Enlightenment and Male Vanity

[Flash]

Posted by jagman (here)
I'm not really enlightened yet..I dont think. lol So I dont know if I should comment,
but what the hell i'm here. Ulli, I have great respect for you and flash. I value both
of your opinions has much has any male that's on the forum. I also enjoy this thread.
So please allow me to challenge the part about "male competitiveness" being a bad thing.
I am a alpha male leo who has competed my whole life in some fashion...

My father was a semi professional baseball player. When he retired he took up coaching.
When I was 8 years old he started coaching a team of 12 & 13 yearolds. He put me on his
team. Right in the middle of a big game my father put me in has pitcher. (A disaster in the making)
I remember being on the pitchers mound throwing ball after ball and when I did throw it over the
plate it was hit hard. The crowd was booing me and I started to cry but my father refused to take
me out. 15 runs were scored against me that day before I finally got the 3 outs.

I think I cried myself to sleep that night. Something else also happened that night. I told myself
that I would practice everyday so that would never happen again. By the time I was 16 years old
I had become a great athlete and a strong person.

There is a large difference between competitiveness high enough to make yourself get better, and competitiveness to kill someone else talents of being. A strong and large difference.

Being the smallest one in a very competitive environment and having to stand it was a lesson of growing up and working at becoming better: working through and with it, becoming better - a life experience that can apply to many part of ones life.
Compare it with competitiveness to kill: I personally am a twin and my twin had decided early on that she would have all the attention for her alone. God did she bullied me. Did it help me to get better, I do not think so. You see, competitiveness was used by her ego to satisfy only her (self service). This is quite destructive.

I also have worked in customer environments all my career, mostly sales of concepts (which is pretty difficult), with high pay and loooooots of competition. When within the same team, where I was most often the only woman (girl as guys would say, so they don't have to respect too much), they would compete so much to make sure that their "friend" would not get the account, this becomes destructive and merciless. Competition on testosterone, much to much of it. Of course, the "girl" would have to be particularly resilient because she would receive more of the knock out. Competing like that against the other company was however part of the job and not personally destructive (although I think now that it is socially destructive).

Those kind of competition do not make you grow, they make you shrink in your being.

When I talk competition, this is the latter I am talking about. And male often overdo it if not stopped. Psychopaths (lack empathy of any kind) over do it all the time, re: banksters, Rotschild like and others)

[Flash]

Posted by onawah (here)
The Bodhisattva is just such a one as you describe here, johnf:

Posted by johnf (here)
I think that in a person who is approaching the point where they have a real ability to help others move to their next threshold of awareness,
in the old paradigm, we called that a teacher or guide, the subtle programming that is left has the purpose of putting things in terms and examples that will trigger a breakthrough in the listener.jf

We cannot relate to other human beings unless we can retain some of what makes us human, even as we aspire to "enlightenment" --whatever that term may mean for us, and I think the meaning of that word changes greatly as we grow...

I was watching this TED talk earlier today

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=qu7ZpWecIS8

At the risk of unfairly making an example of this man, I will say that I was struck by a couple of things that had little to do with the data he was sharing.

At one point, he was talking about LOL Cats, as a phenomena of the internet community that demonstrates a kind of free sharing, and later in the talk, he disparagingly equates LOL Cats --which he describes as "throwaway" in value --with the erotic novels that resulted when the printing press was first making its appearance.

(You will have to watch the video to understand the full context of these remarks.)

What struck me was the thinly veiled contempt that he displayed when speaking of two demonstrations of humankind's affinity for humor and eroticism, two of the ways in which we are most able to experience our humanness that allows us to release some of the stress and other forms of negative energy that tend to be generated by our existence in this material reality.

Folly (as opposed to seriousness, which is thought of as being more of a male attribute) our kinship to the animal kingdom, and eroticism (usually typified as a more feminine -and untrustworthy-characteristic) are portrayed as trivial and slightly disgusting by this man.
And he never cracks a smile during the whole talk.

