The "Get a Job, Have a Wife, Make a Child , Get a Life" Thread

[JustARandomPanda]

The holes are from having kids. The energetic cords are there, and I made a post about it on your forum.

 

TaoMeow has a forum? Where?

[Enishi]

Neurocognitive studies I have no vested interest in peddling.

 

Oh, and by the way, according to the same studies, a human being can't personally know in any depth more than 120 people during his or her lifetime. Which was well known to all tribal peoples who would start splitting the village in two as soon as it grew to 130-140, or else sending the newly married couples to live wherever the village was smaller, or else there would be growth and with it, frequent personal misery for some and eventually, for most (which didn't take root in the under-120 native settlements even if there were personal mishaps.) A leader can only be efficient if he or she knows all the people he or she manages personally, otherwise there will be gross mismanagement. The larger the group being managed, the grosser. That's one reason our leadership is so truly lame, and globalists keep making it not just worse but psychophysiologically one hundred percent incompatible with the human nature.

 

To truly know 120 and to truly love 7 people is more than enough. Most can't really pull it off even with ONE person -- including those who like to talk about universal love. Universal love is a watered-down artificial sweetener for the bitterly disappointed -- unless its base of operation is people with practical experience of successful application of personal love to at least 7 live immediate people rather than billions of abstract ideas.

 

Very interesting info.

 

This is one of the reasons I'm very decentralist/anarchist in my views.

[Taomeow]

TaoMeow has a forum? Where?

I used to have a forum, but I was banned from it by someone who was supposedly tech support. (No worries, taught me to choose my support more cautiously, tech or otherwise. ) I won't take it up with him, so I ain't got no forum no more. Sorry...

[3bob]

Wow, this looks like a great thread...! (and lots of reading yet to do)

 

adding a little quote here:

 

"Who of us is mature enough for offspring before the offspring themselves arrive? The value of marriage is not that adults produce children, but that children produce adults".

 

by Peter DeVries

[soaring crane]

wow, crazy thread, for this place

 

fwiw, I've been married for 25 years (yes, to the same woman, lol) and we have ten-year old daughter who I just grow more and more fond of every day. Kids are amazing and they are our teachers. I "knew" that beforehand, but now that I have one here, I know it.

Edited December 30, 2009 by soaring crane

[DalTheJigsaw123]

Neurocognitive studies I have no vested interest in peddling.

 

Oh, and by the way, according to the same studies, a human being can't personally know in any depth more than 120 people during his or her lifetime. Which was well known to all tribal peoples who would start splitting the village in two as soon as it grew to 130-140, or else sending the newly married couples to live wherever the village was smaller, or else there would be growth and with it, frequent personal misery for some and eventually, for most (which didn't take root in the under-120 native settlements even if there were personal mishaps.) A leader can only be efficient if he or she knows all the people he or she manages personally, otherwise there will be gross mismanagement. The larger the group being managed, the grosser. That's one reason our leadership is so truly lame, and globalists keep making it not just worse but psychophysiologically one hundred percent incompatible with the human nature.

 

To truly know 120 and to truly love 7 people is more than enough. Most can't really pull it off even with ONE person -- including those who like to talk about universal love. Universal love is a watered-down artificial sweetener for the bitterly disappointed -- unless its base of operation is people with practical experience of successful application of personal love to at least 7 live immediate people rather than billions of abstract ideas.

 

Very interesting. I actually follow this.

[宁]

You know... I can't stop wondering, with all this pollution and mind-control, do we really have a chanse of doing anything with our practice?

I mean, look at it this way: it's said that today every young man is half of what his father used to be, and a quarter of what his grandfather used to be... the further you go in the past, the greater the difference...

(btw, our daoist goal is to RETURN, isn't it?)

 

What if you don't succeed. Say, you'll end up having a pretty healthy life, living 5 to 10 years more above the media, and so what.

I think having offsprings, raising humans to carry your DNA into the future, with all that you acheived in this life, is the easiest way to become an immortal... the surest.

