“Anger comes from individual to society, not due to there being something wrong with the latter, through due to a certain factor of loneliness through which the former feels. Loneliness is the trigger, the fuel, to rage. When people are told to be victimized in their strain, as the only sorts to be suffering, it is never themselves they look upon, anymore. That is loneliness. Loneliness is to burn down the world, so that one’s own bubble can have more room.”– Modern Romanticism
Philosophy – “Love, the Epitome of Logic” – 6/12/2020
“How can we neglect love, when the seeking of knowledge causes the stain of ignorance, upon whatever was dissected, was destroyed? For it is only that love is neglected, or it is only that God can be turned away. It is because love, itself, is not something to ever neglect, on its own.”– Anonymous
It is that knowledge can only benefit itself, upon existence. It is that love benefits others, through its non-existence. For that love does not neglect, makes it a non-existence, only when we turn away from it, when it cannot turn away from us. What knowledge gains, is granted from flesh, dissected and deconstructed through analysis. Physical matter, is what knowledge takes advantage of, whereas love will keep things whole. It is to say that knowledge is only ever gained through ignorance, while love is only ever given from the knowledgeable one for the one dissected by such ignorance. For ignorance is the sight of something torn apart, deconstructed. It was the touch of ignorance, for the knowledge of someone else, that caused destruction.
When love can be the thing to keep something whole, there was never a need for ignorance to have dissected something. It is that love keeps things whole, that it represents logic, when the most logical of things to do is keep something whole so there is never a need to solve what is broken. In merely keeping something from falling apart, that is love, becoming what logic is, at its core.
Base a ruined marriage on the love being lost, for that is because love would be the only ingredient to keep the marriage upright and stable. The touch of ignorance, the cause of destruction, is always for someone else’s benefit, for someone else’s gain. It is just as divorce is for the gain of both former husband and wife. Love does everything it can to protect, making there be no need to destroy something for knowledge’s sake.
Quote – “A Reason to not Defend yourself” – 6/2/2020
“When one defends themselves, they believe themselves to not be at fault. When one does not see themselves at fault, they see others to be at fault. There is only the internal or the external. There is no third option, no middle-ground. There is only the one or the other.
Therefore, a belief, or an ongoing promotion, that a person should guard themselves will cause such a person who follows this, to find all others needing to defend them, too. For if they believe themselves to not be at fault, they will believe themselves to be perfect. Thus, they will hold themselves up as someone to be praised, rather than scorned or criticized. They do believe themselves at fault, because they are never internal in their words. For not being internal in their words, they never see what is wrong with themselves, despite feeling that bitter string during all days. Such a negligence only embeds the pain. They believe themselves and all others of their kind, to be the only ones deemed worthy to be critical of all else, except for themselves. Such people are always the self-loathing sorts, defenders of themselves, and will be the ones to criticize what is wrong with the world, never seeing what is wrong with themselves.
In hindsight, they will be the defenders of the world’s problems, never a solver of what is actually wrong.”– Anonymous
Excerpt – “A Fine Line for Justice” – Chapter One – “The Danger of Blurring Lines” – 6/1/2020
A common human way with our Nature, is to believe one should have a choice in the matter, to possess freedom for what one can do. Though, in the creation of choice within a social realm, there is never a chance to do what is correct, for a world.
All such means is that a person of personal desire, had never maintained an effort to be beyond that. Such a person, who believes in personal desire, had thought of their way as unique and different from another. It is to be proven, in these words, that to be “diverse” only means to be divided, and numerous in these choices.
It is to mean that a person who desires a choice for their lives, will never do what is right for someone else. Continuous promotion of choice involves continuous promotion of the self. It is a psychological influence, to guarantee the freedom of a choice, when a choice cannot help but to be the thing that rejects another’s advice. For there are those who desire their own voice, their own skin, their own identification. In doing this in continuous repetition, we forget another’s voice, another’s skin, and believe we cannot possibly identify with someone else. As it has already been stated, the source of division is this, in the promotion of a diverse world.