While the theme of his talk that has to do with building community through generosity and freely sharing, is interesting and admirable, it bothered me that so much of what I think is wonderful about humankind in this talk was being downgraded by this man to something less than worthy--our ability to laugh at ourselves and our natural ability to enjoy and bond via our material bodies.

And that seems to be how humanity in many cultures has gone about handling the erotic and the humorous aspects of our nature- through suppression, and by cheapening and ridiculing.

That is typical of patriarchy, and is no doubt why the male ego is so surprisingly fragile, especially about things that are, by the definitions that patriarchy has imposed upon them, so little worthy of consideration.
(This may have to do with something akin to "womb envy", I suppose.)

But I think we are never be able to be fully human unless we can embrace those aspects of ourselves as well, and to integrate them into our definitions of what is sacred.
Our hearts have to evolve along with our heads, or we will be forever out of balance.

Very keen and interesting observation, you see, even me I have been caught with the macho paradigm here, not making the links you did. You are right about him.

[Flash]

Posted by ulli (here)

Posted by Justintime (here)
Thank you Ulli for posting this thread as it gives me a chance to share my own personal failures at creating or joining brotherhoods throughout my lifetime. But, first let me start by saying as a man who sometimes thinks incredibly deely that even though I discover and rediscover profound truths and possibilities I don't think I'll ever get over my hardwiring of being competitive. I'm the third child in an ultra competive family, where it felt( though it wasn't the case) it felt like my worth was based on how I performed academically, athletically and social-emotinally compared to my older brother and sister. Now, I sometimes surpassed my sister, but never outshined my older brother. And still don't, I'm a teacher and he's a principal
Anyways, competition between males is a completely insane thing. As I matured physically, my brothers five years older than me, I started to compete with him and eventually beat him in one on one basketball games. In our twenty's these games would get so heated that they would end in blood. An elbow here and there during the game would lead to fists after the game. Needless to say in our thirty's we no longer play.

(Ill add more to this in a bit, I've got to go, but let me end by saying that I haven't been able to find a group of quote on quote brothers that hasn't been fabricated and fake, but would enjoy being able to form those bonds here at PA and think given the commonalities of interests on this website we all should be able to become closer here with people than say people at our work or neighbors or even some of our friends who just aren't Ito this sort of thing)

Freedom and enlightenment happen when something deep within is let go of.
And that is usually a program that has trapped us in family patterns and that can create these competitive attitudes.

And we can erase it with a single step...I believe this is possible.
Asking oneself the question "what is served by this?" might be enough.

I realized already in my teens that I had to get out of my country, away from my family,
because my sanity would depend on it.
Germany in the 1960s was too confusing for me...too many extremes...fascism, communism, capitalism.
Lots of confused and war-damaged elders.

I would now recommend any young person to travel overseas,
to see how different cultures operate.
Find friends online and invite one another to visit...
it is the best way to see one's own programming and make an objective evaluation...
free from all national or patriotic bias and family indoctrination.

Absolutely agree, i have worked and lived in 3 different countries and we cannot see better our own cultural programming than when we go out of our country. And let me tell you, we do not always find our own people so nice afterward.

In the same line, I would very much like living in the skin of a man for a few months. Would be a great experience, an eye opener I am sure.

[ulli]

Posted by Flash (here)

Posted by onawah (here)
The Bodhisattva is just such a one as you describe here, johnf:

Posted by johnf (here)
I think that in a person who is approaching the point where they have a real ability to help others move to their next threshold of awareness,
in the old paradigm, we called that a teacher or guide, the subtle programming that is left has the purpose of putting things in terms and examples that will trigger a breakthrough in the listener.jf

We cannot relate to other human beings unless we can retain some of what makes us human, even as we aspire
to "enlightenment" --whatever that term may mean for us, and I think the meaning of that word changes greatly as we grow...

