Why is creativity considered a feminine trait when women don't create anything except babies?

[witch]

Well, I always read any thread TaoMeow posts in. I'm rather regretting this one!

 

First off, you can't extrapolate modern society and imprint it backwards. Women were basically considered men's property worldwide until the beginning of the last century. In some places they are still considered men's property. Even when not considered men's property outright, they have historically borne the lion's share of the childrearing. Childrearing is an all-consuming task, particularly in the pre-birth control family with seven or eight children. Add to that the rarity of women going to college, and of course women were not creative, except in the small arts that women were taught--watercolors, needlepoint, in the Middle East making carpets. They surpass men in those things.

 

Rather, compare men as a whole to the rare wealthy single women who had the freedom to be either college educated or educated in the particular field of their art. The percentage of superb artists in that subgroup of women far exceeds the percentage of superior artists in men as a whole, and even, if you want to compare apples to apples, the percentage of superior artists in wealthy single men. Virginia Woolf wrote a book, A Room Of One's Own, lamenting the fact that Jane Austen was forced to write as a mere hobby, and put her writing away when she was called to babysit or make social calls or be a companion.

 

Now, things have changed. Young ladies have a chance now, there is a level playing field. You asked, and here they are:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDhV-xXDWsE

 

http://www.inventions.org/culture/female/lamarr.html

 

 

Now it's true that women are not as concerned with patents as men are--we are more collaborative to our detriment, but I will rank Marie Curie against Yoshiro Nakamatsu any day.

 

http://www.edinformatics.com/great_thinkers/curie.htm

 

I do want to apologize to the newer female members of taobums, who may not realize this mostly unmoderated board attracts young men interested in learning ancient Chinese secrets to brush up their PUA (pick up artist) game. They are here to get the sixth chakra power to seduce young ladies, and to learn to avoid premature ejaculation, and that's about it. If I were a more wicked witch, I would avail myself of some of the angry pent-up young jing plashing all over the board.

[gendao]

I feel that way all the damn time.

 

Anyway...

 

I was reading about sexual selection....

 

there are two types of selection. intra sexual and intersexual. Intra has more to do with male to male competition for females (the NEVER ENDING VIOLENCE AGAINST HUMANITY, OUR OWN KIND WHICH WOMEN SEEM TO SUPPORT) and intersexual.

 

I feel people focus more on intrasexual, and so do women.. such that now it's all based on this...

Ha, me too!

 

Anyhow, by the same token - those bad boy studs whom women naturally flock to...tend to achieve less greatness in life...because they DON'T NEED TO. In fact, they usually underachieve. Because if they are ALREADY getting tons of women by doing nothing, then they have no motivation to strive for anything more.

 

It's more the guys who are frustrated with their place in life (often sexually) who feel the need to prove themselves more. Or find something to do with all that pent-up, creative yang energy. Which sucks for them, but is good for society - which then benefits from their creative achievements.

 

Anyhow, you can see how much male behavior and the very heights of civilization - are subconsciously driven by female sexual selection.

[gendao]

Now it's true that women are not as concerned with patents as men are--we are more collaborative to our detriment, but I will rank Marie Curie against Yoshiro Nakamatsu any day.

 

http://www.edinformatics.com/great_thinkers/curie.htm

Really?

 

Curie did some research on radiation. But what did she actually invent?

Yoshiro Nakamatsu has invented over 3200 inventions and holds 2300 patents.

Yet, Curie > Nakamatsu??? How you figure?

 

If Curie was a man and Nakamatsu was a woman - would that be considered a totally sexist conclusion?

 

And Orianthi is a decent axewoman, but let's not pretend she's anywhere near the league of a Jimi Hendrix, Prince or SRV.

 

Again, if men beat women in creativity, but women beat men in intuition, then why can't we just call that a draw? You don't hear men making excuses why they're less intuitive in general. So, why do feminists have to claim that women equal or surpass men in EVERYTHING? Which even then I'd accept, if it was factually-supported. But, that's simply not what the record factually shows. Not trying to be sexist here, simply factual.

Edited December 7, 2009 by vortex

[fiveelementtao]

Can you elaborate on the power strenght thing. I just don't get it but find it interesting.

 

I would love to... this realization was life changing for me.. I'm a little hesitant because I am fairly certain it will ruffle some feathers on both sides of the sexual street. But let me first suggest that you meditate and examine the concept of strength vs power. I mean for weeks or months. Look everywhere in Nature and society for the difference between the two and learn to distinguish one from the other... Our modern society has completley forgotten this disticntion and is IME and IMO is a MAJOR key to magical accomplishment. If you want to be a toist wizard... Learn this distinction and then internalize it... It can only be learned in experience. Not in words...

