WHEELER

Socrates and Plato both grew during their carreer in Philosophy. Dan mentioned that Xenophon recorded Socrates younger days as a flaming homo. But in the later dialogue of Plato, Plato has Socrates denying a homosexual union. I believe Socrates grew out of it. People do change.

The early dialogues of Plato can be said to be Socratic. Socrates was such a tremendous influence that Plato invented the dialogues for people to discover who this character was. Yes, in the Republic Socrates called for women in the military and as guardians. But in the Laws, it is very different. Women do not appear in the military or in the government. Read the Laws.

I quoted from Edith Hamilton: her view of stoicism is in the reply of the thread, "A Mystery---The Good comes thru the hard". Yes, Stoicism had it's errors. But Stoicism had more in common with Christianity than many other of the cults, mystery religions of Rome.

This is from ASM1 in another thread.

Someone needs to alert the moderator of this board and contact the FBI about this WHEELER fella. He sounds like the next Ted Bundy to me. How the hell did he ever get into Scouting?

You really hate women don't you WHEELER?

PS. I think my wife would be the one woman who would love to wax your rails! But it would take a real man to stand up to her. You do not qualify.

I was replying to this.

Sorry.

I meant this of all the boys in Scouting. Do we harden them while they are in the adventure of Scouting?

I am not saying do away with "Fun and Adventure" but it needs to take its proper place and in the right proportion. "Fun and adventure" has overwhelmed all aspects of Scouting. I am bringing to light other aspects of it.

I meant of all the boys.

But the question still remains At what point do boys become men????

At what point do we start demanding manhood from them?

OGE you started this question in the thread of "The Scoutmaster, the Efficient cause". I went back and retrieved my answer because apparently you never went back to the thread to read it."

Socrates was a citizen of Athens. He refused to escape his death sentence in order to be an obedient citizen.

From An Introduction to Greek Philosophy, by J.V. Luce, l992 pg 66.

This is about Anaxagoras

"...when someone asked him, 'Have you no care for your country?' he replied, 'I have a great care for my country', (pointing to the sky."

Mr. Luce remarks immediately "The anecdote marks him out as the first explicit 'cosmopotitan', that is to say, 'citizen of the universe', owing allegiance to scientific truth rather than to Athens or Clazomenae."

Right on.

This trait can be clearly seen in many Greek Orthodox Churches as well. "Greek mothers" are terribly mothering also. I've witnessed my own relatives and the Greek Orthodox priest I mentioned before. Mothering destroys the masculine.

Seperation is the Second principle of Male Paedogogy. This paradigm of separation exists throughout reality.

Skin for leather must be separated from the flesh.

Meat must be separated from the bone.

Wheat must be separated from the chaff.

Juice must be separated from the grape rind.

All minerals must be separated from the earth.

Gasoline must be separated from oil crud(crude).

We live by separating. This physical pattern is also evident in creation where God separated light from darkness, land from water, and living from non-living. God separated man from non-being to being. If this is in the physical then it also exists in the metaphysical.

Separation is pattern evident in all cosms of reality. This is also a metaphysical reality as well. The Socratic principle of Philosophy is to Define and Divide. (1) This is not only a epistemological precept but a principle of logic; the Paramenidic principle of non-contradiction.

Yves Christian in his book Sex Differences, Modern Biology and the Unisex Fallacy, points out that on the release of testosterone in the fetus brings major changes to it differentiating it from the female fetus. One of the most important changes happens in the brain. Testosterone prevents the growth of the corpus callusum thus keeping the two halves of the brain separate. Whereas in the female brain, the corpus callusm grows thick and big, deeply connecting the two halves of the brain.

As the male brain is separated in the physiological realm, this paradigm of separation is played out in the sociological realm. (The Socratic principle, what goes in the microcosm, so goes the macrocosm and vice-versa.)

In this same book, Yves Christian points out observations of adolescent boys that exhibit aversion toward anything female and/or weak. Boys are drawn to the strong and the powerful. This is not culturally taught but naturally inbred. It is character that naturally exhibits itself.

This Define and Divide principle must become reality for boys. Boys must be separated from the feminine. Seperation is a male paedogogical principle that develops and increases masculinity.

The feminine is marked by softness, luxury, triviality, and gaiety. Men must be separated from these attributes if he is to succeed as a man. He must be divided.

