ironmarlin1 said:First off, he concludes by showing that she really *was* speaking with God—which is precisely the central tension the movie forces us to question. Secondly, the logical fallout is that Bess is essentially compelled to submit to God's demands. Now, I wouldn't say she *has* to in a literal sense, but within the confines of Trier's little fantasy, she absolutely does. You argue that all this nonsense happens to her "because of who she is," but the reality is that she is who she is because Trier wrote her that way, specifically to demonstrate that her behavior stems from following divine commands. And I mean actual, legitimate ones!
Where am I getting the idea that he’s suggesting this is desirable? It’s exactly what I pointed out earlier. By the very end of the film, he passes an ethical judgment on everything that has transpired by essentially saying: "God approves."
It sounds as if you believe that being a warrior is a virtue in and of itself. 🤷 He places that combativeness within the context of a struggle defined by men. Even war criminals were likely passionate warriors who simply followed the orders of superiors commanding them to commit atrocities. But that kind of warfare is inherently immoral. In the same vein, the female submission to men here is repulsive, yet through the lens of Trier, it is justified... for the sake of a "higher purpose."
It isn't a matter of being modern or humane; rather, we are dealing with a distorted form of patriarchy that maintains its sovereignty even to this day. However, I completely understand where you're coming from. I have no intention of attacking his position; I am simply trying to move the conversation forward.
I believe the concept is... Strong women. To be quite honest, I find myself leaning toward a pre-feminist perspective regarding this specific poetics and philosophy; when one examines the metaphysics involved, the nuances are far more subtle than they might initially appear.
I find myself compelled to offer my own reflections regarding Lars's muses.
In my estimation, his body of work should be viewed through the lens of rebellion; he acts as a modern Don Quixote who has chosen women as the primary vessel for his defiance against societal norms. His muses are nothing short of captivating figures, 🙏 🙏 🙏 ranging from the witch depicted in Antichrist, to the devout Bess, and ultimately to the mother who kills her own children—Medea. His portrayal of women within the framework of society is so piercingly realistic that it becomes painful to witness. Is it not evident that his female characters serve as spiritual successors to Anna Karenina or Madame Bovary? They are mythical beings imbued with profound archetypal and symbolic significance.
Every one of his muses is a warrior—a formidable fighter. While many critics accuse him of misogyny, I perceive the exact opposite within his cinema; I see a profound adoration and an immense sense of reverence for women.
Michael Ortiz68 said:b.) Works by Ivana B. Mazuranic (perhaps something akin to an old-fashioned Price) but reimagined through a distorted, shadowy lens—much like the aesthetic of Tim Burton or del Toro's Pan's Labyrinth
Honestly, I was just reading an interview where she mentioned that nothing irritates her more than being constantly compared to Joni Mitchell 🤣 She isn't exactly the most polite person, if I'm being honest—I'd even go so far as to say she's a bit crude 😁
I have to wonder where Yivan actually picked up that information; did you tell him directly, or perhaps mentioned it in a post somewhere else on the forum? 😕 As for the question of whether that constitutes private information, I simply see no reason to engage in a debate about it.
Sean Cruz said:How can anyone claim this is anything other than a double standard? It’s blatantly obvious that either you wrote that yourself, or—if we're believing your little story—someone else used your moderator account to post it.
You can see you're just twisting the truth.
What kind of twisted truth are you talking about? I was simply quoting what happened. That user, "Moldy," was the first one to jump in here just to stir the pot, posting nothing but absolute nonsense under the Spirituality section—and you, acting as a moderator, just sat there and let it happen. It’s pretty obvious he was writing under your direction. Using their official handle.What can we actually take away from this? Honestly, what kind of logic does it take to navigate a situation this obvious?
If you ask me, you’re just trying to manipulate people.
Don't start trolling again. I am not the subject here.
Besides, I’ve been completely transparent about this. I wouldn't be acting this way if I actually had something to hide.
You probably forgot you even wrote about that. Well, I didn't. 😉
By the way, your logic is a bit flawed here—you can clearly see that I introduced myself myself.
What exactly does that prove? You couldn't bring yourself to write it because your username is just plain embarrassing. Using your official moderator handle. "I am moldy." Give me a break. We aren't in preschool anymore. 🙄
Don't try to derail this thread from its purpose, because I'm done engaging with your trolling posts.
Excellent. 👋
By the way, I am more than willing to admit my mistakes and offer an apology for them, but I certainly will not confess to things I did not do simply because you are so desperate for that to be true. Do try a little harder; perhaps if you exert enough effort, you might actually convince yourself that reality can bend to accommodate your paranoia.
Sean Cruz said:Back to the ad hominem attacks and trolling the topic again.
