....my values are different than yours but speak for yourself, and please, don't assume that everybody thinks like you....
Ftil, you might like to take that advice. Apparently it comes from an impeccably self-righteous source.
....my values are different than yours but speak for yourself, and please, don't assume that everybody thinks like you....
Ftil, you might like to take that advice. Apparently it comes from an impeccably self-righteous source.
I wouldn’t say vast experience. I have made 50+ documentary movies. It is a little more than having a few friends who are film-makers.Originally posted by stlukesguild
You of course know that for a fact... based upon your vast experience in the field?
Where did I say that I was an expert? Would writing a thesis about violence and abuse in relationships give me a little knowledge?Ah... yews, you are an expert in the field.
Mt point? Read the articles and you would know my point. BTW, I didn’t start this thread so that don’t blame me. It is 4th thread about pornography in a year. I didn’t start any one of them and I am curious why is such an interest about pornography on LitNet.What exactly is your point... or your goal? You are here at a literature site where the topics discussed are primarily literature and the arts, yet your the focus of most of your posts have to do with your claims as to the negative psychological impacts of pornography,
Wrong. Try to argue those points that were raised by the authors. BTW, how can you say that it is my personal bias without reading the articles? I guess we have a very different understanding what intelligent discussion means. It is not what we believe or not. BTW, have you noticed that rather then bringing your arguments you attempt to undermine my knowledge or experience?In other words... if I don't read the specific papers that support your personal bias, there is nothing more to say. That seems fine with me.
Hi Ftil pornography is a fact of reality and it is one of those things that people do not talk openly about but do a lot as some kind of ritual.Mt point? Read the articles and you would know my point. BTW, I didn’t start this thread so that don’t blame me. It is 4th thread about pornography in a year. I didn’t start any one of them and I am curious why is such an interest about pornography on LitNet
Talking about it sheds light about people's attitude on it.
I could imagine pornography being a ritual for some.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
Yes, it is a fact of life. I don’t agree that people don’t talk openly about it. You will hear from the interview I have posted how wrong you are. I am wonder why the negative consequences I mentioned on my previous posts are scrupulously avoided.Originally Posted by cacian
But let’s leave aside abuse of porn actress, mental and emotional problems, or high prevalence of sexual diseases they suffer. Let’s leave the negative consequences for those who watch pornography such as decreased ability to be sexually aroused to a real partner, erectile dysfunction, withdrawals symptoms after braking the addiction, inability to develop a deep and intimate relationships to name a few.
Let’s leave aside that porn actress don’t enjoy sex and what is looks as a smooth sexual act is a result of editing.
Let’s look at a bigger picture how sex has been used as a tool of mass control and manipulation. Dr Michael Jones is the author of Libido Domionadi -Lust, Power, and Control.
His book reminds me about prof. Ioan Couliano’s Eros and Magic in Renaissance and Giordano Bruno, renaissance magician and occultist.
Bruno knew that love and sex is as he said” bond of bonds” and the most powerful tool of mass control. Bruno’s De vinculis in genere is considered a cornerstone of modern political thought. In fact, many Anglo Saxon and Middle European historians and intellectuals consider De vinculis in genere modernity’s most intelligent and insightful political work.
Dr Michael Jones explains how sex has been used for mass control and manipulation. Well done.
E. Michael Jones - Libido Dominandi - Part 1 of 7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=8XkrZPZI2uU
How much research have you done into your esteemed Dr. E. Michael Jones? From what I have gleaned after a brief perusal on the internet, it seems that Jones took extremist positions early on at while teaching at Saint Mary's College, of Notre Dame, Indiana. He disagreed with the more liberal and open-minded professors and felt that the college was "the antithesis of what a Catholic college should be: being pro-choice, feminist and secular." He made little effort to conceal his extreme conservative and antisemitic views, leading to conflicts with many faculty, his department chairwoman and eventually the college's president. His department, which viewed him as a religious absolutist, decided against renewing his contract after his first year.
Much of his research into sexuality and the "sexual revolution" centers upon the issues of friction between the Catholic Church and secular culture... and the Jews. Jones has stated publicly that he considers modern Judaism to be a wicked ideology. He has repeatedly sided with the Palestinians in debates over the Middle-East and portrayed Israel as a force of immorality and debauchery... as he does in your posted interview... claiming that the Israelis bombarded the Palestinians with broadcasts of pornography as a means of psychological control. Jones' theories are seen as so extreme that the Catholic League condemned his anti-Semitism and repudiated his efforts to justify it in the name of Catholic theology.
Jones publishes a magazine/e-magazine entitled Culture Wars in which he has increasingly focused on the alleged evils of the Jews. The magazine's cover stories over the last year or so are instructive: "Judaizing: Then and Now," "John Huss and the Jews," "The Converso Problem: Then and Now," "The Judaism of Hitler," "Shylock Comes to Notre Dame" and so on. Jones runs through all the usual anti-Semitic canards -- the ideas that "Jewish media elites" run the country, that Jews are "major players" in pornography, and that Jews are behind Masonry and the French Revolution -- but that's only the start. He also accuses Jews of poisoning society with thinkers such as Karl Marx (a devotee of Satan, says Jones) and Sigmund Freud (who set off an epidemic of sexual sin, he says). And he describes the World War II Nazi genocide of the Jews as "a reaction to Jewish Messianism (in the form of Bolshevism)." Last April, in an article raging about a new president of Notre Dame University, Jones charged that anyone who went to a mainstream university would emerge "with a Jewish world view … and maybe a Jewish spouse."
