Naming the Female God: A Metaphysics of Cucks and Bulls - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

An atheist-free area for those of religious belief to discuss religious topics.

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be discussed here or in The Agora. However, this forum is intended specifically as an area for those with religious belief to discuss religion without threads being derailed by atheist arguments. Please respect that. Political topics regarding religion belong in the Religion forum in the Political Issues section.
#15008588
Essay 1: Naming the Female God.

At this point in time, many leftist positions appear to be inherently contradictory, such that they cannot be explained with a typical materialistic dialogue. It may be possible however to explain these positions through a metaphysical dialogue. We can, if we are willing to take such risks, make up a religion whose cosmology and characteristics reconcile otherwise irreconcilable positions. Previous cosmologies, or at least those whose texts have survived to this day, have all been “right wing” and to some degree or another, patriarchal cosmologies. In these cosmologies, if there is a God, God is always a man. As such, a rational starting point for explaining far-leftist metaphysics would necessarily be that in their cosmology, God is a woman. Starting from this point, it is possible to reconcile and explain every seemingly contradictory stance that the radical left take. This is their religion; they just don’t know it yet.

When God is a man, it naturally follows that patriarchy should be considered a norm. If God is a woman, it can be more easily argued that women should be the leaders of society (in other words, a matriarchy). The contemporary western far left is without a doubt matriarchal; if God has a gender or a sex at all, then their God must be female. It can also help, in order to speed discussion, to give this God (or perhaps Goddess) a name of her own so that we can avoid confusing Her with the traditional, patriarchal male God. We might also wish to recognize a need for a cognizable western context because even though the radical left is “globalist” in its aspirations, the best possible English name for this female God can be found in western apocrypha: her name can only be Lillith.

In an apocryphal book of the Abrahamic canon, Lillith is Adam’s first wife. She refuses to accept the male God’s order that man be dominant over woman and as such, she is exiled from the garden of Eden. Although the apocryphal Lillith later becomes a wife of the devil, in this case it is not enough for Lillith to merely be one of the devil’s wives (as we will explain later, in this leftist cosmology, the devil is actually those who support the western patriarchy). In this cosmology, Lillith is actually God herself, it is only the name of Lillith that we will be using for the sake of continuity.

Metaphysically, the story of Lillith is similar to the story of the radical leftist woman. If we take Adam to be an “alpha male”, Lillith has known (had sex with, perhaps through Tinder) the alpha. Yet Adam/the alpha spurned her because he wanted to be dominant over her and Lillith could not accept that. She wanted to be the ruler herself, or this might be better phrased as her desire for independence; for her to rule herself. When the alpha abandoned her in order to try and become the patriarch, something which requires him to be aided through a partnership with a submissive woman (note the metaphysical necessity here of the female) both he and his new woman began their journey towards becoming demons. That is because in this cosmology, the alpha and his submissive woman (whom we might refer to later as his Omega) are fulfilling the will of their male God (the “Patriarchal One”). In resistance to this, Lillith sends her manifestations and agents against those manifestations and minions of the Patriarchal One.

With this early context established, we can now begin to define who those allies and manifestations of Lillith are. It includes all “strong and independent” women, those who have a woman’s soul but may have been cursed with a man’s body (trans women) and those others, including males, whom have chosen to ally themselves with Lillith: the victim, the homosexual, the transexual, the male feminist, the cuck and the bull. The devil and demons of this cosmology are those whom have allied themselves with, or are manifestations of the Patriarchal One: the patriarch, the minion and the Omega (the weak submissive woman). With these archetypes established, we can now engage in a very cursory review of the role each type plays in the left’s metaphysical framework:

The Patriarchal One
The Patriarchal One wants to cast Lillith down from her natural place and rule all beings. He is a conquering and destructive phenomenon that wishes to monopolize the female principle, which is itself manifest in women and to a certain degree, manifest in all females of any species. The Patriarchal One, which is simply a religious manifestation of the Patriarchy as a metaphysical construct, wishes to possess all material power and all femininity for himself. That makes him the closest thing to the devil in this cosmos. The Patriarchal One is usually conflated with the Abrahamic God of Christianity and Judaism (we will briefly touch upon Islam in a later section). Any patriarch on the earth is a manifestation of this devil. A patriarch possesses and exudes an “inner whiteness”, which is a metaphysical state that we will also review in more detail later; for now it should suffice to say that inner whiteness is distinct from outer physical whiteness. The Patriarchal One and his immaterial manifestation as inner whiteness are considered to be synonymous with evil.