 

 

Strength = the steel girders of a building.. Power = the electricity that powers it.... The steel girders provide the shape of the building. The electricity makes lights, elevators, telephones and computers work.

 

This is my recollection of aquote from one of deng ming dao's books. I like alot... A chinese Taoist master and young american student are standing on a streetcorner. The student asks, "Master please explain yin and yang." The master says, I cannot explain it in words." "then show me." says the student. "Yang is the light post and yin is the traffic going by." The student says... "That is exactly the opposite of what I have read in books." The master said, that is why you shouldn't learn Tao from a book."

 

Maybe start the power/strength discussion in another thread. I don't want to hijack this thread...

 

But for now, let me say that it is easier for me to teach this concept in person, not with words. These forces of yin and yang are not intellectual concepts. They are real. and they operate under real laws. I learned this concept in Shang Ch'ing martial arts. In our strikes, there are always simultaneous yin and yang. Unlike some other IMA applications where first there is a pull (yin) and then a push (yang.) In Spirit Fighting there are two (almost) simultaneous strikes... First the yin hand strikes from behind and disrupts the Chi flow of the body drawing all the energy of the body to heal that spot struck by the yin hand. This leaves the front of the body without Wei (external) Chi and is vulnerable to attack. Then the yang hand immediately strikes the front of the body. The impact is devastating. The victim feels the impact of the yang hand and thinks the Yang hand has done all the damage, but the truth is that the Yin hand did all the work and the yang hand takes all the credit. This is why we have a saying, "Behind every successful man is a good woman." Nowadays that is a sexist and innacurate statement. But the principle is true when we talk about the function of yin and yang in creation...

 

This is why I originally talked about that even if men were to do all the "creating" in this world, it is just the external, visible result. The Yin (feminine) still set up the scenario for the men to do all the "creating". I still think people are confusing industriousness for creativity. There is a difference. In any case, even if Agape were correct that men are doing all the creating, it is only a surface interpretation. Under the surface, the Yin is doing all the creating and the Yang is just taking all the credit. As has been said before. It takes both yin and yang to create.

 

To all the ladies that feel slighted. I welcome your input. I understand why Agape's posts are offensive to you. I do understand where Agape is coming from and I actually think that a male perspective is very helpful to him. From what I see, he does not understand the feminine and more feminine input, if done reactively will only confuse him further and justify (in his mind) his perception. I've been where he is, so I am not offended by him. But I also see that unlike Non, what Agape needs is more yin. But because he doesn't understand her, he keeps driving yin away from him...

Edited December 7, 2009 by fiveelementtao

[Non]

I would love to... this realization was life changing for me.. I'm a little hesitant because I am fairly certain it will ruffle some feathers on both sides of the sexual street. But let just suggest that ou meditate and examine the concept of strength vs power.

Strength = the steel girders of a building.. Power = the electricity that powers it.... The steel girders provide the shape of the building. The electricity makes lights, elevators, telephones and computers work.

 

This is my recollection of aquote from one of deng ming dao's books. I like alot... A chinese Taoist master and young american student are standing on a streetcorner. The student asks, "Master please explain yin and yang." The master says, I cannot explain it in words." "then show me." says the student. "Yang is the light post and yin is the traffic going by." The student says... "That is exactly the opposite of what I have read in books." The master said, that is why you shouldn't learn Tao from a book."

 

Maybe start the power/strength discussion in another thread. I don't want to hijack this thread...

 

But for now, let me say that it is easier for me to teach this concept in person, not with words. These forces of yin and yang are not intellectual concepts. They are real. and they operate under real laws. I learned this concept in Shang Ch'ing martial arts. In our strikes, there are always simultaneous yin and yang. Unlike some other IMA applications where first there is a pull (yin) and then a push (yang.) In Spirit Fighting there are two (almost) simultaneous strikes... First the yin hand strikes from behind and disrupts the Chi flow of the body drawing all the energy of the body to heal that spot struck by the yin hand. This leaves the front of the body without Wei (external) Chi and is vulnerable to attack. Then the yang hand immediately strikes the front of the body. The impact is devastating. The victim feels the impact of the yang hand and thinks the Yang hand has done all the damage, but the truth is that the Yin hand did all the work and the yang hand takes all the credit. This is why we have a saying, "Behind every successful man is a good woman." Nowadays that is a sexist and innacurate statement. But the principle is true when we talk about the function of yin and yang in creation...

