Men's Memes: Pook on The Da Vinci Code

Thursday, May 04, 2006

Pook on The Da Vinci Code

Written by 'Pook' on my forum:

That the Da Vinci code is full of theological errors is without question. One only has to go to a library and could easily research it themselves within five minutes.

It puzzles me how people can be so uninterested in truth. What good is believing a fantasy? If you are reading about a religion, don't you want to know if what you are reading is correct or not?

I've concluded that people, especially women, are interested primarily in sensation. It is a bestial life where they end up feeling 'good' (for whatever reason). The Da Vinci Code is popular because it produces certain feelings within the readers.

My problem with sacrilege is not only is it unneighborly, it is unproductive as well. You will never see the movie or book industry apply sacrilege with Judaism, Islam, or Eastern religions. Not on the scale of the Da Vinci code.

What I have always admired about religion and good classical philosophy is how thoughts are bended upwards. Today, so many thoughts are bent downward into a psychological abyss. I prefer the concept of sins over the concept of 'disorders' as you can transcend the sin. In the post-Rousseau culture, there is no transcendence. Our entire life is to be nothing more than a glut of the senses.

I 'obtained' a digital version of the Da-Vinci Code. I figured the book would be a good read even if the content was bad (since it did sell 40 million copies). The book is written like a screenplay, and I consider it boring, bland, and quite awful. I consider the book to be torture.

I don't even think most women believe in God. To them, God is just another man who works for them. This version of religion Brown is putting out works more for the women so no wonder mostly women love the book (and do not like being reminded on the realities of it).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Turn of the tide: feminists begin to regret

Cosmopolitan (The women's magazine that urges women to use men for sex) Editor Lorraine Candy has a change of mind and now urges women not to have "Soul-less sex":

"We didn't feel ashamed about one-night stands...this, we thought, is what feminism is about."

70s feminist Fay Weldon now says:

"It is the fault of me and my like, who... got it wrong.

So were we wrong, we feminists, setting women free? The results have been devastating – greater than we ever imagined.

We steamed ahead, changing the world with too little caution, and I hope the future will forgive us.

The pendulum has swung too far over. But it may yet swing back again. Societies, thank God, tend to be self-righting."

"Once a man could look forward to starting a family and the dignity that came from being the provider. Forget it. At best as a man you're decorative, look after the kids and earn a bit sometimes; at worst you're a write-off. Women are elbowing the men out. The boys get anxious, the girls swagger. The male suicide rate goes up, female down. Twenty-eight per cent of us now live in single person households - a lonely and unnatural state - and most of the 28 per cent consist of young men. It is strange that it is left to a woman to suggest, in the normal nurturing way, that men start some kind of movement to promote their gender's status and self-esteem - call it masculinism, brotherism, machoism, what you want - and some mark of the success of the feminist movement, that it needs to be done."

60's feminist Doris Lessing now says:

"It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.

Men seem to be so cowed that they can't fight back, and it is time they did."

An excerpt from an interview with Joan Rivers:

"She's not with the feminists when it comes to matters of the heart. For her, they're to blame for the current parlous state of our relationships, as depicted in these television Shows (Such as Sex in the city) and films. "I saw this coming. You cannot be equal to a man, you cannot make a man feel 'I don't need you' or 'I'll take my sex when I want it'. All these shows are so sad."

Camille Paglia :

"Women have been discouraged from genres such as sculpture that require studio training or expensive materials.

But in philosophy, mathematics, and poetry, the only materials are pen and paper.

Male conspiracy cannot explain ALL female failures.

I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant.

. . . Even now, with all vocations open, I marvel at the rarity of the woman driven by artistic or intellectual obsession, that self-mutilating derangement of social relationship which, in its alternate forms of crime and ideation, is the disgrace and glory of the human species."