Opening To “Cultivating Natural Beauty” Chapter (Unedited)

Fortune

Shanghai residents scream out from high-rise apartments as lockdown stretches into second week

Other viral videos coming out of the city show pets being beaten to death, parents being separated from their children, and a struggle for f

As if these past few years couldn't get more disturbing...

While they are shoving celebrity slaps and reality tv in our face, across the globe, people are screaming for a shred of freedom, and having their children snatched away from them. Is this really about "safety" at this point? What is happening to them could happen to the rest of us if we remain silent. They will create a problem, then snatch away every shred of freedom we could possibly own just to "fix" that problem. People will eventually have to create their own solutions. We know what we want. It is up to us to take it. There is strength in numbers, but a few individuals in their little high chairs have convinced us that we are lesser than. How have they done that for so long? It will come to a point where we can no longer rely on figures that would have us b*mbed in a second if it meant they could spit right back at their opponent.

These people don't want to lead. They want to destroy. The world is their playground, after all.

it's actually really weird to me that a lot of adults don't seem to remember the worst bits of being a child. were you not horribly aware of when adults were talking down to you as a child? don't you remember how little autonomy you were allowed, even when it came to things that seemed pretty harmless? don't you remember the times when adults would seemingly be assholes to you for no reason? even if you had nice and reasonable parents, didn't you ever have teachers or other adults in power who treated you disrespectfully? didn't it sting no matter how people justified it?

especially when I was a teenager, it seemed obvious to me & to most of my peers when an adult wasn't treating us with respect. you could almost smell it, in certain classrooms. there would be this palpable, shifting undercurrent of teenage dissatisfaction whenever some teachers started talking. and it made a lot of the kids act out! which of course made the teachers try to exert their power, which never worked because nobody respected them, which made them get more draconian, etc.

as a teen, I didn't really get why my peers and I seemingly had a superhuman sense for when an adult was on a power trip. but now I think I get it. kids are systematically denied autonomy, respect, and consistently have the validity of their experiences denied. like, flat-out. they're a vulnerable class of people made even more vulnerable by their lack of societal rights. being disrespected as a kid is so frequent that I would say it's a defining experience for most children. is it any wonder they tend to pick up on when an adult doesn't see them as worth listening to?

so yeah, of course a ton of kids want to be treated "like an adult." to them, that's synonymous with being treated like a human being worth listening to. it's up to you, as an adult, to understand that wish for what it is, and behave accordingly. you don't gotta be a child psychologist. you don't gotta be perfect at it. all you have to do is remember how painful adult disrespect could be when you were a kid & do your best to act with some compassion.

We celebrate David Bowie, Freddie Mercury and Prince for their gender-nonconforming amazingness as we should, but let us not forget

Annie Lennox

Grace Jones

Sinead O‘Connor

Dolores O‘Riordan

Patti Smith

Tracy Chapman

Please add if you like, i do not own the photos

The Path of Chastity

I follow the path of Chastity because it is the path to the purification of Self. If you wish to learn the gnosis concerning the path of Chastity:

As explained in the attached video, the difference between Chastity and Celibacy is that Chastity is remaining without orgasm and transmuting your sexual energy into Pure Love. Celibacy is remaining without orgasm but the energy is stagnant resulting in the same damage caused by having orgasms. Sexual energy is transmuted through meditation and you will be cured of all diseases.

According to Gnostic Teachings, one can transmute energy by not having an orgasm as the orgasm slowly destroys the brain and you lose the sacred oil needed to restore the Third Eye (sex causes spiritual blindness). Without Chastity, it is not possible to reach the heights of Divinity because forgoing the seconds-long orgasm is considered a sacrifice for Cosmic Knowledge. This is the only way to obtain it. It can't be pondered on or read in a book, so all these people talking about sensuality, eroticism, sexuality, yet speak on being awakened are lying as there is a trade-off for all actions one engages in. The exchange for instant gratification is their potential for Awakening.

