The Dudeism Forum

Whoa, it did happen.

Quote from: Dirty Hippie on August 28, 2011, 07:48:37 AM
Whoa, it did happen.

Yeah, your coffee intake is fine, my friend

Quote...well... everyone must have gone off to bed... except for drunken caesar dude, stumbling around his flat. look out for that lamp CD! 

How did you know!!!!? Ialways sumble over that bloody lamp! And yep one oat soda too many on school night!

Love and peace dudes.

well stated, you ginger horseman of the apocalypse 

well, i hardly know where to begin 

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 04:49:13 AM
...I see the biggest issue in calling ourselves a religion to simply be the perception in the West of what a religion is....

yes, because religion is particularly hard to define (even in the court of international law), and usually, in a nutshell, generally contains one or more theistic components. i know and understand that other non-theistic philosophical/spiritual belief systems are often referred to as "religions" for ease of reference, but aren't they really "practices", rather than "religions"? i'm not down with the implication that i'm a god-worshipper, though i fully respect other people's rights and wishes to do so  it's the old "philosophy vs. religion" debate, i'm afraid... and at some point, religions move from trying to interpret and understand the founders' original epiphanies, to practicing mindless rituals designed to emulate the original moment of enlightenment... which leads me to the next point...

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 04:49:13 AM
I can't express how much I love what we have here, and my own personal beef is merely with the fact that the Lebowskiian side of Dudeism is not in keeping with the egalitarian ideals that are closest to my heart.  I don't want a religion that has too much focus on single white males.

i know, dude... i love it here too... and i'd like to take this moment to throw an ether kiss and hug to all of the dudes that have made my time here special-- you know who you are... everyone! xox 

i think the elephant in the closet here is that we are not going to be able to successfully separate lebowskiism from dudeism, without losing a lot of what attracts people to it in the first place. and let's face it... some of the lebowski stuff is really fun, from the language, to the mode of dress, not to mention zesty coitus! and really... the rug that ties it all together...but, in present form, really is a refuge for dudes of the male persuasion. speaking for myself, i've always been somewhat of an anomaly... but most females aren't going to be attracted to dudeism in its present form... and i'm not sure how to address that. it's really not enough to make the official statement (paraphrased), "...we are encouraging the use of the term 'dude' as non-gender specific..."  this is an area where we really need to put on our thinking caps, and dig hard.

i realize the dudely lama saw the movie as an inspiration for this belief system... so how much of it can really be let go, with the basic precepts still making sense?

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 04:49:13 AM
Which leads to the structure... Once again, I hear the concerns, but I don't see anyone, not a single person, in favour of a structure (Christian or otherwise).

that's because here, on the boards, we're not, in my opinion (apologies, if i'm speaking out of turn for someone). and yet, the idea of dudeism, so far, has basically been taken and superimposed onto an existing organized religious framework, both eastern and western (and there's where the titles thing rankled); and that's a real shame, because i feel like we have the opportunity to break some new ground here. that's not to say that we shouldn't build on the knowledge of what's come before, but as you pointed out somewhere, a rose by any other name still costs a fucking fortune when you get it from the florist! 

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 04:49:13 AM
I don't think I can make my position clearer that I don't want anything to change that means structure and inequality.  All along I've been an advocate of MORE equality by laying off on the Lebowski image somewhat.  I don't see how anyone could say I was doing otherwise, but, maybe I'm not always so clear. 

i think you have been clear on this, but it doesn't seem to generate a lot of buzz or discussion (and if you are referring to cakes' post regarding "keeping your heads in the sand", this is an example, imo, of his idea not being clearly expressed, as he was pointing out a systemic problem). so, what's that saying about us as a collective group? that we can't be arsed to get past, "...if it ain't broke, don't fix it..." mentality? we can't really shy away from tough issues by saying, "aw, fuck it. let's go bowling", as a way to deal with everything... i mean, would you go bowling if your house was burning down, for example?  much as one would like to, it's not always an appropriate response.

i'll post more later-- time to fix brekkie for the kids.

peace and abidance friends and loved ones!

Quote from: Caesar dude on August 28, 2011, 08:28:50 AM

Quote...well... everyone must have gone off to bed... except for drunken caesar dude, stumbling around his flat. look out for that lamp CD! 

How did you know!!!!? Ialways sumble over that bloody lamp! And yep one oat soda too many on school night!