Leon Podles writes:

Males who mature in a biologically normal fashion may still fail to be men. What must be added to male biology is masculinity, which is not a physical, but a cultural and spiritual quality. (2)

He goes on to say:

The boy must achieve masculinity by rejecting the female and differentiating himself from the feminine to which he reverts unless he constantly exerts himselfa reversion which will destroy him as a man. (3)

He continues; writing on the research and work from David Gilmore, an anthropologist from Yale:

A man must give up the state of boyhood, in which he is protected by women, fed by women, and cared by women. So that he may become a protector and provider for women and children. In other words, he must give up being mothered before he can become a father. He must reject the feminine in himself, cultivating a distance from the world of women, so that he can one day return to it, not as a recipient, but as a giver. (4)

If this separation does not occur, he will have problems with his identity as a male. Becoming a man begins with a break with the mother, but continues throughout life with a rejection of the feminine. (5)

He footnotes this section to Irene Fast who claims that there is a pattern of femininity found in men who have not successfully resolved issues of gender differentiation. This unresolved conflict can result in a variety of disorders: extreme misogyny,sado-masochismpassive homosexuality and to pedophilia. (6)

He quotes Margaret Mead: The boy learns that he must make an effort to enter the world of men, that this first act of differentiating himself from his mother, of realizing his own body as his and different from hers, must be continued in long years of effortwhich may not succeed. (7)

It is clear from several studies, that boys must be separated from the feminine or else pathology sets in. The boy must be put into a mans world to learn his part.

A boy must be surrounded by the hard. He must become hard himself. Why? Nature requires this. Life and death permeate nature. Nature kills off the weak and the sick. It is the same for human communities. This is not the error of Nazism that saw this principle of nature as something physical requirement but since man is a metaphysical creature, both body and soul, this principle of nature extends also not only into the physical but also the spiritual as morality and virtue. A man must be strong both physically, mentally and spiritually.

His reasoning must be separated from feminine thinking; His objects of thought must be turned to the essences of reality away from the feminine trivialities and superficialities, His life must be simple separated from feminine luxury, and he must be serious separated from the feminine gaiety.

What society does is accentuate the positive and represses the negative. This feeling of separation in many of the primitive cultures that Lord Baden-Powell saw and in other warrior cultures is positively reinforced as puberty rituals and other measures because societies need men as men. Nature dictates so.

Boys are born with an art. The art of reasoning. This is due to the shrinkage of the corpus callusum. The art of strength. He is born with greater upper body strength and longer legs. What separation from the feminine does, is sharpen and perfect this, physical and mental art inherent in the male. Seperation increases the act and art of being a man.

Separation is the 2nd principle of male paedogogy. The First principle is to define and the second principle is to divide. What male paedogogy does is increase and perfect the act and art of being a man. Human beings are the weakest physically of the animals. The only way he survives and wins in Nature is by the use of his intellect. This guarantees the survival of both men women and children of his tribe.

(1) Platos Republic, B. Jowett, M.A., Vintage Books, NY. Sec 454; pg 174.

(2) The Church Impotent, The Feminization of Christianity, by Leon Podles, Spence Publishing Company, Dallas, TX 1999.

Pg 39. The title is a play on words. In Roman Catholic theology there is three parts of the church: The Church Militant here on earth; the Church Suffering in purgatory; and the Church Triumphant in Heaven. Mr. Podles is making a play on words: instead of the Church Militant it is really the Church Impotent and I happen to heartily agree.

(3) Ibid.

(4) Ibid, pg 43.

(5) Ibid, pg 40.

(6) Ibid, pg 222-223.

(7) Ibid, pg 223.

(This message has been edited by WHEELER)

How the saying, "I am citizen of the world" you said is attributed to Socrates. It was actually said by Anaxamender.

But I still don't see your definition of love OGE.

To NJCubScouter,

I also attend the Battle Creek school board meetings. One of the teachers proudly displayed her students who were studying Mexican immigration. If John Adams, quoted hugely from Cicero in his "Defense of the Constitution", then how come not a single public school student reads Cicero? What does Mexican immigration have to do with the price of tea in China?

I sat next to a freshman in High school. He was doing a paper on child labor rights in India.

What does child labor rights have to do with a single thing here in America? absolutely nothing. These students don't know squat about their own country.

What these children are learning to do is to be 'LITTLE MARXIST SOCIALIST LAWYERS' but are absolutely clueless on the difference of a Republic and a Democracy and are absolutely ignorant of the Western culture.