Selflessness is required when you are on the path of Christ-Consciousness because it is the path of the healer. Retaining your energy to perform meditation is required; if you do not have energy there is nothing to transmute. It is impossible to meditate when you are spending your sexual energy on orgasms. When you engage in sex meditation is futile which is why so many people struggle with it - when you save your energy and begin meditating regularly you will experience the ecstacy people say they get from sex, but this bliss is permanent. This is possibly the serotonin people speak of missing when they experience depression or other mental illnesses but they are resistant to the truth so they deal with depression for decades and some even their whole lives.

The definition of sex varies, but orgasm is considered sex regardless of the sexuality you label yourself. This includes masturbation. With that said, if you are not on the path of Chastity you would disagree with this, but not everybody is here to follow this path where lust is hell and orgasm is the death. Not everybody on Earth is interested in restoring their emotional centers or even having a Soul or a higher purpose and that is their karma.

« Foreigners follow American news stories like their own, listen to American pop music, and watch copious amounts of American television and film. […] Americans, too, stick to the U.S. The list of the 500 highest-grossing films of all time in the U.S., for example, doesn’t contain a single foreign film (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon comes in at 505th, slightly higher than Bee Movie but about a hundred below Paul Blart: Mall Cop). […]

How did this happen? How did cultural globalization in the twentieth century travel along such a one-way path? And why is the U.S.—that globe-bestriding colossus with more than 700 overseas bases—so strangely isolated? 

[…W]hen 600 or so journalists, media magnates, and diplomats arrived in Geneva in 1948 to draft the press freedom clauses for […] the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights […], definitional difficulties abounded. Between what the U.S. meant by “freedom of information” and what the rest of the world needed lay a vast expanse. For the American delegates, the question belonged to the higher plane of moral principle. But representatives of other states had more earthly concerns.

The war had tilted the planet’s communications infrastructure to America’s advantage. In the late 1940s, for example, the U.S. consumed 63% of the world’s newsprint supply; to put it more starkly, the country consumed as much newsprint in a single day as India did over the course of a year. A materials shortage would hamper newspaper production across much of the world into at least the 1950s. The war had also laid low foreign news agencies—Germany’s Wolff and France’s Havas had disappeared entirely—and not a single news agency called the global south home. At the same time, America’s Associated Press and United Press International both had plans for global expansion, leading The Economist to note wryly that the executive director of the AP emitted “a peculiar moral glow in finding that his idea of freedom coincides with his commercial advantage.”

Back in Geneva, delegates from the global south pointed out these immense inequalities. […] But the American delegates refused the idea that global inequality itself was a barrier to the flow of information across borders. Besides, they argued, redistributive measures violated the sanctity of the press. The U.S. was able to strong-arm its notion of press freedom—a hybrid combining the American Constitution’s First Amendment and a consumer right to receive information across borders—at the conference, but the U.N.’s efforts to define and ensure the freedom of information ended in a stalemate.

The failure to redistribute resources, the lack of multilateral investment in producing more balanced international flows of information, and the might of the American culture industry at the end of the war—all of this amounted to a guarantee of the American right to spread information and culture across the globe.

The postwar expansion of American news agencies, Hollywood studios, and rock and roll bore this out. […] Meanwhile, the State Department and the American film industry worked together to dismantle other countries’ quota walls for foreign films, a move that consolidated Hollywood’s already dominant position.

[…A]s the U.S. exported its culture in astonishing amounts, it imported very little. In other words, just as the U.S. took command as the planetary superpower, it remained surprisingly cut off from the rest of the world. A parochial empire, but with a global reach. [And] American culture[’s] inward-looking tendencies [precede] the 1940s.