The Minion
Although most minions are inferior versions of a patriarch, other minions might externally possess the characteristics of groups which are normally allies of Lillith. This is because a minion has the soul of a minion; there can be no other explanation. Therefore, a black person can be a “black white supremacist” because said black person possesses an inferior version of the “inner whiteness” which is the immaterial manifestation of the Patriarchal One; in other words, they possess the soul of a minion. This argument can apply to any and all seemingly contradictory descriptors of those who would support the Patriarchy despite being part of a traditionally victimized class of people.

The Weak Woman
Any woman who would support the patriarchy is a weak, failed or traitorous manifestation of Lillith. Some of these women can be rehabilitated if they “embrace their inner Goddess” and reject their patriarch. If her patriarch is her "alpha" then she is his "omega".

Lillith
The female God; Lillith has a thousand faces, each face representing a unique truth and a unique dimension. Within each dimension, that truth is absolute, even if it might conflict with the other truths found in other dimensions. This explains the phrase “your truth” and is one part of the reconciliation which must attempt to take place between subjective and objective values in modern far-leftism, a subject we will discuss in greater detail later.

The Victim
Lillith sympathizes with all victims and never blames them for their situations. The Patriarchal One takes pleasure in blaming the victim because this helps him maintain his hegemony.

The Homosexual
The homosexual can take on many forms but is an ally of Lillith, due largely to the Patriarchal One’s irrational hostility towards him.

The Trans Woman
The trans woman has a female soul, making her closer to Lillith but she has been trapped within, or is cursed with, a man’s body. As with most of these examples, we will expand upon this in a later essay.

The Trans Man
The trans man has a man’s soul but possesses a woman’ body; similar to the homosexual, he is allied with Lillith largely because of the Patriarchal One’s hostility towards him.

The Male Feminist
The male feminist is a man who advocates for Lillith. A majority of male feminists are either cucks or bulls.

The Cuck
The cuck is one of Lillith’s most dedicated allies. He naturally exists in a complex relationship with at least one other male, typically called a bull. We will discuss the cuck and the bull in detail in the next essay but for now, it should suffice to say that in this religion, the cuck represents the subtle side of the subservient male principle; the bull represents the powerful side.

The Bull
Usually existing in a complex relationship with at least one cuck and possibly alongside other bulls, the bull represents the powerful side of the two-sided male principle when said maleness is subservient towards Lillith.

The Unwoken
Allies of Lillith are generally referred to as the Awoken, or “woke” for short. Those who are neither servants of the Patriarchal One nor allies of Lillith are therefore the unawakened, or if we must persist in using contemporary slang, they are “unwoke”.

Essay 2: The Metaphysics of Cucks and Bulls

The Metaphysics of the Cuck
The cuck is able to possess (to a limited degree) a woman of a slightly higher quality than what he might otherwise obtain because he agrees not to oppress her “inner Goddess” (her manifestation of Lillith) through attempts at sexual monopoly. Despite this, he is still a male and therefore he is always in danger of succumbing to his own “inner whiteness”. The most common form this can take is if he feels or expresses jealousy because that leads to an attempt to oppress (sexually monopolize) his partner, an act that would interfere with her attempts to awaken her inner Goddess. As such, the cuck represents one side of the two-sided male principle insofar as the male principle can be allied with Lillith. The cuck is a metaphysical serpent curled around the feet and legs of Lillith; his influence is subtle, sometimes even unnoticed. A cuck will typically sink as low as he is able to, in every possible way, while still being able to maintain a connection with his Goddess. By sinking down to such a lowly position, the cuck is signaling how different he is from those who would dominate others (e.g., the patriarchy) but he must also at times defend himself. As such, the cuck uses the apparent virtues of his low position as a tool for when he feels he must strike at others. His venom is his ability to guilt trip others, his fundamental necessity (he is often making financial contributions towards his partner) and anything else that his wits might muster. Note that this type of combat is in sharp contrast to that of the bull, whose power is usually represented as muscle.

Another viable analogy for the metaphysics of the cuck is that of a male insect which attaches itself to a larger female of the same species. In many insectile species, the female is larger and more powerful and said insect may store or otherwise interact with multiple smaller males. The cuck is metaphysically similar to one of these small males and the female can crush him any time she wishes (#MeToo) but she allows him to live and will mate with him on occasion so long as he does not stray too far from the purpose she intends for him.