The President of the School Board says "We teach character" just after he mentions that they are trying their hardest to get federal monies. I said, Point out to me sir in the Constitution, where the Federal Government is responsible for education? Can you give me Article and section #? He couldn't. I said the first principle of leadership is to set the example. What example are you setting? The disregard of the law for filthy lucre? Because that is what you are really teaching the children, that for the sake of filthy lucre, one does anything including breaking the Constitution. I said, "It takes CHARACTER to obey the law." I said, "You don't know what character is at all and you claim to teach it."

The whole American educational system and style of paedogogy is from the supposedly "Father of American Education", John Dewey. John Dewey was a Marxist.

This is great and it needs to continue. The question is though, when the going gets tougher, will he continue and tough it out.

Provide all the adventure, hiking, camping, and whiteriver rafting. But while he is doing that, is he becoming hard or remaining soft? Is he learning virtues? Does somebody challenge him when he starts to complain---"Quit yourself like a man". Does he hear this charge?

Does he wear Boy Scout approved hiking shorts all the time with the knee socks so his legs are exposed to the weather to harden him or has he become mommyized by wearing long trousers? Does he sleep on the ground on his campouts or does he bring a cot?

Does he suffer the elements bravely or do we comfort him?

These are the questions that need to be answered.

The flippant behavior of most of these people here really is a sign of childishness and not gravitas.

OGE, I know for a fact that you do not know the first thing about love and you definetly didn't know that saying belonged to Anaxamander and not Socrates.

Define Love for me OGE. You and the Catholic Church don't know the first thing about love. See I study which is a virtue and you do not.

"When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I thought as a child, I reasoned like a child; when I BECAME a Man, I GAVE UP childish Ways."

Let me ask the community, AT WHAT POINT DOES A BOY BECOME A MAN!??!

If I gather from the official handbook and official literature, it would seem that Manhood starts at wha 30 years of age, or 40 years of age or maybee its 50 years of age!

AT what time Executive Committee does the boy take up THE MANTLE OF MANHOOD and put away childish ways??? If I understand the mentality, it is never.

Look at the Zulus the boy is 12 or 13. Look at the Bar Mitzvah, 13 years old. Look at the Victorian British Navy, officers started at the age of 12.

How long are we going to keep boys childish?????

I have worked two and half years at a Jewish Synagoge. I have read their magazines and literature. I was friends with many of them and invited to their houses and the rabbi's house.

At one of these visits, my Jewish guests said that the huge percentage of homosexuals are Jewish. They wondered why?

Jewish communities are the bastion of liberalism and therefore feminism. Well, in my observation of their family interactions, their mothers are extremely mothering of their sons. Jewish culture has an exceedingly notorious reputation of the "Jewish Mother". She is overbearing and extrememly mothering! On the other hand, the one thing I extremely enjoyed about their culture and their religion was the APPARENT MANLINESS and MASCULINITY of their liturgy!! (Since then, I can't stand a single Roman Catholic or Orthodox liturgy because their music is so wimpy and feminine! a few fundamentalist Protestant services still maintain some masculinity but the Conservative Synagogue that I was with beat everybody hands down.)

It is of no wonder that Jewish men take up a large percentage of the ranks of homosexuals.

In the Boy Scouts, "Fun and Adventure" have now become the formal cause and the telos, the end. "Fun and Adventure" are really "the marketing tools" and the "chisel" of the stone mason. "Fun and adventure" have assumed such a high priority that is has DWARFED everything else in its path.

Why do you think, boys and men are into video games---to escape reality and keep feeding themselves this ideology of "fun and adventure".

Most things men do are for "ESCAPISM".

Liberals do want boys and men to be completely absorbed by "Fun and adventure". This is all about effeminizing men.

Thomas Setan did not start his group to have "fun and adventure". The Boys Brigade and the YMCA did not start for the reason of having "fun and adventure".

As for Eminem, he doesn't know what it means to be a man. He is a disgusting piece of a human being. No white man has ever acted like that since the debaucheries of the Roman Empire and the Athenian democracy. He is filthy and vulgar mouthed puerile and ARROGANT. He teaches his character to all his listeners. He is just an elevated street punk.

Do you walk into a mechanic's shop and tell them what to do?

Do you walk into a doctor's office and tell them what to do?