Love and peace dudes.

hahahaha-- i love how conjunctions cease to exist when one is trying to drunk-type! 

Er, problem, I've been revgms longer than I have been a Dudeist, my friends have been calling me Rev for years, not reverend, just rev.

Other nick names that I have gathered are;

Gary the Gray, my wife has called me that for years
Uncle Graybeard, that's from my nephews
Guru Gary, my wife's friends

So what happened? I am ready for a new nickname, so I asks Duder, "hey I needs a new nickname, here's what others have applied", see above. He says"how about Archdudeship of Maine or New England"(I used NE cuz I really cover 4 out of 6 states, I travel alot).

But even then I am looking at lots of work changing my handle all over the web, particularly at the CN.

Yeah I need moar coffee before I finish this thought, brb.

Quote from: revgms on August 28, 2011, 10:42:22 AM
Er, problem, I've been revgms longer than I have been a Dudeist, my friends have been calling me Rev for years, not reverend, just rev.

Other nick names that I have gathered are;

Gary the Gray, my wife has called me that for years
Uncle Graybeard, that's from my nephews
Guru Gary, my wife's friends

So what happened? I am ready for a new nickname, so I asks Duder, "hey I needs a new nickname, here's what others have applied", see above. He says"how about Archdudeship of Maine or New England"(I used NE cuz I really cover 4 out of 6 states, I travel alot).

But even then I am looking at lots of work changing my handle all over the web, particularly at the CN.

Yeah I need moar coffee before I finish this thought, brb.

revgms, don't be hasty! as has also been pointed out, names are who we are-- it's how "titles" are applied and enforced that seems to be the debatable point. 

Quote from: revgms on August 28, 2011, 10:42:22 AM
Er, problem, I've been revgms longer than I have been a Dudeist, my friends have been calling me Rev for years, not reverend, just rev.

Other nick names that I have gathered are;

Gary the Gray, my wife has called me that for years
Uncle Graybeard, that's from my nephews
Guru Gary, my wife's friends

Well, I kinda like those names, but still, I wouldn't worry about the name revgms there, Gary.

I think it's the use of the term Archdudeship which is causing the issues, which you've not yet done (apart from letting us know you had it, that is, you've never used it that I've seen).

I was simply moving myself away from the title reverend, as was Jason.

Like I said, I'm not keen on moving away from my own name, as I like being me, not a self-applied nickname, here in the Dudeist circles.  I'm not beholden to the term Rev, but, if it's going to cause issues, well... I dropped it.

You've got more of a right to use rev in your name, as it's a nickname, mine was just a tag to denote I'm an ordained Dudeist.  But the ordination thing seems to be making waves as well...

I'm just playing it safe.  Of course, it takes seconds to change it back if people would prefer I put my name back as they recognise it.  It's no bother either way.

So don't worry, be revgms, that's you, man

Oh, yeah.... Busmum... right...

We're playing Long Post Pingpong

First off, thanks for recognising my clarity, it just seems as though my message kept getting garbled, from how responses seemed to come out (and not just Cakey, he was a special case )

Secondly, my personal definition of a religion is simply:  A fundamental belief int he way things are.

So, from my perspective, any true belief is a religion.  Philosophy can be just a musing, unless you hold the thought as true to your understanding.  I believe in Dudeism and the Dude Way, so to me, it's a religion, and it's that simple.  Yeah, laws and scholars and such like to make it more complicated and such, but they can't invalidate my beliefs, only refuse to recognise them themselves (IMHO).

I know that's not the commonly held definition of a religion, but it's my simple manta of the subject

Thirdly, I still think we can build something unique, even if we use things that other people have hit on in the past.  Another reason I want to move away from parodies and move more into an organic flow of evolving discussions on these things until we can find something good we can agree on.  Hard thing to achieve, I know, but, I'm patient (and have low expectations ).

And as for Lebowski, it's not about removing it, it's about not playing up to it so much.  We could no more remove it and lock it in a cupboard (with the elephant) that we could with the Tao, or Zen.  I just think the image needs a trim and we need to make sure people don't think that what we are is all about it.  We want Lebowskiists to be themselves, but to let us be who we are, which is a broader thing altogether.  This isn't a demand from me to rip stuff out, it's about how to smoothly flow down stream and leave a few silty deposits along the way that we don't need to carry with us

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 11:25:12 AM
Oh, yeah.... Busmum... right...