A cuck can stray, giving in to his inner whiteness, when he allows his jealousy to take over. Jealousy is itself a curse of the Patriarchal One, a phenomenon fundamentally tied to a male’s potential for inner whiteness (which in this religion, is evil) that all beings have. For the purpose of controlling the potential volatility of the cuck, a “cuck shed” is sometimes deployed. The cuck may need to be physically constrained within a cuck shed, usually provided with some means of entertaining himself while the bull is intimately involved with their God. Some cucks prefer not to be provided with entertainment because they believe that the act of fighting against or merely suffering their own jealousy helps them in fighting against their own inner whiteness. This is, in a sense, similar to the acts of physical isolation and soul seeking that have been employed in some religious traditions.

The Metaphysics of the Bull
While the cuck is a metaphysical serpent coiled around the feet and legs of Lillith, the bull is literally (for lack of a better word when we are discussing metaphysics) a metaphysical bull standing by Lillith’s side. Whereas a cuck fights with the venom of his wits, a bull is all muscle. Although a bull possesses qualities which might have led him to be favored by the Patriarchal One, Lillith offers him many women and a chance to extinguish his inner whiteness. Due to both his metaphysical position and the very physical position of his musculature, the bull could be a dangerous enemy, yet he is quickly exhausted by the many women that Lillith offers him. Most bulls exist in a symbiotic relationship with a cuck, physically controlling him or confining him to his cuck shed when necessary. At the same time, the bull is also too physically exhausted and metaphysically divided to oppress (sexually monopolize) the woman himself, thereby allowing the cuck to maintain his lower position despite the bull’s great strength.

Rarely, a bull will tire of this diffuse nature that his sexual life offers and might attempt to “raise his head”, looking upon the Patriarchal One and seeking to grow his inner whiteness.

More often, a bull will simply run wild, talking about how he is "red pilled" and "all women are sluts so they deserve it." This does not necessarily make him an enemy of Lillith because in this state he is also not an ally of the patriarchy, he is merely volatile.

The Two Aspects of Allied Maleness
As such, maleness allied with Lillith possesses two aspects: the subtle, serpentine side of the cuck and the diffuse, muscular side of the bull. At no point does allied masculinity become possessive because to possess is to oppress; and although every male has the potential to become oppressive, the cuck and the bull are engaged in a constant but subtle metaphysical war against each other. In doing so they continually weaken each other and this is what allows Lillith to remain dominant and free.

Something to be mentioned near our conclusion to this essay is why Lillith is interested in the male phenomenon in the first place. The answer is that she is not always interested in it. When she is, she wishes to be subtly in a position of power over it because that is the only thing that the male principle understands: it must either dominate or be dominated. These two symbols of Lillith then are the serpent and the bull, one at her feet and the other at her side, or perhaps one in her hair and the other being ridden. The most important thing is that the serpent and the bull are never in control; they are merely animals to be tamed by the Goddess.
#15008817
Have you just described fag hags? :lol: I enjoyed that Hong Wu. Good stuff.

Are Cucks and Bulls just closet homosexual men?

You should watch John Wick 3. Your analytical brain will love it.
#15008970
ness31 wrote:Have you just described fag hags? :lol: I enjoyed that Hong Wu. Good stuff.

Are Cucks and Bulls just closet homosexual men?

You should watch John Wick 3. Your analytical brain will love it.

Yeah I do like the Keanu Reaves movies but I haven't seen that yet.

Unfortunately, I think this post is one of my worst trains of thought yet. The left is affiliated with atheists, why would they care about stuff like this. I am sort of stunned at the kinds of garbage I had to come up with to try and make some of these positions make sense. Like, it would be so much easier to say that this is just what some people who were trying to get laid and always look like the good guy came up with but since none of them admit to that, I wasted an evening on this thing I wrote... but at least it had a couple funny moments :lol:
#15009432
Hong Wu wrote:Yeah I do like the Keanu Reaves movies but I haven't seen that yet.

Unfortunately, I think this post is one of my worst trains of thought yet. The left is affiliated with atheists, why would they care about stuff like this. I am sort of stunned at the kinds of garbage I had to come up with to try and make some of these positions make sense. Like, it would be so much easier to say that this is just what some people who were trying to get laid and always look like the good guy came up with but since none of them admit to that, I wasted an evening on this thing I wrote... but at least it had a couple funny moments :lol:


No, I think your intuition is pretty good actually, although I'd call the ''Feminist God'' the Devil myself. Nor are we sailing without a rudder in this, with the traditional depiction of the Devil as an Androgyne, as late as Mel Gibson's ''Passion of the Christ'';






After all, we're talking about a subversion of the natural order of things, of the very Cosmos, with these people.
#15009477
annatar1914 wrote:No, I think your intuition is pretty good actually, although I'd call the ''Feminist God'' the Devil myself. Nor are we sailing without a rudder in this, with the traditional depiction of the Devil as an Androgyne, as late as Mel Gibson's ''Passion of the Christ'';






After all, we're talking about a subversion of the natural order of things, of the very Cosmos, with these people.