Are any of you trained in philosophy. Before I arrived, you couldn't give a rat's patuty about philosophy. None of you use philosophy because none of you use any philosophical terms or methodology.

None of you are trained in philosophy and could care less. Just because you have a mouth you think you know what to do and you do not. Opinions are not philosophy!

You don't know what virtue was! It is in the Federal Charter of l916. And then you want to tell me what to do!

What does this prove YOU ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT and clueless!!!!!

I pull up quotes from old Boy Scout literature and you people go bananas.

You don't know the first thing about education and you certainly don't know anything about male paedogogy. You never used the word and you certainly don't have any ideal what it means.

I have proved my points. You refuse to read.

How many times do I have to say this: Leon Podles states emphatically that Feminism is dangerous and is a heresy. What don't you get?

For you Roman Catholics out there, you never read the Bible, You don't have a love of the Bible, you could care less about the Bible. This goes for your priests as well. All they preach on is 'love' and nothing else.

The Book of Sirach in chapter 38 and 39, in so much words "that not all people can lead, only those who study the law of the lord". You know none of it

In IV Maccabees 1.17 "And this is contained in the education (paideia) of the LAW; by which we learn divine things reverently, and human things profitably." If you don't study the Bible, you don't have a clue about God or reality!

The other verse is from Matthew 18.3.

Jesus said, "Unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of God."

Children here in the Greek is "Paidia". Paidia also has another connotation and in a slighty different form as SLAVES or servants. "Paida" and "Paidiskin" from the Septuagint Ex 20.17. Accents are probably different.

Childlike is to be servantlike.(This message has been edited by WHEELER)

I Cor 13:11

"When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I thought as a child, I reasoned like a child; when I BECAME  a Man, I GAVE UP childish Ways."

The word in Greek for child "nipios"  but for the word childish, it is "nipious".

Interesting you would say that Mr. Doyle.

Jesus used the word "childLIKE" NOT CHILDISH!!!!!

Effeminates are CHILDISH. And I won't go in to the word "childlike" until I post the piece de resistance in the far future.

And it is the EFFEMINATES, (i.e. the childISH) that won't inherit heaven! Jesus doesn't want the childISH in heaven and so you don't have a clue what childLIKE IS.

Do boys join the football team for fun and adventure?

The Boy Scouts in America are also a take off from Earnest Seton.

Why did he start?

Because a gang of boys vandalized his fence.

The Boys Brigades in England and the YMCA where Scouting had its start were all formed to put CHARACTER in the Scouts. To make them manly!

WHAT IS THIS BIG PUSH AGAINST SAYING OR DOING "TO BE A MAN"? What in tarnation is going on that we are afraid and resist this "to be a man"? I have already pulled out three references about becoming a man from old BSA literature and yet there is resistance from Men?

What is the problem with manly? "Fun and adventure" sounds like what women put in their personal ads all the time. "Someone that will make me laugh". More feminism!

From the evil 1962 Scoutmaster's Handbook, "See to it that each boy . . . has the chance to develop himself into a MAN (emphasis original)"

Today, they hid it all behind crap like "Character counts" because "building men" is not PC.

1948 Field Manual pg 469

he is on his way to becoming a man of action.

Becoming a Man

Baden-Powell tells of the test that was given the Zulu boy of Africa before he was considered a man:

1948 Handbook for boys.

Pg 43, Those are the Ideals of Scouting. Those are the qualities that make great and successful men.

Pg 62 wants to see them grow up to be real men.

(This message has been edited by WHEELER)

I notice in my own life how feminism has affected me. I see also in other people how it is affecting their sons. I also see that Feminism affects Politics and it is affecting the Church. Its influence is very destructive. I point again, Please read "The Church Impotent, The Feminization of Christianity" By Leon Podles. He sees the same thing I am seeing.

There is a bigger picture going on here. I know what the 'BIG PICTURE' is. It is my duty to know.

Boys are childish. Adult men who never gain masculinity persist in childishness. MTV and all the current TV programing like the Simpsons, Friends, Sienfield is a good example of the growing puerileness in men. As Women take over, Men will regress more and more into children and persist in childishness. This is a fact of life.

In the Book, Sex Differences, by Yves Christian, he reports on studies of female and male adolescents. Males avere the female and anything that is weak. This is not trained activity, it is natural born.

Leon Podles in his first chapter of his book chronicles the DECLINE of all the mainstream liberal Protestant churches due to feminism. Christianity is declining because of feminization.

