Self Defense: playermatt

Sometimes I feel like I could agree with Innomen, and then he goes batshit crazy the next sentence. It's like, "That makes sense... yes, good point... Ha, I can't believe I'm agreeing with Innomen! Wait. Wait. What the fuck? What the FUCK?" And, sadly, that's only about halfway through the wall of text.

Let me write a (comparatively!) concise version of every essay every written by Innomen, so that you never have to suffer through dedicating two hours of your life to his writings:

I am Innomen, the most original thinker in today's world. My alter-ego is a talking vagina, but forget about that -- I have no issues with women, and I'm definitely not a misogynist. In fact, I envy women! I wish I were a woman. If I were a women, I could have so much power over men, because, as everyone knows, women choose the man; the man never chooses the woman. Never! And I could always be the center of attention, everywhere I go! If only I were a woman... it's so hard being a heterosexual, white male in this matriarchal society. If only I were a woman, I could choose when and with whom to have sex, and I'd never be turned down, because, as we all know, no man has ever turned down a woman for sex. Ever. And I could sleep around all I wanted, with no repercussions at all, because women who sleep around are never vilified in our matriarchal society. If only I were a girl... (sigh) Girls don't know what it's like to be a man, and how hard it constantly is. In fact, did I ever mention that I got beat up in high school? I must be the only person in all of the world who attracted bullies, and, even though it's been over ten years, I still carry those wounds. Let me tell you about each and every bully who ever hurt me, because, let's face it, I'm the important one here. You're here just to be educated or be deprogrammed of your slave-think. I'm here to help you evolve into OH GOD I JUST CAN'T GO ON. I'M STARTING TO GET INSIDE INNOMEN'S HEAD, AND IT'S SCARING ME. AND YET, I CAN'T STOP BECAUSE IT'S CLEARLY UNDER 5000 WORDS. THE AGONY, THE SELF-HATRED, THE FEAR... HELP ME.

This guy is without a doubt my favorite hater for one simple reason. He's me when I was 15. Almost exactly. Its like the time machine paradox for me. I was guilty of every flaw here exposed. And so, what will likely be my final self defense post from stumble upon, given that I'm done producing content for them, barring more blasts from the past, I'm pleased to present my counter argument to this hateful and incorrect review.

Edit: That day I received 3 new reviews of hate, so his was obviously not the last.

First of all, I've been writing my whole life. And a good huge chunk of that body of work is to be found online. He says he dedicated two hours of his life to my “writings” and then complains about the “wall of text”. I'm thinking he had already decided how he felt before he even began reading, if he began reading at all.

I don't blame him really, its a daunting and unpleasant read, because of the daunting and unpleasant subject. But since I'm writing about the foundation of human society, those two traits, if found in relation to this subject at all, should warrant further reading.

Of course, if you're going to make up my position for me, as this young man has down so bluntly, I suppose reading the work isn't needed.

I'm tired of using the word and indeed the concept of strawman, but the repetition is hardly under my control. So long as people chose to argue with their own word rather than mine, I'll continue to point out this fact.

However, if taken as a list of implied arguments, instead as a sarcastic rant, why actually find a critically valuable list of counterpoint to my positions.
So what I'm going to do here is extract those implication to the best of my ability and answer those instead.

Deep down I think if I had met myself when I was 15, I'd have hated the older version, but I would have been fascinated none the less. In order to placate that satisfaction and allow my younger self to save face, I'll respond.

I apologize if I miss the mark with my extracted implications, but thats the price you pay for communicating via sarcasm. Next time figure out what you really mean and say that instead.

So lets get started.

“ My alter-ego is a talking vagina, but forget about that”

The implication being that I'm so obsessed and gender confused that I subcionsioly make my face genitalia.

Well, I will admit that gender roles do occupy a significant portion of my thoughts, but only on a systemic level beyond my personal animal needs. I'm quite comfortable with my body, ,gender and sexuality. I could go on.

“I have no issues with women, and I'm definitely not a misogynist.”

since the entire post is sarcastic, treating phrases as opposites will be common. This is the first such case.

If you seriously believe I hate women then you could not have progressed very far into my “writings”

read the article with woman hating in the title on my blogspot for a complete refutation of the claim that I hate women.

You then go on to imply again that I'm gender confused and wish to be a woman. And that I feel our society is a matriarchy.

Well, again, no, I'm quite comfy having boy parts, and no I don't consider our society a matriarchy My position is that if it were an open matriarchy things would be quite a bit improved. You like many have this lovely mental infection which causes you to make logical leaps it completely wrong directions. In this case the leap from the claim that mating is the most important aspect of social development and that women are the most powerful figure in mate selection and thus mating, to saying that society is ruled by women.

