ever be sufficient to render a violent seizure or wresting of control sustainable.

For someone with such a love of the old history books Putin doesnt show much in the way of learning from them besides his own narrow confirmation bias being satisfied.

 

[Lark]

I think it can be hard to figure out how to be yourself. We have so many disparate parts of ourselves (or at least I did), and we're often told that we can't combine them, that we can only pick one, and we have to stick with that, and suppress everything else. Or at least, that is the message I got when I was young, that you had no choice but to let society peg you down as this thing, or that other thing. It was refreshing when, thanks to help from others, I learned that I didn't have to play that game. If I had anyone else with me at the time, male or female, I could have resisted that much earlier, but I didn't.

Many people don't even think about "becoming who they are" like this and the struggle involved and just worry about how masculine or feminine they appear. That's certainly a limited mindset.

Do they? I can appreciate what your saying as there can be toxic stereotypes at any time and place, not questioning your own experience, but I'm not sure its always a great idea to generalize from experience which may be context specific, Marx taught me that in his own skepticism about so many things considered ahistorical and perrenial which sure where not.

Equally what "society" and in what ways did they tell you anything? I agree with some of the "be yourself" messaging, I just worry that Ed Gein or other psychos of his ilk are a good demonstration of what the hell happens when it goes to far one way.

Anyway, just as its been, for some people, a source of grievance and misery that they felt they couldnt or didnt want to conform to expectations of masculine and feminine I'm sure there are people who have an equal dislike for attempts to erase masculinity or femininity, I think that's valid, I find nothing appealing what so ever about androgyny. As a feminist male I do think there are things about femininity which are socially vital, or superior as a basis for social norms to masculinity, at least to masculinity to date (and I know the same issues with generalizing exist with respect of this too).

Besides that, as a heterosexual, and a heteronormative one too, I think binary sexes is great, I think its served humanity well over the longest historical period and dont see any protracted successful history of any alternative working or proving healthy. In time I'm hopeful that a full appreciation of that may return to matters but certainly dont foresee it in the medium term given just how successful the blackening of that thinking has been and how much a confused, desperate need to shun it has gained traction and started trending. Part of that I think has been well intentions gone awry, part of it I do believe has been some sort of sabotage, geopolitics, racism, or a grossly machavellian "give them enough rope" type of thinking.

 

[The Cat]

That's Nick Fuentes?!

I'm always surprised when one of these right-wing gurus and experts on masculinity turn out to be these really twerpy guys. I see them and I go, oh, that's it? I feel more masculine than them. Ben Shapiro is also in this category.

Ol Nick "its gay to fuck women, really possessive and creepy towards his "guy friends" streams gay porn accidentally on purpose to "troll" and not because he secretly yearns to be fucked like one of the women he hates by a big strong man" Fuentes.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

It took me decades to learn some important things about myself, but I was able to learn about and develop the most important things in my youth, and managed not to get sucked into that game. I think it was because I grew up with open-minded and supportive parents, and good educational opportunities.

The primary thing was that neither of them were of much help when it came to social situations. This could have either not mattered just by having one or two cool people around, or I could have received useful information as to how to navigate it, which I did not. Advice would be about what they valued and found important, not what I thought was important. I was less interested in being a super special smart snowflake; for me, it was more that I wanted to belong, and that I wanted hostile people off my back.

I suppose many people must give advice on what they value, and not what others value , though.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Do they? I can appreciate what your saying as there can be toxic stereotypes at any time and place, not questioning your own experience, but I'm not sure its always a great idea to generalize from experience which may be context specific, Marx taught me that in his own skepticism about so many things considered ahistorical and perrenial which sure where not.

Equally what "society" and in what ways did they tell you anything? I agree with some of the "be yourself" messaging, I just worry that Ed Gein or other psychos of his ilk are a good demonstration of what the hell happens when it goes to far one way.

The first thing that jumps out at me was a conflict an interest in radical politics and being into geeky things like science fiction. I think the latter had to do with broader social dynamics in that particular environment and the fact that it was just not considered cool to like those things. At the time, though, I was not in the business of being cool, I was in the business of changing the world (that was the goal, anyway).

