lessdaomorebum

still, we've gotten to the point were most women gather shoes instead of ' husbands' seems alike unhealthy situation to me, now how did that come about? Why is that necessarily unhealthy? Granted, most women would over the long term prefer something more stable (not necessarily so for men), but to each his or her own. Many women say that sluts have low self-esteem, but I don't find that to be the case (and I am not saying you were saying that). Some do, but most just seem to have stronger biological needs than so-called good girls. That was very much the case with the friend I mentioned above, who eventually had two happy long term relationships with MUCH older men, before settling down with a man who is only quite a bit older. Her needs? She said she learned to control herself (no mean feat). In summary, 100+ men suited her for a time, and then she had some lasting relationships. Her son just turned a year old last month. Different situations suit different people at different times. EDIT: You asked how did that come about. The women's movement and the greater access to birth control. So, while good girls can still be good girls, sluts can now feel more comfortable being sluts because they have their own job, don't live with their parents, and can get condoms. That's my answer.

My sincere apologies to the OP, thelerner. I blame it all on Marblehead and blue eyed snake. And their comments on Islam and 72 virgins or whatever . . . I always find that such an odd idea of heaven, for the reason I gave (and will add here that virgins/young ones are not so malleable). Should this be made into a new thread? What would be the scope? On which subforum? I am new here and don't know if this sort of thing is ok here or not. As for your more philosophical points, eros yes, thanatos no. Sex is rather enjoyable, right? So, people would naturally think about that in any sort of talk of death that touches on some sort of heaven type concept, IMHO.

I think I basically agree with what you are saying, but not the notion of women as somehow the victim. In fact, there are feminists who take the opposite tack from you, saying women shaped men. I think women and men show the same tendencies in different ways which I believe is what you were saying on the whole (?). Women are not as physically weak as they may seem, but during pregnancy and in the years following, they and the kids are. Interestingly, there is a school of thought in evolutionary theory that women just as much as men had an evolutionary interest in playing the field, sexually speaking. If she's been with every guy in the tribe, then (aside from giving her a gold star and a blue ribbon) every guy in the tribe has a potential interest in the kids "What didn't change were the rules...if you want sex often than stay with me and our children." But there are always sluts to be found (and I have rarely come across a married man who thinks his wife is sexually cooperative)

Shit out of luck. It means that the situation will not work out for you, or has not worked out for you.

I see nothing incorrect in what you say, but may I humbly suggest that something is missing? Nature. Most men have a strong innate desire to *^%*. For women, it is not nearly so universal, that's why women's sexuality has historically been more easy to keep under control. It is interesting how you can look at women from an until recently conservative society like China (to say nothing of Japan, the US, etc), and see how most girls have sex for the first time and then have a fairly take it or leave it attitude, while some dislike it, and a few really want it. I have a close Chinese friend who grew up in a village and swears up and down she never thought about sex until she first had it at age 17. I knew her scant months later at age 18 and she was already a voracious man killer (but it was the best way to die). By age 23 she told me she had had more than 100 men (her book would be a bestseller). Similar stories exist. On the other hand, most women I have known are just okay with sex. To the other extreme, I have another close friend, a 29 year old Chinese woman, who has never even seen a man's private parts. However, she has let on in discussions that she is not wholly unaware of her desires. Add to this the fact that while most men are desperately trying to get some, if you are a nymphomaniac, all you need to do is choose a guy that is to your liking since he will most likely be willing.

The Naxi (納西族) of China's Yunnan province had a matriarchal system into the mid 20th century. They had a practice know as the walking marriage. When she didn't want a guy around anymore, she would put this shoes outside the door; that was his eviction notice. Anthropologists found that some women had more than 100 'husbands' this way. Actually, most societies are matriarchal. As Dilbert author Scott Adams has said, "If men ruled the world, they could get sex anywhere, anytime. Restaurants would give you sex instead of breath mints on the way out. Gas stations would give sex with every fill-up. Banks would give sex to anyone who opened a checking account." (from The Dilbert Future, chapter 7, "The Future of Gender Relations"). BTW, I am being totally serious. Sex is parceled out in a miserly way by most females, intentionally for her power. Hence, my sincere and deep respect for 'sluts' and nymphomaniacs. I adore them.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Muslims get 72 virgins? That is not heaven, more like hell. Heaven would be 72 s!@ts (and I use that term with the utmost respect).

C T, on 28 Jun 2016 - 11:43 AM, said: From page 1 of this thread. Thanks for your misandrist drivel. Innocence of women? Give me a break. The evil of women typically manifests differently than in men, but there is no less evil.