That fact aside, this experience, of parenting, is so deep and has such a profound effect on us as humans, I mean, energetically, physically, psychically, that it would be very hard to replace with anything else...

What would replace this experience? What magnitude would it have to have?

 

Saving the planet? It's still not that close, not that intimate...

Our Earth is our mother, but I love my kid more.

Humanity may be just a temporary infection that plunders the Earth for a short period. Any single acheived master could save this Earth in a couple of minutes, if he would want to. Isn't it curious that nobody does this?

 

Anyway, back to where I've started... it's another curious fact that this thread has been read so many times. Many many times. I wonder if there's another one as popular as this one.

Why?

[Owledge]

I think having offsprings, raising humans to carry your DNA into the future, with all that you acheived in this life, is the easiest way to become an immortal... the surest.

If you consider this vague impact-making on the universe and perpetuation of parts of your DNA being immortality, then it should be equally appealing to you to see yourself as already immortal. When all that is you dissolved with death and your soul/spirit/whatever will become an undefinable part of the tao again, this is about the same type of immortality.

So whether you have children or just kill yourself amounts to the same 'quality' of immortality.

I think it is more desirable to some people to learn how to keep yourself together at the moment of death.

[Smile]

....Which means I have a hole in my energy field the moment I'm born, and having or not having kids is immaterial at that point -- it's already there. Many, many charts I've seen miss a phase, or have too little of one and too much of another -- which also creates holes in many cases -- and in fact I don't think I've seen charts that had no holes at all, it's a matter of how big the holes are and how mendable and whether the person will ever know and do enough to mend them...

Let me continue in addition to what I said about babies and their connection to parents...

One of the biggest reasons for that is LOVE. Simply, if you love someone you will eventually establish the "energy cords" connecting you and the loved one. That feeling of butterflies in your stomach, the tingling and feeling "in love" are the physical signs of this happening. The parent's love for an unborn baby establishes the connection as well, but what will happen if the connection is broken somehow? The cords will rip and you will see the hole. Not just in unloved babies but adults broken up as well. And the physical pain in the stomach, inability to eat and sleep well come with this type of brake up.

 

The solar plexus/navel cords are the most common connection between people in love. The next would be the heart connection but it is very rare to see it these days. One's heart should be completely open for this to happen. And not just for one lover but both.

[jago25_98]

"If men feel the system is unfair they need to work to change it. "

^ Possibly more efficient to defend & promote the Islamic way of life, as one example

 

"much of the heartache women experience is due to them choosing partners who turned out to be bad guys"

^ Absolutely. I wish marriage would give me protection against that. I can see the merit now, as a guy. Otherwise it's just all the way into dog-eats-dog instead of peaceful community.

 

Looking at attraction, evolution... the conclusions are stark. I am a good person. Am I good person only because of religious upbringing or is it truely who I am?

 

When I had the opportunity to add another woman to a casual relationship I did so.. and felt guilty the next day. If I had continued I would have been genetically a more successful male... and had the confidence to do many things more.

 

By logic the truth is clear. Do as thou wilt and preach the opposite. But the heart does not follow this and to do so leads to great dis-resonance to go that path.

 

Thus, this knowledge is a great burden. I dread to even think about it.

 

I look for solice outside the duality of good and bad.

 

My parents are still together after 30 hard years. This gives me a strength rarely seen in todays world of broken families. A gift so strong I once felt I could make a relationship work with anyone, if I choose and they participate. Any failure is my failure to change them.

 

I am in a position to choose the life I want. Family or not. I'd like to hear some inspiration from the lonely recluse. They may be lonely but they aren't damaged.

 

"I only want to be enlightened so i can live my life how i want"

^ Absolutely

[Smile]

A good article for any future fathers-to-be to consider... Of course it's not always the case, but the law is almost always not on your side.

 

 

By Stephen Baskerville

 

Independent

http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/nightmar...amily_court.htm

22 April 2001.

 

The ordeal of Mark Harris, the father sent to Pentonville prison for ten months for waving to his children, is not an aberration. It is part of a growing international trend whereby fathers (and sometimes mothers) have been arrested for sending their children birthday cards, calling them on the telephone, or seeing them in church.