The second thing that jumps out at me was a conflict an interest in radical politics and being into STEM. I got the impression between some people that STEM was like the dark arts, or something. I thought this was odd then, and I do now. I think cultivating a logical mind can actually be extremely valuable for left-wing politics. It can help in spotting BS that many other people fall for, and if you can do a decent job of keeping your ego in check, it can help you keep an open mind.

I'm tempted to blame certain philosophers for why people see logic/rationalism/empiricism as hostile to the left-wing project, but I haven't done my homework yet.

Anyway, just as its been, for some people, a source of grievance and misery that they felt they couldnt or didnt want to conform to expectations of masculine and feminine I'm sure there are people who have an equal dislike for attempts to erase masculinity or femininity, I think that's valid, I find nothing appealing what so ever about androgyny. As a feminist male I do think there are things about femininity which are socially vital, or superior as a basis for social norms to masculinity, at least to masculinity to date (and I know the same issues with generalizing exist with respect of this too).

I think being psychologically androgynous is a good thing to be. Consider from a cultural perspective what we might consider the "masculine" mentality of thinking logically, and the "feminine" mentality of being more "relational/value" focused.

The process of thinking logically can help one figure out the truth and solve certain kinds of problems. If we continue with only that, we feel dead inside, which is not desirable; this sucks. This probably results in people seeking to fill that void which could include buying an expensive sports car or imposing unreasonable expectations on women.

The other way of thinking can solve different kinds of problems, and it can contribute positively to your well-being. If you can learn to value people beyond what they can do, even if they piss you off much of the time, well, it turns out this is actually good for you. If you can learn why you should hold on to what you think is important even when other people seem to stop caring about it, that's helps you feel good, too.

What I'm talking about seems analogous to the Jungian concept of T and Fe/Fi. It's occuring to me just now that Feeling might be very useful for engaging in what might seem to be hopeless causes. Could incorporating a "feminine" way of thinking actually be the way of developing a warrior's spirit?

Besides that, as a heterosexual, and a heteronormative one too, I think binary sexes is great, I think its served humanity well over the longest historical period and dont see any protracted successful history of any alternative working or proving healthy. In time I'm hopeful that a full appreciation of that may return to matters but certainly dont foresee it in the medium term given just how successful the blackening of that thinking has been and how much a confused, desperate need to shun it has gained traction and started trending. Part of that I think has been well intentions gone awry, part of it I do believe has been some sort of sabotage, geopolitics, racism, or a grossly machavellian "give them enough rope" type of thinking.

There is the concept of "external" androgyny and my opinions on that is that nobody should interfere. I think every person should be permitted to do as they see fit. Speaking for myself, I have no interest in deviating from what is considered masculine in this regard. I don't think too much about fashion and if given total freedom I wear lots of plaid and in warmer weather T-shirts with things I'm interested in if I'm up for talking to strangers.

Also, some people are born androgynous. What would you do about them?

Also, since the concept of sports sometimes comes up here, I will admit that I tend to see weightlifting as a masculine thing. I'm delighted, though, to see on social media, all these women that have taken it up. I think that's very cool. It's probably a good idea to possess physical strength; I need to take up weightlifting myself.

 

[Coriolis]

Do they? I can appreciate what your saying as there can be toxic stereotypes at any time and place, not questioning your own experience, but I'm not sure its always a great idea to generalize from experience which may be context specific, Marx taught me that in his own skepticism about so many things considered ahistorical and perrenial which sure where not.

Equally what "society" and in what ways did they tell you anything? I agree with some of the "be yourself" messaging, I just worry that Ed Gein or other psychos of his ilk are a good demonstration of what the hell happens when it goes to far one way.

