Stosh

three

Four

Re: This earlier The vow protects the mind from concepts that cause it to cling to the attributes of ordinary appearance or to those of the deity. "Attributes" here are the individual aspects of the objects, and "conception" is the clinging to the reality of these particular aspects. Is this 'deity' being treated or spoken of- as an actual, conscious, living, volitional, figure ? or, as a symbolic one ?(-perhaps representative of or - an anthropomorphism -of an abstract point).

The world is a finite place, things die so others may live, and its all tied into a big web. If you leave them salmon swimming , well they eat the food that some other struggling creature wouldve eaten, maybe its one of them sea otters, a whale, or a thousand crabs. They use oxygen , take up space , carry pathogens, replace consumption of mammals etc, theres no way around all these connections ,, nor is there any reason to feel bad about having to make a living fishing. Sure , theyre beautiful creatures, and wanton destruction, overharvesting etc is undesirable, but theyre healthy eating , almost an ideal food for humans... and youre beating yourself up for no good reason whatsoever IMO. Obey the fishing laws , understand that they are there to protect the resource , protect the resource! admire them for that which they are , dump the silly stigma . That there is right livlihood. ( oh , and if you like this post feel free to send me a nice big Sockeye) .

The action violates TTBs founding principles whether it has been done already or not. Besides you're claiming that men have , and do run the women off , ( like who?) and that the women will only participate if there arent men around. I dont like the implication ....that women in the same context as men get dominated. subtext , that women are essentially .weak , perpetuating stereotype both against women, and against men. If Admin changes the founding principles , well then those are changed , but if those principles arent changed , then the womens cultivation forum is in violation of the standing principles.

Well, yes, half the worlds population wouldnt be a few, but then this thing was applied to the buddhist forum , and the worlds population of Buddhists isnt a few either though its a similar principle. And were not talking about the womens right to vote., but whether reverse sex descrimination is fit for TTBs or whether the subdivision into restricted groupings is to be TTBs modus operandi.

Dawei also posted this not long ago 1. Any forum area should appear to welcome posters and not be the exclusive posting area of a few. There may well be only a few posting in certain sub-forums but it should be because they are interested to post, not because everyone else is run-off, put-off, and generally feeling ill by coming to it. The womens thing certainly seems to violate this principle to me. and so He doesnt mistakenly feel Im singling him out personally .. This following was posted by Trunk... Welcome! ~ TheTaoBums is an open internet forum for the discussion of the internal arts. Outside the boundaries of any one tradition or school, though leaning toward eastern influenced thought and practices, it is eclectic, egalitarian and lively. Membership is free of cost (though donations are accepted). TTBs' Cultural Context and Founding Principles The purpose of this document is to concisely state the most fundamental framework principles that give TTBs it's distinctive shape. This is not "all the rules, permutations, etc", just the steel beams. TTBs exists in the general field of "The Search for Truth". The Usual organized formats (schools) for The Search tend to have: 1. focus exclusively within a school 2. hierachical learning structure, hierachical ability to speak TheTaoBums' founding principles form a deliberate cultural counter-point: 1. run independently of any school, which allows a more eclectic atmosphere 2. conversational learning, egalitarian ability for members to speak TTBs' social format is "cafeteria", not "classroom". It's part of TTBs' premise that, broadly in culture, these two formats are necessary, distinct yet complementary. TheTaoBums has a strong egalitarian ethic in that it's whole purpose is to provide a civil very open context for member conversations. However, its governance structure is mostly top down; it's not a democracy. - admins - own / run the board - moderators - enforce rules - members - converse TTBs' Conversational Context: 1. At TTBs member participation in conversation is non-hierarchical. Meaning, members have equal ability to talk regardless of level of knowledge, achievement, or status / credentials of any kind. TTBs has an underlying ethic of valuing the communication of each person.