 

Last year a father in New Hampshire was beaten to death by jail guards after being incarcerated without trial for allegedly missing a child support hearing of which his family claims he was never notified. A father in British Columbia was evicted from his home, cut off from his children, and ordered to pay more than twice his income in child and spousal support plus court costs for a divorce to which his never consented. He hanged himself from a tree.

 

A mother in Massachusetts was recently told by social workers to divorce her husband or they would take away her children, and they did. In the same state a fathers' rights activist claims he was dragged from his car and beaten by what appeared to be plainclothes police and told to stop making trouble for the courts or he would never see his son again.

 

These cases are the tip of a huge iceberg.

 

In the United States, Canada, Australia, and beyond both fathers and mothers are losing their children in large numbers and turned into outlaws. They are subjected to questioning about their private lives that attorney Jed Abraham has termed an "interrogation" and incarcerated without trial. They are jailed for failing to pay lawyers and psychotherapists they never hired for services they never sought. Their children are taught to hate them with the backing of government officials and used as informers against them.

 

Why is this happening?

 

Contrary to basic principles of free government, family courts operate largely behind closed doors and without record of their proceedings. The secrecy ostensibly protects family privacy, though more often it provides a cloak to invade family privacy with impunity. "The family court is the most powerful branch of the judiciary," writes a prominent American judge.

 

"The power of family court judges is almost unlimited." American Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas once characterized them with the term "kangaroo court."

 

Family courts sit at the nexus of a powerful network of lawyers, psychotherapists, social workers, bureaucratic police, and others. Recalling Dickens's observation that "the one great principle of the law is to make business for itself," it may not be overly cynical to suggest that judges and their entourage have a vested interest in separating children from their parents.

 

Family courts routinely ignore basic civil liberties and international human rights conventions. "Your job is not to become concerned about the constitutional rights of the man that you're violating as you grant a restraining order," American municipal court judge Richard Russell told a judges' training seminar in 1994. "Throw him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and tell him, see ya around. . . . We don't have to worry about the rights."

 

Family law is now criminalizing activity as basic as free speech. In Australia it is a crime for litigants to speak publicly about family law. A Sydney group protesting peacefully in 1998 was told "if any people who had any involvement with family court were identified the media and that person would be prosecuted to the fullest extent" of the law. As in Britain, Australian family courts have closed Internet sites operated by parents' groups.

 

In some American jurisdictions it is likewise a crime to criticise judges. The former husband of singer Wynonna Judd was recently arrested for speaking to reporters about his divorce.

 

A father protesting outside his Los Angeles home on Fathers' Day 1998 that he had not seen his son in more than two years was apprehended by police for a "psychiatric evaluation". Following his congressional testimony critical of family courts, a Georgia father was stripped of custody of his two children, ordered to pay lawyers he had not hired, and jailed. "We believe the court is attempting to punish [him] for exposing the court's misconduct to a congressional committee," said the president of a local fathers' group.

 

Family courts are now politicized by ideological agendas and attack citizens ' groups for exercising their political rights.

 

The Australia Family Court publishes a book attacking fathers' groups as "a concerted lobby of disaffected individuals". In 1998 the court's Chief Justice publicly declared them a "sinister element". In a paper funded by the US Justice Department, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, an association of ostensibly impartial judges who sit on actual cases, attacks "dangerous" fathers' groups for their political opinions and "values" and their belief "that divorce is always harmful to children".

 

The words "divorce" and "custody" sound deceptively innocuous. We should remind ourselves that they involve bringing the penal system into the home for use against family members. Once we thus marshal the state apparatus there is no reason to assume it will stop where we want it to. "When they've taken away the fathers," warns Irish Times columnist John Waters, "they'll take away the mothers."

Stephen Baskerville, a professor of political science at Howard University in Washington, is spokesman for Men, Fathers, and Children International, a coalition of fatherhood groups from 9 countries, and serves on the board of Gendercide Watch, a human rights organization that monitors gender-selective atrocities.