Why can we not say we are alike someone else, that we have the same voice, the same beginning and the same ending? It is because we want a choice, that such commonalities are neglected.
To have a choice means to be freedom, to embrace the self wherever only the self yearns to be.
Though, in the matter of lines being blurred, especially between the zones of Justice and Vengeance, we are, as instinctual enough as desirous, more-so inclined to fall upon the latter. We desire, as humans, though through effort, we are meant to reject what we want, in favor of what another person needs. What we create of any social realm, that falls along the definition of convenience, will have a populace motioning towards that convenience, that ease, never desiring to work for a need.
For to provide for someone else, be that the family of a worker, makes a person have no choice in a matter. In having no choice, one does the right thing by believing more in the need to preserve, over the desire to have something solely for the self.
In the want to have something solely for the self, one destroys all that is around, since their desires have been born on the willingness to take part in negligence. To neglect, means to never raise. To never raise, and to be on the side of destruction, versus preservation, a person will inevitably deconstruct, versus construct. What such a population will live upon, will thrive upon, is their own dirt and sweat. They will be emitting the same oils from the pores in their flesh, without the work.
A Man’s Personal Thought – “My Reign in Guilt” – 11/16/2019
As a man, my reign is within guilt, and guilt is my protocol. I am no disbeliever to guilt, no stranger to it, as it hangs over my head like a plastered cloud, being stuck upon some unseen surface.
I receive the opportunity to not achieve, though to cover guilt. Behind me, there is a whirlpool of disaster, and I am the cause of it.
I wonder always why a woman is envious, of my mind? She, so fragile and gentle, so unbroken as she should be, is envious of this? This mentality to shroud guilt with yet another fortunate mistake?
A “fortunate mistake”, as it is rightly named, is not where a woman belongs. My reign in guilt is only to never see behind. I would only ever drown my pain, what I see so close, being the past, in a tide of wine. For Bacchus would be my friend, my closest neighbor, were a woman not ever present.
Her face, her love, and her heart, where I become lost in its endless veins of infinite paths, where I see emotion after splendid emotion; and, I am met with a new task. To not create chaos in her heart, to not turn her heart into yet another storm of my making. Not another disaster, with her. Not her.
Beauty is so delicate, and I have crushed much.
Why her? Why would she want this? The guilt in knowing what should be protected from her loving eyes? That is not for her.
I am a man, with a pain called “guilt”, and it is an instinct to be guilty, and to feel this guilt surround my form.
Love denies the present, and makes up for the past.
It is what I shall do for her.
Poem – “A Step Back in the Right Direction” – Romance – 10/30/2019
Fall upon me, now,
And un-shield your eyes,
That sparkle from the dew of a newest morning,
A cry for aid, when you came astray,
Feeling pain as you did upon the birth
Of our love.
Your mind is a curse for your heart,
Your heart is a feast for my mind.
Your flesh is the place where I part
The breasts, to see where I may carve,
The distinction between love’s breath in time,
For all that I could rewind.
I am in love with a mirror,
Two delicate eyes that reflect
The most diseased memories.
God would raise me to his height, so that I could know,
All the pain of the world, that surely grows.
Denial is a place for the most comforted,
And the most suffering.
I am in love with a mirror
That reflects a distant past.
It glares upon me, in heated romance,
It pours upon me, pain after growing pain.
Do not die for me, as I take this final retreat,
A step backwards in the right direction,
To a place I know well,
A place I do recognize,
As an area kept in Hell.
A Remembrance – “Three Layers to a Human” – Philosophy on Life – 10/20/2019
Three layers, meaning, three separate areas that can become three focuses for a world, filled with creatures identical to “intelligent beings” called Homo-sapiens…
And these three layers are:
Bottom layer: Death.
Middling layer: Flesh.
Top layer: Love.
In a current world obsessed with “liberation” and “equality”, we’ve changed simply the words for the three layers, though they mean the same.
The changed words become:
Bottom layer: Poverty.