We're playing Long Post Pingpong

i know we are, and i apologise to the ones who are probably sitting there thinking, "get the fuck over it, already!" i know i haven't been too given to deep, philosophical posts here, mainly sticking to humor and the like, but there's no time like the present, i suppose. 

i understand your personal point  twobandsrevedcsensitivegingerantichrist , about what constitutes a religion and what it means to you; i also understand that "religion" is also a broader term used to represent a belief system, even one without dieties, so i'm not splitting hairs there.

brought over from the other thread:

Quote from: forumdude on August 23, 2011, 03:57:51 PM
...Still, it is something to consider [titles] - at the moment Dudeism doesn't require any hierarchy. But if it grows, it might. Just the nature of the beast. I don't mean that anyone would be any duder than anyone else, only that if we have people setting up local congregations then the buck should probably stop somewhere...

i think it's all well and good for us to continue the flow (even if it's mostly just us 2 blatherers  ), but i'm pretty interested in knowing what the DL is thinking about all this as well. i mean really... regardless of what we think, it's really a moot point, if the founder of this particular "religion" has a different vision in mind.  is there something (recent) out there that i've missed, that precipitated this whole discussion? if, so, i welcome the enlightenment. 

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 11:25:12 AM
Thirdly, I still think we can build something unique, even if we use things that other people have hit on in the past. 

definitely-- i don't advocate reinventing the wheel; i'm an avid recycler.

Quote from: Twobands on August 28, 2011, 11:25:12 AM
And as for Lebowski, it's not about removing it, it's about not playing up to it so much.  We could no more remove it and lock it in a cupboard (with the elephant) that we could with the Tao, or Zen.  I just think the image needs a trim and we need to make sure people don't think that what we are is all about it.  We want Lebowskiists to be themselves, but to let us be who we are, which is a broader thing altogether.  This isn't a demand from me to rip stuff out, it's about how to smoothly flow down stream and leave a few silty deposits along the way that we don't need to carry with us

hahaha-- yes, we are making the same argument. and what, specifically, do you think might qualify as a silty deposit? 

of course, it nearly goes without saying that any belief system contains components that we as individuals simply don't relate to, and so discard and/or ignore, while still participating in that system. to that degree, i've been a dude, or perhaps an abideist, for longer than the coens have been making movies, as i suspect many of us here have.

i honestly with there were a way to speak in realtime, as a group... my wrists are killing me! 

xox abide, my fellow dudes xox

"...Those ordinary struggles are the practice, in the midst of which we come to understand and appreciate the meaning of life..."

http://www.tricycle.com/ordinary-struggles

yeah mang!

Busmum ^

I agree

That is all.




Oh, no, wait, you asked about silt...  Well, that was what I was hoping to be discussed, alas, it never really happened.  The biggest thing I saw that was an issue was that despite the Dudeism.com website being about the wider ethos, the banner at the top of my broswer said we were the "religion of the big lebowski".  Now that, is misleading silt  That's a start, the one footstep that leads to a thousand-league journey...

I am thinking there are two ways that Dudeism expresses it's self, hermetic Dudeism living a Dudeist life, and Engaged Dudeism promoting a Dudeist life.

Even the Sikhs have the Khalsa, their form of Engaged Sikhism. Further they have recognized Gurus, though they now only recognize the Book as Guru.

Not everybody who bowls is in a league, but they are all bowling.

That's another thing, instead of "religious" iconography and structure, why not mimic bowling structure, leagues, teams and trainers, something along those lines? Everyone's a "bowler", but rolling with different styles.

Not a manifesto, just out loud thinking. First rule, don't panic.

So, what is wrong with using your real name dudes?
I never did like the anonymous nicknames...too easy to misbehave.
I just figured I would just be me. But I have used my cck initials as a shorthand on the MOTU board...i've since gone back to using  cckeiser.

GaryMartinSilvia, GMS.

I use the revgms handle every where except gaming, there I am Knuckles McGhee, or McCoy if it is an alt toon. Currently Knuckles McCoy with the Preatorian Guard, New Conglomerate on Planetside, feel free to find me and take your shot, lol.

To me nicknames/titles are abbreviated conversations, they tell a story and give an impression of who you are talking to.