The media ecosystem in particular, Lebovic writes, [already] constituted an “Americanist echo chamber.” Few of the films shown in American cinemas were foreign (largely a result of the Motion Picture Production Code, which the industry began imposing on itself in 1934; code authorities prudishly disapproved of the sexual mores of European films). Few television programs came from abroad […]. Few newspapers subscribed to foreign news agencies. Even fewer had foreign correspondents. And very few pages in those papers were devoted to foreign affairs. An echo chamber indeed, [… which] reduced the flow of information and culture from much of the rest of the world to a trickle. […]

Today is not the 1950s. [… But] America’s culture industry has not stopped its mercantilist pursuits. And Web 2.0 has corralled a lot of the world’s online activities onto the platforms of a handful of American companies. America’s geopolitical preeminence may slip away in the not-so-distant future, but it’s not clear if Americans will change the channel. »

— “How American Culture Ate the World”, a review of Sam Lebovic’s book A Righteous Smokescreen: Postwar America and the Politics of Cultural Globalization

I am speechless…

Everytime I see Germaine Greer mentioned on radfem tumblr I get a knee jerk reaction thinking about that creepy pedo book she made

FRIDA KAHLO ‘Heroine of Pain’

My gripe with Euphoria. Part 1:

The Defamation of Kat and Cassie

So against my better judgment, I watched the darn show....

Both seasons.

It had your typical "teen" drama filled with drugs, sex, and depression, and it was exploitation at its finest.

This is not to say that teens don't experience these things. Far from it, but the way the show frames these experiences does not come off as genuine. We get the sexualization of teen girls and the exploration of how women view their feminity. By exploration, I mean it was some grown man's interpretation of what he feels a powerful and complex teenage girl should look like. That usually always deals with her sexuality. She should be sexually desirable, even when her mental health is at stake. This is shown drastically in characters like Kat and Cassie, two young girls who feel like they are "empowered" in their sexually escapades, and this is done at the expense of their childhood. Teens are practically still children. Legal age has nothing to do with the development of the brain. These characters were told that their value was rested in mainly their sexuality, especially since society saw them as expendable and useless. They tried to show Kat coming into how she views herself, but that storyline was quickly tossed and they left her character hollow.

Image of Kat Hernandez, played by Barbie Ferreira

She started off an actual lead in the story. We see her as the odd one out amongst her friends, Maddy and BB. This oddity, of course, is her virginity. The concept of losing virginity goes back into the idea of a woman's purity and social standing. I have grown to loathe these plot points in teen shows. They are never handled with care or consideration, especially as it relays the idea that a girl can't truly progress in life until she has been conquered, presumably by a man. The story remains even more tasteless when these girls enter a party and Kat is coerced into having sex with some boy from another school. This results in a video being spread, showing her engaging in this deed. I'm sure some laws were broken here, but nevertheless, Kat has to do some damage control in order to stay out of trouble. It is unfortunate to see the show almost enjoy displaying what was clearly her first experience with sex in such a degrading manner. For the sake of plot, I'm sure it suited her to not have her face shown. Still, it makes one wonder about the facelessness of women who are watched online from such humiliating videos. We don't even know if they consented to being video taped. Kat sure didn't.

In episode 2 of season 1, we continue her story with flashbacks of her childhood that show her struggling with her weight as well as the loss of her first boyfriend. Her fight with body image is inherent. Even more heart-rending, Kat finds this new spike in internet fame to be intriguing and goes on to upload more videos of herself to a p*rn site (faceless of course).

Her cam-girl status was simply to shock, not offer meaningful commentary on teen girls and the exposure of themselves to a world that despises them. I believe the actress herself even commented on not wanting another "fat girl" plot line. Of course, not much followed from that outside of her story being cast out.

