RELIGION AND WOMEN – AND A VECTOR OF SOLUTION
by Maria Al Masani Makienko
( FROM CURT: Learn Please. I will delete all counter-signaling.)
As a Muslim woman, I have to make a comment about ex Muslim women. My issue is when they leave the faith, they cut their hair short, become rad feminists, sleep with every man they can, then they get into their 30s and want to settle down and men are not interested. My issue with ex Muslim men is they enable this behavior, encourage it, but don’t marry them.
I think religion is an excellent tool to manage women and prevent them from eating each other and destroying their marriage marketplace value and policing weak beta males who put them on a pedestal and become their slaves when they know better. Female cognition is highly emotional, made to care for infants – something autistic women such as myself are terrible at. Female cognitives and their emotion-based thinking must be managed not to destroy themselves and society.
I think for male cognitive with an IQ 115 and above that are not slaves to women, P is excellent. In a way, P creates a cognitive aristocracy and a traditional masculine religion is the only effective tool for cognitive commoner management. The utility of religion is domesticating the slaves of emotion-based thinking.
The aristocracy should use philosophy, logic, and reason for decision making. In leading Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim seminaries, Aristotle is studied a lot – as my husband said, why can’t that be updated with P?
— by CurtD:
It can be updated with P. But I didn’t think through the universal application of aristotle in doing so until you just mentioned it. (FYI: @adam … wth is Adam’s alias now?)
— by Maria Al Masani Makienko
They as in ex Muslim women, the men who enable them? As for they can be… my favorite response is Dr Johanthan Haidt on decay. The issue with 6 pronged conservative values is they prevent decay. Every generation of secular women is more degenerate than the next and eats each other. I am a sufi, a moderate who used to go after religious conservatives and moved to Canada .. but then in 15 years I saw the decay of each subsequent generation. Women from when I came to Canada are Audrey Hepburn compared to the blue and green hair tattooed feminist monsters coming out of the schools. And then at 30, they are tired and spent. And the religious immigrant girls who don’t integrate from a patriarchal faith have their pick of men here.
If the woman has male cognition and is an ex Muslim autist, she would agree with me about what happens to female cognitive ex Muslim women over time. Female cognition is a problem: if you give them power they ruin everything! And the way you control them is not the way you think for yourself. When one is motivated by logic and reason, they first go to Aristotle for their thinking, Marcus Aurellius … but its so nice to have something modern and even more relevant like P. P for the aristocracy – a traditional religion for the underclass
— by CurtD:
Smart. Very smart.
Agreed, but In our culture we must state this differently: “We have had centuries to develop many institutional means of controlling men’s bad behavior when they have gained social, economic, and political freedom, but we have not had time to create institutions to control women’s bad behavior when they have social economic and political freedom – and women, just like men, clearly have many bad behaviors we need institutions to control.”
Agreed .. But in our culture, where the majority is in the middle, not the bottom, we use tri-partism and tri-functionalism, so we must have three: “Law for the aristocracy who have power to limit its use, philosophy for the middle have some to use it well, and theology for the bottom, that have least, so that they are not used by others. Limits for the top and bottom and choices for the middle.”
I have so many projects I would like to finish:
1) to rewrite all of Aristotle in propertarian prose.
2) to write a tripartite theology for western peoples
3) to try write one book that tries to reform christianity, islam, judaism, buddhism – if not hinduism (i don’t think I can understand it) so that they are rational as well as spiritual, but not in conflict with the natural law.
But I think you have given me the right wisdom: that if I start with aristotle then all will follow. @adam (Don Miguel) suggested this last year I just didn’t piece it together until you said it here.
I will not live long enough to do all these things.
But I’ll do the best I can.