Like moths to light, males are attracted the "strong". They want to identify with that. This is the scientific facts.

The Boy Scouts have trouble recruiting? increase the participation of more females and you will definately witness the death of the movement!

Masculinity is based on brotherhood. How can a Man have a "brotherhood" with a female? Nonsense!

NJCubScouter,

Shakespeare said in one of his plays, "The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers." You are up on that list of firsts.

What didn't you get in the post of "What is a Republic"? A republic is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT a representative democracy. What is there that you don't get?

The first election rules of this country were that only the men WHO OWNED LAND could vote. There is no such thing as a "right to vote". This idea of "men who owned land" only, is the landed aristocracy. Aristocracy is needed in every human institution!

To get back on thread here. From Leon Podles, "The Church Impotent" agrees that "Adult" is a terrible use of terminology for boys and men.

"Simply being an adult male is not enough; one must in addition be a man, which means more than having a male body. Being a man in the fullest sense is a matter of the will, a choice to live in a certain way. A male can be praised for acting like a man, or blamed for not being manly." pg 37.

TwoCubDad,

What have I been posting these last three weeks.

you posted: You begin with a false premise that the purpose of Scouting was to "rigorize boys into men,"

In the l948 Handbook for Boys gives the reasons for the start of the Boy Scouts. I don't have the page number here now. But it is in the post The Ideal, The telos, and the lack in the BSA. I quoted straight from the BSA literature.

I also quoted in that same post from two other BSA books that had sentences that said "to be a man" or other words to that effect.

Then I have scoutmasters that say this is not the purpose of the BSA.

We have a contradiction. The OLD LITERATURE refutes the "doxa" (opinion) of these moderns. Something is going on. Liberalism is a dagerous virus and it has invaded the BSA rank and file. This silly notion of "fun and adventure" that has assumed the rank of the telos or the ideal is outrageous.

"Fun and adventure" is quite meaningless in and of itself. It has no substance and real meaning in them at all. "Fun & Adventure" are almost nihilistic in substantive meaning. This is crazy.

The Post were the l948 manual is compared to the l998 manual is proof positive something is wrong somewhere.

OGE,

You corrected me on my spellings and because you did so, now my thesis is in error?

"Lord" is still an aristocratic term. Lord Baden-Powell means he was elevated to the aristocracy. Even if, he wasn't born that way, he became that way. He is aristocracy NOW. Thomas Jefferson believed in a "landed aristocracy". Aristocracy just means rule of the best.

Archduke is a type of prince. I had the word at the tip of my tongue and couldn't remember properly so I used the generic term prince. "Dukes", "Arch-dukes", "Earls", are all forms of the term prince. Lower forms of aristocracy under the King.

From the Oxford English Dictionary 20 vol set

Duke: #2a. In some European countries: A sovereign prince, the ruler of a small state called a duchy.

#3 In Great Britain and some other countries; a Hereditary title of nobility, ranking below that of a prince.

Earl: #3a. Applied to all feudal nobles and princes bearing the Romanic title of Count;

#3b in the modern peerage an earl ranks next below a marquis, and next above a viscount.

When I used "Prince", I used it as a Generic term to include all nobility. Just like "Bishop" desicribes all Patriarchs, Metropolitans, Arch-Bishops, Popes, Cardinals. Bishop is the generic and the rest are graduations of the theme.

For, Palios Xristos I will not use in shortened form anymore. O Palios Xristos estin. The shortened form I used, doesn't take away from the meaning that Old is not to be discarded because of age as many in modern, contemporary society would like that. I will have more to say on this subject though.

You are right NJCubScouter.

My Thesis is that the Boy Scouts have compromised...compromised with something they don't fully understand the complications it has. Never does Man fully realize the consequences he causes. All the what if's...

I am not finished posting by far.

When one throws a rock into a pond the ripples expand exponentially. Allowing the females in is that proverbial "rock". It is dangerous. I will be proving my point in the future and continuously. Rome wasn't built in a day.

The change of words, the change of philosophy, the change of conceptions, the change in methodology are all signs of the creeping influence of what George Orwell, Ayn Rand and others have seen.

Cicero in the Fifth Philippic:

"Every evil is easily suppressed at its birth. It is when it has had time to remain in existence that it gathers strength." On Government, Penguin Classic, pg 359.

Cicero lost his life to the Evil. He tried his hardest to suppress it but it didn't work.