Anyway, just as its been, for some people, a source of grievance and misery that they felt they couldnt or didnt want to conform to expectations of masculine and feminine I'm sure there are people who have an equal dislike for attempts to erase masculinity or femininity, I think that's valid, I find nothing appealing what so ever about androgyny. As a feminist male I do think there are things about femininity which are socially vital, or superior as a basis for social norms to masculinity, at least to masculinity to date (and I know the same issues with generalizing exist with respect of this too).

Besides that, as a heterosexual, and a heteronormative one too, I think binary sexes is great, I think its served humanity well over the longest historical period and dont see any protracted successful history of any alternative working or proving healthy. In time I'm hopeful that a full appreciation of that may return to matters but certainly dont foresee it in the medium term given just how successful the blackening of that thinking has been and how much a confused, desperate need to shun it has gained traction and started trending. Part of that I think has been well intentions gone awry, part of it I do believe has been some sort of sabotage, geopolitics, racism, or a grossly machavellian "give them enough rope" type of thinking.

Masculine and feminine will always remain as a fundamental dichotomy, sort of a yin/yang pair. How real people manifest this is on a continuum. Even the most masculine person will have some feminine qualities, and vice versa. Also, which qualities go into which bucket can vary with culture and over time. The problem comes when we try to enforce behavior to fit whatever pattern we think appropriate. Better to encourage people to be the best human they can, and fall where they fall on that spectrum naturally. If it's not to our liking, we don't have to befriend much less get romantically involved with them, just treat them with common courtesy and move on.

The primary thing was that neither of them were of much help when it came to social situations. This could have either not mattered just by having one or two cool people around, or I could have received useful information as to how to navigate it, which I did not. Advice would be about what they valued and found important, not what I thought was important. I was less interested in being a super special smart snowflake; for me, it was more that I wanted to belong, and that I wanted hostile people off my back.

I suppose many people must give advice on what they value, and not what others value , though.

We all will value different things. Some of the most helpful advice involves showing someone how to achieve what you value, and how to remain true to your principles. These skills and habits are definitely transferrable.

The first thing that jumps out at me was a conflict an interest in radical politics and being into geeky things like science fiction. I think the latter had to do with broader social dynamics in that particular environment and the fact that it was just not considered cool to like those things. At the time, though, I was not in the business of being cool, I was in the business of changing the world (that was the goal, anyway).

The second thing that jumps out at me was a conflict an interest in radical politics and being into STEM. I got the impression between some people that STEM was like the dark arts, or something. I thought this was odd then, and I do now. I think cultivating a logical mind can actually be extremely valuable for left-wing politics. It can help in spotting BS that many other people fall for, and if you can do a decent job of keeping your ego in check, it can help you keep an open mind.

I'm tempted to blame certain philosophers for why people see logic/rationalism/empiricism as hostile to the left-wing project, but I haven't done my homework yet.

I think being psychologically androgynous is a good thing to be. Consider from a cultural perspective what we might consider the "masculine" mentality of thinking logically, and the "feminine" mentality of being more "relational/value" focused.

The process of thinking logically can help one figure out the truth and solve certain kinds of problems. If we continue with only that, we feel dead inside, which is not desirable; this sucks. This probably results in people seeking to fill that void which could include buying an expensive sports car or imposing unreasonable expectations on women.

The other way of thinking can solve different kinds of problems, and it can contribute positively to your well-being. If you can learn to value people beyond what they can do, even if they piss you off much of the time, well, it turns out this is actually good for you. If you can learn why you should hold on to what you think is important even when other people seem to stop caring about it, that's helps you feel good, too.

What I'm talking about seems analogous to the Jungian concept of T and Fe/Fi. It's occuring to me just now that Feeling might be very useful for engaging in what might seem to be hopeless causes. Could incorporating a "feminine" way of thinking actually be the way of developing a warrior's spirit?



There is the concept of "external" androgyny and my opinions on that is that nobody should interfere. I think every person should be permitted to do as they see fit. Speaking for myself, I have no interest in deviating from what is considered masculine in this regard. I don't think too much about fashion and if given total freedom I wear lots of plaid and in warmer weather T-shirts with things I'm interested in if I'm up for talking to strangers.