Middling layer: Truth.
Top layer: Reason.
There are still the same meanings to each layer, and no matter how many words are added, the original meaning stays the same. That is because the original meaning is still operating outside of human control. That is to say that there are forces at work, in which humans, too stupid and too arrogant, cannot possibly control, without inevitably playing into the hands of both fate and Nature.
When we disbelieve in God, we begin to look for truth…
In such a scenario as a “disbelief in God” makes human change the word “love” into the word “reason”, and everything below “reason” becomes “everything useful”. Though, God, if He is an existence, would never see something beneath him as any alike a “practical application” for something else. To “take care” would mean “to care”, and would also mean to apply the emotion of love to keep something durable. And, to see something or someone beneath oneself as “useful” would turn the tool eventually broken, if there is no emotion of love involved.
And then, when we begin to find that humans are, as well, just as “untrustworthy” as God, we begin to long for love’s return. Though, since we’ve already taken the step down from Heaven to be upon Earth, we’d also take an additional step down from Earth to be in Hell. This is to say that we’ll now identify more with animals, find compassion more in things we are meant to eat. As well, it is among paupers who find themselves looking upwards, not at the sun, by at the passersby so they may offer money.
In a world “filled with distortion”, it is only because of our immense compassion for animals that is not the cause of that distortion, though is a result of our distrust towards humans.
We first distrusted God, until we began to believe in humans as “realer” than what we called an “imaginative being” like God.
Though, if God is “for the imagination”, then the same would be true that the imagination is for God. That, those who would create, would be those involved in the sciences, studying movement, as an observer, as even a voyeur, much like how God is written to do the same. That is, he looks, he watches, though does he “make use” of those he loves? In fact, does any human “make use” of those that they love?
Do we, as humans, not as gods, but as mortals, ever look upon an infant we’ve created, and dare to perform an experiment on a child? We might, were we to be sadistic, because sadism is revolved around what is going to be seen beneath the flesh of the naked infant.
Therefore, to “make use” of someone beneath someone who has taken God’s place, would be to see what beneath the flesh, which is death.
And yet, such people are still humans, as only their arrogance will ever compel them to state that they have “replaced God” in such a way.
From these three layers.
Bottom layer: Death.
Middling layer: Flesh.
Top layer: Love.
Love protects the flesh, so that it doesn’t stray towards the layer of death.
Would “reason” protect the flesh, leave the flesh unscathed, or would reason only desire to “make use” of the flesh, so that ennui and apathy causes that person, who is being used, to decline towards death?
We would ask this of a hospital, which is the focus for that hospital, that if either their goal is to “make use” of the flesh, or to “love the flesh” as they apply the necessary medicines for a cure to the ailment. That is, how does a hospital think, when it means to cure, should it ever mean to cure, in the way of preserving life, that which the emotion of love is meant to do?
Flash Story – “A Book Beside a Pillow” – Romance – 9/13/2019
“Where loss encourages the will for survival, a human will each believe that there is more to do, more to gain, and more for the stride. Such is how life functions, in contrast to the forced contentment from death. Or, in love? How does love also evoke the stillness of gratitude?”
She is the waltzer to this afternoon, embedded in a fervency alike the notes played upon the piano; and even he, a man with his fingers so engraved in the keys, as he seems to touch them a lot like the skin of a certain woman. And that woman, is the mover and the waltzer. She is the memorable beauty to strike bleakness out of the depressed gentleman, and cause him to rumble from the new light founded in his morose heart.
What is the maker of the memory? It must be the woman, the “she” spoken as either the “she” or the “her” around the atmosphere of the parlor, about nighttime, when guests are caked in candlelight.
The woman of any newest memory is from that moment, locked in the mind, the branching and stretched blooded veins, and nothing is represented as straight. It is said, or has been said, that a woman enhances herself in Lesbia, before straightness is met through a man. And what else better describes beauty than from Lesbia, the female-to-female, when the heart is cradled by a heart; and that is to speak on the term “possibility” when in the realm of that exact organ.