Thats a fair point , new folks may be overwhelmed by 'old hands' ,, thats not gender specific though, is it ? If one said it was , then Id think the one thought women arent as good at handling the adversity. Also It would hint that the women weren't old hands, or they were more compassionate than the male 'old hands'. So instead we end up with a gender divided forum.

So she would join, if the current female complement posted female specific posts , .. well they always couldve, or she couldve joined, and then asked questions. The us vs them mentality popped up as soon as a gender specific section popped up. One female said she didnt want to share certain information with men, made some dehumanizing comments ,and another person suggested me to leave the thread so only people with opinions he agrees with could post to it. Another initially reacted as if I was suggesting she shouldnt be free to speak her mind. Dividing by subjects or interests is fine for organization purposes, Its the dividing by gender or race that fosters fear and aggression,, the proof was right there in the thread, just at the suggestion! That last part there again , underlines a soto voce gender bias , reversed.. Ex. 'alot of girls could potentially gain by self inquiry into why they feel the way they do about men. Many women may project onto men what they feel about some other men.' More fully corrected, IMO , Folks can learn more about one another, if they dont project the attitudes of one person onto another unfairly.

Well that there speaks for itself. Ill leave it there.

Just that the bad examples men have set , creating boys clubs, excluding women etc isnt the fix -just reversed for gender. Some guy wants to talk about his semen retention, in general or health , well then you just go right ahead and post up those physical issues that interest women in particular. At the very least, why shouldnt guys have some interest in their partners wellbeing? But mainly my point is that if you are doing it for reasons that have stereotype at heart , well then you 'aint no better' and are not noticing of the fact that it doesnt fix the social issue which offends us.

Youre setting up a straw man argument here , Thats a no no.

Right , agreed, the subjects are open , sometimes folks want to be a bit private , fine. Again , fine nolo contendere. The comments? Yeah they are , but heck , theyre just comments , sometimes said as jokes , sometimes relating to more emotional-upbringing issues. Ya gotta see that many of the dudes here are sympathetic about the malignment of both women and men , gays and races and probably of puppies and bears. All Im saying is that dividing up the 'water fountains' has a negative aspect- it emphasizes stereotypes, instead of you ladies right there in the mix , yall end up seen discussing vaginas in some back room. IF this action is taken specifically to attract women , ( which I figure it would) then the attracted women are attracted to the clique , the subjects of that clique etc The men that may not give a hoot to hear about 50 cures for menstrual cramps , well theyre just going to see this as one more example of women having no larger interests ,, AND theyd be largely right about it because youve attracted women who really did have these interests foremost ,, Proof of that ? well, they didnt show up for the rest of the subject matter. Im not saying you cant talk the subjects just that reversing sexism - or racism- doesnt put an end to it ,, the erroneous perceptions are emphasized. Yall need to stay in the mix and put up with all the various brands of stupidity just like the men. Dont retreat.

Me personally , I do think its sexist based idea, 1 you already couldve talked about or started a thread on it any of that at any time there still is no call that there needs to be a special 'womens section' for it, just like I dont see a mens section. The desire to somehow segregate out a special section for it, is where the issue of just reversing sexism appears. 2 Men have wives daughters mothers and jobs in the medical fields , and frankly some may know more on the subject of womens health issues than you do. and no, I dont think the issues are sexist , nor moot. @Z About this,, "women are vampires who try to steal your life force." C'mon , dont expect me to try to justify stupidity like that.. but I will say , that theres plenty of things I find ridiculous or even mildly offensive if I was going to be bothered by it -every day. Heck I just recently read "men are pigs" . Thats more justifiable ?

Thats a good post , but ummm, how does someone have a womens cultivation subforum without violating the correct social ettiquette being promoted. Its essentially hypocritical. IMO One just cant get away from the sexism by reversing it , or artificially trying to make it go away. It just has to be let go of and forgotten , made moot by non attatchment.

