Hitler and Sex

[Brig]

MaPen, in your last post you stated "women found Hitler attractive" They also found Bill Clinton attractive. If I were a woman, and had to choose between the two, my choice would be Hitler! :twisted:

a buddy of mine's aunt lived in Germany at the time, and according to her Hitler was considered a sex symbol at the time

[Brig]

Yes. This is supposed to mean that Adolf "Evil" Hitler, Führer und Kanzler des Deutsches Reiches, was a very clever, cultured and talented man, with exceptional energy and force for work, maybe the most talented public speaker in history, with a hard-disk like memory able to keep in mind entire books allowing them to talk to specialists on an equal level. And this man of genius could be also very pleasant to those he sympathized - although he could be dreadful for his enemies.

So being a genius makes him somehow released from the crimes he committed, or less "evil".... Einstein was a genius, I do not remember him going about murdering millions of people. Or is it you think that the rest of us who do not have any respect for the man think him non-human.
.

not to defend or attack either side, but Einstein did help with getting the Atomic Bomb project going

[Brig]

I don't think that the belief that Hitler was a homosexual is that ludricous. I heard on some show about Hitler that he would become paralyzed with fear when he was becoming intimate with an extremely attractive women and that they would have to virtually rape him to get any action from him. If this is true, he sounds pretty gay. That or he was just a total wuss.

then why would homosexuals be part of the Holocaust? They were treated as bad, if not worse, than the Jews in the camps. I can provide you with a link later if you want, but I'm away from my home computer

[R.M. Schultz]

…Many hormonal systems in the body rely on a system of feedback - the pituitary gland in the brain releases a 'stimulating' hormone …

Thank you for expressing more scientifically my earlier point. I remembered the basic idea fairly clearly from my college biology course, yet lacked the terminology to present it clearly.

…A single testis is quite capable of producing sufficient hormone; there would probably not be any problems with a refractory state, as suggested by RM Schultz in his otherwise excellent posts above.

You really don't think that two testis would give "smoother operation," with less spiking of hormones?

I don't think that the belief that Hitler was a homosexual is that ludricous …

then why would homosexuals be part of the Holocaust? …

Homophobia is just one more form of camouflage for the "closeted." I went to an all male college (where the latent suspicion of homosexuality hung over all of us) and I can assure you that the most virulent homophobes were the closeted homosexuals.

[Prit]

You really don't think that two testis would give "smoother operation," with less spiking of hormones?

Remarkably enough, no.

Wherever the body has 2 of something - lungs, kidneys, gonads - it functions astonishingly well if only one is working properly. Good evolutionary reasons, I guess.

Remember that a woman's hormonal cycles are produced by hormones released from just one bundle of cells on one small part of one ovary - and, as most of you will agree, women's hormones are of a magnitude to put men's hormones into perspective!

Prit

[Brig]

I don't think that the belief that Hitler was a homosexual is that ludricous ?

then why would homosexuals be part of the Holocaust? ?

Homophobia is just one more form of camouflage for the "closeted." I went to an all male college (where the latent suspicion of homosexuality hung over all of us) and I can assure you that the most virulent homophobes were the closeted homosexuals.

I highly doubt that to be true all the time, the ratios just aren't logical

[R.M. Schultz]

… the most virulent homophobes were the closeted homosexuals.

I highly doubt that to be true all the time, the ratios just aren't logical

It is often the case that the most fanatical activists (be they anti-semite, racists, homophobes, communists, religious activists) have ulterior motives. This is especially true in ideological organizations. My friends who belong (or have belonged) to leftist organizations could always spot the police infiltrators because they were consistently the most "fanatical." Similarly, the most fanatical supporter of the Palestinians that I know personally comes from a secular Jewish family.

Fanaticism and repudiation very often go hand in hand. Think for instance about the ex-smokers you know, are they not obnoxious about the issue in a way that those who have never smoked are not? Are not the most ardent of religious believers those who have had a conversion experience? Similarly, the most violently homophobic are those who are hiding their homosexuality or those who, having homoerotic inclinations, must over-compensate for this by being stridently heterosexual.

[Brig]

? the most virulent homophobes were the closeted homosexuals.

I highly doubt that to be true all the time, the ratios just aren't logical

It is often the case that the most fanatical activists (be they anti-semite, racists, homophobes, communists, religious activists) have ulterior motives. This is especially true in ideological organizations. My friends who belong (or have belonged) to leftist organizations could always spot the police infiltrators because they were consistently the most "fanatical." Similarly, the most fanatical supporter of the Palestinians that I know personally comes from a secular Jewish family.