 

This is why I originally talked about that even if men were to do all the "creating" in this world, it is just the external, visible result. The Yin (feminine) still set up the scenario for the men to do all the "creating". I still think people are confusing industriousness for creativity. There is a difference. In any case, even if Agape were correct that men are doing all the creating, it is only a surface interpretation. Under the surface, the Yin is doing all the creating and the Yang is just taking all the credit. As has been said before. It takes both yin and yang to create.

 

To all the ladies that feel slighted. I welcome your input. I understand why Agape's posts are offensive to you. I do understand where Agape is coming from and I actually think that a male perspective is very helpful to him. From what I see, he does not understand the feminine and more feminine input, if done reactively will only confuse him further and justify (in his mind) his perception. I've been where he is, so I am not offended by him. But I also see that unlike Non, what Agape needs is more yin. But because he doesn't understand her, he keeps driving yin away from him...

 

lol. Man you and your 'yin and yang' stuff, confusing it with Masculine and Feminine. you still hold onto such concepts as "men = strong, women = weak"

 

I still dont think yin and yang have much to do with masculinity and femininity which are simply based on sex, which is an earthly thing OR of the human condition, which is cultural and societal construct. What if there were 3 genders, and the only way sexuality could work was if those 3 genders came together to procreate. Lol, which is yin and which is yang on that one? As far as I can see, female is yin because she has a hole, male is yang because he has a penis which goes into the hole, and they are complementary (but it really depends on which angle you view it to suggest that one is yang and yin).

 

I mean.. REALLY yin and yang are simply complementary aspects of each other, which means from one angle yang is yin, and the other angle, yin is yang. It is are simply 1/1=1.

 

 

But yang is NOT male, and yin is NOT female. Male and female and concepts of the human condition. If it was then yin and yang would really just be "masculine/feminine" and such concepts are worldly concepts.

 

Its clear too that u think masculine is stregnth and women is power.

 

Power is somewhat more passive than strength. Women hold a lot of power by simply being born and looking pretty that's for sure. And they dont have to move a damn finger according to this theory.

Edited December 7, 2009 by Non

[fiveelementtao]

edit

Edited December 7, 2009 by fiveelementtao

[immortal_sister]

 

This is why I originally talked about that even if men were to do all the "creating" in this world, it is just the external, visible result. The Yin (feminine) still set up the scenario for the men to do all the "creating". I still think people are confusing industriousness for creativity. There is a difference. In any case, even if Agape were correct that men are doing all the creating, it is only a surface interpretation. Under the surface, the Yin is doing all the creating and the Yang is just taking all the credit. As has been said before. It takes both yin and yang to create.

 

To all the ladies that feel slighted. I welcome your input. I understand why Agape's posts are offensive to you. I do understand where Agape is coming from and I actually think that a male perspective is very helpful to him. From what I see, he does not understand the feminine and more feminine input, if done reactively will only confuse him further and justify (in his mind) his perception. I've been where he is, so I am not offended by him. But I also see that unlike Non, what Agape needs is more yin. But because he doesn't understand her, he keeps driving yin away from him...

 

 

i think you make a lot of good points, and i tend to agree with most of what you said. i am not one of those feminists that think men and women are the same, or should be the same, and my understanding of equality is often offensive even to other women, as i do not agree that equality means being the same. women and men are completely different creatures in so many ways, and these differences should be embraced and even brought to the forefront, as these are ultimately what help create & maintain balance between men and women. differences does not make one lesser than the other in its essence. this concept does not make me feel slighted; men's attitude about these differences does, however.

 

yes, for the most part, men have more physical strength, women have more "power". but discussing this on an internet forum is somewhat futile, as you alluded to, since it is hard to really discuss these very subjective concepts; everyone has their own definitions. already non reacted strongly to your choice of words and completely misunderstood you...

 

agape could probably use some advice from both sides of the spectrum, this is true. but the negative energy he put out with his first post was not in any way a genuine invitation for information and input. your observation that his misunderstanding yin is driving her away is absolutely correct. and i still stand by what i said in one of my others posts - no amount of internet chat is going to truly make him realize what the missing piece of the puzzle is for him. he needs real life experiences and growth that will lead to maturity and greater understanding of the all-permeating truth.

Edited December 7, 2009 by immortal_sister

[fiveelementtao]

no amount of internet chat is going to truly make him realize what the missing piece of the puzzle is for him. he needs real life experiences and growth that will lead to maturity and greater understanding of the all-permeating truth.

 

I completely agree. Much of my posts are designed to pique peoples' interest so they seek out a real teacher to guide them experientially.

