Parththakkar12

@Matt8800 I'm just saying we need this. What's unrealistic/impractical today will become realistic/practical tomorrow!

@Matt8800 A lot of mastering your emotions involves healing from childhood traumas. We have inner child aspects that get emotionally triggered and defensive in response to certain traumatizing stimuli. A 'safe space' would be useful to help each other work through these extreme, unpleasant emotional reactions. Now, when you're working through that, the last thing you want is for someone to say/do something that is unintentionally re-traumatizing! This is such a huge issue that a lot of people are too scared to be vulnerable outside therapist's offices. The safe space would give you freedom around whom you want to trust, how vulnerable you want to be, etc. Not everyone is capable in participating in the healing of specific people, and the safe space would help discern that. Treating each other with kindness is nice, but not quite enough. We collectively need to help each other heal and dare I say, heal each other. This needs to become a lot more mainstream than doing it in a therapist's office!

I understand what you're saying. Getting triggered by 'micro-aggressions' is a personal problem and the resolution to that would be to master your emotions. A lot of our emotional issues have to do with lack of connection with each other. This means that we need each other's help to master our emotions because the human nervous system equates being alone with death! These emotional issues can be traced back to childhood traumas. Would we need safe-spaces for doing this emotional mastery? I think so. Are the safe-spaces today designed for emotional mastery? Probably not. The thing is, these are the most progressive people we have. The rest of us haven't recognized emotional issues to be real issues!

If you're a conscious person, I highly recommend channeling!! It can be exceptionally useful to channel the collective consciousness of various organizations, big corporations, cultural phenomena, etc. Even Parts Work can be useful, for example, talking to the part of You that is the Tax system and passing tax regulations accordingly, etc. Leo's episode on Collective Ego is a must-must-watch for conscious politicians!

@Matt8800 There's a difference between validating how someone feels and enabling their victimhood! The former is a human emotional need. Denying yourself a need will make you go for it in subconscious and manipulative ways (as we all see on social media). Needing other people is 'weakness' if you're scared of them! Spirituality doesn't mean you stop needing people as a human being. The human body will work the way it works, however 'spiritual' you become. Getting what you want (whatever that may be) is a good thing for spiritual evolution! Enlightenment comes only after you see that it didn't make you happy/it didn't take away your suffering. Denying yourself what you want, on the other hand, is unnatural and counter-productive. It's basically denying the reality of what you want, which is anti-spiritual.

Leo I'd like to hear your thoughts on the movie 'Fight Club' and how it relates to our current Western society. It makes some good points about what happens when a society as a whole doesn't have a 'life purpose' of sorts! It kinda challenges the materialist paradigm and tries to make a anti-materialism case seem plausible.

Interesting take. Why do you think Trump would participate in this?

@Serotoninluv But now I'm not progressive anymore. I'm a sexist male pig, remember?! Just kidding!! I had to make a troll post or two to ease the tension of the thread. On a serious note, nice work! We're pretty pretty far from gender fairness and we will plod along.... slowly but steadily.... I'm lost in thought again...

To all the non-feminists here, it's okay to be a 'sexist male pig who's lesser conscious'! I'm integrating my inner 'sexist male pig' and I invite you to do the same. It doesn't make you a bad person objectively speaking (there is no objective bad), in fact it's self-loving and self-accepting to do so. Being a feminist doesn't make you a better person, in fact there is no absolute good/bad in the context of people! Maybe it's more conscious (or woke), but we don't control how conscious we are now, do we? Being more conscious also doesn't make you a better person.

Turns out Trump had said this in November 2011!!

If and when AI does develop an ego, it will learn to treat us the way we treat each other, animals and technology. The key to maximizing the good potential and minimizing the bad potential of AI would be more consciousness!

In that case, according to a quality feminist, which one is the problem : Men having male privilege, or men misusing it? Can a man cease to have male privilege if the whole issue of unequal representation/unequal power gets resolved?

Ohhh!!! I didn't think about that. The PR war can work cuz they're triggered, so it's easy to make it seem that they're talking out of their ass. Makes sense.

There's reasons for the popularity of such statements and that it's okay to be public about your hatred for men, getting overwhelming support for that! There's shadows which don't show those reasons. This isn't what feminism represents, right? I want this to be clear because there's cultural phenomena doing this stuff in the name of feminism. Ah okay gotcha. Makes sense. The demonization of masculinity in the name of feminism runs pretty deep though. I shared a Teal video which talks about the Castration Dynamic which explains this.