A heart, the realm of the unlimited, is where this certain woman, whose name is Beatrice, forms a curve with an arm.
So alike the curves from hips, the curves from Beatrice’s mouth, and the whispers spoken in the idleness of this afternoon, given from her cherished emotion. She walks to where the pianist has accompanied himself in his notes, to next accompany himself in her fragrance.
It entices him to an extent, so that in length, he turns his head towards her features, that are, at this moment, fluid and fervent in the many folds from eyelids and pouting lips. Her lashes are brought down to the lower lid, and remain there for but a moment; as then, her cheeks spread across them the crimson current, bleeding an emotion similar to stark resonation, the feeling of association with belonging; as then, her lips are curled to the area beneath her nose, with nostrils that find her scent to be, as well, pleasing.
Novel – “Signs of a Man in Love” – Chapter II – WIP – 8/30/2019
“Beauty rapidly falls apart when it is not sustained by the support of love.”
“I had loved a woman,” says this man named Joshua, his feet carrying his body towards a certain uncertainty. He had indeed loved, bared himself wonderfully to a child of his own worship. He had been God upon a time, and gave birth to his pride; the flesh of his own flesh, that is, and made himself smile. Has one ever envisioned God to ever smile?
God is not a thing of power, were ever power to be attained as is, because power has no creation of itself without a viewing of a creation’s suffering; and as the Atheist would adore their emotion of denial, for whatever compiled list of emotions creates denial, sees God as the one to ignore suffering. A compelling sight of ignorance is drawn into the Atheist’s own mind, to say that God ignores suffering. A child, much alike to Joshua’s once-beloved he beheld for himself, is never a child for long. Much alike how Joshua abandoned his beloved, God abandons Mankind for their independence. The pitiful anger an Atheist throws to the sky finds itself nowhere fast, only swimming in the deepest darkness of a limitless universe; and that anger is only a depiction of a proof, that to be angered at God for his supposed refusal to cleanse suffering, proves the angered one to be eternally the child. Therefore, in comprehension of this, God becomes only ever-so powerful, in sight of suffering, in hopes of its thwarting of God’s own throne, in expectation of perhaps a certain someone to die and then ascend.
Joshua had abandoned a woman to her independence, and many movements have encouraged this, for a woman to abandon love, and abandon unity with a man; though, has God ever held the hands of a wife?
What has God built to destroy besides everything he sees with eyes that so many will believe to disbelieve does not exist, as such eyes are seemingly never opened? The sun, and what of the sun, besides warmth, and the warmth we find to open our own eyes after a night’s period of sleep?
Oh, love; such an emotion that awakens; as such occurs for a woman when she is kissed. Beautiful beauty. Beautiful recognition. Flesh rises when it is kissed, and denial only ever surfaces when depression strikes a man down to kiss the soil.
A man is in love with death, not in the act of stooping to kiss, though in the act of loss; to be a pauper is when a man would weep. And Joshua has lost, though of his own accord. A society of Democracy is now London’s breath upon the cold skin of this melancholy town. It is a society of eternal choice, of the uncertainty that comes from never an answer to show itself.
Beauty rapidly falls apart when it is not sustained by the support of love.
A man is in love with a woman when he desires to root her. In place, her desire for exploration is cast aside, and every dance she yearns for becomes wrapped in silence; a dance in silence, that is, and her place becomes the roots for a man’s belonging for her. A man is not in love with a woman when he desires to see her set free. In place of that rooting, she is married with Satan, or deception, and she makes her mark never in sight of God, but of countless opportunity.
For a woman is more-so the opportunist than ever a man was; and a modern realm for a world, especially for Joshua’s hometown of London that has embraced Democracy, has only sought to utilize the essence of the opportunist, so that work is rapid.
A thirst, a burning, a quenching; for the fires of love cannot be quenched, though the first of lust burn out on their own. What has a woman, for any world, in any society, desire for herself? Is it eternity in the arms of a truthful someone, or is it the many placed beams of support, that raises tall a fragile skyscraper, to indicate revolution and endless change?