Edited December 7, 2009 by fiveelementtao

[gendao]

Strength = the steel girders of a building.. Power = the electricity that powers it.... The steel girders provide the shape of the building. The electricity makes lights, elevators, telephones and computers work.

 

This is why I originally talked about that even if men were to do all the "creating" in this world, it is just the external, visible result. The Yin (feminine) still set up the scenario for the men to do all the "creating".

So, are you basically saying that Yang is like the electricity (Heaven) while Yin is like the wire (structural Earth grounding)?

 

Anyhow, these gender battles always end the same: Women get emotionally hurt/defensive and men get logically frustrated. Ironically further proving the gender gap and stereotypical Mars/Venus differences, lol.

 

So, what's the real solution here??? Anyone?

[immortal_sister]

So, are you basically saying that Yang is like the electricity (Heaven) while Yin is like the wire (structural Earth grounding)?

 

Anyhow, these gender battles always end the same: Women get emotionally hurt/defensive and men get logically frustrated. Ironically further proving the gender gap and stereotypical Mars/Venus differences, lol.

 

So, what's the real solution here??? Anyone?

 

i don't think there is a solution. these conversations will never end, because it is an eternal struggle, one of the greatest dualities in our lives. we can have amazing conversations about these topics, and learn a lot about the opposite gender. if people are open-minded and willing to genuinely try to look at the world from the other's perspective, they might learn something new, and expand their mind. but you need that open mind to begin with. so, yeah, no solution just an anger-filled opening post, with several great replies that will probably be ignored by those who need it most!..

[fiveelementtao]

So, are you basically saying that Yang is like the electricity (Heaven) while Yin is like the wire (structural Earth grounding)?

 

sorry... the building is not a good metaphor... let me think of a better metaphor...

 

just an anger-filled opening post, with several great replies that will probably be ignored by those who need it most!..

My powerful sister.... sounds like you need to forgive someone who has hurt you... Then you could contribute without fear or anger... I for one want to hear what you have to contribute... forget about the opening post. I can feel that there are men listening who honestly want to learn...

[Non]

sorry... the building is not a good metaphor... let me think of a better metaphor...

 

 

When I say "guidance" being yin I meant just that, what u meant. You got all caught up in the word "guidance" and it not being "yang" or something.

 

How can anything be either yin or yang? Everything is yin AND yang. If it wasn't, it wouldn't exist..

 

Again... male/female are yang/yin, but yang/yin are not male/female. I see yin/yang as 1/1=1. Haha. Looking from the yin side, the other side is yang, and vice versa. Looking from the yang side the other is yin. But they are actually in a sense, one and the same when together.

 

When you cut something in half.. right down the middle.. do you always see one peice as having only void while the other half has a peice sticking out to fulfill the void, or is it simply half and half? Is the cup half empty or half full? or both? Is the half empty portion feminine while the half full portion masculine? lol

 

Which is better? Going beyond duality or getting caught up in it ?

Edited December 7, 2009 by Non

[Birch]

Lest we forget.

 

Sex = biology

Gender = social construct

 

Pretty much anyone can get knocked up (or knock someone up) and drop a kid on the floor. Being a mother or a father is a whole different thing.

 

Taoism would point me in the general direction of a way of orienting myself in society based on my biology. So what happens when society is f8cked?

[Ya Mu]

Kuan Yin Laughs,

She said How Funny!

As Creation Can't Be Performed

Without Intuition.

Do you not remember?

 

So are we here to Create?

Or Are We Here to Get in Touch with Our Intuition?

Kuan Yin Laughs again,

And Replies, Yes.

[witch]

Really?

 

Curie did some research on radiation. But what did she actually invent?

Yoshiro Nakamatsu has invented over 3200 inventions and holds 2300 patents.

Yet, Curie > Nakamatsu??? How you figure?

 

If Curie was a man and Nakamatsu was a woman - would that be considered a totally sexist conclusion?

 

And Orianthi is a decent axewoman, but let's not pretend she's anywhere near the league of a Jimi Hendrix, Prince or SRV.

 

Again, if men beat women in creativity, but women beat men in intuition, then why can't we just call that a draw? You don't hear men making excuses why they're less intuitive in general. So, why do feminists have to claim that women equal or surpass men in EVERYTHING? Which even then I'd accept, if it was factually-supported. But, that's simply not what the record factually shows. Not trying to be sexist here, simply factual.