Consequently, we see her character get more and more one note. Thankfully, she has quit her dominatrix job by season 2, but ber struggles with identity are still realistically persistent. The show refuses to expand on that past episode 3, however. She grows unsatsified with a boy, Ethan, who appears to really like her. The show tries to dispaly how her self-esteem could not be solved through sex, but they refuse to leave her with a shred of diginity. At this point, we can infer that she loathes her body, but is afraid to admit that to a world that will reject her admission. Instead, she fantasizes about getting with someone that views her as an object to be sexually assaulted (shown in a weird Game of Thrones where she is practically r*ped by a warrior). Again, a real life circumstance for some teen girls and women, but also one the show refuses to explore further. We see her then gaslight and berate Ethan in the 2nd season's last few episodes, presenting the idea that girls only want "bad boys" in the end. This is in refusal to address Kat's emerging belief in how she lacks confidence herself and how it was a facade. We don't get to see her feel devastated by her actions, despite being shown as a character very capable of sympathy for others. Her facade of care free sexual appeal is put to the fore-front, and we as the audience are meant to see her just as shallow as she portrays herself. It is also important to note that her counterpart from the 2012 Euphoria series, a character by the name of Noy, dealt with a little more plot wise. Noy's character is actually shown to face long-term consequences from her sexual exploration. Kat's edition of this is shown to be so careless and almost glorifying as a result. Sex of any kind came come with risks, and that should have been shown for her. We don't know much about the men she experiments with, both online and off, how old they are, or what they've done in their pasts. The plus-sized girl in this series is not given any more nuance than she is in most other media portrayals. Kat is still the promiscuous and plus-sized girl who is hard to love. We are no longer able to have her point of view. We are no longer able to sympathize with the girl in this seemingly female-centric show.

Image of Cassie Howard, played by Sydney Sweeney

Cassie is shown desperately clinging to any male figure in her life, carelessly placing her own friends on the back burner. This may be reminiscent of real life, but again, the show does not attempt to humanize her. We are somehow meant to objectify her, especially with the amount of times we've seen her topless. The camera seems to thoroughly enjoy scanning over her body. It matches the ominous and far from hidden attention that her body received upon reaching puberty. This attention, of course, was given by men, strangers and family members alike. Of course, she is naturally unaware of the male gaze as it strips her first of her awareness, hiding behind smiles and gentle gestures. As her body blossoms, the world decides when it would be best to attack. Much like Kat, this attack is confused for affection. With an absent father, much of any male attention can be taken as fickle. Subconsciously, it becomes her mission to keep them however she can. She lives in a world where keeping a boy means you must give much of yourself away to please him. As we know, this does not earn the male’s respect, but rather his denigration. Her character is humiliated and remains unaware, as we see boys talking crudely about her behind her back. To them, she is sexually starved. It is almost sadistic, and masochistic on her oart, how much we are shown her being desperate. Even as we see her get with the seemingly kinder Mckay, it wasn't long before she was being roughhoused by him in bed and gobbling goldfish for his college initiation. The actress, Sydney Sweeney, even explicitly came out and said she asked for less nudity in her role. This is not something that should have to be told, but I guess the director didn't see her for anything but eye candy. You shouldn't need nudity to enthrall and audience, especially at the expense of your actresses. Sam Levinson (writer, producer, director) appeared to have eased away from nudity, noticeably in the show's second season. That did little to polish the show, however. In the 2nd season's final moments, we see Cassie spiral into a fit of grief and righteous fury, feeling rightfully that the world is against her. Of course, this does not excuse her from her own selfish acts. She is decides to get with the ex-boyfriend of her best friend, Maddy, and hide this up until all is revealed by a character I will discuss later. We know the origin of Cassie's lust for love, but she is ultimately shown as shallow and in the wrong. We do not get to discuss how she can come to find more stability in her life, to love herself and love other women. She just simply exists as visual entertainment beside the near sociopathic Nate Jacobs. We see Nate pull her close and push her away, and she is willing to come back everytime. We are supposed to believe she is not allowed mercy, even as she struggles with her own hidden addiction. We see her character painfully go through an abortion, which surely contributed to her declining mental state. This is shown in episode 7 of season 1. It's a plot fleetingly introduced and would never be spoken of again. Shock value for you. We do not get to see her mourn over this loss, although we are aware that this teenager would not do well with a child at the moment. Still, we don't know how she feels about having kids. We do not know how she feels about sex (I mean truly feels, not in how she presents it in scenes with Mckay and Nate).

