# Are There Adults In Any Rooms?
July, 2022

Women finally being defined for them, they now turn to question the very idea of an adult, particularly an adult female. Obviously have long said that they seek to do away with childhood innocence by sexualizing children and blurring any distinction between adult and child, and it is obvious that they cannot help themselves as their entire mode of operation relies on rejecting the very notion of defining anything at all (actually, that's obviously not true, because even declaration is a definition when no other defining exists, but the forms, structures and symbols of queer culture are highly visible and clearly defined), aside from defining ourselves, we must all face the prospect of caring for others, with those requiring the most care being those who cannot care for themselves.

Are they, then, going to tell us that babies do not exist? That newborns or infants are indistinguishable from an adult human, that is: - at full height - at full bone maturity - at sexual maturity, meaning that their capacity for reproduction, should it ever be achieved, has become viable and that secondary sexual characteristics are confirmable (hair growth, organ size changes, etc)?

Sure, they might balk at the imprecision of stating a zone of distinction rather than the precise moment of occurrence, because they brain is expected to continue growing, or because bodily changes continue to be observed, but they are also demonstrating to us that they know what these characteristics are and what quantity of their expression is to be looked for and evaluated. That is, they know exactly where the lines are, because that's precisely around where they focus to complicate the matter.

There is no human who stops changing, but we can clearly say that if a human were to become capable of surviving and reproducing that it would be because certain capacities had been reached, and that if they were not to have been reached, we would have some understanding, at least theoretically, as to why, or that the individual in questio would be considered an exception precisely for these reasons. In fact, even in those exceptional circumstances, we could still estimate the point at which some or all of these characteristic quantities would be reached.

They are willing to play dumb because it retains their hope that they have improved access to the bodies and minds of children.

# New German Man
So ironic, isn't it, that so many who convince themselves and others that they are fighting against the oppressive privilege of white men are, in fact, employing the systems of thought and furthering the pursuit of the goals of old, dead, white German authoritarian male patriarchs.

Certainly, it seems as though the goals might not be the same, because the cultural phenomena and present-day context seem to present artifacts which might have been rejected by those same patriarchs. But, alas: And so the dialectic progresses.

# Identifying Ideology
July 17, 2022

Decry Marxism and you will find many who claim there is no Marxism except the study of Marx and his writings explicitly in a manner which presupposes they are the particular ideas we aim to implement in our society. They will claim that, short of this, there is no Marxism and that the only detriment to Marxism is a prediction that capitalism will destroy itself - that detriment being capitalism itself which, in this case, has nothing to do with Marx nor the prospect of the teaching of Marxism.

So, why would this defensive behaviour be instantiated? Is it because a Marxist is trying to deceive? Or is it something else entirely? Unfortunately, it is mostly partisan thinking with, perhaps, some element of cultural Marxism having come into play, though not explicitly so, and likely not even with the knwoledge of whomsoever is defending it. This isn't even to say Mind Control or something of the sort. One cannot have an explicit opinion on any matter through defensive reaction. The perspectives of Marx are not exotic in the sense that they are easily perceived by anyone with a particular set of sentiments, and that this set of sentiments is not only common but may very well be a part of the human experience. Yes, we must suspect that distribution of resources occurs unfairly and that, if we aren't making a conscious effort to do so, the distribution of those resources will transform into a format where the cost of engaging in the pursuit of resources results in access to fewer resources than having no pursuit at all.

Partisanship hurts us all with its capacity to erode the potential of deep and insightful discussion on the ideas themselves and render them into opportunities of proving semantic error on the part of a presumed political adversary, or someone who thoughtlessly took a position congruent to an adversary. The fact is, though any time minds may differ in political opinion, it is foolish to assume the other is partisan unless they wear their insignia proudly, which is itself a warning sign.

Of course, once you have a partisan, you have an agitator whose goal is some form of collectivism. You must always maintain the possibility that no party speaks for the people. If you fail to maintain this condition, then the only alternative is to suppose that there can be a position that can be blindly adhered to without having to perform the intensive work of reviewing the landscape and its players, which is a march to irrelevance insofar as yielding utility towards new thought and evolution of society in a truly progressive sense.

## Limit of Potentiality
Yes, to be truly progressive, one must maintain that information and knowledge is never fully attained, and that one can expect prosperity through attainment of knowledge as limits and constraints are removed. Unfortunately, the partisan allows for the supposing that their party already does this implicitly simply by being dominant in the political arena. Furthermore, it allows for the normalization of accepting that a movement fulfills the premise of its language by virtue of the words alone.

The true progressive is not found in the party, and does not adhere to the method of addressing complex subjects through partisanship. The true progressive understands that controlling language leads to precisely the opposite destination: constraint on knowledge and prosperity.

## Burning Bridges
Sometims it can seem that one's refusal to participate is itself an aggressive action to burn a bridge, but one must understand what the activity one opts out from truly is and what it required. If that activity is only superficial and carries with it the circumstance of denying one's own ability to see ideas be utilized and examined, then one's ideas and prsopect for understanding and learning is being hindered and, though this is bad enough on its own, it reinforces a mechanism for avoiding the exploration of ideas, forcing the acceptance of a standard of mundane or even malicious limitation.