 

I am sexist. There are some things men are better at than women, just intrinsically. I was a math major. Men at the highest levels are better than women at mathematics. They are better at analytical thinking, and MUCH better at spatial thinking. They are more tactical than women, they are more strategic than women. Men are more analytical, women are more intuitive, and men and women are equally creative. And of course men are better at sports, again at the highest levels, aside from sports that require endurance or agility over speed and strength.

 

Creativity belongs to both of us, and I think you realize that at some level. Most people don't immediately think "inventors" when they think creativity, and yet two out of the three examples you gave were inventors, and the other example, of music, was in a genre that has only had genuine non-singing female artists that weren't gimmicks for less than ten years. When Jimi Hendrix made his mark, 100% of rock guitarists were male, except for gimmick girl guitarists in girl bands. Even with that stigma, three of the "girl band" guitarists broke out and had respectable careers--Joan Jett, Lita Ford, and Nancy Wilson. Even Orianthi, shredder that she is, is relegated to singing Miley Cyrus-like pop fluff, but she will break out of that. Right now she's not Jimi, but she is Paul McCartney back when he was singing in a boy band. And in ten years we will have a female Jimi.

 

In the more obvious creative arts, like writing novels or painting, women have long held their own. As for recent patents, it's hard to find a Thomas Edison nowadays, first because most everything has already been patented, and second because new important patents are now mostly held by corporations, not individuals. Yoshiro Nakamatsu was born in 1928. Find comparable male inventors born after 1960, when men and women started having the chance of competing on an equal playing field in terms of education. I'm rather shocked that you consider Marie Curie's contribution to science as less than his.

[fiveelementtao]

How can anything be either yin or yang? Everything is yin AND yang. If it wasn't, it wouldn't exist..

You are speaking an intellectual half-truth to avoid yourself... You;re playing word games. you are not speaking from experiential understanding. My original comment about you needing more yang was not an intellectual response to your words, it was an energetic revelation to me based on your freudian slip about wanting to be guided by women...

 

Meditate on it for a while, If I am wrong, you'll know it.. But I can see it is bugging you... So look into it... What have you got to lose?

 

OK, I'm done for awhile, I need to eat something...

[witch]

This Marie Curie thing is really bugging me.

 

She won two freaking Nobel prizes, in physics and chemistry.

 

"Marie Curie was a Polish physicist and chemist who lived between 1867-1934. Together with her husband, Pierre, she discovered two new elements (radium and polonium, two radioactive elements that they extracted chemically from pitchblende ore) and studied the x-rays they emitted. She found that the harmful properties of x-rays were able to kill tumors. By the end of World War I, Marie Curie was probably the most famous woman in the world. She had made a conscious decision, however, not to patent methods of processing radium or its medical applications."

 

http://inventors.about.com/library/invento...lMarieCurie.htm

 

"Her achievements include the creation of a theory of radioactivity (a term coined by her), techniques for isolating radioactive isotopes, and the discovery of two new elements, polonium and radium. It was also under her personal direction that the world's first studies were conducted into the treatment of neoplasms ("cancers"), using radioactive isotopes. "

 

She created a new branch of science. And healed people. And discovered two new elements. And won two Nobel prizes. In her off time she invented the mobile X-ray machine. Oh hell, read this to understand the deep importance of her discovery

 

http://www.aip.org/history/curie/resbr1.htm

 

And your inventor invented CD's, the karaoke machine and the taxi meter, big whoop-de-doo.

[NeiChuan]

This Marie Curie thing is really bugging me.

 

She won two freaking Nobel prizes, in physics and chemistry.

 

"Marie Curie was a Polish physicist and chemist who lived between 1867-1934. Together with her husband, Pierre, she discovered two new elements (radium and polonium, two radioactive elements that they extracted chemically from pitchblende ore) and studied the x-rays they emitted. She found that the harmful properties of x-rays were able to kill tumors. By the end of World War I, Marie Curie was probably the most famous woman in the world. She had made a conscious decision, however, not to patent methods of processing radium or its medical applications."

 

http://inventors.about.com/library/invento...lMarieCurie.htm

 

"Her achievements include the creation of a theory of radioactivity (a term coined by her), techniques for isolating radioactive isotopes, and the discovery of two new elements, polonium and radium. It was also under her personal direction that the world's first studies were conducted into the treatment of neoplasms ("cancers"), using radioactive isotopes. "

 

She created a new branch of science. And healed people. And discovered two new elements. And won two Nobel prizes. In her off time she invented the mobile X-ray machine. Oh hell, read this to understand the deep importance of her discovery

 

http://www.aip.org/history/curie/resbr1.htm

 

And your inventor invented CD's, the karaoke machine and the taxi meter, big whoop-de-doo.