Also, some people are born androgynous. What would you do about them?

Also, since the concept of sports sometimes comes up here, I will admit that I tend to see weightlifting as a masculine thing. I'm delighted, though, to see on social media, all these women that have taken it up. I think that's very cool. It's probably a good idea to possess physical strength; I need to take up weightlifting myself.

Androgynous people simply have a more even balance of the masculine and feminine I mentioned above. For some, this is physical, due to their physiology at birth. Even then, such a person may outwardly exhibit traits closer to one end of the spectrum than the other because it feels right to them. As I have mentioned elsewhere, that "psychological androgyny" is basically the fundamental qualities all humans can and perhaps should possess. This includes things like being honest and reliable, responsible and kind; caring about your friends, family, and community; having courage in the face of fear; being resourceful in times of need; trying to learn and better yourself. Masculine and feminine are often just different flavors of the same. We are all much more alike than we are different.

As for interest in SF and especially STEM being at odds with certain parts of the political spectrum, that is because those parts have divorced themselves from fact and reason. These are the anti-vaxxers, the climate change deniers, the mask avoiders, the creationists, the people who think you can "pray the gay away". They are unconcerned with demonstrated scientific fact and instead will base decisions on ideology, mythology, or simple wishful thinking. While I might agree that we need to respect their right to make their own choices on these bases, and to suffer the consequences, they do not have the right to force such choices on others. Unfortunately that is what they have been doing. It is not enough to be able to live their lives as they see fit, they have to make others live that way, too. As Tim Walz likes to say, they need to mind their own damn business.

 

[Lark]

The first thing that jumps out at me was a conflict an interest in radical politics and being into geeky things like science fiction. I think the latter had to do with broader social dynamics in that particular environment and the fact that it was just not considered cool to like those things. At the time, though, I was not in the business of being cool, I was in the business of changing the world (that was the goal, anyway).

The second thing that jumps out at me was a conflict an interest in radical politics and being into STEM. I got the impression between some people that STEM was like the dark arts, or something. I thought this was odd then, and I do now. I think cultivating a logical mind can actually be extremely valuable for left-wing politics. It can help in spotting BS that many other people fall for, and if you can do a decent job of keeping your ego in check, it can help you keep an open mind.

I'm tempted to blame certain philosophers for why people see logic/rationalism/empiricism as hostile to the left-wing project, but I haven't done my homework yet.

I think being psychologically androgynous is a good thing to be. Consider from a cultural perspective what we might consider the "masculine" mentality of thinking logically, and the "feminine" mentality of being more "relational/value" focused.

The process of thinking logically can help one figure out the truth and solve certain kinds of problems. If we continue with only that, we feel dead inside, which is not desirable; this sucks. This probably results in people seeking to fill that void which could include buying an expensive sports car or imposing unreasonable expectations on women.

The other way of thinking can solve different kinds of problems, and it can contribute positively to your well-being. If you can learn to value people beyond what they can do, even if they piss you off much of the time, well, it turns out this is actually good for you. If you can learn why you should hold on to what you think is important even when other people seem to stop caring about it, that's helps you feel good, too.

What I'm talking about seems analogous to the Jungian concept of T and Fe/Fi. It's occuring to me just now that Feeling might be very useful for engaging in what might seem to be hopeless causes. Could incorporating a "feminine" way of thinking actually be the way of developing a warrior's spirit?

There is the concept of "external" androgyny and my opinions on that is that nobody should interfere. I think every person should be permitted to do as they see fit. Speaking for myself, I have no interest in deviating from what is considered masculine in this regard. I don't think too much about fashion and if given total freedom I wear lots of plaid and in warmer weather T-shirts with things I'm interested in if I'm up for talking to strangers.

Also, some people are born androgynous. What would you do about them?

Also, since the concept of sports sometimes comes up here, I will admit that I tend to see weightlifting as a masculine thing. I'm delighted, though, to see on social media, all these women that have taken it up. I think that's very cool. It's probably a good idea to possess physical strength; I need to take up weightlifting myself.

