|We need a closer look..|
It has always been the case that Feminism(slut) has promoted the "Female" as the supreme being, the purest form of perfection and that everything else was just a derivative of this god-like apparition. A form that not only wallowed in perfection but deserved reverence and worship, as it was and is the epitome of all things imagined, seen and unseen. It was perfection enshrined in human form and everything else was just, well, second hand. A mere facsimile, an imitation of the real thing..
The had forgotten to inform everyone that they do fluctuate every month and bleed and stuff but that was apparently not really important as it muddied up the image they wanted to build.
They even stated that every form in the womb started off as female and by some error or quirk of nature, or in the DNA, a male was produced, as if by accident. Yep, we are all "women" until we were injected with testosterone and the girls received, somehow, as if by magic, an additional squirt of estrogen in order to grow bumps and stuff. They dreamt that, they felt it, so it must be true. Feminism(slut) have been trying to psychoanalyze that into existence by corrupting previous knowledge and re-inventing, reconstructing it to suit their own interpretations..
We are already well versed with that level of illogic.
The majority of gloating that the slut-feminists have been indulging in of late, especially over the past five years or so, was the hope that the male DNA was deteriorating and would thereby be extinct, so life on Earth would be a sole event, for and run by women alone. The Lesbian/Radical slut-feminists have been worshiping, offering sage leaves and orchid petals to Earth Mother Gaia, in the hope that it would be fulfilled in their lifetime. They were chortling and gloating at the possibility when some incompetent, misanthrope scientist stated that it may well be the case, that the male DNA will kill itself off in due course..
Much to their greater disappointment it has been proven to be just another farcical lie. Apparently the male DNA is a copy of itself and works in both directions, an extensive sequence of Pallindromes. Which basically means it can also be read in reverse as well and that stunned the drones into silence at least for the time being. Gaia only got goat weed and smelt from the local pond after that..
So we have the next eye opener..
Throwing another spanner into slut-feminist theories and lies, just makes my day..
Femininity and MasculinityMasculinity is taken by Freud as the paradigm; he asserts that there is only one libido, which is masculine, and that the psychical development of the girl is at first identical to that of the boy, only diverging at a later moment. Femininity is thus that which diverges from the masculine paradigm, and Freud regards it as a mysterious, unexplored region, a "dark continent."Freud, Sigmund. The Question of Lay-Analysis, 1926e. SE XX, 212 The "riddle of the nature of femininity" comes to preoccupy Freud in his later writings, and drives him to ask the famous question, "What does woman want?"Freud, Sigmund. New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis, 1933a. SE XXII, 113 Masculinity is a self-evident given, femininity is a zone of mystery:
Psychoanalysis does not try to describe what a woman is -- that would be a task it could scarcely perform -- but sets about enquiring how she comes into being, how a woman develops out of a child with a bisexual disposition.Freud, Sigmund. New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis, 1933a. SE XXII, 116
HysteriaIn 1956, Lacan takes up the traditional association of hysteria with femininity, arguing that hysteria is in fact nothing other than the question of femininity itself, the question which may be phrased "What is a woman?". This is true for both male and female hysterics.Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 178 The term "woman" here refers not to some biological essence but to a position in the symbolic order; it is synonymous with the term "feminine position".
Lacan also argues that "there is no symbolization of woman's sex as such", since there is no feminine equivalent to the "highly prevalent symbol" provided by the phallus.Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.176 This symbolic dissymmetry forces the woman to take the same route through the Oedipus complex as the boy, i.e. to identify with the father. However, this is more complex for the woman, since she is required to take the image of a member of the other sex as the basis for her identification.Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 176