@ Asmo "If someone thinks that his pov is right and won't consider any other opinion why should you care or even talk to him/her?" If one does not feel a need to change anyone elses point of view , that requirement would be moot. "Different persons different viewpoints different truths/lies, because everyone percieves their reality different." If one believes this to be true , then , there is no possibility of ever having the same point of view anyway. Why should I talk to someone who isnt sure of even their own point of view?

Yep it is pretty, creates its own environment , but down here , folks act like its evil incarnate ,, as you said. ..it clogs the water for those bass fishermen that havent learned how to fish amongst the weeds ( where all the fish hang out if they have any choice) .

Looks like one copy of book five avail on open library, I ususally only do ebooks so Im not sure whether they 'deliver' physical copies. WorldCat looks like it has four copies to get through library

Though I might be on a list or two Ive never put anyone on an ignore list , ever. ( that I recall) I dont want to box out entirely folks I may eventually come to like, or may say things Im not happy about hearing , but should listen to at least. It strikes me ,personally, as intolerant, or breeding of intolerance. it doesnt look like extending compassion for humanity in general and besides , I just have too much curiosity. I just cant find it in me to close doors like that. But I get it , that some folks feel otherwise.

Lotus can be very invasive in places , keep this in mind because weird things happen and plants manage to escape , and , though the seeds generally have decent germination rates they need to be prepared correctly. (the seed coats are so durable they might last 300 yrs ! )

That , the fire in my attitude is far more enthralling to me than it is to anyone else. Oh! and that no sentence ever uttered is beyond misconstrual

I think Im right almost all the time, and the other times Im just not sure. But Im suspicious that vigilante justice has the same pitfall as our voting habits , it hinges on uncoordinated opinion. Persons -are often decent , its mobs that rarely are.

Ok , its delegated. But in defense of my point Id like to explain that the only one ultimately ( so I think) that really can say what the larger goals of the forum are would be him. I couldnt determine that this was a site for primarily Taoists , or equally for Buddhists , or anything like that. I didnt create and define it.

Well Im sorry if I mischaracterized your stand , Ive seen your comments elsewhere being rather preferential to leaving the Buddhist section as it stands , So I just do not know how much is supposed to be taken at face value or ' tongue in cheek'. Your personal posts have always seemed to me to be well measured , respectful, and self controlled. I do still still, however think you wish to protect the Buddhist section , from 'excessive interference' figure you feel it has merit even as it is , and that its not much different from other sites on the subject. I disagree as mentioned. I didnt want to hang this hat on your hook but to the direct question by Apech I felt I needed to answer bluntly. If you really would prefer an upgrade in conduct in that section , Im thinking it would be in your own interest to say so outright. If not, then Im at least not coming to an understanding way off the mark.

The folks that I dont have to name because their own posts decare their opinions... Like Ralis and Ct and Simple Jack , the posts repeat the same refrain. ' Leave us alone this is just fine'. Simple Jack presents a clear example so Ill elaborate, when he was called out for his verbal behavior, he posted an offensive picture, when his two days were up he read something else which he reacted to by directing to the same exact insulting picture. Clearly he feels justified in his actions, he sees the suspension as misplaced, and in a very obvious way he showed that his own views were unchanged , and he still wasnt going to accept the correction. As I see it , the pleas or arguments have been made and rebuffed. Theres no reason to keep harping on the guys for that, nor is there reason to expect any changes from that quarter if they are left to continue the degree of self moderation which theyve enjoyed. They arent 'on board' for changing anything, PERIOD. If there are Taobums members which dont feel that way , and do want a less argumentative more courteous buddist section , well then they need to post something. So I suppose it leaves the issue on Seans desk, but since he didnt change the issue before, Im guessing he isnt going to do anything about it now either , despite the verbalizations of complaint being made. I dont have to prove 'rightness' of the sentiments that the larger Taobums community may be voicing. They are voicing their sentiments , which means they have them , that some others may not care that the sentiments are HAD , and are looking only to find out if they can be proven "wrong or right", well then obviously they dont consider the sentiments of the other Taobums important. (Which is ironically why you end up with the never ending arguments of PROVE IT .)