intellectualammo

Rand is still being talked about in regards to politics/economics because of Ryan. Though one can find lots to criticize in this long entry, she's still being talked about: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/paul-ryans-budget-ayn_b_2878815.html

I guess the goal is to find a person you want to be with that has all (or to be realistic, some of the most important) traits you desire Exactly. And when one cannot find ANY such thing with the ones around one, whether it be because of those others, or because of something about themselves that they cannot be in a relationship, then you have to take matters into your own hands. Artificial body parts don't cut it for me. A whole artificial human, does very nicely. One can go buy a doll, or toy, or choose to settle with the women or men around one, sex for hire, "fuck buddy", etc. For me, dolls are the best alternative. People get them for various reasons, one can see that in online doll communities, many take pics (I have over a thousand up online), and it becomes a lifestyle for some. I had so much more fun with dolls than simply trying it with a toy. A Fleshlight does nothing forme, unless in a mannequin. A Cobra Libre would do nothing for me. I want a whole artificial human, as I want a whole woman, not just pussy. Lips, ass, etc.

You brought up sex toys. For me, I can't use them alone, as in use an artificial vag. To me, like with artificial dick, I see them like a dismembered dick, where's the rest of the person? Only way I can use the vag is like cutting a hole in a mannequin and inserting it into the hole a certain way. Or buy a doll that already has a built in vag or area for a vag. I want the whole package, a whole person, not just pussy. Then you can kiss, touch, scent, dress, make them into artificial human companions. Kira didn't kiss just artificial lips, she kissed lips on them. What those statues meant to her. One can project/fantasize with sex dolls, but I can't with a real woman, because I can't get past who they are as a woman, woman, you know, you can't fake or ignore that, at least I can't. I can go so far as to try to fantasize that I am in a happy loving relationship, etc. with the doll.

Mdegges wrote: I believe that anything that prevents you from entering into real relationships, or causes you to be isolated and lonely, is not good for your health. For me it's entirely contextual. I am unable to enter relationships with women that do not meet rational requirements, like ones I can't admire, or where there isn't much mutual value affinity, etc. My relationships, how few I was in, were unhealthy, and almost all had some degree of toxicity even. For me, when I see a 4Woods high end sex doll, I'll take her over any real woman around me right now. To me, she's good for my health, not the selection that is around me, which would not, and has not, been. What has been most problematic in my relationships, are the very things, foundational things, they lacked, so they crumbled. If I am unable to build such a foundation with another, then naturally one is single, isolated, and lonely perhaps. See page 34. (75th anniversary edition)

I have been reading We The Living for the third time now. I came across a quote that to me is striking, seeing how I was into Doll Culture for good while: "She climbed to the pedestals of statues in the parks to kiss the cold lips of Greek gods" Why did she do that? I see her preferring them over any man around her. May even have been her first kiss. Now what if someone was to take that even further, sexually speaking? What are your thoughts on that? Say someone who can't bring themselves to being with the women around him, decides to buy a high end sex doll like: American: RealDoll, Boy Toy Dolls, Sinthetics, Ruby13, Private Island Beauties, et al. Anatomical Dolls (Russian) Japanese: 4Woods, Make Pure, Orient Industies Candy Girls, Honey Dolls, et al. (Anyone that wants links to such doll manufacturers and can't find them on their own, let me know, worth looking at to see how real they look) As I have said I was in the online doll communities for some time and had been a doll owner myself. I owned 7, and 3 mannequins. I don't now though. I felt and thought it was a rational alternative to women around me. Safer than say making it with a prostitute, or casual sex, because I just couldn't bring myself to doing that casual sex thing again. So for years I was single, alone, then in my writing I wrote in a way that I had wondered if anyone had ever written like that before, so I did some online research and came upon the story of Pygmalion and Galatea. Then I found doll culture and became fascinated by it, so much so I got really into it. But this is really about why Kira did that, but also if she would have done more... there are male high end sex dolls, too. But I guess such a hypothetical is irrelevant to her, but what about a real person buying them, dressing them, buying wigs, clothes, perfume, jewelry for, much like Pygmalion did, what are your thoughts?

Indeed. It was my first encounter with Socialist Realism genre as I never heard of it before.

Thank you for posting that. I didn't know the jury reached a verdict, I'll have to look more into it.