I was watching this TED talk earlier today

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=qu7ZpWecIS8

At the risk of unfairly making an example of this man, I will say that I was struck by a couple of things that had little to do with the data he was sharing.

At one point, he was talking about LOL Cats, as a phenomena of the internet community that demonstrates a kind of free sharing, and later in the talk, he disparagingly equates LOL Cats --which he describes as "throwaway" in value --with the erotic novels that resulted when the printing press was first making its appearance.

(You will have to watch the video to understand the full context of these remarks.)

What struck me was the thinly veiled contempt that he displayed when speaking of two demonstrations of humankind's affinity for humor and eroticism, two of the ways in which we are most able to experience our humanness that allows us to release some of the stress and other forms of negative energy that tend to be generated by our existence in this material reality.

Folly (as opposed to seriousness, which is thought of as being more of a male attribute) our kinship to the animal kingdom, and eroticism (usually typified as a more feminine -and untrustworthy-characteristic) are portrayed as trivial and slightly disgusting by this man.
And he never cracks a smile during the whole talk.

While the theme of his talk that has to do with building community through generosity and freely sharing, is interesting and admirable, it bothered me that so much of what I think is wonderful about humankind in this talk was being downgraded by this man to something less than worthy--our ability to laugh at ourselves and our natural ability to enjoy and bond via our material bodies.

And that seems to be how humanity in many cultures has gone about handling the erotic and the humorous aspects of our nature- through suppression, and by cheapening and ridiculing.

That is typical of patriarchy, and is no doubt why the male ego is so surprisingly fragile, especially about things that are, by the definitions that patriarchy has imposed upon them, so little worthy of consideration.
(This may have to do with something akin to "womb envy", I suppose.)

But I think we are never be able to be fully human unless we can embrace those aspects of ourselves as well, and to integrate them into our definitions of what is sacred.
Our hearts have to evolve along with our heads, or we will be forever out of balance.

Very keen and interesting observation, you see, even me I have been caught with the macho paradigm here, not making the links you did. You are right about him.

This is great, to be able with the help of another person's input,
arrive at a fresh insight about where one stands.

This is the real value of a discussion forum...having all sides come together and build a discussion
with personal input for other's perusal, no tearing down, only building.
A win-win for all.

[johnf]

Posted by northstar (here)
This discussion is getting interesting. It strikes me that some clarification of terminology might be useful at this point.

Patriarchy

Patriarchy (rule by fathers) is a social system in which the male is the primary authority figure central to social organization and the central roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination. Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male lineage. The female equivalent is matriarchy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

Misogyny

Misogyny is the hatred or dislike of women or girls. Misogyny can be manifested in numerous ways, including sexual discrimination, denigration of women, violence against women, and sexual objectification of women.[1][2] Misogyny has been characterised as a prominent feature of the mythologies of the ancient world as well as various religions. In addition, many influential Western philosophers have been described as misogynistic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogyny

Kyriarchy

Kyriarchy ("rule by a lord") is a social system or set of connecting social systems built around domination, oppression, and submission. The word itself is a neologism coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza to describe interconnected, interacting, and self-extending systems of domination and submission, in which a single individual might be oppressed in some relationships and privileged in others. It is an intersectional extension of the idea of patriarchy beyond gender. Kyriarchy encompasses sexism, racism, economic injustice, and other forms of dominating hierarchy in which the subordination of one person or group to another is internalized and institutionalized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy

In my opinion the terminology is important because there is a vast literature of research and writing on just what we are discussing here. It might help to connect and ground our personal stories, thoughts and opinions with some of that theory.

I find Kyriarchy especially interesting. The developer of that term is a radical feminist who claims that we are living in a post-patriarchy world and we must broaden our notions of domination and oppression to include not just gender but race, economic class and others.

I am an old-fashioned feminist but when I came across this concept of "Kyriarchy" it rang some bells for me.