One need only read an excerpt from Jones' book Francis' Legacy to see that sexual freedom is simply a peripheral concern of the good doctor. His real focus is the Jews:
"If what is left of the WASP establishment wants to do something effective in the culture wars, they will have to understand just who the enemy is. In order to understand this, they will have to go back well beyond the 1960s. In fact, they will have to go back beyond the 18th century: to be precise, 1800 years before that, right back to the opening shot in the culture wars. This war began 2000 years ago at the foot of the cross, when the Jewish high priests, Annas and Caiphas, said to Jesus Christ, “If you come down from the cross, we will accept you as our Messiah.”
Needless to say, Jesus did not come down from the cross. And because he didn’t, the Jews rejected Him. Instead, they chose Barabbas, a bandit who had been condemned to death for his revolutionary activities. At once, by doing this—by preferring a notorious criminal to a man of spotless innocence who had come to redeem them—the Jews became revolutionaries themselves: condemned to seek heaven on earth by following one false Messiah after another from Simon bar Kokhbar to Shabbetai Zevi, from Alex Portnoy to Paul Wolfowitz.
As my friend Sam Francis used to say, Who is the real enemy?"
I'll stick with the pornographers myself.
Last edited by stlukesguild; 12-06-2012 at 12:28 AM.
Beware of the man with just one book. -Ovid
The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.- Mark Twain
My Blog: Of Delicious Recoil
http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
......Jesus, you did research. Actual research. I mean, come on, stlukes - this is an Internet forum. You're not allowed to do research. What do you think would happen if everyone did research? It's just so selfish and inconsiderate of you. Are you trying to undermine the entire future of dialogue on the Web?
I am so shocked and upset, I'm tempted to use a face-palm emoticon. Yes, really. Me. That's how disturbing this whole research thing is.
Originally posted by stlukesguild
How much research have you done into your esteemed Dr. E. Michael Jones?
Well, I have done some research and I don’t agree with him on many issues. However, I have found his interview interesting and I would like to read his Libido Dominandi to make up my mind. In his interview, he didn’t go as far as prof. Ioan Couliano, for example. He didn’t mentioned Giordano Bruno and he was a key player with his De vinculis in genere. Bruno was very perceptive and insightful into the nature of human beings, but unfortunately, it has been used as a mass manipulation and control. Dr. E. Michael Jones explained mass manipulation well. So, if you reject Dr. E. Michael Jones ‘s Libido Dominandi, you have to reject prof. Dahrendorf, prof. Eliade and his disciple prof. Couliano, who are just the latest scholars who considered De vinculis in genere as a masterpiece of political manipulation.
Please don’t forget that the first to recognize the importance of Bruno’s text were the Rosicrucians, as indicated in the texts of P. Arnold and F. A. Yates on the movement’s history.....You would have to reject more people then.
Anyway, I don’t reject Dr. E. Michael Jones’s work because I don’t agree with him on many issues. BTW, have you read Libido Dominadi to make such a strong criticism or you have just made your opinion based on what others said? Have you read Bruno’s De vinculis in genere to understand mass manipulation and control?
You may stay with pornography and I will continue to expose it. Luckily, more and more psychologists address pornography with its impact on relationships and sexual dysfunction.I'll stick with the pornographers myself.
I am the last person wanting to see young men with erectile dysfunction.
I will speak up against violence and exploitation of women too. We are not on the same side. I stand for emotional, mental and physical well being of people.
~ R e m i n d e r ~
The OP:
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
This is what we in the arguing trade call a 'motherhood' proposition.
I'm in favour of motherhood, and as you disagree with me, you must be against motherhood.
I second this thought. In fact it is the emotion that proves at the end of the day when it comes to relationship, not any pornographic displays. Nothing proves sounder than passion or compassion when people are together
“Those who seek to satisfy the mind of man by hampering it with ceremonies and music and affecting charity and devotion have lost their original nature””
“If water derives lucidity from stillness, how much more the faculties of the mind! The mind of the sage, being in repose, becomes the mirror of the universe, the speculum of all creation.
Blazeofglory,
I don’t have any clue with what thought you agree. In my previous post you quoted, I have addressed very important issues such as mass manipulation and control and Dr. E. Michael Jones explained it very well. When I said that I didn’t agree with him on many issues I didn’t mean his interview where he discussed his Libido Dominandi. On the contrary, he has a very good understanding of mass manipulation and control.
This is simply about the emotional issue and nothing else. That part you addressed fascinated me
“Those who seek to satisfy the mind of man by hampering it with ceremonies and music and affecting charity and devotion have lost their original nature””
“If water derives lucidity from stillness, how much more the faculties of the mind! The mind of the sage, being in repose, becomes the mirror of the universe, the speculum of all creation.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