If I knew what I did now about public education (aka government schools) I'd of been a truant, on principle. Then armed myself against anyone forcing me to attend them. Boy, that would make a nice story for a book. But before I get off topic, for me teachers are not the last people that I would want to see armed, as long as they follow the rules with concealed carry, I don't see any issue.

Yep, I bought it not long after the estore went live. Bought many various electures.

South Dakota to let teachers, et al. carry: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/08/south-dakota-to-let-schools-arm-teachers/comment-page-1/ And from this (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/us/south-dakota-gun-law-classrooms.html?_r=0) :

Night of January the 16th on YouTube! I just found this, so I haven't gotten to watch them yet, but here is the first one: Part 1

Jury deliberation has now begun in this trial.

Ayn Rand says humility is "the rejection of morality" "Discard the protective rags of that vice which you call a virtue: humility" "learn and value yourself" "and when you learn that pride is the sum of all virtues, you will learn to live like a man" Thus Spoke John Galt http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/humility.html Jesus on humility: http://www.pbministries.org/Theology/kohler/kohler_02.htm

Right, and thank you for your contributions auctions to this thread. There is Mich I don't know about in this area. For me, even just fantasizing about tying someone up, or being tied up, (seemingly anything SMBD) suggests to me something might not be right with them, like psychologically and so forth, and I was wondering if objective law would warrant any investigating, or psychological evaluations into such "lifestyles" just based on fantasizes alone, or even engaging in SMBD shit in relationships period.

Night of January the 16th http://www.coastweekend.com/arts/astoria-high-school-performs-ayn-rand-mystery/article_ff4d170a-841f-11e2-a63c-001a4bcf887a.html

And this should be viewed from a mental health standpoint: Staying up late at night, not interested in sex w/wife, etc. So thoughts can get someone into such places, like suicidal thoughts. I wonder, in all the things he wrote, talked, fantasized about, if any of it, could qualify?

Yeah, his thoughts are on trial here, basically. He is charged with accessing a data base, that should be easy for the prosecution to convict him on, which he probably will do 5 years for, but for actually plotting, intending to actually follow through with what he wrote about, will be quite a challenge for the prosecution. He did use real name and photos, and may have even met one of two of them, and so forth, and with accessing the data base, he may have gone beyond just fantasy. For me it's the fantasies alone that disturb me. What kind of man has such fantasies? If we can't convict him for life in prison, what about in a mental hospital or something to that effect? Don't thoughts get people into those?

This is a trial that is going on right now, and I wonder that even if the prosecution was not able to prove that this is an actual blueprint, but was just a fantasy, that that fantasy, as such, how would it be viewed under objective law? Is it cool because of freedom of speech? Or are there legal actions that could be taken simply for having such fantasies? http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=17562584&ref=http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=cannibal cop wiki&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CEEQFjAC&url=http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cannibal-cop-plotted-eat-100-women-feds/story?id=17562584&ei=okUwUcDWCsHG0QHF1oHYDg&usg=AFQjCNF0H9B-nSX_7zjF5ukFdoWJY63T6A&bvm=bv.43148975,d.dmQ Here is more on what's going on in the trial right now: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/nyregion/at-officer-gilberto-valles-trial-a-focus-on-the-line-between-intent-and-fantasy.html?_r=0

The sarcasms intended effect, has no effect on me since I have never seen, nor heard, of that movie before.

No. It's only after I read the novel a second time recently, that I began to question his actions because of a comment Johnathan made elsewhere which got me thinking and I created this topic in order to discuss some things.

Not to me. It actually loses much of its power with me now, after having looked more closely at Roarks actions.

Nope. To me, if he wanted to stick it to the man, he could have made it public that he was able to design Cortlandt, as no other architect was able to, but refuses to have it built on public funds by the government. Then Toohey could work the masses with that one and Roark could have done some kind of speech about it in print or something like that.

I saw Pulp Fiction. I did not get anything positive out of the characters immoral actions. I get nothing positive from Roarks immoral actions he took such as - dynamiting, lying, and the fraud he committed. But yeah, I do get some positive things from the book, despite that.

I agree with the ethical integrity, but thought artistic integrity because of not protecting his work properly, like with a valid contract, etc.

Jonathan wrote: My view is that the novel is about the hero's artistic integrity, not his ethical lapses You wouldn't say that he betrayed it by working on Cortlandt? And by committing fraud in order to? He does say later he should not have done it.