How long will Joshua continue to travel?
To walk, upon the toes that were once there to see their cleansing in the running waters of a bathtub. And now, to merely stumble over the airy nature of his own depression; and such depression that is a past thrown forward.
He raises his head, during this moment, to espy the walkway before him. A marvelous sight of complete loneliness seems to be now his future.
For what has a man to do with freedom? It is a nothingness to him.
A man becomes the slave, while a woman becomes the asset, for a world that speaks of politicians as saviors.
Politicians have been the leaders of corruption, and nothing more. Love is the only weapon to cleanse; and from this factual sliver of evidence to what has been toyed with, strangled and buried, where are the books with the opening pages to remind all of it?
With what Joshua, as well, espies before him, is a river. In the metaphorical sense, it is another way to depict that road of loneliness, previously mentioned. Though, it is also a way to describe a place of uncertainty.
Of a man and his uncertainty: it is the sight of a globe rotating on the spine of disorder.
Love a man, and he will find himself to make a decision; and to take that decision will reflect upon him as himself never dwelling in eternity to make a decision; and this means, that should a man ever take a moment to decide, he will be forever in love. Though, should he ever take an eternity to decide, then he will be forever in Hell.
Offer freedom through love, to the man, and nothing more. Offer freedom to a woman, and she roams, and nothing more; or a woman will find herself crawling in filth, and still believe herself to hold power.
“I am death,” says a woman, whose power enables her to be that opportunist, repeatedly mentioned, now. “I am love,” says a woman, whose power enables her to cleanse the blood from the responsible man.
Joshua quits his walking, finally.
He has found something that strikes his interest to heart.
Volume One/Chapter I – “The Devorah of Reims” – “A Limited Love” – 6/25/2019
“Her yearnings are infinite…”
Empathy is the emotion of the personal. The snow and its cold are where people are buried. Beneath its flakes, there is the death of where people sleep. We have noticed of the towns and cities that are spread across the earth, that sympathy is now the emotion used for when one deserves to be equal. In death, we are equal. In love, we are equal.
Like a flower that failed to bloom, and remained as a bud, there is a certain woman with the name, Katharina, only about as beautiful as the black orchid, grown in Asia. She prowls these streets in France, in the city of Reims, cradling a child of no name.
In love, we are equal. For God, we are equal. A scientist will dig for truth, because a scientist has no choice but to see their own feet. They refuse to be blinded by God. It is because they believe God holds no truth.
The lack of a reality makes either denial or yearning.
Truth is the flesh, separated from God, or love, so that what is noticed is only the body. As Adam and Eve, who were once nude, before betraying God, their bodies were risen from the soil, and from death, or the soil, came the life that we behold for beauty. Beauty, which is the truth or the flesh, made shocking, when exposed. Katharina is a woman of no love.
“Little to no love…”
Without love, she cares little for what occurs about her. That which surrounds her holds no interest to her wandering stare. She is in love with no purpose for love, besides the cradled infant in her arms. An infant of no name, and certainly no surname.
There are flakes that descend and fall to land upon her nose and cheeks. They lay there against the warm skin, to then melt and blend themselves in with the blackened tears that wash from Katharina’s eyes.
She is surrounded by the stares of the people of Reims.
She is surrounded by their eyes.
Glares that have witnessed her deformed appearance. An appearance that is stricken by grief. A loss to which has touched her heart and has tainted the ruby orb into black coal. Metaphorically, this would mean that there is something she flees from; and as a woman will leap from one thing to the next, she will soon return to the center.
Outside of a woman’s home, there is the world. It is because a woman’s emotions, as important as they are to her, branch throughout the world as temptation. Femininity and temptation make business thrive. Temptation creates the fuel of lust to make beauty an alterable thing. A changeable thing, because love cannot ever be used. The limitations in love become an awareness to any human, when it is simply stripped away.