I think that the left wing has always had a strong attachment to the blank slate idea of personality, gender, whatever the case may be, in part its got to do with the rejection of tradition as exclusively oppressive and innovation as exclusively beneficial, that's a generalization and a vulgarization but its also pretty on the mark if you ask me.

I dont see things that way at all, some forms of tradition are progressive, some arent, some are progressive for the majority and less for particular minorities but an awareness of this may permit some sort of social inclusion or integration without requiring some radical idea of negating all categories. That relates to my own thinking about progressives concerning themselves with avoidable suffering, primarily, and the amelioration of necessary suffering, while acknowleding its necessarily so, not amenable to change, no what what stout hearts may trust or hope to the contrary.

That is a bit reductive, that version of masculine and feminine, though its maybe a start, in some ways, I think that femininity has something to do with an "ethic of care", acknowledgely this is at its best. Jung also wrote entire books about the masculine and feminine archetypes besides touching on them in typology, those are good books, I own copies of the latest routledge ones.

I dont share the view about internal or psychological androgyny, I think that's a terrible idea, its like the "equality as sameness" idea and ends in the whole "grey goo uniformity" or like something in the (under rated) dystopia movie Equilibrium. I'm not personally a big fan of external androgyny either, unsurprisingly maybe, but to each their own and everyone has their own way of going mad, I guess, its imposition as a social norm, through law/force or public opinion, I reject that and think there should be no compromise with it.

So far as people who're born androgynous, well, what percentage of the population are we talking about here? It would guess it is a vanishingly small percentage of the population, not that this means it is irrelevent or should count for less but I definitely would not suggest that any universal or perrenial social norms could be raised on that particular foundation without it inviting adverse consequences, not just for the androgynous individuals themselves either. Which I think is a reflective of a wider problem, especially within the left but in another way on the right wing too, the thinking is that in order to provide any improvement for the minority you need to wipe out, totally erase as offensive to the eye, what defines the minority and majority in their distinctiveness. I dont think that's the case at all, I also dont think that anything short of that is a kind of "compromise solution" or "piecemeal reform" or whatever.

So far as sport, I think that its a bit artificial to have sports thought of as exclusively male or female, although I dont think its fair to have mixed competitions and I think people have every right to want to preserve spaces which ARE exclusively male or female, including within competition, and in the main these days the attack seems to be upon anything which is exclusively female by men or by men who have had surgery to resemble women physically. The best feminists, in my opinion, are actually the Amazon feminists, they have written some great stuff about martial arts, body building and feminism in which they propose serious competition between the sexes without trying to erase that distinction of male and female, their manifestos are some of the ones which I dont think have aged badly in contrast with others.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

As for interest in SF and especially STEM being at odds with certain parts of the political spectrum, that is because those parts have divorced themselves from fact and reason. These are the anti-vaxxers, the climate change deniers, the mask avoiders, the creationists, the people who think you can "pray the gay away".

Everyone knows about that, but there's a left-wing equivalent to that, or at least, there was in my early twenties. They didn't approve of science, not as a topic to study for themselves, but as a thing that exists. I knew someone who she would insinuate that it represented some kind of indoctrination into a "white male" way of thinking (this seems incredibly racist and sexist, but what would I know). Who knows if these people still think that? They definitely thought that at the time.

If I talk any more on this subject, I'm going to sound like Jordan Peterson, lol. I don't share his views. Like I said, I need to do my homework here.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I think that the left wing has always had a strong attachment to the blank slate idea of personality, gender, whatever the case may be, in part its got to do with the rejection of tradition as exclusively oppressive and innovation as exclusively beneficial, that's a generalization and a vulgarization but its also pretty on the mark if you ask me.

I dont see things that way at all, some forms of tradition are progressive, some arent, some are progressive for the majority and less for particular minorities but an awareness of this may permit some sort of social inclusion or integration without requiring some radical idea of negating all categories. That relates to my own thinking about progressives concerning themselves with avoidable suffering, primarily, and the amelioration of necessary suffering, while acknowleding its necessarily so, not amenable to change, no what what stout hearts may trust or hope to the contrary.