Society is an abstraction given birth to by the mating process, which is controlled by women this does not mean however that society itself is run by women. Far from it, like an abused mother with a gargantuan and aggressive teen, society is run by abusive ignorant greedy men with the fore site of a mayfly, and the morals of a pit viper.

Sure the mother shares a degree of responsibility, if such a thing even exists in the face of various facts about reality, but thats not top say that all social ills can be laid at the feet of women, especially considering that the choices women make in a cold feed back cycle are often controlled by that very society.

“I could choose when and with whom to have sex, and I'd never be turned down, because, as we all know, no man has ever turned down a woman for sex.”

so you think I'm oblivious to the fact that in certain circumstances the male becomes the chooser on a superficial level. Of course males get to choose at times, but only between women who have chosen them. Or women who choose them after being made aware of the fact that they exist as a choice.

This is not the same as claiming that women have never been turned down for sex, far from it, but of course you know all that, you're trolling. You're implying something here that even you don't believe in an effort to annoy me.

Fail. You might have noticed I like written debate, this whole thing is fun for me, I'm on my lunch hour, you're part of my hobby. :)

“And I could sleep around all I wanted, with no repercussions at all, because women who sleep around are never vilified in our matriarchal society.”

no, my position is that women have the authority on a personal level to begin to corrode monogamy, if you had read my work you'd know that I consider myself a champion of equal rights, not just men's rights. The slut player double standard is one of the many things I'd like to see annihilated. I'm well aware of the consequences a woman faces if she frees herself sexually, and wishing to remove those consequences would seem to also serve as an argument against the claim that I'm a women hating gender confused bigot :)

“In fact, did I ever mention that I got beat up in high school? I must be the only person in all of the world who attracted bullies”

First of all there is the implication that I'm supposed to not discuss what happened to me. Second of all is the implication that I can only take issue with a social problem if its a part of my day to day life. Third is the implication that I'm obsessed with my past experience simply because I make mention of it in perfectly relevant contexts, fourth is the implication that for a problem to have merit it must be unique.

Well, one, I'm not ashamed of my life or any of my reactions, my parents taught me from a very early age to not make decisions I would later regret and to grasp the concept that while a decision may have appeared correct t the time it may still be wrong, and that the perfect decision is an illusion. So I'm pretty well without regret.

Two, I use my experiences at the mercy of alpha idiots merely to highlight the duration of the problem and the duration of my thinking about the problem. There is an assumption that in order to know anything you must be 50 and have a degree in it that constantly needs attack. Most of my mention of my past is with an eye towards that sort of explanatory purpose.

Third, I'm well over my experiences on a personal psychological level beyond their impact on the formation of who I am today. In truth I handled what they did pretty well, I never even had nightmares, but I did think a lot about why I was treated as I was, it was a puzzle, and I've always liked puzzles.

And finally, my past is relevant in that I know it continues to happen all over the west. Perhaps everywhere. Anywhere children group, the adults in authority will encourage the males to fight amongst themselves with varying degrees of openness, and encourage the females to choose the strongest among them to desire and, choose the equal among them to actually pair with.

Did it occur to you that I simply care about the experiences of children? If not is that deficiency of imagination honestly my fault?

As a side note, if you can name two of my bullies I'll give you 10$ via PayPal.

“I'm the important one here. You're here just to be educated or be deprogrammed of your slave-think.”

this one is particularly amusing, am I supposed to take a sycophantic tone towards a faceless anonymous reader simply because statistically speaking at least one of them is going to be my superior intellectually or in any other way?

It's my writing on my blog, all about my opinion, and you're attacking my self important perspective? Thats like accusing a marathon running of being in too much of a hurry and overly competitive Have some awareness of the setting man. Do you think I just walk around and lecture people? Opening conversations with “did you know you're a moron?” everything has a time and a place, and this is exactly the time and place for my writing.

I will not speak in eprime simply because you've given up on context and perspective. Besides, the instant I did you'd simply accuse me of being simple minded.

I assume that readers are interested in my opinion when they read my blog. Color me crazy :P

“ I'm here to help you evolve into OH GOD I JUST CAN'T GO ON. I'M STARTING TO GET INSIDE INNOMEN'S HEAD, AND IT'S SCARING ME”

Thats quite interesting because where you stopped is pretty much where the singularity occurs heheh.

I'd stop too, lol.

You actually are in my head to a degree, you just have some slight imperfections in vision. I think you find me threatening because of our similarity. In some ways my mere existence threatens your identity. And I feel your pain. Often time I'll hate in others what I see in myself. But I'm doing better.

Thanks for the banter man, that was a great lunch hour :)

Self Defense: imorgen

Ah, here we go again (he can't mind me linking like that surely, since he spams his own blogs at every opportunity).

It's telling that there are apparently two camps, "those who have asked "Are you really leaving?" and followed it up with kind words", and then "everyone else" aka "you people" (horrible and/or ignorant). The "private" bit does also seem a tad ironic in light of his contacting people, often with huge assumptions, then posting their private responses all in relation to himself.