 

hm. Very cool, I remember in elementary I did a report on her

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

I have to say Agape thanks for the first of the morning laugh for me when I read the thread title.

 

Having said that I don't think it's totally a worthless argument, but I can see your main point is with a frustration with females and your expectations of them.

 

As someone else mentioned women haven't exactly had the options over the last few thousand years so it's kind of a bit difficult to judge on the creativity side.

 

The other point is though, there is a big difference between female/feminine and feminine goddess. This is where spirituality gets mixed up. There are many women I don't consider feminine, not that I think they need to be, there are others who are feminine who are not the goddess either(and I don't mean goddess as in hot)yet like to bang on and on about the goddess and feminine energy whereby in my view they are anything but feminine but simply 'feminist', again nothing wrong with that, but there is a difference.

 

Expressing like a 'bish-bash-bam!' feminist is not feminine or the goddess energy, it's a misplaced 'my cocks bigger than your cock' male attitude, but you can't blame anyone for fighting back, someones gotta do it to pave the way for equality and rights for those in the future and now. Having said that I do suppose 'Shiva' the creator/ destroyer could be mentioned in contrast.

 

Going back to mainly the first page of this thread and a few of the concerns about women.......

 

You gotta stop expecting women to be perfect.... your socially conditioned view of the perfect woman. It certainly wasn't your fault, you expect perhaps a lot more out of women than they can deliver...... ie. virginal/filial mother type. Women are born into their condition having to be expected to live up to this, yet, who told you women were not allowed to enjoy sex, and as much sex as they like. Society insinuated it to you. Christianity and the media gave this ideal of the 'perfect woman'...... and they have had to try to live up to it.... sometimes against their own urges.

 

Men in their younger years want that from women, because it is the part of themselves they have lost, purity in the physical and emotional sense. It's unreasonable to expect so much from them. They are not perfect, sad, but true. It was a sad day when i realized that. I wish they were, then I wouldn't have to bother working on my own crap, and I could just see/live perfection and purity through them.

 

It wasn't their fault either, the whole alpha male thing, yes it's true in their younger years they are often attracted to those qualities, but that is conditioned in their psychology through the media and societies expectations of them ie' married and having babies and being a mother. It's not their fault no more than it's your fault for wanting a hot 'piece of ass' that only ever wants to service your johnson, and no one else's.

 

But it's not on really. A human is a human is a human. Stop seeing the ideal, just see the human with needs and decide if you want to fulfill those needs, if you think it's worth it. Stop thinking male/female. It's limiting to yourself and others. Play the game if needs be, then when you get the ONE, all social expectations aside, drop the game.

 

Do make sure you drop 'the game' after though, what was it, 'PUA', as it gets rather soul destroying afterwards. To them and you.

[Seth Ananda]

Hmmm All my Girl Friends have been 'Hot', I would even go so far as to say very hot... and their creativity levels were mostly through the roof.

The blessed partner who now graces my life is constantly creating things, she paints, sews, has a ceramics major.

 

I don't really know what else to say to such a ridiculous Idea?

[Taomeow]

Well, I always read any thread TaoMeow posts in. I'm rather regretting this one!

I'm bound to disappoint from time to time! sorry, I guess it was a private joke between me and me (I just didn't feel like taking the subject on with any seriousness, I figured someone else will... bows )

 

but let me try to explain the punch line... and also give you a reference for if/when you have the time/inclination: "The Cosmic Serpent: DNA and the Origins of Knowledge," by Jeremy Narby, Ph.D. He is an anthropologist who met the female entity I was talking about and spent the next fifteen years pondering what she showed him. He came to the same conclusion I did -- to wit:

 

that the universe itself is female,

that it expresses its creative imperative through creating life,

that life is governed by DNA in any and all of its dimensions,

that ayahuasca is the interdimensional connecting cable that plugs you into the DNA database of all universes in all dimensions, no less, all times and all spaces and all the timeless places...

and -- now the punch line -- that in all of this universe of universes, the real and ONLY Power is the power of the mother over her baby, and all the rest of existence plays out this creatress-creation relationship.

 

I've said it in one line here but She took the first 18 hours of the first intro nonstop to show me, among billions other things, the single most important thing: exactly why humans are so puny, so not calling the shots in the grand scheme of things, in the universe of universes. We can't create shit on any scale that matters, we, the rejects among peoples that create galaxies and play their games of gods with them, precisely because we don't understand The Power. We are the village idiots of creation, the joke of ages, because of that.