Aside from talking to yourself and at least five different handles (not just the one you mentioned) in that post, you also claim you have a habit of sharing passwords. Yet here you are, acting like a moderator.
on another forum I have about five accounts... sometimes when I'm really bored I chat with myself😂 and sometimes my husband logs into both his account and mine so we can talk together... it can be quite lively😂 😂
Yes, I did that on a message board that lacked any moderation, and it was only ever in benign circumstances; I truly don't see anything nefarious about it, especially since everyone was already aware and there was simply no opportunity for misuse. However, things are different here, as it is clear you are implying a distorted truth—or rather, I would suggest you are attempting to manipulate people.😉 Furthermore, I have spoken about this quite openly, as I certainly wouldn't want to have anything to hide.
By the way, your logic is flawed; it is evident that I presented myself individually.
Sean Cruz said:That was beautifully put; someone naive might actually buy it. Unfortunately, I’m far too familiar with how you play the "refined lady" role. It reminds me of our old messages where you admitted to using five different handles on one forum just because you enjoy the thrill of chatting with yourself when you're bored. Here is that post. Now, you expect people to believe it wasn't you? Right.
logged in just to defend my honor
And you think you know anything about honor? If you had even a shred of it, you would have stopped your petty lies and the constant purging of anyone you don't like... But I don't hold my breath anymore. Just stop preaching about integrity and decent behavior.
I'll ask the unknown moderators for a ban due to insults or whatever else they deem necessary.
Oof, don't strain yourself. You're supposed to be the face of this community, and if they let you stay on as a moderator after this, then there's truly nothing left for an honest person to look for on this site.
😲 Imagine the sheer horror!! Oh dear, now you've gone and revealed something truly scandalous 😲 oh my! I wonder what everyone else will think of me now 🙂 🤣 🤣
In the interest of full transparency, I will let you in on another little detail—my handle over there is Florin 😬
That is all for such a massive, earth-shattering secret ☕
And with that, greetings to you all, my dear friends.. I wish you a wonderful day
unknown, Laura Hughes7 is the same handle that started posting on unknown after you kicked me out, and he’s been coming to this thread specifically to stir the pot (two of his posts were already nuked) Didn't you notice that before?
The whole "it's a family member" and "long-time lurker suddenly appearing" excuse doesn't really fly with regular users... but hey, we'll see how it goes, I guess...
So, he started this thread to defend your honor? You're a moderator there, you didn't realize that?
------
There is no browser that logs you out automatically; there is just a setting you choose to stay logged in or not. That's basic tech knowledge any moderator should have, and I'm pretty sure you know that too. It's your responsibility not to leave your account vulnerable to others while you're holding a moderator position.
I don't need apologies—honestly, never—just actions.
Why was I removed from unknown?
You can try to convince me all you want, but don't assume for a second that I am some fool who would intentionally put myself in an awkward position only to turn around and offer an apology for it. Honestly! 🙄
Why was I removed from Spirituality?
You have already received your answer, and if you find it unsatisfactory, that is hardly my concern. People here have gradually begun to notice certain patterns in your behavior; believe me, you have caught many by surprise in quite an unpleasant way. If I may offer one piece of advice: GET A LIFE. People are laughing at you.
I believe it is high time that certain matters are clarified. Primarily, Laura Hughes7 is by no means anyone's clone; rather, they are a member of my own household who has followed this forum for years and is intimately familiar with nearly every username here. Irritated by this entire situation and the unjust accusations leveled against me, they logged on to defend my honor, yet in their attempt to do so, they were quite abrasive and consequently received a justified ban. However, in a moment of my own oversight—given that I use a browser that does not automatically log me out when I navigate away from the page—they took advantage of the opportunity to post their thoughts once more under my username. As soon as I realized what had happened, I deleted the messages (which was an action taken by no one else), but unfortunately, the damage had already been done.
I would like to take this opportunity to offer my most sincere apologies to user Sandra Parker3 and to request that the moderators issue me a formal strike for harassment, or whatever disciplinary measure they deem appropriate.