[Taomeow]

A good article for any future fathers-to-be to consider... Of course it's not always the case, but the law is almost always not on your side.

It's true and more is true and more horrible things are true. It has nothing to do with family courts though which do what they are instructed to do by parties whose least concern it is to protect anyone's rights, children's, mother's, or father's. It's happening exponentially now -- they (THEY) are taking children away and breaking families more vigorously every month. It's part of a bigger thing that is happening, but breaking the families is what they (THEY) have been after for quite a while now, as well as communities, any form of human togetherness and mutual support. You are expected to be alone and lost in order to fit in the agenda.

 

Which is why I ask you (you personally, Smile) to take another look at your beliefs in this regard... You know which species don't care for their young? and why? 'cause they lay eggs, that's how they go about it... which is why the idea of non-parenting comes naturally to them... But we don't want to be THEM now, do we?..

[Smile]

It's true and more is true and more horrible things are true. It has nothing to do with family courts though which do what they are instructed to do by parties whose least concern it is to protect anyone's rights, children's, mother's, or father's. It's happening exponentially now -- they (THEY) are taking children away and breaking families more vigorously every month. It's part of a bigger thing that is happening, but breaking the families is what they (THEY) have been after for quite a while now, as well as communities, any form of human togetherness and mutual support. You are expected to be alone and lost in order to fit in the agenda.

 

Which is why I ask you (you personally, Smile) to take another look at your beliefs in this regard... You know which species don't care for their young? and why? 'cause they lay eggs, that's how they go about it... which is why the idea of non-parenting comes naturally to them... But we don't want to be THEM now, do we?..

Yes, it's a part of a bigger picture, along with chemicals in food, water and air, TV, porn etc. Family as it used to be doesn't exist anymore, Taomeow. So every time you sign this piece of paper (marriage license), you wave your rights away goodbuy. Due to chemicals, men are more like women these days anyway so I'm not surprised women drop them like flies. Unfortunately, the law is set up to punish the men if they get divorced, and they end up paying for the rest of their lives, kids or no kids. So my believes are no important if I stand in front of a judge... just as ANY man will tell who went through the divorce court system.

 

There is such thing as Common Law marriage which doesn't give your rights away. Some states have it.

 

As for animals caring for their young... I would like to think we are much more then that. But again, in the world of dancing Unicorns and pink bunny rabbits, we would all live happily ever after. I'm all for it. Unfortunately some of my friends who went trough divorce keep telling me all the Unicorns are dead. Who should I believe, Taomeow?

 

To me, a great family is an outcome of a great society, and this good old US or A is long in a coma. The root values that we used to have are replaced by superficial BS. The family is dead, Taomeow, as a whole. And to bring it back it takes more then replacing the next idiot in the White House.

[宁]

. The family is dead, Taomeow, as a whole. And to bring it back it takes more then replacing the next idiot in the White House.

 

this reminds me of a quote from the 300 (Spartans): 'Immortals... we put their names to the test'

 

 

 

You are expected to be alone and lost in order to fit in the agenda.

 

I think so too. What is the most sensitive part of our bodies...? the most vulnerable one also.

[Taomeow]

Yes, it's a part of a bigger picture, along with chemicals in food, water and air, TV, porn etc. Family as it used to be doesn't exist anymore, Taomeow. So every time you sign this piece of paper (marriage license), you wave your rights away goodbuy. Due to chemicals, men are more like women these days anyway so I'm not surprised women drop them like flies. Unfortunately, the law is set up to punish the men if they get divorced, and they end up paying for the rest of their lives, kids or no kids. So my believes are no important if I stand in front of a judge... just as ANY man will tell who went through the divorce court system.

 

There is such thing as Common Law marriage which doesn't give your rights away. Some states have it.

 

As for animals caring for their young... I would like to think we are much more then that. But again, in the world of dancing Unicorns and pink bunny rabbits, we would all live happily ever after. I'm all for it. Unfortunately some of my friends who went trough divorce keep telling me all the Unicorns are dead. Who should I believe, Taomeow?