The home of a woman is the heart, itself. The love; and the streets away from it, are the veins. Are we as one body? As a species, we are as one body, and the roads that led out of Eden, were endless.
God has no wife, because He has no home, besides Heaven. For a man will make his home, a woman’s heart. God would have to make his home, as everyone’s heart.
Temptation is for flesh. Love raises flesh. After love is abandoned, there is flesh exposed to the cold. Warmth no longer makes flesh warm. A shelter, a home, a shield, or an encasement, makes the flesh warm, through love. Modesty is the love. Beauty is the flesh. When love is gone, there is flesh exposed; when flesh is torn through, the human has died.
Katharina’s heart is the cold stone withdrawn from the evermore cold river and held close to her face so that she may examine its appearance. If winds run against it, it would not become colder.
Love is the emotion of modesty.
Love does not show itself, so therefore, God would not show Himself.
To the woman, and her cravings or yearnings, would a man show himself, as God is asked to show Himself? A craving, a saving, and a woman who pleas to the Lord above. In turning away, woman is betrayed by God, or a man, and beauty is revealed.
A woman’s pride, or even the downfall of any love that centered herself, comes by way of following those veins throughout a city.
She walks, Katharina, down an endless road, because she has nowhere to turn, and no time to cease her pacing.
“A vein is as any other…”
Her face holds the appearance of possession.
Possessed by the limitations in love. She has exposed her warm flesh, no longer warm to the shelter of a home, and open before the descending flakes of snow. Like a canvas drawn with a nude for reveal, shock and controversy are there for viewers.
She walks with the infant enclosed in her cradling arms.
Her only love is the world.
The roads are endless.
She follows them like the veins from her heart. When a woman moves her arm, she moves a vein. When a woman moves her leg, she moves a vein. When a woman desires freedom, she doesn’t desire love.
Love freezes, encases, and imprisons a woman in a home. For a man, love traps him to the study and examination of a woman. She may see what she sees, but he cannot see anything. To pierce his eyes, would be simple. To pierce her eyes, would take raw masculinity.
What is Katharina?
She is a woman who wanders. The road she wanders is as any other vein, as the sympathy to which is offered upon a passerby. A road and its paupers are met by the sympathetic Saint.
Katharina offers a degree of sympathy to a pauper who passes her. Though, as he passes on the endless road, the sympathy acts as the road. No intimacy is shared between them. The road is as any other vein. The sympathy for the pauper treats the pauper as any other pauper.
What would hurt through empathy?
Everything would hurt.
And the pain would oftentimes be mistaken for pleasure.
Dialogue – “A Sympathetic Government” – A Debunk to the Idea of a Caring Nation – A Debunk to Socialism – 6/24/2019
Q: You say that sympathy is the only utilization of any form of government?
A: It is correct.
Q: Why is that?
A: There used to be a time when the common American would empathize, not sympathize, with their nation. Understand, this is purely a psychological argument. This was during the time when only men were allowed to storm on foreign soil, during a heated war. Psychologically speaking, men went to war to “free their lands” and this means to keep the weak free; that is, to keep women free. Empathy was in their hearts, and such battle cries were there for inspiration. What America’s founding fathers fought for, was for the government to fear its people, not for the people to fear their government. When the people benefit the nation, the people love the nation, through empathy. When the government benefits the nation, the government cannot understand the individual, or individualism, so therefore, the common American is neglected of their ability, which relates to their ability to work and prove themselves.
Q: You mean that when a population of people use empathy for their nation, then the people are seeing the nation as a one?
A: That is correct. A population of people who see their nation as a one, will be the same as an individual viewing another individual as a one, and never part of a group. A nation’s government, whose leadership views its people as a one, will again, never see its people for individuals. Individualism is left to die, and the government becomes the one.
Q: And this means that the people will, though unknowingly, empathize with their government?