Indeed, I must express my gratitude to the moderators of unknown for not locking this thread sooner; it has allowed me to gain a certain perspective on matters that I simply hadn't had the opportunity to observe until now. 🙂
You haven't been exiled from this spirituality forum; rather, we are simply attempting to maintain a level of order and peace that remains a complete fantasy whenever you are present. While there is a chance your partial ban might be overturned, every single one of your attacks against me pushes that possibility further and further out of reach. Therefore, I strongly suggest you retreat, take a step back, and truly reflect upon your actions. On another note, what exactly was your objective in publishing screenshots of my private messages? Did you honestly believe the administration wasn't already fully aware of my ideas? 😲 Did you assume I was being foolish by sharing these with you for mere amusement, under the impression that the other moderators and admins were kept in the dark about my concepts? The truth is, I have been actively advocating for these very things for months now. By acting this way, you have merely demonstrated how unscrupulous, vindictive, and untrustworthy you truly are, proving that my assessment of you was not only accurate, but that I actually 😢precijeniti you. Whether or not you are ever welcomed back to this community depends entirely on your own choices. That is all I have to say regarding this matter. By the way, I am absolutely trembling with fear at your hostility—look at me shaking :brrrr:. Should I interpret this as a threat and request that someone takes official disciplinary action? 🤔 🤣
ruggedjackal46 said:Does Joanna also possess that spark of being provocative or slightly repulsive, or do we simply have a different aesthetic preference?
No, she is pure beauty 😍
By the way, there is something to be said for that tiny speck of ugliness—those raspy voices that carry the scent of cigarette smoke, or a melody that feels imperfectly tuned as a stylistic choice, much like that hysterical vibrato you hear in 😁 Banhart. For me personally, expression and individuality are what truly matter.
It is hardly a major issue. One either enjoys something or one does not, and while we have concluded that this is merely a matter of taste, I have no intention of attempting to sway anyone else; I perfectly understand that certain people simply may not grasp the specific brand of poetics that appeals to me. Joanna Newsom is an idiosyncratic artist, and I find it quite logical why you might perceive her as pretentious. However, that particular brand of exaggeration does not leave a negative impression on me; quite simply, I enjoy it. I find great pleasure in that vibrant spectrum of both sonic and visual aesthetics, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with being intentionally flamboyant. You actually mentioned Banhart yourself, who I believe belongs to this same category, alongside artists like Baby Dee, Antony and Johnsons, David Tibet, and several others. 🙂
The harpsichord served as a precursor to the piano, much like the lyre paved the way for the harp; the true distinction lies within the mechanics, the technical execution, and the resulting timbre of the instruments. In practice, Joanna Newsom manages to blend those ancient, classical textures with contemporary pop music in a remarkably successful and inventive manner—all without descending into the more predictable territory of artists like Vanessa Mae or Yanni.
I find myself completely enamored with the harp 😍 though, if I am being perfectly honest, the most intriguing element of her entire musical toolkit is actually the saw 😁
Why shouldn't a person be allowed to express their dislike for something? 😕 Taste is fundamentally a subjective matter rather than an objective debate regarding quality 🙂
I absolutely adore Joanna; her creativity, her vocals, even the harp... I love it all. To this point, Ys stands as one of the finest albums ever produced, and while I haven't yet experienced the new one, I intend to find the time.
Regarding her aesthetic—she is truly beautiful and remains so remarkably consistent in her whimsical, colorful style, appearing much like a forest sprite 😍
boldsailor32 said:Curses and hexes aren't against the rules here on this forum, nor are they illegal under American law.
That is an entirely legitimate way to handle the moderators.
You are a creative soul, so you should certainly lean into that natural talent of yours.
I would much rather have you moderate me; I hear you actually have some experience with it. 😳 I certainly don't want some amateur casting curses at me who doesn't even believe in them—what if they mess up the ritual? Instead of me ending up looking foolish or unattractive, what if I end up even more beautiful and brilliant? What am I supposed to do then?! 😲 🙂
Sandra Parker3 said:Option B would be an unsuccessful attempt at typing a winking emoji—one that you'd have to find behind the ellipsis... likely done intentionally to soften the blow of the entry.
That was not an attempt to type a winking emoji; rather, the semicolon was part of the original post, which you failed to see because I had already edited it before you arrived, as I was striving to remain as faithful to the original text as possible.
Consequently, you are lying and fabricating details simply to damage my reputation, but darling, you are only hurting yourself. I truly wonder why you persist in this behavior; I genuinely feel for you.😢
Does it require too much imagination to conclude that since Yivanmukta is in a post where he lashed out at the thread starter regarding baptism—characterizing her as a clone, among other things—he was actually referring to Soul Sister?
How could you possibly know what Yivanmukta intended?😕 It never even crossed my mind, given that Soul Sister and the woman who started this thread share absolutely nothing in common. Please pull yourself together and cease inventing these conspiracy theories; perhaps you should ask yourself if your imagination has become a bit too overactive.🤷
Furthermore, regarding the controversial topic that initially sparked this issue (see here), I believe the discussion on spirituality was rightfully opened and subsequently received a sufficient number of satisfactory responses. However, because the initial post was framed with such an arrogant tone—which prompted ym to react with inappropriate language and led to his red card penalty—there was a distinct possibility the thread could have veered off course, which is why I made the decision to lock it.
I do not intend to rescind this decision either. 🙂