I'm not talking about the fight for women's rights per se. The literature you're directing me to will talk about that, and I get that. What I am talking about, though, is the open hostility towards men which happens under the name of feminism. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/white-men-are-bad-even-six-year-old-tells-me-so https://quillette.com/2018/08/15/why-its-not-ok-to-hate-men/ https://gen.medium.com/why-do-some-men-hurt-women-b6a8e97f872b https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/13/feminists-do-not-hate-men https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/08/ironic-misandry-why-feminists-joke-about-drinking-male-tears-and-banning-all-men.html https://medium.com/humungus/should-we-stop-saying-men-are-trash-684ec1357440 https://www.iol.co.za/capetimes/opinion/why-all-men-are-trash-and-need-to-take-responsibility-for-gender-based-violence-32326101 Slander works! I've seen dozens upon dozens of such articles! The only reason I'm still having this conversation is to know why are you defending such behavior? Why does this stuff get swept under the rug or rationalized away?

I'm sure that's possible to do. Can you tell me how can I see the following as an expansion of consciousness, love and self-identity : Everyone is basically calling masculinity toxic, i.e. being a man is a bad thing now. Aggression is bad/dangerous, stating the facts is mansplaining, power/authority is oppressive, competition is sexism, women can do everything men can do so men have no value, etc. All of this is circle-jerked among feminists. The explanation is 'No we're not anti-male, we just make an enemy of everything that is masculine!' These things make me conclude that it's an all-out war on men for women's rights. It's not oppression per se, but it's very very concerning and definitely mistaken. It results in men having to suppress their masculinity and it has vastly negative implications on our emotional health. Now before someone says 'Men's emotional health is not important cuz they're the oppressors!!! Men should die!!', we wouldn't get the same response if we put women's emotional health there. This is collective emotional abuse and humiliation and it gets trivialized mercilessly. Very disrespectful towards men. Also, how does making an enemy of men for being men help you get women's rights, let alone expand consciousness and love?

@Arcangelo I think there's some truth to what you're saying. I'm not saying that men can't overcome this, but it's important to look at and consciously overcome. Raised by a single mother, I know too well what this is like!

A right is defined along with rules on what to do if that right gets violated. All of this legislation has to go through an authority which everyone abides by. So it's this authority (which the community has put in place) which gives people rights and decides what to do when a violation occurs. Now, this authority will act according to what the overall community wants! The important people in the authorities/communities have predominantly been men, in the case of women's rights movements. That's what I meant when I said 'Men give women rights in response to feminism' Five hundred years ago, consider a situation in which there's a king who is this authority. Women are treated like the property of men. Now lets say, a group of women does a feminist protest. What do you think the king will do? He'll crush it completely with violence! It will not work. Lets say the king was nice to his subjects, and took a poll of the people on this issue. People voting, predominantly male. What do you think will the outcome of the poll be? Will the men be like 'We love our wives, so let them be free'? Nope. The response will be more like 'Crush this nonsense! We need women in the kitchen cooking for our children, while we work hard outside bringing home food.' And that is exactly what will happen! No conversation about 'rights for women'.

How's it circular? I thought you were the one claiming that women can get their rights with zero help from men! You guys, I understand the barbarity of the situation I'm describing. I recognize that women have not had it well in history. If male privilege is dripping from me (even I feel it now) that's right! I am a privileged male and I have the balls to own said privilege. But the good news is that I care about women enough to stay tapped into the consciousness of this discussion the whole time and doing internal work alongside! It's important for me to understand the feminist perspective, that's why I'm playing devil's advocate here to contrast it with the opposing perspective.

Exactly! Women rely on the traditionally tyrannical patriarchy for survival, cuz there is no other system. That's why they rely on men to give them rights.

Then why did women choose to get oppressed instead of creating their own system? Women have always had the option to not be reliant on the patriarchy and create their own system (if they could), but they chose not to.

The concept of equal rights for men and women is fairly recent. What belongs to whom, is a subjective conversation which depends on the time, and the perceptions of good and evil at that time. Always keep in mind that human rights aren't an absolute, they're a human creation and they weren't originally created equally for men and women. Equal rights for men and women is a fairly recent conception, and both men and women made it happen!

No! It's like saying that if you don't have the police to catch the robbers, you're pretty screwed as the robbers are armed. This is the case as it's a system by men, and men are physically stronger than women.

@Annoynymous Feminism is a fight for women's rights! If women are the ones fighting for the rights, guess who's giving the rights? Men! Have there been feminist movements in your country? Did they succeed or fail? If they failed, why so?

@Eph75 I have parts of me which are dogmatic and purposefully so. The purpose is to take a stand for inspired and decisive action. I don't want to be willy-nilly and weak in my action, that's why a few dogmas are in place for that purpose!