Fran11

True. But what would their motive be? Maybe they evaluate individuals to see how advanced we are as a species and wether they can make that first contact or not. If it was for reaserch propouses, that wouldn't make them so selfless.

But what about alien abductions? There are many reports. Do you guys think they are real?

It always happens to me when I experience ego-death. Does sense of being located inside the body also vaishes? It's like your perspective shifs from being an object inside the waking conciousness, to be an infinite space in which the entire waking conciousness field is nothing but a dot.

I dom't know the context, but it seems the "degradation" is not about your lack/abundance of femininity, but rather they are just looking for reasons to be offensive. Only you can evaluate if your masculine/feminine balance is healty.

Sounds like you are in contact with very immature men. If you can't/don't want to cut them out of your life, at least avoid these can of conversations with such simple minded people, let them be with their ignorance, it can't be helped

That's because sometimes in psychology when they use the word conciousness/self-awareness/wathever they just mean the mind's capacity to reflect upon itself, which animals don't have. They don't give much attention to actual conciousness

They are thinking about conciousness like an epiphenomenon, just basic standard materialism...

Groundlessness is a phase, it will pass. Spirituality makes you transition from acting out of egoic motivations and desires to act not seeking a particular result but as an expression of love for existance. Why does God, totally complete and perfect by itself, creates reality? Becouse of love. Why does a person who has trascended desire act? Becouse of love.

That's precisely the point, eye for an eye philosophy and unusual punishment are signs of low social developement. Death penality is not necessarily eye for an eye, it depends on how it is treated and used by a particular society.

We are talking about legal systems here. We make it up precisely by picking these sort of things. This is unavoidable. Like I said above, allowing every member of society to have whatever kind of self-identification they have valideated by law is impracticable. Consider there are millions more examples besides the two we are using here, as many as people. I may identify as a billionarie, as a tall person, as a cow, as an orange, etc etc. Are you gonna create a law for each, or in most cases you wil appeal to respect and love from society? This requires a mature society of course, but there's no other way. We can't rush progress just by making lost of laws. The necesity for drawing a line is clear, the pleace in which it must be drawn is not, which is why these discussions arise.

What you have from birth is a sex, not a gender. Gender is social construction originally based upon sex, basically speaking, it stereotypes women as being hyper femenine and men being hyper masculine, which was so in the past mostly due to survival conditions. Nowdays, these stereotypes are slowly being revised and trascended. Again, for it to happen totally, it may take generations. By that time, what you call trans-gendering would be just chainging an irrelevant label. The mismatch that trans people percieve beetween body and mind is due to social constructions which are in permanent change. The point most people don't understand is that there are objectively no women/men's preferences/activities/bahaviour/minds. Which is why there's so much vaiety within one gender. People built stereotypes around a byologcial caracteristic like sex or age. And then want to change the meaning of a term that was originally lingustically pointing to a biological caracteristic, to a more pshychological meaning. This is not bad but it becomes irrelevant as stereotypes colapse.

I'm not opposed to these kind of solutions per se, but I a line must be drawn at some point becouse it is impossible to allow everybody to legally force everybody else to respect their identifications. Also, trans gender and trans age are notions that deppend on prior social stereotypes in continuos revision and deconstruction. So my guess is that probably in the future these will be discarded and only the freedoms that they allowed will remain, without changing an irrelevant label becausd stereotypes will be gone. This may take generations.

Yeah we can make guesses but who's really to say? We'll have to wait and see... It is close-minded either to discard anything or to totally buy into every random green-sounding thing.

Exactly. With the "Green rising", along with the real social progress, inevitabily appear a lot of extremist ideas and proposals that aren't of much value and will latter be descarded. This is totally natural and it happens as we struggle to find the new equilibrium. But of course arguing against these extremist ideas with Green may cause him to percieve you as being conservative.

Also, underdeveloped societies are usually the ones with the "eye for an eye" philosophy (look at the punishments they use in Middle East, some parts of Africa and some parts of Latinoamerica), and criminal activity is still higher than on more developed regions. It doesn't solve anything.

You must differentiate punsihment from protecting other people. Punishment for the sake of it, is low conciousness, because it ignores the external factors (genetics, enviroment) that led the person to commit the crime. It's just revenge seeking. Regading actions in order to protect others being insuficient, because of S. Green fanatism maybe, is a different regard and it depends on where you live. I also judge them to be insuficient in my country.

The problem is where do we draw the line. Shoule we allow everyone to legally force everybody else to validate wether self-perceptions they have? Evidentely, this would be far too impractical. But of course there's value in using the power of goverment in order to help correcting social issues. Like preferential hires like you said. It's a delicate balance in my opinion.

It's reinforcing them in a way. If I am old and happen to like things that society considers to be "for younger people", by changing my age I'm actually convalidating that these things are in fact for yonger people. If people don't get offended by someone asking them the very thing they are pushing society to deny, there would be no problem. But that's too optimistic in my experience.

That's why I think we should work on deconstructing these social sterotypes instead. By education, for example. Age/height/weight do have important uses and implications taken as biological facts. We would lose that if we allow people to just change them instead of attacking the real root problem.

You can identify yourself the way you want, the point is if you should be able to legally force the rest of society to conform with your perceptions. An advanced spiritual practicioner also feels ageless, and doesn't need society to validate this. This, on the other hand, seems to me just pathologic denial of bodily age, and wanting society to validate this for you.

Gender IS a complex social construct. Age/weight/height HAVE complex social constructs attached to them. These constructs and steretypes do exist and require social evolution in order to be trascended (which is slowly happening). But it's nonsense allowing people to legally modify these raw variables just because they feel like.

But I want people to periceve it longer and tell it to me, while keeping it exactly as it is, like with age change. No, I have a post on that and I'm even more progressive than most. Trans-age on the other hand seems ridiculous to me.

I've alway felt my d*ck is five inches longer, where do I change it legally? Metrics are a social construct after all... Please, this is a good example of Stage Green excesses.

Some people have a hard time telling masculine and femenine energies appart from more supperficial social costumes like clothing, grooming, etc. First learn to identify both energies in yourself and also see how the balance it's not static buy they vary. You should work towards being able to move across the spectrum at will according to the needs of the moment, just like sometimes you need to be more left-brained and sometimes more right-brained. That's what Sadhguru means IMO. Neglecting either side of the spectrum is unhealthy for both sexes. If you are mindful about it, you will see many man you wouldn't consider to be girly are actually quite near the center.

Everything that can be, is. Everything that cannot be, is not.