Thank you for an excellent post! The last three paragraphs were particularly interesting. I am slowly trying to look into Goodman, and trying to get his book through interlibrary loan (it's too new). I will look into Juice and tai chi ruler in the near future. I have been slow to reply (big gap in the thread there for a while), and to try things, because on May 16th a family medical emergency happened and that is still ongoing, so I am just now trying to do some things I would have done in my pre-May 16th life. I mention this only because I don't want anyone to think I don't appreciate their advice. I very much do appreciate anyone who posts or PMs me, even if some of their replies make no sense to me or seem self-contradictory. I am a very open-minded skeptic

I should add that if you know what you are doing and want to do a remote scan or remote healing, have at it! You can even deposit money in my bank account . I mention this since one generous soul contacted me asking permission to do a remote scan.

My middle back locks up. Hence, rather than a relaxing posture that opens things up, standing meditation (站樁) gives my middle back tension to the point of numbing the muscles around the middle spine due to the tension and even causing what I would call nerve pain in my arms and hands (the latter only in the past when I was stupid enough or advised by a more adept classmate to keep standing to see if I could 'break through' the tension to relaxation, since I know even people with a healthy back find standing to be a workout initially). I should add that while lower back issues respond very well to standing or tai chi since one learns to relax the lower back and let the pelvis naturally tuck (though many even in tai chi use an active tuck, which is different), if you are hunched your middle back muscles are constantly trying to pull up your upper torso and head, so it is the opposite situation and therefore not possible to relax them. They are pulling any time you are sitting or standing. That's why one gets the extra muscle there (which in an extreme case gives the Quasimodo look), because it is a 16 hour a day workout for that area, seven days a week.

Standing meditation is not possible, as previously explained. The second method you mention, seemingly common to all styles, does nothing for me . If it were that easy, I wouldn't have started this thread

Marblehead, I'll stick with the lifting analogy if it helps us. It takes a month or two to really notice gains from weight lifting, or for an experienced lifter to notice whether a new program is making the changes he wants. But, you start lifting to begin with because you know for a fact that other people have done this to get stronger. For decades, researchers have known how weight lifting makes you stronger. You change your routine because some book or person says try it this way and get better results. People often change things because they find it doesn't work, but weight lifting is not a secretive exercise with lifter dudes only agreeing to teach the chosen ones how to do a proper curl. Also, aside from poor technique, no one suggests that doing curls a certain way will lead to you forever damaging your biceps or something like that; such claims are common in qigong. Some people are teaching things that others say are flat wrong and harmful. And that back and forth comes even from students of well known teachers or styles, not just some sort of American health club qigong. All I am asking for is someone to zap me with qi, so to speak. I am a big skeptic (of anything). I used to lift weights a little, and I would try different things, never believing in any of them unless they showed results. If someone can give me unequivocal proof of their ability through sensation in my body or healing results on me, then I would be willing to work for some months with no tangible results. Some people here will jump on that last line and ask if the teacher demonstrates to my satisfaction, why wouldn't I be able to practice for eons without tangible results? Because even qigong enthusiasts talk about teachers who can't or won't teach 'the real stuff'. In other words, the teacher may be good, but he either is not able to efficiently get his students to get that ability, or he intentionally won't teach them the most efficient method he knows of to get that ability (a common complaint I have heard among qigong enthusiasts).

Hi Michael, I am responding since folks here seem to think well of you. Your reply, like some others, makes me think either I can't communicate what I am trying to say or you may not have read what I said as what I said. I did practice. I practiced a little. Then I practiced a lot. I had a teacher who stressed no expectations and learned before the internet or many books on qigong being published, so I don't think there was a lot of qi envy involved. At that time I had daily back pain. I just have discomfort these days. I can not do standing meditation, as previously explained. Most of that was covered earlier in the thread. Can Chinese methods of body work be so different than the ones I have tried so much of? Qi, ok, but how differently can one do massage? I did have massage once and acupuncture once (two different people) in Taiwan, many years ago. Maybe different practitioners would have had some noticeable result; those two did not. Yes, I do expect some sort of results. To various other posters: All this advice about my mental state and issues, it sounds all well and good if you don't know someone. It is fascinating how sure everyone here is that they know about qi, yet there is such disagreement about what it is and how it works. Some people talk about the tantian; others insist you need bone marrow washing. Some teachers insist that if you can't feel qi, you are wasting your time; others think it all comes out in the wash. One person PMed me, starting out by saying most people here don't know the first thing about qi; maybe he's right; how would I know? In the quote above, Michael says "Some I can project qi to and sling them several feet, others may [not?] bat an eyelash." Clearly that means your qi doesn't do much or isn't very real. Obviously, what you are describing is almost entirely subjective and unreal, a placebo effect. With all the stories of qi healing, and one first hand story of martial use of qi I have been told of as well other stories I have read about, if the stuff is real it should work. Otherwise it is like those videos of lama so and so and his students faking the effect his qi has on them, or that qi guy who went into an MMA fight and was shocked that his voodoo had no effect on the guy who bloodied him up. You can see aikido and aikijutsu students falling every which way to maker master happy. There is mostly bs out there, that is for certain, so I am trying to find out if there is any truth to qi at all. Anyone who thinks they or someone they know can use qi to heal, objectively, can PM me, especially if it can be taught. Spring Forest has not made me feel anything. Zhineng Qigong almost does, and attracted me initially due to its purported safety and wide use, as well as the lack of guruness. I am curious about Pangu Qigong, but who knows when he will even be within 200 miles of me again (not this year, it seems)? There is also the very new Xuan Gong (built off of Zhineng), as well as the somewhat defunct and discredited Xiang Gong (fragrant qigong). In the past I did Yang style taichi's qigong set and eight brocade from Li Qingyun's lineage, as well as some very short qigong sets. I can go to a beginner class full of people saying they felt something, and I am left wondering if someone forgot to pass me the wacky-tobacky. How long would you lift weights before asking "When will I feel stronger?" Is the idea of progress so odd? I am not a seeker looking to spend my life in full lotus and make others feel my qi at one hundred paces. I am just looking to add to my health maintenance repertoire (and heal others, if this stuff is real) and I have known some sane people who felt qigong was quite beneficial (and I have seen in the past how real tai chi's logic defying physical skills are, so I am open to things that don't make sense at first).