I think things like the definition of Kyriarchy are very important, because they take the gender focus off of the disscusion.
I think the term supressive is very far reaching here.

A very simple definition here of, to push down or hold down. Compression is a form of supression, and in some of the examples of negative female human behavior you can see that a lot. Shaming, judging , etc, to me have this energy, and there is a tendency to see them as Patriarchial, both my Father and Mother did a lot of this sort of thing with the kids, and in my case, I seem to have internalized a lot of it. A common occurence was for them to tag team me with questions, that were designed to get me to say something that was ridicule worthy. If you get someone to reject themselves, and consider themselves lesser or bad, you have a condition that is ripe for programming. So in this case both genders using the supressive techniques to get what they thought was required from me. Needless to say they have mellowed over the years, thank God.

And In my mind this concept applied to energy, core aspects of spirit or source goes very far in characterizing the period of time we have just left.
Been talking to another member via skype, and on seeing this thread he brought up a statement from Eceti , about how yesterday was the first day of the time of the female yesterday.
I had never heard that idea about yesterday though I had heard it was the first day of something new.
I was in a theater yesterday enjoying one of our patriarchal, and mysongynistic institutions watching the new wolverine movie.
The female characters were mainly warrior types, but my fascination to the supporting actresses very interesting face sparked off a quasi visionary experience where I saw an image very like a Zen sumi painting of a mountain horizon with a very large moon above it.
The term Lunar came to mind. And when I was out on a short walk just now , it seemed like everything I looked at had this lunar/silver/spiritual energy to it.
So perhaps the occurence of this thread today is a symptom of this energy?
Ulli since you seem to be well versed in astrology, does any of this make sense to you will all the recent interesting configurations recently?
Perhaps Sunday will be even more interesting.

jf

[grannyfranny100]

From left field, here is my idea. Learn to tango. At a certain point, the confident male lets the female completely let go with all her wildness and eroticism and is not frightened by it. Other men in the room may be shocked and frightened but also envious of the sensuality this couple has a achieved.

[ulli]

Posted by johnf (here)

Posted by northstar (here)
This discussion is getting interesting. It strikes me that some clarification of terminology might be useful at this point.

Patriarchy

Patriarchy (rule by fathers) is a social system in which the male is the primary authority figure central to social organization and the central roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination. Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male lineage. The female equivalent is matriarchy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

Misogyny

Misogyny is the hatred or dislike of women or girls. Misogyny can be manifested in numerous ways, including sexual discrimination, denigration of women, violence against women, and sexual objectification of women.[1][2] Misogyny has been characterised as a prominent feature of the mythologies of the ancient world as well as various religions. In addition, many influential Western philosophers have been described as misogynistic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogyny

Kyriarchy

Kyriarchy ("rule by a lord") is a social system or set of connecting social systems built around domination, oppression, and submission. The word itself is a neologism coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza to describe interconnected, interacting, and self-extending systems of domination and submission, in which a single individual might be oppressed in some relationships and privileged in others. It is an intersectional extension of the idea of patriarchy beyond gender. Kyriarchy encompasses sexism, racism, economic injustice, and other forms of dominating hierarchy in which the subordination of one person or group to another is internalized and institutionalized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy

In my opinion the terminology is important because there is a vast literature of research and writing on just what we are discussing here. It might help to connect and ground our personal stories, thoughts and opinions with some of that theory.

I find Kyriarchy especially interesting. The developer of that term is a radical feminist who claims that we are living in a post-patriarchy world and we must broaden our notions of domination and oppression to include not just gender but race, economic class and others.

I am an old-fashioned feminist but when I came across this concept of "Kyriarchy" it rang some bells for me.

I think things like the definition of Kyriarchy are very important, because they take the gender focus off of the disscusion.
I think the term supressive is very far reaching here.