Maddy confronting Cassie in season 2 episode 8

We do not get to see her discover that love does not exist solely in connection to a man. It should have existed in the love for her sister, possibly even in her flawed mother, or in Maddy and Kat. Primarily, that love should have been for herself, even if it took a long time to find. I highly doubt the upcoming 3rd season will give her that level of complexity and growth. She is just a dramatic plot point. Someone to be put in her place when she breaks under societal pressures. Obviously, self love is not everyone's conclusion, but Cassie, like Kat, is young and very impressionable. It is difficult to tell if the show sees them as such. Girls are told to act like mature adults, and are shamed if they don't achieve this in a way that leaves them both f*ckable and manageable. There is still time for them to learn, but where is their help? Or their conclusions?

It's quite literally feminists' responsibility to care about each other's husbands. The role of a "woman" is a role where her existence is related to males; feminism is essentially heterosexual activism which is why non-heterosexuals struggle to find belonging in it because it's not for them (and it's getting awkward they constantly voice this but don't remove themselves from it).

Feminism is for the adult heterosexual and bisexual male and female because they are 99% of the adult population. The #1 misconception surrounding feminism is that it is for all women when it is absolutely NOT that - it's about equality in heterosexual relationships; this is what liberation and the death of misogyny is to the average woman. A male taking a bullet for them is their version of divine intervention because man is their god. If you are not in a heterosexual relationship there is nothing to protest against because you've achieved liberation without the drama and self-victimization. Congratulations, you've made it. You're at a point where you're free from distractions to make minor tweaks to your thinking to make your life go in the direction you want.

Feminists are not lacking class consciousness. To the manlover, heterosexuals are the only class to be conscious of which is why they're hostile toward anything that isn't about their union. They would know about the movement they created more than the ignorant few trying to dissuade them from what the majority of them agree on; homosexuals are the main ones causing division within their movement. When you pledge your allegiance to a group, you are agreeing to be owned and used by that group. The average feminist's activism ends when they get into the relationship they want leaving celibates, asexuals and lesbians fighting for the rest of their lives. All feminists hold up the patriarchy they complain about because they support heterosexual women who put the energy and resources they received from feminists into males. Since these females put all of their attention into the patriarchy and males it gets fuelled - they are their own oppressors.

Manlovers do not have to prioritize homosexuals since they do not relate to your plight - how can a lesbian expect the herculean task of "care" from people who lack empathy? If anything you are privileged for not being attracted to males because Ys are intoxicatingly irresistible to the point where you're the obstacle to women's liberation. Lesbians are nothing but a body that fluffs up their movement's numbers, a stepping stool and a token to use in arguments against transwomen. Adopt an elite mindset where you genuinely believe you deserve more instead of being a mutt begging for scraps under the table heterosexuals create podcasts about.

The same thing can be said for the recruiting female separatist - it's all work for the heterosexual if they are accepted into those spaces. Only lesbians, asexuals and celibates are creating safe spaces for women. Heterosexuals and bisexuals are not interested and are even looking to destroy female-only spaces because they are waiting for the right man to come along (and that cannot happen when there are only women around). Those who want to live a peaceful life simply live it instead of trying to convince manlovers it's for them when it isn't. They like the thrill of disease and death. Separatism is only for the 1% who are already doing it and it starts in the mind. People trying to convince other women to separate are those who aren't living that life, ironically. Real separatists aren't trying to attract anybody male-minded into their circle. There's nothing to talk about when you've found Peace except Peace itself.

Focus on creating the life you want on an individual basis and you will find what you want happens quickly and your life will keep unfolding in that direction because you MUST get what you want. Activism does not work and it's just a time waster for those who are dedicated to it, but I understand the activist path is for the soulless so what else is there for them? When you ask for other people to get in line with what you want, you're asking others to go against their free will which means you depend on other people for your happiness and not yourself. In this situation you don't really want separatism, liberation or even peace, you want friends and it's okay to admit that.