I think categories will always matter, but I think to move forward we do have to seek to move past them a little bit. If people are so invested in categories that they believe they are fundamentally and irrevocably capable of communicate with someone not like them, that's a problem. That's the only way to a desirable endgame, as I see it.

We should now however declare that categories do not matter simply so that we can pretend inequalities don't exist. That's also a danger.

That is a bit reductive, that version of masculine and feminine, though its maybe a start, in some ways, I think that femininity has something to do with an "ethic of care", acknowledgely this is at its best. Jung also wrote entire books about the masculine and feminine archetypes besides touching on them in typology, those are good books, I own copies of the latest routledge ones.

I mean, really, I'm influenced a little bit by MBTI in some respects. Basically: Ti =rationalism; Te = Empiricism; Fi: values and authenticity; Fe: Relatedness and community. It makes sense to me, as a shorthand, anyway.

I'm interested in the Jungian idea of anima development. Sometimes I'll fall for a woman and she becomes almost like a goddess. This seems maybe like what Jung was talking about here.

I dont share the view about internal or psychological androgyny, I think that's a terrible idea, its like the "equality as sameness" idea and ends in the whole "grey goo uniformity" or like something in the (under rated) dystopia movie Equilibrium. I'm not personally a big fan of external androgyny either, unsurprisingly maybe, but to each their own and everyone has their own way of going mad, I guess, its imposition as a social norm, through law/force or public opinion, I reject that and think there should be no compromise with it.

For me it creates a life more worth living. When I only really valued Thinking and people who thought that way, I felt dead inside. I had no passion for anything, which, coincidentally, made me psychologically unattractive to the ladies (I saw countless dating site profiles on how they want men with passion about.. anything at all).

Oh, there are a few areas of with regards to clothing I forget to mention. Sometimes I like to wear purple because I've always loved that color. I think when I was really young, that might have been my favorite color, and somehow I got the idea that it shouldn't be that (not from my parents, to their credit), and went with green instead. Sometimes I've wondered if we should just make babies wear green instead of forcing the arbitrary pink/blue thing on them.

I also really enjoy wearing green. I tend to view blue as an annoying, boring color that's forced on me; I resent that it is sometimes hard to find button-down shirts that are not blue.

So far as people who're born androgynous, well, what percentage of the population are we talking about here? It would guess it is a vanishingly small percentage of the population, not that this means it is irrelevent or should count for less but I definitely would not suggest that any universal or perrenial social norms could be raised on that particular foundation without it inviting adverse consequences, not just for the androgynous individuals themselves either. Which I think is a reflective of a wider problem, especially within the left but in another way on the right wing too, the thinking is that in order to provide any improvement for the minority you need to wipe out, totally erase as offensive to the eye, what defines the minority and majority in their distinctiveness. I dont think that's the case at all, I also dont think that anything short of that is a kind of "compromise solution" or "piecemeal reform" or whatever.

Typically what they have done with androgynous (intersex) people is chop off whichever genitals they deem appropriate before the person is too young t have any say in it. That seems wrong to me. For instance some people might have an abnormally large clitoris that looks more like a penis. There's more here about the development of genitals with regards to hormones, but I don't remember the details here.

So far as sport, I think that its a bit artificial to have sports thought of as exclusively male or female, although I dont think its fair to have mixed competitions and I think people have every right to want to preserve spaces which ARE exclusively male or female, including within competition, and in the main these days the attack seems to be upon anything which is exclusively female by men or by men who have had surgery to resemble women physically. The best feminists, in my opinion, are actually the Amazon feminists, they have written some great stuff about martial arts, body building and feminism in which they propose serious competition between the sexes without trying to erase that distinction of male and female, their manifestos are some of the ones which I dont think have aged badly in contrast with others.

I don't know a great deal about body-building. I once met someone who reminded me of Gina Carano (this was before she got fired) but with much better politics and I thought they were pretty awesome.