 

Well, I can't explain here what 18 hours of "Lesson 1: Power" encompassed (I too will need the next 15 years should gods grant them to me to integrate at least some of that). I can just try to explain why it is that the title of Agape's post -- "women create nothing but babies" -- resonated with this knowledge of mine in a funny way... And besides funny, the hair-raising part was... well... I just know She has a temper, oh my god of gods, cara madre mia has a temper you or me or any other woman who is less than Power Herself will never have... shudder.... so I imagined what She would tell him, and how...

 

(and I call her cara madre mia because she told me to call her that, against my objections that I speak no Spanish -- She said, well, all people here do and so you'll have to -- and snap -- unsilenced that silenced part of my DNA where complete and eloquent Spanish I never learned is stored, by removing a SIR 2-P enzyme ring -- she showed me how -- ... THAT was fun.)

 

...did I redeem myself a bit yet, or did I only make it worse?

Edited December 7, 2009 by Taomeow

[Taomeow]

Anyhow, these gender battles always end the same: Women get emotionally hurt/defensive and men get logically frustrated. Ironically further proving the gender gap and stereotypical Mars/Venus differences, lol.

 

So, what's the real solution here??? Anyone?

 

A guru of mine used to say that whenever people say "always," "never," "everybody," "nobody," they are referring to the feeling they are stuck in.

 

In any event... What the solution is?.. Well, to refer to something I learned recently, Wang Liping dedicated one of his lectures (lectures always preceded the practice during the workshop) to natural body cycles to follow so as to be at one's most productive and most creative at the most appropriate times. He used the 28-day female cycle, explaining what should be done on every particular day of this period and why. Then someone in the audience asked, well, what about men, what are we, chopped liver?.. do men have cycles they could abide by? He said, well, men have cycles too, but they are neither as precise nor as easly to learn to perceive subjectively, and most men today are deaf, dumb and blind to their own energies and are better off not trying to be guided by them. Men, he said, are way WAY better off following the woman's cycles, and following women in general, and obeying women. He said, in China, men are thought of as the smartest and most prudent -- and tend to be the most successful -- who are actually afraid of their wives. I for one, he said, am afraid of mine (bowing in her direction -- with timing uncanny she was coming in just at that moment), see, she walks into the room and already I don't know what to say...

 

How do you like this idea from this source?..

[de_paradise]

I'm not sure what this thread is about now, but to address the OP, PUArts should be merely a stepping stone to personal development, but spiritual cultivation is the BIG DEAL, so big that few dare to believe it. Forget all this sociology mind games, save it for the aspiring minds at fastseduction, just leave it behind and go beyond it by literally evolving. Vajrayogini practise is meant to be a quick path for depraved modern people like ourselves.But, if you think PUA learning curve is steep, its nothing compared to literally evolving yourself through meditations and energy practises. As Buddha says, time is short. I know this will probably for all intents and purposes be ignored, but I threw it out here anyway.

[witch]

I'm bound to disappoint from time to time! sorry, I guess it was a private joke between me and me (I just didn't feel like taking the subject on with any seriousness, I figured someone else will... bows )

 

but let me try to explain the punch line... and also give you a reference for if/when you have the time/inclination: "The Cosmic Serpent: DNA and the Origins of Knowledge," by Jeremy Narby, Ph.D. He is an anthropologist who met the female entity I was talking about and spent the next fifteen years pondering what she showed him. He came to the same conclusion I did -- to wit:

 

that the universe itself is female,

that it expresses its creative imperative through creating life,

that life is governed by DNA in any and all of its dimensions,

that ayahuasca is the interdimensional connecting cable that plugs you into the DNA database of all universes in all dimensions, no less, all times and all spaces and all the timeless places...

and -- now the punch line -- that in all of this universe of universes, the real and ONLY Power is the power of the mother over her baby, and all the rest of existence plays out this creatress-creation relationship.

 

I've said it in one line here but She took the first 18 hours of the first intro nonstop to show me, among billions other things, the single most important thing: exactly why humans are so puny, so not calling the shots in the grand scheme of things, in the universe of universes. We can't create shit on any scale that matters, we, the rejects among peoples that create galaxies and play their games of gods with them, precisely because we don't understand The Power. We are the village idiots of creation, the joke of ages, because of that.

 

Well, I can't explain here what 18 hours of "Lesson 1: Power" encompassed (I too will need the next 15 years should gods grant them to me to integrate at least some of that). I can just try to explain why it is that the title of Agape's post -- "women create nothing but babies" -- resonated with this knowledge of mine in a funny way... And besides funny, the hair-raising part was... well... I just know She has a temper, oh my god of gods, cara madre mia has a temper you or me or any other woman who is less than Power Herself will never have... shudder.... so I imagined what She would tell him, and how...