Oh neat, new word.

I get the point, and I'm sure to some I meet the definition, but allow me to pose a hypothetical relating to the ethic of keeping your mouth shut while exiting.

Lets start with the extremely obvious. I see a bomb hidden under the counter at a crowded bank, the counter reads 5 minutes, I exit silently, the bank explodes killing five. Ethical?

Of course not. But this is hardly a crowded bank and its not like lives are directly on the line. I produce that example simply to illustrate the point that in some situations it is indeed appropriate, perhaps even morally urgent to announce one's exit and reason for said exit, and in others its not.

The question then becomes which is the case here?

My exit of the stumble upon community with regard to providing content and thus profit for them, is based on what I consider to be a destructive attitude towards civil liberty and freedom of expression generally, like the employer who fires everyone who refuses a drug test. Sure its legal, but are there not larger freedom related implications? Think of it like a boycott.

I follow the logic of an employer being able to do as it please on its own private property, and while I disagree with an abstract noun being given the same rights as me, I do understand the position. But the matter becomes ethically complicated when you note that all employers can engage in this behaviors and most people must be employed. Suddenly Corporate law becomes defacto criminal law and if you do not conform you pay your fine for violation of said law in opportunity costs.

My point is that my exit was not merely a gambit for attention to myself, but attention to a series of social problems of which SU policy and the attitude of its most popular posters is merely a symptom.

Innomen as a stumbler identity has in a fundamental way, died. I'll admit that he could rise again, depending only on my mood, but if that's not the case, does he not deserve last words?

There is no deceit here. When I wrote that post I felt that way, and I still do. As I explain in the post I still use the inbox and the send/receive url function. I am automatically notified when I get a new review, as any experienced stumbler knows.

I like blogspot better for the purposes of self expression. It has a clean and easy to use interface, and that's because of course it is made for what I'm doing with it.

It's telling that there are apparently two camps, "those who have asked "Are you really leaving?" and followed it up with kind words", and then "everyone else" aka "you people" (horrible and/or ignorant).

Not at all, and you know better.

The "private" bit does also seem a tad ironic in light of his contacting people, often with huge assumptions, then posting their private responses all in relation to himself.

I respect the respectful. I post what I feel is ethical and relevant. This can take the form of me not caring about what someone thinks, and me caring deeply about what someone thinks.

If a person talks to me and I talk back I own my responses. I have permission to post everything I've ever posted of someone else, even though I don't see any ethical need to acquire said permission. If someone doesn't want me to post their words and my responses, I create a hypothetical version of the conversation with no identifying bits.

You seem reaching, if you read more of my work I'm sure you'll find something easier to tear down if you're looking to troll for whatever reason.

Self Defense: Pigasus

In which our hero Innomen laments the world's failure to grasp the genius of his self indulgent ramblings. He's leaving... well sort of... NO HE'S REALLY LEAVING... he's kind of leaving. Dude, stop saying goodbye and just go. Even money this guy is back posting in 30 days or less.

This kind of obvious misrepresentation coming from people who clearly haven't even read my work is a big part of why posting on SU has become as futile as looking for depth on myspace.

If I choose to return to SU I assure you, your opinion of said action will be even more irrelevant. I'd be glad if something changed my opinion of the community's quality as a whole. Enduring your "I told you so" would be worth a welcome trade.

I also adore how I'm given shit for being sad at people not understanding and thus adopting my position given that in my opinion the only thing I would gain if people did, would be the satisfaction of helping others.

Put that in perspective. I'm hated for being sad at the fact that people are rejecting a way to maximize both the quality and quantity of life.

That fact is why no hater will ever get under my skin.

At most they could conclusively prove me wrong about something at which point I would gladly adapt, since my goal here despite popular misconception is not to defend what I am, but to grow. And that means change.

Having said that, if I appear rigid and unthinking to you, please consider that while I do indeed want to change, maybe I just don't want to change into what you would like.

The one thing all my haters have in common is the in ability to seriously consider the possibility of me being correct.

They are so sure of that not being the case, it is so obvious to them, that they never make any real effort to prove it. Not a single point.

And after two solid years of writing at least three hours a day, its not for a lack of claims.

The reason for that is simply not even contemplated by my haters. I can say that without equivocation because those former haters who had done so, and engaged me in rational debate, typically taught me something while learning something and made a friend.

But I'm sure saying that I like making friends rather than something manly and violent about enemies makes me a loser or something.

*shrugs*

Self Defense: annex10

Pretty constructs do not make you a hero. Your ability to wax philosophic and twist logic into a ladder where only you can be on top makes everything you say of little value, impact, or importance.

Agreed completely.

Good thing I've never claimed the first or engaged in the second.