A very simple definition here of, to push down or hold down. Compression is a form of supression, and in some of the examples of negative female human behavior you can see that a lot. Shaming, judging , etc, to me have this energy, and there is a tendency to see them as Patriarchial, both my Father and Mother did a lot of this sort of thing with the kids, and in my case, I seem to have internalized a lot of it. A common occurence was for them to tag team me with questions, that were designed to get me to say something that was ridicule worthy. If you get someone to reject themselves, and consider themselves lesser or bad, you have a condition that is ripe for programming. So in this case both genders using the supressive techniques to get what they thought was required from me. Needless to say they have mellowed over the years, thank God.

And In my mind this concept applied to energy, core aspects of spirit or source goes very far in characterizing the period of time we have just left.
Been talking to another member via skype, and on seeing this thread he brought up a statement from Eceti , about how yesterday was the first day of the time of the female yesterday.
I had never heard that idea about yesterday though I had heard it was the first day of something new.
I was in a theater yesterday enjoying one of our patriarchal, and mysongynistic institutions watching the new wolverine movie.
The female characters were mainly warrior types, but my fascination to the supporting actresses very interesting face sparked off a quasi visionary experience where I saw an image very like a Zen sumi painting of a mountain horizon with a very large moon above it.
The term Lunar came to mind. And when I was out on a short walk just now , it seemed like everything I looked at had this lunar/silver/spiritual energy to it.
So perhaps the occurence of this thread today is a symptom of this energy?
Ulli since you seem to be well versed in astrology, does any of this make sense to you will all the recent interesting configurations recently?
Perhaps Sunday will be even more interesting.

jf

Frankly, I hadn't thought about it, but a hexagon formation in the solar system would mean gentle flow..harmony.
fewer clashes.
A good time for building lasting relationships,
well polarized, with roles clearly defined, voluntary input, and zero coercion.

[ulli]

Posted by grannyfranny100 (here)
From left field, here is my idea. Learn to tango. At a certain point, the confident male lets the female completely let go with all her wildness and eroticism and is not frightened by it. Other men in the room may be shocked and frightened but also envious of the sensuality this couple has a achieved.

Love this. Here is my favorite Tango tune:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-xAXksZOL1w

[markpierre]

I want to know what 'IT' is.

[Justintime]

Being human and not being competitive is challenging indeed. We compete with our father for our mothers love and attention, with our siblings for both our parents love and attention, in school we compete with our peers for the teachers attention and approval at first, than we compete for the affections of our peers. In athletics we discover that one teams victory is another's defeat. Than we enter the professional world and after discovering that acquiring a job at first means to put on our best and brightest face and selling ourselves so to speak. And while in the working world we constantly compete with others in order to make ourselves feel valuable and worthy. In fact it's unfortunate that our sense of worth, our self esteem comes from feeling as good or superior to others in something. So, its almost a given that we compare ourselves to others, male, female, enlightened, enslaved etc, our sense of worth depends on these comparisons.

And I do have to check my thought processes and motivation here when I post because there are so many bright people here at PA, and at times I feel threatened by that and almost feel like I need to prove myself through making some sort insightful comment at the expense of respecting the integrity of another's post. But, I quickly check myself and just move on. I definitely value PA more as a place to make connections with others and bond over the fact that this is a place where I can share my interests with others, grow and learn. This is certainly more important than that built in desire to prove myself by attacking the beliefs of another.

[ulli]

Posted by markpierre (here)
I want to know what 'IT' is.

Sorry, I can't help you there. You will have to ask IT.

But of course, you already know. That was just a trick question, wasn't it?
You seem to know about "the field"....

[ulli]

Posted by Justintime (here)
Being human and not being competitive is challenging indeed. We compete with our father for our mothers love and attention, with our siblings for both our parents love and attention, in school we compete with our peers for the teachers attention and approval at first, than we compete for the affections of our peers. In athletics we discover that one teams victory is another's defeat. Than we enter the professional world and after discovering that acquiring a job at first means to put on our best and brightest face and selling ourselves so to speak. And while in the working world we constantly compete with others in order to make ourselves feel valuable and worthy. In fact it's unfortunate that our sense of worth, our self esteem comes from feeling as good or superior to others in something. So, its almost a given that we compare ourselves to others, male, female, enlightened, enslaved etc, our sense of worth depends on these comparisons.