Fanaticism and repudiation very often go hand in hand. Think for instance about the ex-smokers you know, are they not obnoxious about the issue in a way that those who have never smoked are not? Are not the most ardent of religious believers those who have had a conversion experience? Similarly, the most violently homophobic are those who are hiding their homosexuality or those who, having homoerotic inclinations, must over-compensate for this by being stridently heterosexual.

it's BS like this that makes me glad I'm altogether apathetic

[xcalibur]

? the most virulent homophobes were the closeted homosexuals.

I highly doubt that to be true all the time, the ratios just aren't logical

It is often the case that the most fanatical activists (be they anti-semite, racists, homophobes, communists, religious activists) have ulterior motives. This is especially true in ideological organizations. My friends who belong (or have belonged) to leftist organizations could always spot the police infiltrators because they were consistently the most "fanatical." Similarly, the most fanatical supporter of the Palestinians that I know personally comes from a secular Jewish family.

Fanaticism and repudiation very often go hand in hand. Think for instance about the ex-smokers you know, are they not obnoxious about the issue in a way that those who have never smoked are not? Are not the most ardent of religious believers those who have had a conversion experience? Similarly, the most violently homophobic are those who are hiding their homosexuality or those who, having homoerotic inclinations, must over-compensate for this by being stridently heterosexual.

it's BS like this that makes me glad I'm altogether apathetic

Agreed. As an ex-smoker I couldn't be bothered about whether someone smokes or not. And I certainly don't care what someone does between his or her sheets. Live and let live. Grow up people, and concern yourselves with the failings in your own realm.

[R.M. Schultz]

Fanaticism and repudiation very often go hand in hand. Think for instance about the ex-smokers you know …

it's BS like this that makes me glad I'm altogether apathetic

Agreed. As an ex-smoker I couldn't be bothered about whether someone smokes or not. And I certainly don't care what someone does between his or her sheets. Live and let live. Grow up people, and concern yourselves with the failings in your own realm.

Just because you, yourself are not prone to fanatical over-compensation, does not mean that the phenomenon does not exist. These things are so ubiquitous as to be everyday stereotypes: the preacher's daughter who is the biggest slut in town, the 97 Lb. weakling who (by application of Charles Atlas's patented program of Dynamic Tension) becomes "Hero of the Beach," the autodidact addicted to displays of erudition. Are these not common types? Do they not illustrate my point?

[1812]

Does it really matter what Hitler's sex life was like.

[R.M. Schultz]

Does it really matter what Hitler's sex life was like.

I think so. By and large people with normal, happy marriages aren't psychotic monomaniacs hell bent upon apocalyptic annihilation. If we are to understand why Hitler felt driven to this end then we must consider the whole man and his monorchism and sexual abnormalities are as much a part of his character as his vegetarianism or anti-semitism.

Would you consider Stalin’s character without considering his wife’s betrayal and suicide? Do not Josephine’s comments on Napoleon’s boudoir manner reflect upon his fundamental impetuosity? Doesn’t Röhm’s hyper-masculinity explain his inability to “seduce” politically?

[1812]

What about monks who are not allowed to have a normal marriage. They are not psychotic.

[R.M. Schultz]

What about monks who are not allowed to have a normal marriage. They are not psychotic.

Abnormal behaviour is typical of the extremes. Just as someone who is psychotic is unable to control their sexual patters, so too someone who is deeply spiritual has complete control over their sexuality. Thus, in either case, we would expect a deviation from the norm.

[xcalibur]

Does it really matter what Hitler's sex life was like.

I think so. By and large people with normal, happy marriages aren't psychotic monomaniacs hell bent upon apocalyptic annihilation. If we are to understand why Hitler felt driven to this end then we must consider the whole man and his monorchism and sexual abnormalities are as much a part of his character as his vegetarianism or anti-semitism.

Would you consider Stalin?s character without considering his wife?s betrayal and suicide? Do not Josephine?s comments on Napoleon?s boudoir manner reflect upon his fundamental impetuosity? Doesn?t Röhm?s hyper-masculinity explain his inability to ?seduce? politically?

"Happy marriages"? I thought that was an oxymoron

But seriously, I tend to agree that Hitler's sex life is worth examination just as are the other components of his personality.