A: For the same reason that a child will look after his or her own mother, in return for the shelter that the mother had offered, by her home, then such a government is therefore, seen as a parental figure. Purely psychological, again, and for a population of people to see their nation, not its leaders, as offering shelter, will mean for the population to empathize and love their nation. This all forms the difference between submission to a government, and submission to a nation, and its individuals. The government would have no choice but to submit to its army of citizens.
Q: And if the people submit to their nation’s leaders?
A: That would be the same as such a nation of individuals remaining as children. Every American that loves animals more than people, subconsciously believes in the innocence that they, themselves, long for, by way of being ignorant. To know nothing, and let a war rage on, or to allow their home to burn, and not react, is epitome of American apathy. As children, and their leaders as a “parental figure” means for such Americans to never mature and become as intelligent as their leaders.
Q: And to the men who protect their nation, or protect their women?
A: When men no longer protect women, it is a singularity of people, a neutrality of people and their inspiration, to ever want to be raised to the height of the nation’s leaders; and the men who once protected women, now protect themselves. It is psychological, because when men protected women, soldiers protected their nation; and this means that men kept their women free, and soldiers kept their land free. The fertility of a woman and her place as a mother, and a nation with its place as a Motherland, makes freedom necessary for the nation and its people, not for the leaders.
Q: Anything else?
A: The basis behind Socialism and its creation of poverty is a war between development and poverty. This is a war between the Primate Brain and the Reptilian Brain. A war between the primate and the reptile. A war between development and underdevelopment. A war between the mind and the heart. A war between leadership and Liberalism. A war between the rich and the poor, as it has always been, for millennia. Two singularities, with one who are rich and the other who are poor, where the rich grow taller and the poor die off.
A Critique on Feminism – “The Destruction of Marriage” – Dialogue
Q: You have mentioned that despite Feminism believing itself to better marriage for women, that it was inevitably to destroy the entirety of marriage?
A: It is correct, because Feminism had a main ideal, and that ideal was discontent. The essence behind love is to make a human not want for more, other than the one who they’ve devoted themselves. Love does not make a human want more, and because Feminism has made a woman want more, then marriage inevitably would have succumbed, as it has done.
Q: Could you elaborate on why love is never to be met with discontent?
A: It is because marriage is there as a lock, and bound together, no two of the ones who are married should ever part from the other. Through the marriage, the ‘leaving of the house’ initiates the process of longing, and the forcefulness of patience. A man lacks the most patience over a woman, and his inevitable ways with discipline, does not make him the patient one. Over a man, a woman will listen to words, and words entice the utmost out of patience. Love cannot, or rather, should not be met with discontent, due to how love operates in the sense that love offers rest. Love offers relief, away from the stresses of life.
Q: And on why Feminism would have inevitably succeeded in destroying marriage, and even love?
A: It is because the most discontent find ways to make use of things. And the most useful of things, are in fact, the most useless of things. This is love, the most useless thing, because one is not meant to look upon family through lust. Discontent makes the human want more, and in wanting more, one makes use of tools. When in lust, a human is out of love, and in the process of wanting more, and that is either a child, or escapism away from stagnancy. Creation, that is, to make art, and therefore, the artist is always the one who is discontent. A world that wishes to create further stagnancy is a world that is seeking the other form of equality.
Q: What form of equality is that?
A: There are only two forms of equality: love and death. Love, as the former, is the higher equality. Death, as the latter, is the lesser equality. Meaning, love is raised, and death is lowered; or rather, love raises, and death lowers. A skeleton, when relating to death, is just as any skeleton, by the bones. Through flesh, and through love, we recognize life, the breathing, and the emotions, because we abandon the dead, save for the memories of their life. Through flesh, a human will recognize their beloved, just as a skeleton, were it to walk, would recognize another skeleton as the same, and be a slave. It is so, because a slave has no way to distinguish his misery from another slave. In today’s world, death has grown to be the new form of equality, because truth, or a woman, or flesh, is never raised. This is Socialism, because death, or poverty, is the only other form of equality, besides a love for God, or the love for a husband, being the love for a father.