And I do have to check my thought processes and motivation here when I post because there are so many bright people here at PA, and at times I feel threatened by that and almost feel like I need to prove myself through making some sort insightful comment at the expense of respecting the integrity of another's post. But, I quickly check myself and just move on. I definitely value PA more as a place to make connections with others and bond over the fact that this is a place where I can share my interests with others, grow and learn. This is certainly more important than that built in desire to prove myself by attacking the beliefs of another.

So you started out competitive, but are now keeping it in check, as a matter of personal preference.
Like me, you probably didn't like what you saw when others were being triumphalist.

And this is what I am aiming to explore with this thread...I'm curious what happens in an atmosphere where information interchange is possible without the fear or worry of being ridiculed.
My guess is that even those who have such a need to denigrate others or rely exclusively on a self image of being antagonistic will then learn to express themselves from the core of their being, and not simply as reactive to whatever negativity they perceive in another. This can be learnt, and the more people try to communicate like this the more space each has to experiment with their own creative thinking processes.
All can then enjoy the product of these fresh ideas which will inevitably spring forth.

[Justintime]

Yes indeed Ulli, I was born and raised in a very competitive environment and the need to evaluate my self worth based on comparisons with others can still be strong. And yes, I did not and do not enjoy the process of competition, especially in regards to self esteem. And I'm in the process of redefining my self worth based on well exploring what it is to be me exactly.

[spiritguide]

Dualism creates flow, it is the flow that we must tame. Try being a left handed person in a predominately right handed world, the lessons there are right minded. Am bi-dexterous folks have managed to tame the difference. As it applies to all theories order is necessary and the dictates are to lead, follow or get out of the way. We can choose one of two things along our path, be part of the problem or part of the solution, it is up to us to choose wisely.Being different is not the problem, rather the lack of respect for the difference is. IMHO

Peace!

[NancyV]

Male and female agendas and traits differ because we have different survival imperatives. Males are competitive and aggressive in order to be able to protect their women and children from harm, often from other males, and in order to hunt for food, etc. They are generally stronger, faster and more fearless. Females are more nurturing because they bear children and have to keep the helpless baby alive until it’s able to survive on its own. If we weren’t so nurturing the human species would become extinct.

I have always preferred Alpha males to more androgynous type males and 3 of my 4 husbands have been alpha types, one was more male/female balanced. A strong balanced woman almost always prefers a strong alpha male unless she is an overbearing, dominant control freak type, which many feminists are, who wishes to have her men, including her sons, accede to her wishes and dictates. As a strong woman it has always been easy for me to control less dominant men (and quite tempting), but I usually dropped that type of man fairly quickly, except for my one more peaceful husband who is the father of my children. We lasted for 16 years and he was a great father.

I find alpha males to be totally delightful ! Probably many women just don’t understand how to nurture a very strong alpha male but feel threatened, so they like to disparage them. This seems to me like a passive/aggressive control agenda. Make them feel guilty and brutish and you can control them better if they buy into the guilt bullcrap. All these alpha males need is a LOT of love and attention and gradually they begin to relax, but they are there to take care of a woman if they are needed in a survival situation. There may come a day when women would WISH they had an alpha male, like if one finds themselves in a war situation or a natural disaster.

We still have agendas and genders in the lower astral dimensions, unless one is just passing through without indulging in the games that are as prevalent there as they are here. One doesn’t become truly genderless unless one has gone beyond agendas and gender identification. If you’re living in or stuck in the lower dimensions, including this physical one, the chances of being without gender are highly unlikely. Androgeny still relates to gender and is much different than being beyond gender identification of any kind. When I hear of a man becoming more androgynous I think of a man who is not really a MAN but a wimp. May god please save me from androgynous males and control freak females who wish to emasculate their sons and mates!!