 

To me, a great family is an outcome of a great society, and this good old US or A is long in a coma. The root values that we used to have are replaced by superficial BS. The family is dead, Taomeow, as a whole. And to bring it back it takes more then replacing the next idiot in the White House.

Well, you reminded me of the days long gone when my very young, very talented husband, reportedly almost as talented as me, was busy working on his Ph.D. dissertation and I was busy getting the kids out of his way. When the kids got sick -- and twins have this interesting way of one getting the very cold the other one has just recovered from -- I spent much time on sick leaves with them, my husband didn't do it once. His co-workers and bosses loved him because he was always reliable and available. Mine hated me because I was the goddamn no-show whenever the kids got sick. Guess whose career went ahead and whose went down the drain. Guess who kept getting pay raises and who was getting promoted. You think society punishes men by taking their money and giving it to wives and kids? I think it punishes wives and kids first, by making sure they will either depend on a man to get the crumbs of society's pie or else live in poverty. In fact, that's what happens to women and children where divorce laws are more to your liking. The overwhelming majority of the world's poor are women and children. Now the big surprise... ditto in the US of A!

 

There's a few other interesting subjects embedded in your message, but I won't go there right now, except to quickly point out that I'm the last person who needs to be informed that the guy in the White House is about as relevant as the words "natural flavor" you read on a label, which actually stand for "MSG."

 

Family is dead?.. Perhaps. WHAT is alive? Which lifestyle has successfully replaced it? Hermit cultivators existed at all times, but they can't be considered a "lifestyle" -- there's too few and has always been and will always be -- so who is the modern viable alternative to a family man, family woman, child?.. grandma, grandpa?.. brother, sister?.. Who is living a new and improved paradigm? I'm really asking, I'm not being sarcastic. I don't see many happy families, it's true. But I don't know even one happy healthy together loner past the age, say, twenty-something. Where are they? What are they doing? Why are they hiding from me, what are they afraid of? -- I don't bite.

[Owledge]

Seems strange to me to complain about divorce law because of families where the mother takes care of the children all the time. Let the father care for the children and the mother pursue a career and you see that the law is only half of the problem. Or do it in a combined/dynamic way. There are no laws that tell you how to organize your family. But I hear complaints about how the good old "family" is gone.

[Enishi]

The tension between work and homelife is something which hurts a lot of people.

 

I think that one has to consider how coworkers at a job might be affected as well. If someone is constantly calling off to stay home with the kids, or takes long maternity leave, that just creates extra work for everyone. Personally, my stress level at work went way up after two women in another department that I don't know and don't feel are members of my 'tribe' went on maternity level, thus resulting in us having to cover their area as well.

 

Personally speaking, I don't think I'd mind staying at home with the kids so long as I can devote myself to my writing on the side and maybe put together an online business. I fucking hate work and never understood why other people were so obsessed with having 'careers'.

Edited January 3, 2010 by Enishi

[Owledge]

I fucking hate work and never understood why other people were so obsessed with having 'careers'.

You are not alone!

http://whywork.org/

[jago25_98]

On the other side of the coin. Let me tell you. I work half the year and have half the year off. I can travel whereever I want. Loads of money. I don't /really/ need to work as I can go to a poor country and live off investments.

Yet...

as soon as I hit land I'm straight on the pull looking for someone to either trap or hurt me again!

Alternatively... I can sleep with women I don't like and hurt them instead. Ho hum.

 

I have the option to choose.

If I listen to this thread I hear what sounds like a lot of people justifying to themselves the benefits of thier life to cultivatation.

 

Is this the truth or egos talking here - defending society from everyone running to the hills.

 

Hermits do what they do for a reason. We can protect ourselves by saying there's some sort of damage response here - perhaps a wife left them and they don't want to go through that again. No doubt, since I am arguing for this case you will be thinking the same of me.

 

When I look at society it's not the way I'd like to run a family. I would like to have children at my side.

 

The difference between hermitage and `life` is that the hermit has better control of thier state, whereas the family member is reliant on other people to not screw them up. What would you feel when the wife leaves? She may test you on it to see what you're made of.