The other benefit of a burnt bridge is that something is unmistakenly communicated. If other forms of communication are not working and the other party continues to play aloof as to the seriousness of the situation, and the degree to which their response and consideration is failing to meet a minimal standard necessary for progress to be made in our collaborative advancement of understanding, then there will no longer be any confusion about it. Regardless of details, they are no longer desirable as a partner with which to improve udnerstanding on matters that are important. If their reaction is to propose that these matters simply be avoided because of your failure to tolerate them or interpret them correctly, then not only does it further reinforce the assessment of them not being a sufficient partner, but it suggests that they believe their political preferences will reign supreme in this world, and that your participation need not be relied upon.

If there are things which they have not grasped and if they continuously fail to demonstrate empathy while always occupying your time, all while declaring that views which challenge theirs are easy to ignore and easy to avoid taking seriously, then it is clear that empathy is something they may enjoy for use as a manipulable buzzword, without themselves having maintained a faculty for generating it.

## In Come the Groomers
Now we find the media and tech conglomerate are coming together to work against the effective defining and applying of this aptly wielded term. Queer Theory. CRT and, in some cases, global plitical movements which demand a form of collectivism have been discovered to be grooming people, especially children, to be recruited into their ranks or for their purposes. Grooming in that they are being coaxed into adopting a politically actionable opinion, position or identity at the behest of someone biased towards promoting a corresponding ideology and that it is done incrementally through steps that are themselves not strong representations of the ultimate view. Furthermore, that these ideologies might be at odds with the perspective of the child's parents, are done without the parents' knowlege and that they are sometims done with the attitude of avoiding its discosure to parents. Lastly, that it is done in such a way that takes advantage of the impressionable nature of the child and that it might make the child susceptible to predation. This predation is not limited to one form, but detractors, naysayers and groomers will cliam that none of this is substantiated as to be expected except in the case that their one deflective item of focus can be unmistakenly discerned. This usually involves classic rape, and even if that were to manifest they would seek to convolute the context and complicate it as much as possible by bringing to attention concepts of pleasure-based sex, non-traditional forms of romanticization, inter-generational love, consent, and so forth. If they do this, they are definitely child-groomers and possibly even pedophiles.

## Religion
Queer Theory follows the Theology of Marxism in centering man as the creator and adopting a subject creates object philosophy. This is perfectly in line with Covidism and might be considered as an extension of the very same phenomenon. In both cases, we are imposing a new standard for what constitutes an acceptable type of human experience; with Covidism, it is that humans should not be subject to respiratory infections, should not inccur illness that is transmissible, should not have to worry that their lives can be inconveniced from a pathogen, and for Queer Theory it is that humans should not be expected to exist in a way which is informed by or at least limited by biological truth. The fact of having a biology which dictates how we develop is a form of oppression and we should all band together to eliminate categories of any kind, because there should be no limits between what thoughts one can have and what one can become.

It's easy to remember plenty of plain, feel-good, encouraging slogans which remind one of what is possible / what one can accomplish if they try, and those who do remmeber might be inclined to accept a prposal for synthesis. But, remember the key difference of how people are affected: if one's failure to fit in needs to be seen as an accomplishment, in the sense of having special knowledge, they now have accomplished progressive movement on the path of gnostic enlightenment. That is very different than inspiring hard work.

## The Good
When the subject moulds the world in the image of itself. They choose their ideology, which they believe they are interpreting correctly, and then they proceed to evaluate whether it is propgated in the world, noting it as evidence that the wrold is becoming more "good" or less "evil".

## Still Masked
The ultimtae token of slavery, because it is so easy to adopt and it immediately places you within a group of its adaptors who will be resonating their emotion. This emotion is one of welcome in the sense of having a commonality implying related interests or concerns as well as a mechanism to help one another supect reinforced rationale without having to actually produce or review one. Lastly, it helps to "print" ? the circumstance of witnessing one another whos eactions imply a logical predicate that the other hopes for and relies upon; they are each one another's implicit evidence for that which they would fear might not be true.

## White Karens
Like guard dogs, they sic on anyone who might question the current establishment order, but what makes the affair so insufferable is that their story, told as a rationale for supporting the established order (incumbents, massive financial oligarchs, systems of ever-increasing conflicts of interest expanding actions, barriers previously unmanageable), is one of undermining and disrupting established order. This works because the evalutaion and ascription of sin is now performed along a set of dimensions deemed most essential to theories of structural determinism. You can now easily find that both you and your neighbour are evil oppressors, therefore you better be concerned whether you might be called out on your role as oppressor, excluded from community, attacked by retaliatory forces, or deemed as having failed to do your part to offset the harms. What is one to do?

Well, if you are a pop-culture aficionado, you are constantly bombarded with instructions and threats, and if you hadn't already been acting accordingly, and all of your favourite cultural activities would have become unbearable and threatening to your down psychological state.

Or, perhaps you find the rationales themselves compelling. Perhaps, you think it makes sense that children of families with certain skin colour can be predicted and understood as having behaviour and beliefs that come most fundamentally for reasons that are intrinsic to the skin colour.