Since I am living on the earth-plane where we happen to have genders, I choose to live consciously as a powerful female who appreciates powerful, competitive and aggressive males. When I leave my body and travel in other dimensions, I can be either female or male or androgynous or beyond gender, depending on the dimension I’m in and the game that is being played. The Source/God has no gender. It is neither more female nor male nor androgynous. It simply IS. Only WE love to revel in our divisions, that’s the game here in the creation and it’s FUN. So we might as well enjoy our differences and divisions because as long as we are separated from the Source we ARE divided, or I should say we are conscious of being divided or separate…. although we are actually always one with the Source and with all other beings. We just are not often, if ever, conscious that we are all things at all times.

[markpierre]

Posted by ulli (here)

Posted by markpierre (here)
I want to know what 'IT' is.

Sorry, I can't help you there. You will have to ask IT.

But of course, you already know. That was just a trick question, wasn't it?
You seem to know about "the field"....

Yup. You're right. I know a bit about spiritual arrogance too. It's a slippery slope atop which I presume 'it' is patiently waiting.
Spiritual discoveries have an interesting way of leveling the field a little with the dominant thinking of the world. That can be a catalyst,
even if illusory. There's a tremendous amount of conditioning involved in keeping a heart centered male identity safe and even surviving
where it seems to have no value. It's not valued by the prevalent male mind, nor the prevalent female.
You'll never hear 'well let it die' from any source outside of our own slow and precariously developing authenticity.
It's not that it's developing as much as the Self is being allowed to address the battlefield, and that I regard as Grace, not personal development.
I remember that no matter how well trained we were as soldiers, it was when we gave up hope for personal survival that we were able to accomplish the mission.

Patience is an important part of the recipe. And I tend to trust the female, wherever it's honestly represented, to help with that.

[mosquito]

Interesting.

What saddens me is that so many women, especially in the West, have chosen to adopt male behaviour and dress it up as "feminism". Women who have the gift of life, joining the military, "serving" their country, gleefully torturing and killing people. Oh well.

Nancy - I like your post. Though far form being androgenous or a wimp, I have always had a very well developed feminine side: when I moved in with my second wife, she was the one with all the hammers, drills and suchlike, I moved in with a pair of red shoes and a box of essential oils !!

And that leads me to what my spiritual journey has been about for the last 10 years - finding the strong, aggresive male aspect, WITHOUT it developing into some macho crap. I'm learning (I think) to face all my repressed anger, not back away from it or pretend it isn't there; To examine my role as an adult male, in society, and especially in relation to women and children; To be self-assured and confident as a man. And NO it isn't as easy as some of the women here may think.

I haven't seen my father since I was 12. My mother taught me to hate him, told me all manner of things about him which were simply untrue. Consequently, I didn't really have a father, and no male role models whatsoever. So I find myself in the position of having to invent myself, to make it all up as I go along.

I love the soft, kind gentle nature which is me at my best, and so do my girlfriends and other female acquaintances. Little girls adore me, which is my indicator that I'm doing alright. I have no intention of ditching my nature just so I can become a he-man. But I'm learning to balance it with a bit more decisiveness, a bit more responsibility, and a bit more authoritativeness (and I tell you, I have BIIIIIIG issues with authority). It would be nice to think that I could find a streak of practicality somewhere, but that seems a lot more elusive !!

I remember an intensive course I was doing about 10 years ago, sitting in a 1-to-1 session with a woman friend (feminist, lesbian, tough) who'd been raped by her father. I found myself sitting listening in a state of pure power and strength (which is nothing to do with overpowering people), and afterwards she told me I was so manly. That was the first and last time anyone has said that !

We can get this right. Men becoming wimps and women becoming macho is not the answer though.