Well, thank you :) I'm glad that some people appreciated it. It's been an interesting thought exercise for me, one of my most dangerous, most embarrassing but in some ways also the most elucidating.

There's a passage in the bible which (I can only paraphrase) says "I have shown you earthly things and you did not believe, how then can I show you heavenly things?" I think that the inverse (or maybe exaggeration is a better word than inverse) of this may also be true. If we have people who are consistently and blatantly delusional about earthly things (transvestites and so-on make for good examples of this) I can only imagine how unreasonable these people would be if they took the subtle and unprovable religious things seriously. As frustrating as it can be, maybe we're fortunate that these people are atheists.
#15009481
@Hong Wu ;

Well, thank you :) I'm glad that some people appreciated it. It's been an interesting thought exercise for me, one of my most dangerous, most embarrassing but in some ways also the most elucidating.


I am not in any way all that articulate, and what I'm thinking is rarely what I manage to put into words, so I think you've got a leg up on me, lol...

But yes, I still make myself engage in this writing and this communication, in the hopes that perhaps I might find common ground with others on the challenges and issues of our time.

There's a passage in the bible which (I can only paraphrase) says "I have shown you earthly things and you did not believe, how then can I show you heavenly things?" I think that the inverse (or maybe exaggeration is a better word than inverse) of this may also be true. If we have people who are consistently and blatantly delusional about earthly things (transvestites and so-on make for good examples of this) I can only imagine how unreasonable these people would be if they took the subtle and unprovable religious things seriously. As frustrating as it can be, maybe we're fortunate that these people are atheists.


Well, in the words of Christ;

"Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you."


Because I think that some enter by birth or conversion into the faith and are not truly believers, and often attempt to twist and/or destroy that which they find of the faith around them.
#15009530
I don’t know who wrote the OP. But it wasn’t a “brain blended word salad” by any stretch. One was able to make sense of it if they were so inclined, regardless of political persuasion.

There’s such a nasty, bitchy streak on this forum :roll:
#15009531
Hong Wu has been trying to come up with a Grand Unifying Theory of Liberalism for years because it is easier than thinking about why he assumes /pol/ is right about everything. It's a nonsensical outward look devoid of any of the self-reflection required to form a cohesive ideology.

It's essentially an "Us vs. Them" mentality as espoused by the least self-aware person to ever trod the earth.

From what I skimmed he offers nothing to justify the first sentence in his opening thesis. A writing concept that is so simple we teach it to children as an "essay sandwich."
#15009533
And that would be your opinion Special Olympian.

Now trot along and go start an “It’s the ‘woke’ left wing leader” thread, because yes, you sound like someone who would use the term ‘woke’ ;)
#15009534
You accuse me of a lot of things for a guy who is following me across multiple forums and posts images of what I write... so you know, speaking of self reflection :) If you're mad that I don't respond, is doing this supposed to get me to respond more?

I've received a lot of praise from redditors for things I've written, this wasn't one of those things and that's OK :) As it gets harder to create a comprehensive theory of a group of people who won't debate or justify their own positions besides "this person is a troll" (there's just too many of them out there for that to make sense, even if it might explain PoFo) it's gotten harder to feel like I'm making progress. I think we may be viewing the final stage of western far leftism in this era though and that may be why I've started failing to feel like I'm writing good things on the subject.
#15009557
Keep at it, Hong Wu. Someday, if you try hard enough, you will come up with an explanation for Why Liberals Are Bad, and then you will never have to think about why you blindly follow whatever Strong Orange Daddy or /pol/ say again.

You will be able to post confidently knowing you have chosen the best ideology through the most intellectually rigorous method possible: process of elimination.
Who is Kamala Harris?

Any answer other than "establishment neoliber[…]

Blast in Beirut, Lebanon

@QatzelOk If we ran by the traditionally recogn[…]

Right. And I should believe you instead. There's[…]

Election 2020

Here are the Biden campaign's first two 2020 elect[…]