I see now that this should have been posted in Daoist Discussion. Oops! Thanks to all of you for taking the time to share your suggestions.

Thank you for your reply. I am not a fan of karma, at least as I understand it. Much too Catholic Do you have any suggestions for the mind training that you say could speed up the process significantly?

Well, then, how can I do things right? That's why I am here.

Thank you for your reply. I see I was not clear in my initial post. This is not about qi-envy. This is about realistic expectations and wanting to figure things out. If I went to drawing class and couldn't seem to learn _at all_ while other students were learning some amount of drawing, it would not be about feeling "behind", but rather thinking I need to figure out how I can learn to draw (unless that is impossible, which is why I mused that maybe some people can't ever feel qi). I spent three years in the early 1990s studying with a teacher I thought then and think now was top notch, assiduously practicing Yang style tai chi, doing the long form four times a day. I did bagua. I did qigong, to the extent I could motivate myself to since I don't enjoy the doing of any qigong form I have tried (unlike tai chi). I tried to do standing stake, but that was a problem as I mentioned in my first post. Tai chi had some definite benefits for me, but it was very uncomfortable due to my kyphosis and tight hips; tai chi did not loosen these areas in the least, and that seems to me to be the key here, or at least one key with other possibly unknown keys. I could bore you with further explanations, but the point is I spent three years doing this, had physical difficulties with the practice, and felt nothing in terms of qi. By way of analogy, if someone is tone deaf, that is going to take something away from their enjoyment in playing piano (to say nothing of their ability). Hence, I am just trying to understand if I might be qi-deaf.

Thank you for your reply. I will look into the three methods you suggested. It is interesting to hear of a kyphotic energy master, perhaps even oddly inspirational. For what it is worth, I have had 17 Rolfing sessions, about that number each of NMT and chiropractic, more than a dozen of craniosacral, and some other stuff. I have tried a large number of strengthening and stretching exercises specifically for the issues I have, which haven't worked because the fundamental problem seems to me to be about muscle education rather than strength or flexibility, though Feldenkrais and like modalities have not been of any help at all. The thing that has been of the most benefit is the way of walking taught in chapter eight of Esther Gokhale's _8 Steps to a Pain-free Back_. It is the best movement education I have found. It naturally loosens the hip flexors. Interestingly, most body workers thought they were done with me even when I couldn't straighten up and used to be in pain (no pain now)! A minority of body workers realized there was more going on. Most people in any profession or personal endeavor focus too much on their success and knowledge; growth comes from looking at our failures and ignorance, IMHO.

Thank you for your reply.

Thank you for your reply. This and many other breathing meditations have been tried. My breathing is physically restricted. A bit of breathing is good for me, but too much of it is counterproductive, as weird as I know that sounds.

Thank you. I do understand all that. But I can't do standing, wuji or other arm postures, as noted.

For perspective on how I am thinking about this, I will say this as well: if I had the money, I would travel around to a handful of qigong healers I've heard are supposed to be qi-supermen, get a chee healing, and see if I can feel their energy in a concrete way -- not just, "Master's hands are very warm." I'm a show me kind of person. Of course, if they could loosen up my back, that would be something as well.

Thank you for your reply. If it came out of my tai chi practice, which I enjoy for its own reasons, then four years or eight would be fine with me. But qigong I've never been into. It was always something I did, and have now picked up again, for the purpose of chee. I don't like qigong forms in themselves. Four years is way too long for me to do something only for that reason. Way back when I had a teacher, he felt one could get there through tai chi alone, but said qigong would very much expedite things, so that is why I did and now again am doing it.

Thea Fortuna said: "Though they’ve also said quite often that masters don’t have to love within the common constraints of morality, because they are so in tune with the will of God." Sounds like something naughty happened . Don't listen to gurus. Live life yourself