 

For the last 2 years I was experiencing the start of family life. It felt great, for a while I felt complete for the first time in ages. Then what happens? You guessed it.

That kind of damage can never be completely in my control.

 

So if you want to avoid that, you have to remove the equation of other people's influence. Easiest way to do that? - run to the hills.

 

Of course, I want a compromise. Escape the lifestyle everyone else says they're trapped in. Passive income travelling the world with family anyone? The Pacowitz family did it. Only... that's self grasping once again.

 

To feel pleasure by attachment is to feel pain.

To feel peace is to feel peace.

 

 

edit:

Regards loneliness and people in general. Facebook - the situation in Microcosm. Every time I see someone say something on facebook and I catch myself reacting, like `Ooh, nice car` or `ooh, photo with loads of girls around` or `ooh, what an exotic holiday` or `ooh aren't they having fun` (usually having fun) I'm tempted to remove that person from my newsfeed. I slowly find there's no one left. Apply that same theory to hermitage.

 

I wonder, how do the hermits do it? One saying came to mind `Find beauty in the world and you'll never be alone`. hmm...

 

I already feel pretty removed of society since I can count on one hand the number of people I know like you guys rather than getting smashed, pregnant and divorced

Edited January 17, 2010 by jago25_98

[Smile]

Nice post Jago.

To add to what I'm saying before.

When people hear what I say about marriage, they go into another extreme of assuming I want to be alone. They can't understand that one can actually be together with someone and not signing a piece of government paper. You can have a loving relationship with a woman without getting married as long as you are clear and open about your intentions.

Edited January 17, 2010 by Smile

[宁]

So, you say we gave up on all these things that to you mean freedom just because we were afraid.

That sounds reasonable

 

Ok, let me thicken the plot here, and I keep in mind I don't 'throw' the next words in anyone's face...

I'd say that daoism and personal freedom are two opposing things.

Why?

Because Ziran is all about law and order. What would happen if the sun decided not to rise this morning? Take an year's vacation and enjoy some freedom... ehm?

 

You can't be free.

You'd have to choose.

Society has it's rules, and they are many. If you break them, your status may or may not be compromised.

The universe has it's rules. If you align with them, when you break them, you pay.

A daoist/buddhist/christian real school has it's rules... if you break them, your progress is compromised.

 

The way I see it, either way you need to develop at least the power to make engagements, take vows, make promises you will hold on to.

The lack of will to do so it's a clear sign you're not ready to start your life as an adult...

 

And if you get over that barrier, having a family is easy-pie.

Or, you can evolve to that stage while having a family.

 

Later edit: This thread is not some place where people with family try to see the good side of having a family, because they need encouragement.

It is a place where we, the family fans, offer some encouragements to those that want to take this step, and are not yet convinced it's the right thing to do.

 

Of course, there will always be people that just CAN'T have a family, it's not their cup of tea, and they live happily ever after without it.

Edited January 17, 2010 by Little1

[lino]

Coming out of a one-parent home where there were some bad times with "means" in general,

along with joining the military and seeing couple STAY together because they HAVE TO because

of economic necessity. In one instance, the husband out of one of the military couples was

rumored to have cheated on his wife (with somebody that was a CLEAR AND SIGNIFICANT

downgrade from his wife). I thought that the wife could have clearly found someone better,

even if she put her hands over her eyes, put a hand with a finger pointing, and spinned around

and stopped. Thing is that on the surface, the husband didn't appear to be a bad guy.

[Mal]

[DalTheJigsaw123]

Must be a good GF then.

 

That goes for me too!

[宁]

interestingly, most of the masters that we know of, were and are all married with children - even high level

and it's the same with most of the serious practicioners

(of course there are some few exceptions)

 

i think we have two kinds of destinies: worldly destiny and heavenly destiny

maybe those masters were concerned with fulfilling both of them

 

if we can't master the seen, nevermind the unseen - this is somewhat what Confucius said, when asked about gods and demons and magic