 

(and I call her cara madre mia because she told me to call her that, against my objections that I speak no Spanish -- She said, well, all people here do and so you'll have to -- and snap -- unsilenced that silenced part of my DNA where complete and eloquent Spanish I never learned is stored, by removing a SIR 2-P enzyme ring -- she showed me how -- ... THAT was fun.)

 

...did I redeem myself a bit yet, or did I only make it worse?

 

No, mistress, you are always wise. It was wading through the pages of crap to get to your post that was making me regret entering the thread!

 

I do have to ask, though, if the universe is female, is the DNA database that gives the life of the universe form, male? I believe what you say.

 

A guru of mine used to say that whenever people say "always," "never," "everybody," "nobody," they are referring to the feeling they are stuck in.

 

In any event... What the solution is?.. Well, to refer to something I learned recently, Wang Liping dedicated one of his lectures (lectures always preceded the practice during the workshop) to natural body cycles to follow so as to be at one's most productive and most creative at the most appropriate times. He used the 28-day female cycle, explaining what should be done on every particular day of this period and why. Then someone in the audience asked, well, what about men, what are we, chopped liver?.. do men have cycles they could abide by? He said, well, men have cycles too, but they are neither as precise nor as easly to learn to perceive subjectively, and most men today are deaf, dumb and blind to their own energies and are better off not trying to be guided by them. Men, he said, are way WAY better off following the woman's cycles, and following women in general, and obeying women. He said, in China, men are thought of as the smartest and most prudent -- and tend to be the most successful -- who are actually afraid of their wives. I for one, he said, am afraid of mine (bowing in her direction -- with timing uncanny she was coming in just at that moment), see, she walks into the room and already I don't know what to say...

 

How do you like this idea from this source?..

 

I think you would like the movie Paranormal Activities. It was created by a very clever and inventive man, but finished and perfected by a man who clearly has the sort of attitude you describe. Steven Spielberg redid the ending, and he made the entire movie ring true.

[Agape]

Wow, this has been quite a popular thread hmmm? If nothing I can be controversial!

 

Vortex I like what you have to say, I see it is grounded in good evolutionary psych.

 

You guys who say 'women haven't had a chance cos society has kept em down' I'm not being deliberately biased but I take my perspectives from the whole existence of the human race...or at least what we known from the study of it. This is my problm with the ;society has kept women down' position. Women were living in their 'natural environment' back in caveman days wouldn't you agree? All of these 'puacentric' theoryies of attraction are based on evolutionary psychology. The presmise is that women (and men) act the same now as that did back in caveman days.

 

I don't recall any data of women being the innovators and creators back then either. There is the usual dichotomy of males being the hunter gatherers and writing on walls and women gathering fruit (also gatherers within the society) and gossiping with the rest of their girls.

 

If you read the Red Queen (hardcore evolutionary biology, only one perspective but it gives alot of good study into this area from that particular perspective) he states that women are gossipers cos it allows them to root out potential beta males, they are more intuitive just so they can see whether a man will be a cheater or if he is not really an alpha- all domestics related.

 

At the same time men are more spatial and logical cos it allows them to catch the more dangerous prey with their comrades as they would form plans and remember good hunting grounds all that logical type stuff.

 

Some may think I remain 'dogged' in my views. That isn't to say I am dogmatic. My intention was to open a discussion to see what others thought of the situation and we certainly have created a good discussion here. The whole idea of a discussion is that each respective party presents their arguments to the table. Like a dual where the best argument wins (not in terms of a battle for battle's sake but just to perhaps gain new perspectives, at worst each respective party remains within their own reality tunnel).

 

Now if I totally IGNORED other's perspectives I'd accept that it would be reasonable for you to not want to discuss it as it would not be worth it on your part. As I say I remain open to changing my views given sufficient evidence to persuade me so however so far nothing offered has provided me with anything but mere exceptions so the defender's arguments remain poultry at best, imo, but again, of course that is my opinion, which I do not deny.

 

The opposers of my position will end up saying-you are just jaded and sex starved and I am right cos I have the PROPER female perspective, I will say ummm, look at the MASSIVE BODY of evidence to the contrary...but when we reach that point without providing new data for or against is when I would say there is no need to continue and the thread will have run it's course but for now we are still getting interesting debate going here. We have formed a good discussion here and it is good to have seen other's views, including a few women's and women sympathiser's, viewpoints on this to get different perspectives.