[onawah]

I like that term Kyriarchy too.
I have puzzled over the differences in the various kinds of tyranny, and the thing that strikes me most about Kyriarchy, as seen in, for example, Great Britain among the royalty, is the way they (the royalty) can arbitrarily and sometimes even just at a personal whim, decide to raise up or put down an individual or group.
Such as when the Queen decides to confer a Knighthood on someone; even though there may be many more individuals who are more deserving, it is apparently very much up to the Queen as to who will receive the prize.
(Though no doubt this is not as much the case as in centuries gone by.)
I would imagine that arbitrariness would keep everyone in the "ranks" feeling rather uncertain and off balance.
A situation which would only be to the advantage of the royalty in terms of power and control, of course...

The term "feminism" is a curious one.
Paradoxically, it's usually used to describe a woman who is claiming the right to manifest her masculine side, not her feminine side.
In a parallel universe, I can imagine it might be used to describe a woman who is exercising her right to be soft, receptive, domestic and maternal.

Posted by northstar (here)

Kyriarchy

Kyriarchy ("rule by a lord") is a social system or set of connecting social systems built around domination, oppression, and submission. The word itself is a neologism coined by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza to describe interconnected, interacting, and self-extending systems of domination and submission, in which a single individual might be oppressed in some relationships and privileged in others. It is an intersectional extension of the idea of patriarchy beyond gender. Kyriarchy encompasses sexism, racism, economic injustice, and other forms of dominating hierarchy in which the subordination of one person or group to another is internalized and institutionalized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy

In my opinion the terminology is important because there is a vast literature of research and writing on just what we are discussing here. It might help to connect and ground our personal stories, thoughts and opinions with some of that theory.

I find Kyriarchy especially interesting. The developer of that term is a radical feminist who claims that we are living in a post-patriarchy world and we must broaden our notions of domination and oppression to include not just gender but race, economic class and others.

I am an old-fashioned feminist but when I came across this concept of "Kyriarchy" it rang some bells for me.[/QUOTE]

[ulli]

Actually, the proposals for knighthood come from the ranks of the people,
who can start the campaigns, and then the Prime Minister brings the matter to the attention of the Queen.
Right now there is a campaign to get Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin the Sir title...

Anyway, back to topic...to have spiritually evolved males consult and brainstorm together without
putting each other down....

[firstlook]

Well if the topic is male hierarchy, I guess I would have to bring up the common discussion of Ego/Identity. But that's pretty well understood in this crowd. So If I Have to dig deeper about this (as a "male") I guess the survival part of me always wants to make sure point is taken with equal consideration whether wrong or right simply for the fact that it would make me feel safer somehow. Of course this low vibrational output, but this is the issue whenever I come into disagreement or any sort of critical debate between myself and another.

I try to remember that "I" whether im a guy or not is a changing construct of ideas. ANd even those ideas are based on a complex pillar of perception of how, when, and where I grew up in life. That isn't to say this is the end all of my journey but it is, IMO, one of the biggest mountains to climb in communicating and living more peacefully and even more importantly, honestly.

I like to really forget "who" I am when discussing particularly on this forum in order to take in the most amount of information without any gut reactions to my day to day survival, which is in turn ironic I suppose considering hopefully that's exactly what all this information goes into helping me get used to. Despite many popular spiritual beliefs I think most occurrences on this planet are still based on very low vibrations of safety. I don't find shame in that when I can because it grounds me to look at things this way. I want others to feel safe and that usually mean debating about different situations and allowing them to naturally find their boundries in order to allow the more creative avenues of thought put them together. Sometimes the truth hurts for both the other party im talking with and also myself. But I like that saying that if it hurts, your doing something right. You feel like your releasing certain things and growing because of it. As a Male, I imagine this process is easier for women simply because of the lower vibrational constructs in which relationships have been previously formed in the past. But that is changing quickly IMO.